Both sides reflect on marathon ACR hearings

"The opportunity allows [environmentalists] to go down a path that's really a distraction, rather than really focusing on the subject at hand," LaValley said. "That's one of the most frustrating things. One [person] can belabor certain points that have already been discussed ad nauseam."

LaValley says the hearing process needs to be revised.

"The adjudicatory hearing process is one that needs to be looked at from top to bottom," LaValley said. "There needs to be some way of creating a focus that does not drag things out for an indefinite amount of time."

Keith McKeiver is spokesman for the APA. He says there are no current plans to revise the hearing process. He adds that the additional scrutiny was relevant because the project is unusually large.

The next step is for interested parties to submit their closing arguments, according to McKeever. That process could take as many as 60 days. After that process is complete, the APA has 60 days to review the application, agree on any final conditions, and render a decision.

McKeever acknowledged that APA commissioners will need to wade through a mountain of information, but said staff would help them move through it in an orderly fashion.

Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment