City Downplays Port Pollution, Critics Say

Harbor-area residents have erupted in anger over a new plan from the Port of Los Angeles, claiming port officials are intentionally manipulating numbers to hide the true impact of port pollution in Los Angeles and northern Orange counties.

The plan is intended to show how Mayor James K. Hahn could keep a 2001 promise to maintain “no net increase” in emissions as the port expands. It concludes that although the amount of cargo passing through the port will quadruple by 2025, existing and proposed controls will cut pollution even without the creation of major new initiatives.

Residents charged Thursday that the plan seriously downplayed the expected growth of the port and the amount of future emissions produced by ships, trucks, locomotives and port equipment. Some called on Hahn to order the plan returned to port staff to be reworked.

“How dare these people do this stuff? It’s just totally unacceptable,” said Noel Park, a member of a community panel working with the port to improve air quality.

“It’s so blatantly unbelievable that I was embarrassed -- I was embarrassed for the port,” said San Pedro resident Richard Havenick, chairman of the panel that received the plan Wednesday evening. “I can’t believe that anyone looked at it with any intelligence and authorized it.”

Deputy Mayor Doane Liu, who handles port issues for the mayor, responded to complaints by saying his office was willing to work with community groups to modify the plan if necessary.

Liu pointed to a separate report issued Wednesday -- one praised by some air experts -- that lists major pollutants emitted at the port. The list will help officials determine how to reduce emissions, he said.

“The plan of how we get there is not done, and we want to work with everyone to figure out how we do it,” Liu said. If there are any faults, “we’ll correct them.”

Residents said, however, that officials presented the plan Wednesday as a fait accompli.

Those residents have lobbied for years to force the port to take their concerns seriously, even going to court and successfully blocking construction of a major new terminal for a Chinese shipping firm. Vowing to ease tensions, Hahn created the Port Community Advisory Committee to help improve relations between residents and the port.

Since Hahn made his 2001 pledge, the port pollution debate has moved to Sacramento.

The plan and report were released as legislators wrestled with a bill by Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) that would force the port, starting in January 2006, to not exceed its 2004 emissions level. The bill is staunchly opposed by California’s ports and the California Chamber of Commerce.

The proposal released Wednesday -- titled “Plan to Achieve No Net Increase of Air Emissions at the Port of Los Angeles” -- was written by port staff with assistance from a private firm, Houston-based Starcrest Consulting Group.

Members of the community panel said it was sprung on them without any effort to seek their advice first.

“Somehow, this plan for no net emissions was forced into the meeting,” Havenick said. “That strategic mistake of springing this plan has really harmed our relationship.”

Port officials say the plan will be refined in coming weeks, and they deny twisting the facts. “It’s not a done deal,” port spokeswoman Rachel Campbell said.

In particular, residents criticized the plan’s assumption that emissions from trucks would begin dropping sharply this year, reach 2001 levels next year and continue to plummet through 2025.

That drop-off will be achieved, the plan predicts, by new federal and state regulations, as well as a local program run by the Gateway Cities Council of Governments aimed at helping truck drivers replace old, more heavily polluting vehicles with newer models.

Residents say they are incredulous, pointing to the thousands of older trucks that jam area freeways daily and saying many independent truckers cannot afford to buy new cabs.

Data from the Gateway Cities program show that at least 6,000 trucks servicing the port are 20 years old or more. Though a $10-million payment from a port legal settlement will replace 400 of those trucks with newer models, that work will continue until 2007 or 2008 -- which does not explain the sharp drop-off projected to begin this year.

“There’s nothing to explain that at all. It’s very mysterious,” said Julie Masters, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Masters also questioned the port’s reliance on a proposal to cut ship sulfur emissions along the West Coast, saying that idea was still in the discussion stage.

City Councilwoman Janice Hahn, who represents the harbor area, said Thursday that she would like to see port staff return to the drawing board to improve the plan rather than rely on existing curbs to reduce emissions.

“I don’t think we should base our no net increase plan on what we think will happen in the industry,” she said.

Gail Ruderman Feuer, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, called on James Hahn to take action.

“If the mayor is serious about his no net increase policy,” she said, “then they need to go back to the drawing board and come up with a real plan -- and not just hocus-pocus with the numbers and show they can do nothing and keep current emission levels.”

Liu said Mayor Hahn did not receive the emissions reduction plan until Wednesday night and had not yet read it.