October 21, 2002August 2, 2026

EXH AR015948: Prefiled Testimony of Michael Cheyne — ACC and CASE v. Ecology and Port Of Seattle, PCHB 01-160

Notes

Prefiled direct testimony of Michael Cheyne submitted on behalf of Port Of Seattle in PCHB case No. 01-160, Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) and Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion (CASE) v. Department of Ecology and Port Of Seattle, Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington. Testimony covers Sea-Tac Airport Master Plan Update process, public process leading to project recommendation, FEIS, SEIS, FAA Record of Decision, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling upholding FAA ROD, Port Hearing Examiner appeals, Superior Court and Court of Appeals decisions, additional environmental review of wetland impacts, 401 certification by Ecology, and borrow sources redevelopment. Document prepared by Foster Pepper & Shefelman PLLC.

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