March 13, 2002August 2, 2026

PCHB Doc 002348: Declaration of Rachael Paschal Osborn in Support of ACC’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony from Dave Garland

Notes

Declaration by Rachael Paschal Osborn, attorney for Airport Communities Coalition (ACC), filed March 13, 2002, in PCHB Case No. 01-160 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington. Supports ACC’s Motion in Limine to exclude testimony from Dave Garland, a witness for the State of Washington Department of Ecology and Port Of Seattle. Relates to Section 401 Certification No. 1996-4-02325 and CZMA concurrency statement issued August 10, 2001, reissued September 21, 2001. Identifies exhibits A–H including Ecology’s interrogatory responses, Garland deposition transcript pages 25-26 (January 9, 2002), depositions of Ann Kenny (February 20, 2002) and Kelly Whiting (February 28, 2002), and correspondence between Osborn and Tom Young dated January 24, February 15, and March 4, 2002.

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