Notes

Petition for Review of Agency Action filed January 8, 2002 in Superior Court of Washington, Thurston County by Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) and Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion (CASE) against State of Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB), Department of Ecology, and Port of Seattle. Challenges three PCHB orders in ACC v. Dept. of Ecology and Port of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160: (1) Order Granting Motion to Stay the Effectiveness of Section 401 Certification, December 17, 2001; (2) Order on Motion to Strike, November 26, 2001, removing Ecology admissions on water rights from stay record; (3) Order on Motion to Supplement the Record, December 17, 2001, denying supplementation with additional Ecology staff admissions. Attorneys include Peter J. Eglick, Kevin L. Stock, Michael P. Witek (Helsell Fetterman LLP), Rachael Paschal Osborn, and Richard A. Poulin (Smith & Lowney PLLC). Administrative Record number AR 005530.

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