February 19, 2002August 2, 2026

PCHB Doc 3705: Letter from Rachael Paschal Osborn to Kaleen Cottingham Re ACC & CASE v. Ecology & Port Of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160 — Service Dispute on Port’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on SEPA Issue

Notes

Letter dated February 19, 2002 from attorney Rachael Paschal Osborn (Spokane) to Kaleen Cottingham, Presiding Officer of the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB), in ACC & CASE v. Ecology & Port of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160. Osborn disputes timely service of Port of Seattle’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on SEPA Issue filed February 8, 2002; memorandum was not received at her office until February 11, 2002 via FedEx after failed fax attempt. ACC and CASE intend to move to strike the Port’s motion as untimely and plan joint response brief by February 21, 2002. Attachments include February 18, 2002 letter from Osborn to Roger Pearce (Foster Pepper & Shefelman). Parties include Peter Eglick, Kevin Stock, Michael Witek, Roger Pearce, Steven Jones, Jay Manning, Gil Reavis, Linda Strout, Traci Goodwin, Joan Marchioro, Tom Young, Jeff Kray, Rick Poulin. AR 003705.

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