TagAirport Communities Coalition(69)

This is a library catalog page listing five legal and regulatory documents from 2003 related to environmental permitting and litigation. The documents include an NPDES water discharge permit (No. WA-002465-1) issued by the Department of Energy, and three entries related to a legal case (ACC v. Colonel Graves) involving a Section 404 appeal and motions for summary judgement filed through the Army Corps of Engineers. A comment letter on the NPDES Draft Permit is also catalogued.

In September 2002, the Port of Seattle filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court challenging eight of sixteen environmental protections imposed on its Third Runway project by the State Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB). The Airport Communities Coalition, which opposed the runway expansion, argued that this legal action proved the Port could not build the Third Runway while complying with environmental and water-quality laws. This appeal marked the third time the Port had used the courts to attempt to weaken environmental safeguards tied to the project.

This legal document covers a 2002 Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board case in which the Airport Communities Coalition and Citizens Against Airport Expansion challenged the water quality certification issued by the Department of Ecology for the construction of a Third Runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The hearing examined 20 issues related to stormwater management, water quality standards, and whether adequate assurances existed that the runway project would comply with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The case involved the Port of Seattle as a respondent and centered on whether proper environmental safeguards were in place before construction could proceed.

In March 2002, the Port of Seattle filed a motion asking the Pollution Control Hearings Board to quash a subpoena issued by the Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) seeking testimony from Dr. Linda Logan, an employee of consulting firm Parametrix. The Port argued two reasons for quashing: Dr. Logan did not appear on any party's final witness list as required by the Board's pre-hearing order, and the accompanying notice under Civil Rule 43(f) was improper because Dr. Logan was neither a party nor a managing agent of the Port of Seattle.

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.

In this 2001 declaration filed before Washington State's Pollution Control Hearings Board, Dr. Peter Willing challenges the Port of Seattle's commitment to improving stormwater management at Sea-Tac Airport. He argues that the Port's pledge to retrofit its stormwater system 'to the extent practicable' is vague, undefined, and falls short of required water quality standards. Dr. Willing also contends that the four best management practices listed in the Port's Stormwater Master Plan are largely inadequate, as most do not go beyond basic King County water quality requirements.

Legal declaration by attorney Steven G. Jones representing the Port of Seattle in a Pollution Control Hearings Board case. The declaration outlines responses to public comments regarding a JARPA application and includes various exhibits related to water quality certification and regulatory matters.

In February 2001, engineering firm GeoSyntec Consultants submitted a technical review letter on behalf of the Airport Communities Coalition, raising serious concerns about the proposed Third Runway expansion at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The review identified significant deficiencies in the geotechnical investigation and analysis supporting construction of the embankment fill and West MSE Wall, including insufficient soil strength data and inadequate seismic safety assessments. GeoSyntec warned that the proposed design — which would result in the world's tallest MSE wall built over weak, potentially unstable soils in a seismically active region — could fail under earthquake conditions, threatening both airport operations and nearby natural resources.