September 17, 2002August 2, 2026

EXH AR000340: ACC v. PCHB — Notice of Assignment and Status Conference, Thurston County Cause No. 02-2-01549-0

Notes

Cover letter dated September 17, 2002 from Peter J. Eglick of Helsell Fetterman LLP to multiple counsel including Roger Pearce (Foster Pepper & Shefelman), Joan Marchioro, Thomas Young, Jeff Kray (Attorney General’s Office, Ecology Division), Gillis Reavis, Jay Manning (Brown Reavis & Manning), Linda Strout, Traci Goodwin (Port Of Seattle), and Jean Wilkinson (Assistant Attorney General), transmitting a Notice of Assignment and Notice of Status Conference in Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) and Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion (CASE) v. Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB), et al., Thurston County Superior Court Cause No. 02-2-01549-0. Case assigned to Department 5, Judge Richard D. Hicks; Status Conference scheduled 9:00 a.m. December 13, 2002. Certificate of Service by Andrea Grad also included. Respondents below include Port Of Seattle and State of Washington Department of Ecology. AR 000340–AR 000342.

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