Long Beach port expansion moves closer to a vote

The Port of Long Beach is expected to release the final environmental impact report today on a 10-year, $750-million harbor expansion that would accommodate the world’s largest ships, reinforce the nation’s Pacific Rim trade and create 14,000 permanent local jobs.

If all goes according to plan, work on the massive Middle Harbor project could begin as early as December.

Environmentalists and health advocates are demanding a number of revisions and at least $5 million worth of mitigation measures to counter the project’s side effects: heavy truck traffic, excessive noise and light, air pollution and higher rates of respiratory disease and cancer.

But with the unemployment rate hitting nearly 11% in Los Angeles County, supporters of the project believe that in upcoming debates the prospects of large-scale industrial growth will carry more weight than the potential environmental impacts.

“It’s our very own economic stimulus package,” said James Hankla, head of the Long Beach Harbor Commission, which will vote April 13 on whether to go forward with the project. “We believe it will be approved.”

Gary Toebben, president and chief executive of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, agreed and said, “This project is the best economic news we’ve heard in years.”

Critics, many of whom complained about having only 10 days to review the voluminous impact report, were preparing to challenge the project.

“One of the big concerns is what kind of mitigation in the communities the harbor is willing to do, and what price the communities are going to pay for the construction and operations that go along with all those jobs,” said David Pettit, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

State air quality and health experts say 2,400 premature deaths a year are linked to emissions from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Complicating matters is the possibility that a federal judge could throw out provisions of a new clean-truck program.

The American Trucking Assn. argued the program imposed an unfair economic burden and violated federal law.

The program is subsidized by fees ranging from $15 to $30 for each shipping container that truckers move through the ports.

“What happens if the judge decides to toss out the entire clean-truck program?” Pettit asked. “Without it, there would be no money for taking care of the environmental consequences of port expansion.”

Port authorities say the project is designed to prepare the harbor for economic boom times, improve its competitive position and implement measures developed in the face of threatened lawsuits to force the ports to cut pollution.

In phases, it would combine two terminals that are too old, inefficient and dirty to meet the port’s goals for pollution reduction and enhanced production. It would deepen waters to handle large cargo vessels and would provide on-dock rail service. In addition, ships would be able to turn off their auxiliary diesel engines and plug into dockside electrical power.

“Air pollution there would be reduced by 50% because plugging in idling ships does away with most of their diesel pollution,” said port spokesman Art Wong. “We’ll be growing green because we will only allow the cleanest available generation of trains and trucks.”

--

louis.sahagun@latimes.com