Search:

• Home
• About Us
• Archives
  • Archive Help
  • Archive FAQ
  • Archive Pricing
• Advertise
• Contact Us

Clearing the Air Between Long-Time Neighbors

Chairman of state air resources board recommends staff look at ways to regulate railroad companies.

By Elizabeth Hsing-Huei Chou, EGP Staff Writer

The state’s air quality authority, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), found itself weighing the importance of health and the economy when they stepped into the fray of a “neighbor-to-neighbor” dispute between railroad companies and the communities that live around the 18 major railyards in California.

CARB Chairman Mary Nichols directed staff at a Sept. 25 board meeting in Diamond Bar to “flesh out” details for using regulatory measures, as well as voluntary measures to compel railroad companies into reducing pollution levels at their railyards.

Representatives from the railroad industry, in support of staff recommendations, pushed for incentive funding programs and the continued use of voluntary agreements, but Nichols said she was “struck” by testimony from environmental groups and residents who live near the railyards.

She referred to a comment by a Commerce resident who said CARB stood between the community and the railroad companies.

“It caused me to think in a slightly different way… It’s true we are not in a one-way discussion, nor just a two-way discussion between ourselves and the railroads,” Nichols said. “That there is not just a public interest but a specific stakeholder interest in play here.”

Commerce residents in particular have a special stake in that they moved into their communities before the railyards expanded to their backyards, she said.  “I think they deserve something more specific and concrete,” she said.

Nichols asked staff to come back in six months or less with a plan for how CARB could potentially regulate railroad companies.

“We want to make it clear that regulation is not just something never to be discussed, but that in fact we will be developing an approach to it as part of the background of the whole program,” Nichols said, adding that a combination of a “regulatory framework” with “voluntary discussions” is typical in industries she’s worked in.

Nichol’s endorsement of a regulatory method departs from the CARB’s  original staff recommendation to continue with existing voluntary approaches, while adding incentive funding programs and other non-regulatory methods.

CARB staffer Harold Holmes said they looked at regulation, but finally determined the “incentive approach” was the fastest and most effective way to achieve the emission reductions needed to lower health risks and meet a 2014 federal implementation deadline.

Because CARB’s authority could be pre-empted by the federal government, staff recommended setting up incentive programs to encourage railroad companies to upgrade locomotives to low-emission models, saying it would reduce the most emissions for the least amount of work.

Board member Dr. John R. Balmes, however, said regulation is necessary because of the significant health risks. “I think we have to be mindful of trying to reduce the local impacts,” he said.

Nichols directed staff to look for areas where CARB could create regulations to reduce emissions, but not before they heard over three hours of public testimony from 70 speakers, most of whom live near railyards or represent environmental groups from around the state, including the Commerce-based East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, and favor regulating locomotives and railyard activity. Several railroad industry representatives also spoke in support of avoiding “institutional” measures and keeping voluntary and incentive approaches.

EYCEJ, Attorney Gideon Kracov urged CARB to “come from a position of strength” by looking at what could be regulated. CARB may not be able to regulate everything, but “there are literally hundreds of locomotives and numerous site specific measures that you can adopt,” he said.

Silent applause, consisting of the meeting audience waving their hands in order to avoid disrupting the public proceedings, greeted many of the speakers who related their struggles with living near the railyards.
Christina Santana of EYCEJ said she is concerned about medical bills if her family members, who already have asthma, were to get cancer. “Not taking action is not an option,” she said.

Commerce resident Jennifer Renteria read a letter drawn up by several environmental justice groups urging regulation, adding her own comments describing the obstacles faced by someone growing up near a railyard.

“I’d like you to all keep in mind that child whose life is in its entirety… is completely bounded… by freeways, railyards, rendering plants, heavy traffic, polluted streets, who likely attended an under-funded, over-crowded school and is likely un-insured, I’d like you to consider how you can take this moment to make this child, or provide the opportunity, to succeed, to become a civically-engaged American citizen, and provide for themselves,” she said.

CARB member Barbara Riordon said existing voluntary measures have been a success, but “There are people, and I’m convinced there will always be people who are unsatisfied… [Voluntary agreements have] worked in the past. I don’t have any reason to believe that wouldn’t work in the future,” said Riordon, who was a party to the negotiation of the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CARB and the railroad companies.

Railroad company representatives urged CARB to take the incentive funding approach and to maintain existing voluntary agreement methods, arguing those efforts have resulted in reductions that would continue without the prodding of regulatory measures.

“The railroads’ track record of working with this agency over the past 15 years is steadfast. Whatever they commit to, they do,” said Kirk Marckwald, representative for the Association of American Railroads, referring to MOU’s that were set up in 1998 and 2005.

Marckwald said a regulatory approach would take money from investments and into developing emission reduction technologies.
“[Railroad companies] only have one pot of money available. It will go to satisfy your regulation and thus won’t be available to co-fund the innovative technologies,” Marckwald said.
Railroad company representatives also took issue with some CARB staff recommendations. “AAR [Association of American Railroads] cannot support the staff’s recommendation to seek changes in federal laws to eliminate federal pre-emption in California,” said AAR representative Michael Barr. “We can’t agree to a patchwork of controls within a state or across states and we strongly disagree with some of the statements here today and the written comments who say that ARB has broad authority to regulate locomotives, railyards or rail operations, even within limited boundaries.”
A Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce representative spoke in favor of an incentive funding program. “The goods movement industry is very important to our region. It’s the driver of business and we need to protect it… there are a lot of other regions gunning for our traffic,” said chamber representative Alex Pugh.
Montebello resident Anna Ariola, who spoke on behalf of EYCEJ, said she would be happy if the railroad businesses made money, but not at the community’s expense. She asked that CARB come up with an agreeable solution between the two parties: “You’re in the middle so you’re like a referee between us. We have to create win-win solutions.”

 Print This Post

Comments

We Are the Largest Chain of Hispanic Owned Bilingual Newspapers in the U.S.

Eastside Sun / Northeast Sun / Mexican American Sun / Bell Gardens Sun / City Terrace Comet / Commerce Comet / Montebello Comet / Monterey Park Comet / ELA Brookyln Belvedere Comet / Wyvernwood Chronicle / Vernon Sun

 

 

Copyright © 2010 Eastern Group Publications, Inc. 5/09 · Log in