New EPA Rules Full of Potholes, Shippers Maintain : Commerce: Transportation firms say they could be forced to reduce operations in California.

New federal air pollution rules could remake the face of West Coast shipping, industry officials said Wednesday, driving commerce away from California just as international trade is becoming recognized as a core industry for the region in the coming century.

Backers of the rules--unveiled this week by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--argue that shippers, exempt until now from the pain of helping to clean up the state’s polluted air, are overreacting much like other industries did when they first came under air pollution controls.

“There’s the potential of some significant impacts,” said Bill Boyd, senior air quality planner with the Southern California Assn. of Governments. “But in terms of heavy transport, the principle issue was that the federal government needs to step up to the plate and start doing something about those sources that only they can regulate.”

Though most executives are still reading the fine print, operators of the ships, 18-wheel trucks, trains and planes that bring goods in and out of the vast California market generally gave negative marks to the EPA plan.

The most far-reaching proposals in the agency’s 1,600-page clean-air plan for the state’s smoggiest cities focus on transportation industries, which create fully a third of the nitrogen oxides, a fifth of the carbon monoxide and a tenth of the hydrocarbons polluting California air.

The EPA plans extensive public review of the proposals before they become hard rules a year from now.

* Ships: Maritime shippers painted the most pessimistic picture in assessing the rules’ impact on the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, which together are the largest in the nation. Fully 25% of all U.S. waterborne international trade comes through them. Under the EPA proposal, ships docking at the two ports would be charged fees beginning in 2001 based on their engine emissions.

“Imposing regulations on foreign and domestic flagships could result in traffic being shipped to (the Ports of) Seattle and Tacoma,” said Arthur Bauer, executive vice president of Californians for Better Transportation, a Sacramento-based coalition of public agencies and transit districts, contractors, major employers, labor unions and financial institutions.

“And with that, there’s a whole distribution industry that moves over time,” he said.

Ships might also be diverted to the Ports of Oakland or Ensenada, Bauer said.

But shippers have already been considering alternative fuels, according to Robert Kanter, manager of environmental planning at the Port of Long Beach.

* Trucks and buses: Beginning with the 1999 model year, heavy trucks and buses would have to meet standards as stringent as those already imposed on private automobiles.

One proposal drawing heavy criticism would limit trucks without adequate emission-control systems to a single stop in each California air basin or a total of two stops per trip anywhere in the state. The intent is to force truckers to switch their loads to clean-burning tractors at the state’s borders.

“This shows a complete misunderstanding of how products are moved in California,” said Dave Titus, spokesman for the California Trucking Assn. “One of the largest growth areas is the LTL, less-than-truckload business. . . . A truck may stop at General Dynamics and drop off some computer hardware, then go on to Hughes, where it drops off mechanical components, and then it might drop off items at a mall.”

* Airlines: The airlines could have an easier time meeting the new rules.

Carriers could use cleaner ground vehicles, not just cleaner planes. At Los Angeles International Airport, United Airlines has already converted some of its baggage tractors, food trucks and passenger vans to run on compressed natural gas, electricity or propane. In addition, United’s jetliners parked at the terminal gate no longer run auxiliary engines to generate power for air conditioning and lights and instead tap into the airport’s electrical system.

Separate rules requiring airlines to ground noisier aircraft by the end of the decade may have the corollary affect of helping the carriers clean up their fleets. But the quieter engines already in the pipeline may not be clean enough to meet new EPA emission standards that would grow tougher every year, airline officials say.

Under a worst-case scenario, the airlines might be unable to meet the more stringent pollution rules without cutting operations at area airports.

* Railroads: Meeting the EPA standards may prove a stretch for the railroads, said Mark Stehly, assistant vice president of environmental affairs and hazardous materials for Santa Fe Railway.

“It may require a change in fuels, depending on how far (regulators) go,” Stehly said. “That would be quite costly. It might affect as many as 250 of our locomotives.”

One possible scenario might see the railroads operating two sets of locomotives--one for the Los Angeles area and one for the rest of the country. Santa Fe would probably change locomotives in Barstow, raising costs and lowering efficiency.

Shipping and Air Pollution

The shipping business--including the airline, rail and maritime industries--contribute a substantial portion of the air pollution in California. New federal regulations will impose emission controls on these sectors, as well as on interstate trucking, for the first time. The chart compares these industries’ emissions to those generated by cars, light trucks and other vehicles, which are already regulated.

EQUIPMENT & TONS PER DAY

HYDROCARBONS On-road vehicles: 720 Trains: 2 Ships: 1 Aircraft: 19

CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) On-road vehicles: 4,700 Trains: 6.5 Ships: 2.5 Aircraft: 89

NITROGEN OXIDE (NO) On-road vehicles: 610 Trains: 42 Ships: 33 Aircraft: 18

Source: California Air Resources Board