Notes

Table of contents for the prehearing briefs filed by Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) and Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion (CASE) before the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB), received March 9, 2002. Document challenges Ecology’s issuance of a Section 401 Clean Water Act certification and CZMA certification for the Port Of Seattle’s Third Runway project, raising issues including: Governor’s Office pressure and closed-door negotiations, temporal/operational/geographic limitations violating Clean Water Act and state water quality law, lack of reasonable assurance regarding wetland fills, stream alterations, stormwater NPDES (402) permit violations, low flow impacts and groundwater modeling deficiencies, mixing zones, MSE wall and embankment failure, MTCA Agreed Order fate and transport study, dam safety, copper in stormwater, turbidity, SEPA compliance, and water rights. Issues enumerated include Issues 1–3, 5–13, 15–19, 21–22. AR number 002066–002068.

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