By Paul Scott Abbott, AJOTAfter months of heated conflict, the controversial programs of the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to begin replacing older, heavy-polluting drayage trucks appear to have a green light to proceed Oct. 1. Although, with the implementation date rapidly approaching, the possibility remained that Federal Maritime Commission actions could still stall the plans, a US District Court judge’s recent ruling looked to pave the way for the San Pedro Bay megaports to put their Clean Truck Programs into gear at the start of October. Nonetheless, upon US District Judge Cristina Snyder’s Sept. 9 denial of the American Trucking Associations request for a preliminary injunction against the two ports, ATA officials said they would continue their fight to block port requirements that drayage drivers enter into concession agreements. Unlike the Port of Long Beach plan, which is designed to permit the small owner-operators who dominate the sector to continue to be involved in handling harbor drayage, the Port of Los Angeles program aims to limit the business to concession-holding trucking companies with employee drivers. ATA’s July legal action fights both the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports’ plans but does not address the Port of San Diego’s initiative, which relies heavily upon voluntary truck replacements and engine retrofits. Snyder’s decision was based on pleadings and a Sept. 8 hearing in US District Court for the Central District of California, during which ATA Deputy Chief Counsel Robert Digges, Jr. reiterated that ATA opposes the concession agreements but in general supports the ports’ Clean Truck Programs, including the phased retirement of older trucks from port operations and their replacement with newer, cleaner vehicles. The port concession agreements that ATA opposes are simply not needed to meet the ports’ environmental goals, Digges argued. The ATA position has received significant industry support, including from the National Retail Federation and the Intermodal Association of North America. “Our diverse member companies transport the vast majority of the containerized cargo moving throughout North America and overseas, and much of this freight flows through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach,” Joni Casey, IANA’s president and chief executive officer, said in an Aug. 28 statement. “The potential for the concession plans to adversely impact transportation movements is too great for IANA to remain silent on this issue.” Snyder’s decision was in great part favorable to ATA’s position in the case, according to an ATA statement, as the judge acknowledged that ATA prevailed on most points presented. The judge acknowledged that ATA would likely succeed on the argument that the Clean Truck Programs are preempted by federal law, the ATA statement pointed out, and she also determined that the ports’ argument that they are sovereign tidelands was without support. However, Snyder, in what the ATA statement characterized as “an overbroad interpretation” of the safety exception to Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 preemption, sided with the ports and determined that the security aspects of the ports’ plans were sufficient to qualify the entire agreements as exempt from preemption. “Enjoining the concession agreements would have the potential to compromise security measures, which could significantly harm the public interest in secure ports,” Snyder wrote in a 26-page ruling.  “Furthermore, the public also has an important interest in ensuring that the environmental benefits from the Clean Trucks Program are implemented…” According to port officials, a key element of the concession system is a requirement that trucking firms dispatch only drivers who have undergone a security background check and obtained a federal Transportation Worker Identification Credential. The Clean Truck Programs of Los Angeles and Long Beach call for the two containerports to, on Oct. 1, start phasing out heavily polluting trucks from port