Shippers suggest alternatives to SoCal port’s proposals

Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor -- Logistics Management, 10/11/2007

LOS ANGELES,  Calif.—On the eve of tomorrow’s public meeting with the port commissions of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the mayors of both those cities received a letter crafted by 34 shipper associations proposing alternatives to the San Pedro Area Ports'  Infrastructure and Environment Container Fee (IECF), and the Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) truck replacement proposal.

“We are writing, not merely to object to aspects of these proposals, but to suggest discrete changes that we believe would improve them,” stated the letter. “We urge you to consider these proposed changes prior to any such meeting of the Port Commissions. We also pledge ourselves to continue to work with you to find a compromise that will result in private sector support.”

The letter to Los Angeles Mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Long Beach Mayor Robert Foster, was signed by shippers as diverse (and powerful) as the Agriculture Transportation Coalition, The Toy Industry Association, and the National Customs Brokers & Freight Forwarders Association of America.

“It is our understanding that some industry stakeholders are considering litigation against the ports if the plan and fee as currently drafted are approved,” the letter added. [This is] something that we would like to see avoided.”

According to Patty Senecal, vice president of the International Warehouse Logistics Association, there are a number of issues related to creating a ‘green’ supply chain being discussed tomorrow. And the solution, she says, is currently in place.

“The current proposals made by the ports are too ‘truck-centric,” she said in an interview. “We want to examine the entire impact new policies might have on distribution centers, the railroads, and the ports themselves.”

Among the suggestions for changes, is one that would eliminate the requirement that all drivers must be employees rather than owner-operators. Shippers are also asking that  port-collected user-fees be used for port projects only – not projects such as the Alameda Corridor. Finallly, shippers are demanding that the creation of a “user fee” not penalize intermodal rail by charging both a fee and a separate toll on the Alameda Corridor.