Notes

The Pollution Control Hearings Board ruled on Airport Communities Coalition’s motion to exclude testimony by Dave Garland regarding his March 6, 2002 report on the December 2001 low flow plan. The Board found that while failure to produce the report by the February 1, 2002 deadline was not a violation of the pre-hearing order, Ecology’s failure to respond to ACC’s discovery inquiries violated CR 26(e)(1)(B). As a remedy, the Board excluded any testimony by Garland on his analysis, findings, or conclusions related to his review of the December 2001 low flow plan.

Sidebar On/Off

As the source for federal transportation grants, the Puget Sound Regional Council was charged with developing a system to meet the growing need for commercial aviation. When the search for a second airport failed, they authorized the Port of Seattle to build the Third Runway, with a mandate to develop a noise abatement and mitigation program. In their effort to stop the Third Runway, the ACC argued over every detail of the Port's efforts--including property buyouts and sound insulation. The dispute was meant to be settled by a three member Expert Arbitration Panel. This is their final report. It finds 2-1, that the Port's program was insufficient in several respects. Despite that, funding for the Third Runway was approved by the PSRC, and the 'Port Package' program, proceeded largely unchanged. Expert Arbitration Panel's final decision finding that the Port of Seattle had not shown sufficient reduction in real on-the-ground noise impacts to satisfy noise reduction conditions required for approval of a third runway at Sea-Tac International Airport. The majority decision concluded the Port's noise abatement programs were insufficient despite being impressive in scope.

continue...

V V

Notes

Message