TagACC(1531)

ACC (Airport Communities Coalition) and CASE (Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion) application filed in Thurston County Superior Court (Case No. 01-2-02386-9) for direct review by Washington Court of Appeals, Division II, of the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB No. 01-160) ‘Order Granting Motion to Stay the Effectiveness of Section 401 Certification’ issued December 17, 2001. Also

Port Of Seattle motion to dismiss under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) filed in Thurston County Superior Court (Case No. 02-2-00029-8) against petitioners Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) and Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion (CASE). Seeks dismissal of ACC/CASE petition for review of Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) orders related to the Section 401 Water Quality Certification issued by

Summary Statement for Deposition Publication submitted by ACC and CASE in ACC & CASE v. Dept. of Ecology & Port of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160, pursuant to Order Granting Appellant’s Motion to Publish Depositions of Ecology Managers and CR 30(b)(6) Designated Witnesses dated March 19, 2002. Deponent Kevin Fitzpatrick, Section Manager of the Water Quality

This document contains interrogatories and responses from a Pollution Control Hearings Board case (PCHB No. 01-160) in which the Airport Communities Coalition (representing cities near Sea-Tac Airport, including Burien) appealed against the State of Washington Department of Ecology and the Port of Seattle regarding a 401 Water Quality Certification for the Third Runway Project. It includes lists of expert witnesses and their prior testimony histories covering topics such as hydrology, stormwater, and environmental impact, as well as objections to broad document production requests related to the Third Runway Project.

Letter dated January 15, 2002 from Peter J. Eglick of Helsell Fetterman LLP to Hon. Kaleen Cottingham, Presiding Officer of the Pollution Control Hearings Board, in PCHB No. 01-160, ACC v. Dept. of Ecology and Port Of Seattle. ACC opposes Port Of Seattle’s emergency request for status conference, arguing it is premature pending ACC’s response

Port Of Seattle motion filed January 2002 in PCHB No. 01-160 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington, opposing Airport Communities Coalition (ACC). Port Of Seattle moves to compel ACC to make designated witnesses available for deposition per the Board’s Prehearing Order of October 30, 2001, and to impose CR 34(b)

Washington State Department of Ecology’s response to Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) motion for summary judgment in PCHB No. 01-160, filed January 14, 2002 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board. Ecology argues that a water right is not required for reasonable assurance that water quality standards will be met under Clean Water Act § 401 Certification.

Port Of Seattle memorandum filed January 14, 2002 in PCHB No. 01-160, opposing ACC’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the issue of whether a water right is required for the Third Runway § 401 Certification stormwater management system. Port argues no water right has ever been required to manage stormwater in Washington under NPDES

A January 2002 letter from law firm Helsell Fetterman, on behalf of the Airport Communities Coalition, raises concerns with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about the Port of Seattle's revised construction plans for the Sea-Tac Third Runway. The Port switched from an in-place ground improvement approach to excavating up to three million cubic yards of material beneath the proposed retaining wall, a major change that critics argue could significantly harm Miller Creek and adjacent wetlands. Attached technical comments from GeoSyntec Consultants also identify deficiencies in the Port's geotechnical report and argue the changes undermine the Port's Clean Water Act Section 404 permit application.

In early 2002, the Port of Seattle filed a legal memorandum seeking to compel the Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) to make its witnesses available for deposition and to place limits on a requested inspection of Port property near Sea-Tac Airport. The Port objected to ACC's demands for unrestricted site access for 17 people, unlimited environmental sampling across 18 acres of wetlands and multiple creeks, and refusal to disclose sampling locations or methods in advance. ACC, in turn, refused to schedule any depositions until the site visit dispute was resolved.