PCHB125003718

PCHBPollution Control Hearings Board of the State of Washington

courtof its concernswith some of the argumentsraisedby the Port of Seattle's Motion to Set Aside Agency Action. This Response is not intendedto be a complete responseto the Port's motion. Failure to address some of the Port's arguments should not be construed as a concession by the PCHB. Rather,the PCHB is merely limiting its response in recognitionof the principalthat AR 003718 IK)IAJLFnON CONTROL HEARINGS I A_ _ OFW_SHnqGTON BOARD'S RESI=ONSE TO MOTION TO Il__ _ SErO_40,00 SET ASIDE AGENCY ACTION _ WA u_,.,otoo p_ ,,_ _a_, ,_ ,__ "i: asia quasi-judicial agency, it has a limited role when a party requests judicial review of one of its Orders under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). Typically, the party that prevailed in the PCHB case continues to advocate in favor of its position on APA judicial review. In Kaiser Aluminum v. Labor and Industries, 121 Wn.2d 776, 781,854 P.2d 611 (1993), the State Supreme Court concluded a quasi-judicial board is like a trial court in the respect that such a board does not as a general matter participate on judicial review merely to argue in support of the substantive correctness of the order being reviewed. However, a quasi-judicial board has an interest in its procedures and rules, and may address such issues on judicial review. 121 Wn.2d at 781,782. Likewise, quasi-judicial boards may participate in judicial review proceedings to address issues relating to the quasi-judicial board's jurisdiction. Snohomish County v. State, 69 Wn. App. 655, 661-62, 850 P.2d 546, review denied, 123 Wn.2d…
V V