December 19, 2001August 2, 2026

EXH AR028816: Summary Statement for Deposition Publication — Peter Kmet, ACC & CASE v. Ecology & Port Of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160

Notes

Summary statement for deposition publication submitted pursuant to Order Granting Appellant’s Motion to Publish Depositions of Ecology Managers and CR 30(b)(6) Designated Witnesses dated March 19, 2002, in ACC & CASE v. Dept. of Ecology & Port of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160. Deponent Peter Kmet, P.E., Senior Environmental Engineer, Toxics Cleanup Program, DOE Headquarters Policy and Technical Support Unit, deposed December 19, 2001, regarding recommendations and reservations about 401 fill conditions, specifically Fill Criteria Condition E of the Certification (pp. 14-19). Includes Ecology’s counter excerpts, objections to CR 30(b)(6) designation, and Port of Seattle joinder. References Ann Kenny, Erik Stockdale, John Drabek, Kevin Fitzpatrick.

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