Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tuhan Hearing Logistics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Guam EPA staff warns board a multi‑day hearing will require full attendance, larger room and possible virtual access
Summary
Board members were told an upcoming hearing in Tuhan v. Guam EPA is likely to run five to six days; directors who wish to weigh evidence must attend every day, staff will seek a larger room and is exploring virtual access to accommodate public and press.
The Guam Environmental Protection Agency board discussed logistics for an anticipated multi‑day hearing in Tuhan v. Guam EPA during its June 9 meeting, with agency staff warning that directors who wish to weigh evidence must attend all hearing days.
Stacy, the hearing officer, said parties estimated five to six days of testimony and that the agency would need a larger conference room than was used in a prior proceeding because of expected witnesses and public interest. "We're probably going to have a lot more public interest in this particular one, especially press interest," Stacy said, and noted efforts are underway to secure a larger fourth‑floor room and to install cameras and improved audio.
Staff discussed scheduling constraints: Stacy said she is available primarily on Tuesdays and Wednesdays (and some Friday afternoons) and that the solicitor and chief engineer have limited availability, which led to a tentative July target and a proposal to hold hearings on the days that align with staff calendars. Stacy also noted that board members who wish to hear evidence and take part in rendering a decision need to attend from beginning to end; directors compared the requirement to a juror's obligation to hear the full record.
The board discussed remote participation and preserving the record. Stacy said prior hearings had been audio-only and that the office is installing cameras and audio equipment; she offered to investigate Zoom or other virtual platforms to ensure broader access and to maintain an accurate record of proceedings. Directors encouraged virtual availability if technically feasible.
No final hearing date was set in the meeting; staff said they would follow up on room availability and formal scheduling. Directors were advised that, if they plan to participate in weighing evidence, they should be prepared to attend all hearing days or to refrain from participation in the final decision if they miss portions of the record.
Next steps: agency staff will try to secure a larger room for July hearings, check technical resources for remote access, coordinate schedules with the solicitor and chief engineer, and return to the board with confirmed dates and logistics.
