NRDC to defend ports by joining ATA suit against SoCal truck plan

NRDC to defend ports by joining ATA suit against SoCal truck plan The National Resources Defense Council plans to intervene in a federal lawsuit against the Southern California ports' $2.4 billion trucking re-regulation plan on behalf of the NRDC, the Sierra Club and the Coalition for Clean Air, American Shipper has learned.
   An NRDC attorney contacted the American Trucking Association Monday, shortly after ATA filed a federal suit against the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, to inform the trade group that the council would be joining the suit.
   'We plan to fight on the behalf of the ports to protect their clean trucks plan and make the air better for local residents,' said NRDC attorney David Pettit.
   ATA filed the suit Monday afternoon in a Los Angeles federal court, seeking to block an access license component of the two ports' truck plan. ATA claims the access license agreements violate federal law and set the stage for the dismantling of federal trucking deregulation through local authority regulations.
   NRDC, one of the leading proponents of the truck plan since it was formally introduced by the ports last April, has a history of threatening legal action over what it sees as environmental issues.
   ATA has repeatedly stressed, both in the filing and over the past 15 months that the truck plan has developed, that it is not opposed to the environmental portions of the truck plan.
   The ports' truck plan, set to take effect Oct. 1, started as a plan to replace or retrofit the nearly 17,000 trucks servicing the two ports. The plan has grown to include an access license scheme that requires trucking firms to meet certain ports-defined criteria to enter any port marine terminal after Oct. 1.
   If successful, the ATA suit could permanently block the implementation of the ports' access license scheme, calling into question the efficacy of the entire truck plan.
   In other reaction to the filing of the ATA suit, the Port of Long Beach said in a Monday statement that the litigation would not keep the truck plan from moving forward 'without delay.' Executive Director Dick Steinke expressed disappointment that the 'ATA is seeking to impede this critical air quality initiative.'
   The port also claimed it has 'worked closely with the trucking and shipping industries to develop a workable program.'
   The trucking and shipping industry deny this, claiming they have been ignored when submitting letters or e-mails to port officials over details of the truck plan.
   In May, after several ATA attempts to discuss modification to the truck plan, the port broke off communications with the ATA.
   At the time, Port of Long Beach Deputy Executive Director Chris Lytle, told the ATA in a letter that 'It is apparent that our differences go to fundamental issues and not merely details.'
   'We have now met on several times to discuss our respective views,' wrote Lytle. 'We do not believe that further meetings on the contents of the Long Beach concession agreement would be productive.'
   Also on Monday, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a staunch supporter of the truck plan from its inception, said the city and port of Los Angeles have a 'moral mandate' to implement the truck plan.
   “We are committed to rolling ahead with the world’s most ambitious and bold plan to simultaneously green and grow a port,” Villaraigosa said.
   The Coalition for Clean and Safe Ports, a local environmental group that includes the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the Sierra Club, released a statement Monday calling ATA's action 'immoral' and accused the ATA of trying to 'bully its way into our backyard.'
   The ports 'have every right to establish rules for doing business,' the coalition said.
   The cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles and their respective ports, each named as defendants in the ATA complaint, have 30 days to formally respond to the suit. ' Keith Higginbotham