Case 2:08-cv-04920-CAS-CT Document 303 Filed 08/26/10 Page 27 of 57 Page ID #:10029
1
concerns regarding truck emissions, safety, and compliance. Ex. 181 ¶ III(l), “POLA
2
Concession Agreement.”
3
I.
The Local Benefits of the Clean Truck Program
4
102. In its first year, the Clean Truck Program reduced the rate of Port truck
5
emissions by an estimated 70 percent. It is expected that, by 2012, Port truck emissions
6
will be reduced by more than 80 percent. Ex. 217, “Holmes and Knatz Memorandum,
7
11/12/09”; Ex. 231, “Press Release, 1/01/09.”
8 9
103. In a June 2009 presentation to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, Mayor Villaraigosa stated that the POLA Clean Truck Program “[c]ost less with greater
10
economic benefit than expected.” In particular, POLA was “bearing approximately 10%
11
of program total cost, instead of anticipated 80% prior to implementation. $44 million in
12
port incentives have leveraged over $400 million in private investment.” Ex. 144,
13
“Villaraigosa Presentation, 6/13/09.”
14
104. On October 1, 2009, Geraldine Knatz, Executive Director of POLA,
15
declared “If ever there were a win-win air pollution initiative at our Port, the Clean
16
Truck Program is it . . . [t]he air is substantially cleaner and continues to improve.
17
Industry is responding by purchasing clean trucks and taking advantage of our incentive
18
program. The trucking industry and our terminal operators have especially been
19
instrumental in the success of this program, and the dollars generated in the purchase of
20
all these news trucks are an added investment into the Southern California economy.”
21
Ex. 231, “Press Release, 1/01/09.”
22
105. According to statements issued by POLA, POLA officials estimate that by
23
spring 2010 there would be between 6,500 and 7,000 trucks serving the ports that meet
24
or exceed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2007 heavy duty truck emissions
25
standards. These trucks were expected to make more than 90 percent of container
26
pick-ups and drop-offs in early 2010. This success was achieved while this Court’s
27
preliminary injunction against several provisions of the Concession agreements was in
28
effect. Ex. 232, “Press Release, 1/01/09.” 27