Post by concernedperson on Sept 4, 2008 16:36:26 GMT -5
Click to Print this Article
If the link above does not work,
please use your brower's print command.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Could Rule on Port Trucks Plan Sept. 8
September 4, 2008
By Bill Mongelluzzo / The JOURNAL of COMMERCE
A U.S. District Court judge on Sept. 8 will hear arguments involving a request by the trucking industry for a temporary restraining order blocking implementation of the Los Angeles-Long Beach clean-trucks concession plans, with a tentative ruling possible that same day.
Melissa Lin Perrella, staff attorney in Los Angeles for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told a media teleconference Thursday that U.S. District Court Judge Christina A. Snyder often offers advance tentative rulings before a court hearing. If she does so on Monday, she would then listen to arguments on her tentative ruling, and would either render her decision on the request for a restraining order or would take the case under advisement.
Snyder’s clerk of court said that if the judge offers an advance tentative ruling, it will be released to attorneys 20 minutes before the hearing.
The American Trucking Associations in July filed suit against the ports’ concession plans, charging that the requirements are illegal under the federal routes, rates and services statute that preserves for the federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce.
The ATA also charges that the ports’ concession requirements would result in hundreds of existing harbor trucking companies leaving the harbor and this would place an undue burden on interstate commerce.
The hearing will be held less than a month before the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are scheduled to implement the concession portion of the clean-trucks programs. Their plans are designed to reduce diesel pollution from harbor trucks by 80 percent over the next five years.
The ports on Oct. 1 intend to ban all pre-1989 trucks, which are the worst polluters, from harbor service. Also, they will limit access to marine terminals to truckers that have secured a port-issued concession agreement.
The ports on Oct. 1 also intend to begin collecting a $35 per-TEU clean-trucks fee on most drayage moves. The ports will use the revenues for subsidies to truckers that purchase new trucks that comply with the ports’ strict emission requirements.
At Thursday’s teleconference, Stephen F. Diamond, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University, joined environmental and community health groups in Southern California in stating that preventing implementation of the concession plans would result in continued truck pollution and health risks near the ports.
Using a balance of harm argument, Diamond said the well-documented health risks of diesel pollution are more significant than the narrow interests of trucking companies and therefore the restraining order should not be issued.
If the link above does not work,
please use your brower's print command.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Could Rule on Port Trucks Plan Sept. 8
September 4, 2008
By Bill Mongelluzzo / The JOURNAL of COMMERCE
A U.S. District Court judge on Sept. 8 will hear arguments involving a request by the trucking industry for a temporary restraining order blocking implementation of the Los Angeles-Long Beach clean-trucks concession plans, with a tentative ruling possible that same day.
Melissa Lin Perrella, staff attorney in Los Angeles for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told a media teleconference Thursday that U.S. District Court Judge Christina A. Snyder often offers advance tentative rulings before a court hearing. If she does so on Monday, she would then listen to arguments on her tentative ruling, and would either render her decision on the request for a restraining order or would take the case under advisement.
Snyder’s clerk of court said that if the judge offers an advance tentative ruling, it will be released to attorneys 20 minutes before the hearing.
The American Trucking Associations in July filed suit against the ports’ concession plans, charging that the requirements are illegal under the federal routes, rates and services statute that preserves for the federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce.
The ATA also charges that the ports’ concession requirements would result in hundreds of existing harbor trucking companies leaving the harbor and this would place an undue burden on interstate commerce.
The hearing will be held less than a month before the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are scheduled to implement the concession portion of the clean-trucks programs. Their plans are designed to reduce diesel pollution from harbor trucks by 80 percent over the next five years.
The ports on Oct. 1 intend to ban all pre-1989 trucks, which are the worst polluters, from harbor service. Also, they will limit access to marine terminals to truckers that have secured a port-issued concession agreement.
The ports on Oct. 1 also intend to begin collecting a $35 per-TEU clean-trucks fee on most drayage moves. The ports will use the revenues for subsidies to truckers that purchase new trucks that comply with the ports’ strict emission requirements.
At Thursday’s teleconference, Stephen F. Diamond, associate professor of law at Santa Clara University, joined environmental and community health groups in Southern California in stating that preventing implementation of the concession plans would result in continued truck pollution and health risks near the ports.
Using a balance of harm argument, Diamond said the well-documented health risks of diesel pollution are more significant than the narrow interests of trucking companies and therefore the restraining order should not be issued.