June 7, 2002August 2, 2026

ACC’s reply in support of its motion to the board for correction, clarification, and/or partial reconsideration of order publishing certain portions of depositions of Ecology managers and CR 30(b)(6) designated witnesses

Notes

The Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) filed a reply brief supporting its motion for correction, clarification, and/or partial reconsideration of the Pollution Control Hearings Board’s April 22 Order regarding publication of deposition testimony from Ecology managers and CR 30(b)(6) designated witnesses. ACC argues the motion is timely, that the Port of Seattle’s cited cases are inapplicable to interlocutory procedural orders, and that the April 22 Order inconsistently edits portions of depositions on the same topic, contrary to Civil Rules requiring inclusiveness for fair decision-making. ACC contends the Board should review each item on its merits to ensure the full discussion is available for consideration.

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