TagPollution Control Hearings Board(1532)

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,

ACC’s response filed with the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB No. 01-160) opposing Port Of Seattle motions to compel depositions of ACC experts and limit site entry. ACC argues that Port Of Seattle has refused to grant CR 34(a)(2) site access requested November 26, 2001, despite ACC serving a routine request for entry to Port

ACC (Airport Communities Coalition) response filed with the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB No. 01-160) opposing Port Of Seattle’s motion to compel production of documents and challenging subpoenas duces tecum served December 10, 2001. ACC argues Port’s discovery requests under CR 26 are overbroad and unduly burdensome, including Request for Production No. 3 demanding ‘all

Draft memorandum dated January 17, 2002 from Hart Crowser engineers Doug Lindquist, Reda Mikhail, and Michael Bailey to Jim Thomson (HNTB Corporation), project number 4978-40, regarding FLAC (finite difference model) seismic analysis of three proposed mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls for the Third Runway project at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Analyses cover four wall sections

Declaration by Michael P. Witek filed in Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) Case No. 01-160, Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) v. State of Washington Department of Ecology and Port of Seattle, in support of ACC’s response to motions to compel and limit entry. Document lists Exhibits A through S, including ACC’s November 26, 2001 Request for

Port Of Seattle legal brief filed with the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB No. 01-160) opposing Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) motion to compel inspection of Port property. Filed by Foster Pepper & Shefelman PLLC, received January 18, 2002. Argues ACC’s demand for unlimited site visit under CR 34(a) constitutes impermissible fishing expedition, citing Belcher v.

Summary statement for deposition publication submitted pursuant to Order Granting Appellant’s Motion to Publish Depositions of Ecology Managers and CR 30(b)(6) Designated Witnesses, dated March 19, 2002, in ACC & CASE v. Dept. of Ecology & Port of Seattle, PCHB No. 01-160. Deponent Gordon White, who signed the 401 certifications for the Department of Ecology,

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