PCHB113003205

PCHBPollution Control Hearings Board of the State of Washington

In the Port of Seattle's Motion For Partial Summary Judgment On SEPA Issue, respondent Port of Seattle has requested to Board to enter summary judgment on Issue No. 14 ("Did Ecology and the Port comply with SEPA?"). In its motion, the Port pointed out that, because the jurisdiction of the Board is limited and because the SEPA statute allows only limited types of SEPA appeals, (a) the Board did not have jurisdiction to hear any administrative SEPA appeal of Port actions and (b) the Board did not have jurisdiction to hear any administrative SEPA appeal of Ecology action. Ecology's SEPA action was limited to consideration of SEPA conditions in any case because the Port was the lead agency for SEPA purposes. ORIGINAL AR 003205 PORT'S REPLY MEMORANDUM - 1 FOSTER PEPPER _ SHEFELMAN PLLC 1111 THIRDAVENUE, SUITE3400 SEATTLE,WASmNGTON98101-3299 206-447-4400 50308223.01 The Port's motion also pointed out that the Port has its own agency administrative appeal process which requires an aggrieved party to appeal SEPA issues to the Port's independent Heating Examiner. 1 In this case, the ACC appealed both the Port's Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") and the Port's Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ("SEIS"). 2 The Port's Heating Examiner, the King County Superior Court, and the Washington Court of Appeals all found that the FEIS and the SEIS were legally adequate. 3 For Port SEPA decisions that are not administratively appealable, governing Port regulations require an aggrieved party to appeal to Superior Court within 21 days. 4 In this case,…
V V