Long Beach Groups Draw Line on Rail Yard Project

0

A decade after Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. first proposed building a $500 million yard in Wilmington, the project now finds itself mired in litigation brought not only by environmental groups but by Long Beach and school districts in the city, which is just across a freeway from the project site.

Long Beach officials late last month filed opening briefs after an attempt at mediation between project backers and opponents fell through.

The legal battle means another delay for the BNSF project, and could alter competing carrier Union Pacific Railroad’s plans to upgrade its own rail yard nearby.

BNSF, a Fort Worth, Texas, unit of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc., declined to comment on the litigation or how the delay might affect the railroad’s harbor operations, and officials at Union Pacific of Omaha, Neb., said they aren’t concerned.

But further delay presents a problem for both railroads as well as everyone else at the local harbors, said international trade economist Jock O’Connell with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles.

Delaying the two projects hurts the local ports’ message to shipping companies that they are a competitive gateway for international trade, he said.

Other ports are vying for the cargo that now moves through Los Angeles and Long Beach, and some are better positioned to upgrade rail yards and other infrastructure. Because much of the cargo that arrives at local ports is bound for Chicago and other points east, O’Connell said robust rail infrastructure is crucial to keeping the ports busy.

“For a cargo owner who has major investments in cargo – especially if it’s high-value cargo – those importers typically like to get their goods on the shelves as quickly as possible so they’re making money,” he said. “That’s why having an efficient rail system is critical to maintaining the ports’ competitiveness.”

BNSF’s main rail yard is in Commerce, about 20 miles from the harbor. The proposed rail yard is just four miles from the harbor, and BNSF spokespeople have said having the yard so close would mean less truck traffic on the 710 freeway and speedier movement of cargo out of the ports.

Opponents, though, say the rail yard, known as the Southern California International Gateway, or SCIG, will cause increased pollution and endanger the health of people who live or work nearby. Opponents, including the city of Long Beach, the Long Beach Unified School District and the Natural Resources Defense Council, want BNSF to pledge further emission reductions if the project is built, or for the rail yard to be built elsewhere.

Though the project site is in the Wilmington neighborhood of Los Angeles, it borders Long Beach and is close to an elementary school and high school.

“The location of the site right there adjacent to schools is just an unacceptable location,” said Morgan Wyenn, a staff attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Dual yards

Phillip Sanfield, director of media relations for the Port of Los Angeles, said the agency’s environmental analysis complies with state environmental law and that communities near the proposed rail yard would be worse off if the project is not built. The yard would be built on land now used by trucking companies, and Sanfield said modern equipment at the rail yard would lead to lower overall emissions at the site.

“SCIG provides many benefits to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach as well as the community and the region,” Sanfield said. “If SCIG is not built, then these benefits will not be delivered.”

Meanwhile, there’s no formal opposition to Union Pacific’s plans for a $400 million upgrade of its Intermodal Container Transfer Facility, or ICTF, a rail yard adjacent to the BNSF project site. Union Pacific has yet to release an environmental impact report for its project.

Attorney Wyenn said that’s likely by design. She guesses that Union Pacific has been holding off on submitting environmental documents as it waits to see the legal vulnerabilities of BNSF’s project so it could then shore up any similar issues of its own.

Francisco Castillo, director of corporate relations and media for Union Pacific, said his company’s project is independent of BNSF’s and that the company has no concern over BNSF’s delay or the recent litigation.

Still, it’s likely that any additional environmental requirements that opponents are able to attach to BNSF’s rail yard will carry over to the Union Pacific project.

David Roberts, director for economic development and planning for Los Angeles City Councilman Joe Buscaino, whose 15th District includes the harbor area, said he would expect Union Pacific’s yard would “at least meet, or preferably exceed, the standards for air quality and health risk improvements set forth by the (state’s) Clean Air Action Plan and SCIG.”

No posts to display