California environmentalists sue Port of Los Angeles, alleging clean water violations

A California environmental group on Tuesday filed a federal lawsuit against the Port of Los Angeles, accusing the defendant of unleashing toxic pollutants into the San Pedro Bay.

The activists — from the organization Environment California — claimed that the port has violated the federal Clean Water Act with more than 2,000 illegal discharges in the past five years alone. Those releases, they argued, have routinely surpassed legal limits on fecal bacteria, copper and other contaminants.

In addition to spotlighting the alleged pollution itself, the plaintiffs also claimed that the Port’s stormwater treatment system is problematically undersized. As a result, the activists contended, some untreated wastewater ends up bypassing the system entirely, also in violation of federal law.

“Everyone in and around the Los Angeles Harbor knows that the water quality is terrible,” Laura Deehan, state director of Environment California, said in a statement.

“We are suing to get the Port’s pollution of San Pedro Bay under control and make it a model for improving water quality,” she added.

Deehan and her colleagues argued that because the Port earns revenue from leasing and services fees charged to massive shipping corporations, the City of Los Angeles should not support this entity via tax dollars.

Currently, the Port is housed within the Los Angeles Harbor Department, a branch of the city’s municipal government, but does not receive any such funding from the city.It is located about 25 miles south of downtown.

Last month, the Port authorized a $2.6 billion budget for the 2024-2025 fiscal year and forecast about $281 million in net revenues, the plaintiffs stressed.

“If a well-funded city department pollutes in violation of its Clean Water Act permit limits, how can the city expect anyone else to comply?” Deehan asked.

While the port’s on-site treatment system is supposed to remove toxic metals, bacteria and other pollutants that amass on the property, the activists argued that the equipment has proved ineffective.

Unable to wholly eliminate those contaminants during dry weather, the system leaves behind excess pollutants — which then pollute the stormwater when it rains, according to the activists.

The pump station at the Port, per the complaint, spills out into a section of the Los Angeles Harbor that is “heavily used for public recreation” — attracting more than a million people every day. 

“People swim, fish, and boat in the Harbor, and picnic, barbecue, use playgrounds, and engage in other activities along its shore,” the plaintiffs argued.

Even though the Port has been regularly paying a “mandatory minimum” state fine of $3,000 per violation, these infractions have persisted, the plaintiffs noted. Deehan described these payments as “a slap-on-the-wrist-penalty,” arguing that the alleged violator is paying to pollute.

Under the Clean Water Act’s “citizen suit” provision, those affected by such violations can bring a case to federal court after providing 60 days’ warning to the defendant and to state and federal environmental agencies.

Environment California said it sent notice of its intent to file such a suit on May 21.

“The Port can afford to solve this problem — and the people of California cannot afford for unchecked pollution like this to continue,” Deehan said.

The Hill has reached out to the Port of Los Angeles for comment.

— Updated at 5:31 p.m.