October 10, 2001August 2, 2026

PCHB Doc 01-160: Port Of Seattle Preliminary List of Issues, Witnesses and Exhibits — ACC v. Ecology and Port Of Seattle

Notes

Respondent Port Of Seattle’s preliminary list of issues, witnesses, and exhibits filed in PCHB Case No. 01-160 (consolidated with 01-133), Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) v. Department of Ecology and Port Of Seattle. Lists 17 issues covering §401 Federal Water Pollution Control Act certification for Sea-Tac Airport (STIA) projects, including water quality standards, wetlands mitigation under the Natural Resources Mitigation Plan, Coastal Zone Management Act compliance, SEPA compliance, NPDES permits under §402, stream flow reductions, stormwater releases, fill acceptability, Gilliam Creek, dam safety permits, and public notice violations. Witnesses include Paul Agid (Port of Seattle Aviation Project Management Group) and Barry R. Christopher Ph.D. PE. Filed by Foster Pepper & Shefelman PLLC. AR 006489–006491.

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