Notes

The Port of Seattle filed a petition for judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act challenging a final order issued by the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) on August 12, 2002. The PCHB had affirmed a Section 401 water quality certification issued by the Washington Department of Ecology for the Port’s Master Plan Update at Sea-Tac Airport, which includes the Third Runway project, but added 16 conditions of its own. The Port argues those conditions are contrary to controlling law, unsupported by substantial evidence, exceed the Board’s authority, and are arbitrary and capricious.

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