Trucking group to appeal court ruling permitting Los Angeles port to enforce anti-smog policy

Truckers to appeal ruling for LA anti-smog program

LOS ANGELES — Environmentalists on Friday hailed a federal judge’s ruling that allows the nation’s largest port to enforce anti-smog rules on big rigs that haul goods in and out.

The case involving the Port of Los Angeles is being watched by ports around the nation that are implementing programs to reduce diesel emissions, or are considering it, but are worried that legal challenges from the trucking industry could put them in court for years. Already, the American Trucking Association says it plans to appeal Judge Christina Snyder’s ruling Thursday, which protects key aspects of Clean Truck Program.

“This victory bolsters the standing of burgeoning clean port programs across the nation,” said Melissa Lin Perrella, senior attorney with the Natural Resources and Defense Council. “This decision allows the Port of Los Angeles to continue introducing cleaner trucks while getting dirty ones off the road and sets the stage for healthier communities nationwide.”

The program began in October 2008 in conjunction with the Port of Long Beach by replacing or retrofitting more than 16,000 aging trucks that serve the ports with newer, cleaner-burning models within a 5-year period. It was launched as part of an effort to dramatically reduce pollution for communities surrounding the port complex that are home to more than 2 million people.

The ATA, while maintaining that it supports clean air goals, sued because it was against certain provisions in the program. It objected to rules at the Port of Los Angeles that prohibit truck companies from contracting with independent truckers and require the companies to hire those drivers by 2013.

The port reasoned that even with subsidies to help pay for new rigs, which can cost more than $100,000, the independent truckers that make up the majority of the drivers hauling cargo at the ports can’t afford to maintain them. It also wants truck companies to be responsible for their drivers and to shoulder some of the burdens of the costly program to sustain it in the long run.

The ATA argued the employee mandate violates a federal law that has long prevented state and local regulation of interstate trucking prices, routes and services. It later dropped the Port of Long Beach from the lawsuit after reaching a settlement.

In her ruling, Snyder said that a “market participant exception” to the law applied to the program. She wrote that the Port of Los Angeles should be allowed to take action to maintain its commercial operations “as any private landlord or facilities operator would.” She cited lawsuits challenging port expansion projects and said air pollution interfered with the port’s growth and has jeopardized its continued viability as a commercial enterprise.

The rules were a “business necessity” that eliminate obstacles to the port’s growth, she wrote.

The ATA said Friday it believes Snyder’s findings are “erroneous as a matter of law.” It plans to ask the courts to maintain a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the ban on independent trucks and other provisions while it appeals.

A transportation economist said if higher courts affirm Snyder’s ruling, it could transform the trucking work force at ports across the nation.

“It’ll be much easier for the Teamsters to organize these drivers,” Paul Bingham said. “Unionization will lead to increased transportation cost to shippers and ultimately consumers.”

Legal uncertainty has left ports in New York, New Jersey, Oakland, Seattle, Houston and Miami wondering whether they can impose similar rules.

While waiting for a final ruling on the case, they’re putting hopes on a congressional bill Rep. Jerrold Nadler introduced last month seeking to rewrite the federal law and give local ports the authority to set more of their own rules. The New York Democrat said the Clean Ports Act will “ensure that future legal challenges do not impede environmental progress.”

Industries that do business at the ports worry the change in law could lead to a patchwork regulatory system.