May 31, 2002August 2, 2026

PCHB Doc 1013: Ecology’s Response to ACC’s Motion for Correction, Clarification and Reconsideration of Board’s Decision Publishing Portions of Depositions

Notes

Respondent State of Washington Department of Ecology concurs with and joins Port Of Seattle’s response to Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) Motion for Correction, Clarification and Reconsideration of Pollution Control Hearings Board’s Decision Publishing Portions of Depositions, PCHB No. 01-160. Filed May 31, 2002, signed by Assistant Attorneys General Joan M. Marchioro, Jeff B. Kray, and Thomas J. Young under Attorney General Christine O. Gregoire. Intervenor/Appellant Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion (CASE) also named. AR 001013.

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