Opinion ID: 2634723
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Low Flow Mitigation

Text: 1. Did the PCHB err in its determination that the planned low flow mitigation would be adequate? The PCHB did not err in concluding that the Port's low flow mitigation plan is adequate and feasible. 2. Did the PCHB err when it required, in condition 6, that the Port maintain a baseline flow in Des Moines Creek of one cubic foot per second? The PCHB erroneously interpreted and applied the law when it required the Port to do more than offset the impact of the third runway; thus, condition 6 is overturned. 3. Did the PCHB err in requiring the Port, in condition 16, to obtain a water right to manage stormwater for low flow mitigation? Washington law does not require a water right for the Port's low flow offset plan; thus, condition 16 is overturned.