TagAirport Communities Coalition(279)

Notice of Appearance filed January 17, 2002 by Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) through attorney Michael P. Witek of Helsell Fetterman LLP in PCHB Case No. 01-160 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington. ACC enters appearance against respondents State of Washington Department of Ecology and Port Of Seattle (counsel Roger Pearce,

CASE (Citizens Against Sea-Tac Expansion) response brief filed January 16, 2002 in PCHB No. 01-160, concurring with ACC’s (Airport Communities Coalition) Motion for Summary Judgment regarding the absence of a water right for the Third Runway Section 401 Certification. The brief argues Port Of Seattle must obtain a water right to implement low streamflow conditions,

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.

Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) motion filed in PCHB No. 01-160 before the Environmental Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington, seeking to extend the discovery schedule against Port Of Seattle and Department of Ecology. ACC requests extension of Port Of Seattle witness deposition deadline from February 1, 2002 to February 25, 2002; final

Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) motion to compel entry upon the Third Runway/Master Plan Update project area filed with the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB No. 01-160) against Department of Ecology et al. ACC seeks an order for access to observe, photograph, and sample soils, wetlands, and streams in the project area. Motion details Port Of

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.

Declaration by Jeanne Moeller, Des Moines resident, filed January 10, 2002, in support of Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) Motion to Compel Inspection of Port Of Seattle property, PCHB Case No. 01-160. Moeller states she participated in a Des Moines Chamber of Commerce tour of the proposed Third Runway construction area at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport approximately

Second Declaration of Steven G. Jones, attorney for Respondent Port Of Seattle, filed in PCHB No. 01-160 (Airport Communities Coalition v. State of Washington Department of Ecology and Port Of Seattle). Jones details ACC’s November 26, 2001 CR 34(a)(2) site visit request, the Port’s December 24, 2001 objections, negotiations with ACC counsel Michael Witek and

Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) interrogatories nos. 1-18 and requests for production nos. 1-6 directed to the Washington State Department of Ecology, filed in PCHB No. 01-160 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington. Pursuant to PCHB October 30, 2001 Prehearing Order and Civil Rules 26, 33, and 34, ACC through counsel

Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) motion for summary judgment filed January 4, 2002 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB), Case No. 01-160, arguing that Ecology’s Section 401 Certification for the Port Of Seattle Third Runway project (Sea-Tac Airport Master Plan Update) should be invalidated because the Port lacks a water right to implement low flow