Posted on 02/19/2008 9:52:23 PM PST by NormsRevenge
The Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners on Tuesday approved the final elements of a clean air initiative aimed at reducing pollution from trucks hauling cargo through the Port of Long Beach.
The commissioner voted unanimously to adopt several facets of the so-called clean trucks program, which looks to replace and modernize older-model trucks with ones that spew fewer harmful emissions.
An after-hours call to the California Trucking Association was not immediately returned.
The program sets up a system for identifying and monitoring the trucks that enter the port so they can be monitored for compliance with security, maintenance and health insurance requirements.
Trucks operated by independent drivers or part of a trucking company fleet will be eligible to register for the program. Early drafts of the plan would have restricted access only to trucks operated by trucking companies, edging out the thousands of independent owner-operators that now haul cargo through the port and its neighboring Port of Los Angeles.
The commission also adopted other elements of the program, including a proposal to push back the date when it will begin charging a $35 fee per loaded cargo container to October 1. It had previously been set for June 1.
That measure, approved in December, is expected to raise around $1.6 billion to help pay to replace thousands of older diesel trucks with cleaner-burning models.
The commission voted on a $2 billion financing plan for truck owners looking to upgrade their vehicles.
Exploding economic growth in Asia is expected to triple the cargo container volume at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach over the next two decades.
That has raised concerns over the impact of pollution from trucks, ships and other vehicles at the ports is having on surrounding communities.
The two ports combined represent America's largest port complex and account for more than 40 percent of all containerized cargo entering the U.S. annually.
The ports' harbor commissions have each sought to enact a sweeping clean air initiative, which aims to slash air pollution from port trucks by 80 percent within four years.
Under the proposed plan, only trucks built after 1993 will be able to haul cargo through the ports beginning in 2010. Two years later, all trucks servicing the ports must meet 2007 federal emission standards.
Baja port may be future competitor
***********************EXCERPT*****************
COLONET, BAJA CALIFORNIA - Three hours south of San Diego on a desolate, picturesque strip of beach surrounded by rolling farmland sits the site of Baja's proposed mega-port.
Planned to be larger, cheaper and more efficient than Long Beach-Los Angeles, America's busiest seaport, Puerto Colonet seeks to provide an alternative gateway to the United States for the growing volume of cargo arriving from manufacturing bases in Asia.
It's also, for now, just a dream.
Still needed is about $4 billion of private capital, construction of community and infrastructure to support the port complex and agreements from various transportation and trade-related entities like railroads, marine terminal operators and ocean carriers.
But the project has cleared several important hurdles, including a $1 billion commitment from the Mexican government, political support from national, regional and local bureaucracy and the resolution of important and often complicated land-use issues.
Plus, there's growing interest from shippers and retailers concerned about growing costs associated with seaports in California and elsewhere.
"The time is right for this project," said Ernesto Ruffo, a well-connected former Baja governor and northern border czar who founded Puerto Colonet Infraestructura (PCI), an international consortium of developers and shipping interests, to support the project. "The ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are getting crowded, the infrastructure is congested and people are looking for lower costs and efficiencies."
The Mexican government, which wants the port designed and built by a single developer, is expected to seek bids on the project by the end of March.
There are thousands of trucks moving in and out of there via the 710 Fwy. If they limit trucks, fine by me- the traffic sucks but what kind of impact will there be when traffic is reduced and cargo doesn’t go to market on time?
It most certainly will. But, wasn’t that part of the plan? :)
While the rest of the Country is suffering from trucking rates depressed as much as 40%, Intrastate California rates are skyrocketing, and extrastate rates are increasing.
California has, single handedly, skewered the entire transportation industry. I have never seen the market so bad for truckers in my life, as it is right now.
Let’s just hope that Obama can save us. /SARC
“....$35 fee per loaded cargo container....”
“That measure, approved in December, is expected to raise around $1.6 billion to help pay to replace thousands of older diesel trucks with cleaner-burning models.”
“The commission voted on a $2 billion financing plan for truck owners looking to upgrade their vehicles.”
Some of the crap that Independents and some smaller trucking firms are running in the harbor are candidates for a museum, but then many are not, and how and why should the harbor become a finance agent for these people of which the majority don’t even speak the language common to our Nation.
This again is Government, in the form of the Harbor Commission involving themselves in an area of expertise that isn’t their business.
Those truckers have their own means of financing newer vehicles to comply with the local trumped up regulations.
I’ve posted on this matter before about many of these guys and their late model Peterbilts hauling low paid containerized freight, wondering how they can make payments on those expensive tractors decked out with all the options plus.
So once the new trucks are paid for then of course the fees will all be eliminated as they will serve no more purpose RIGHT!?
Have you ever read the sticker on the back of a trailer that says something like...
This truck paid more than $36,000 in taxes last year?
That’s an understatement. You see 1000’s? Do the math.
Have you ever seen the sticker on the back of a trailer that says...”Without trucks, America stops”?
Can you name any product that doesn’t rely on a truck?
Trucks aren’t the cause of traffic congestion, the government is.
I’m not advocating the elimination of trucks Long Beach is. And the 710 Fwy is congested with trucks.
I’m sorry, I didn’t mean it sound as though I thought you were. It’s just one of my “soapbox” issues. :)
Long Beach would need a sharp tax increase if they banned trucks.
“California already has a “clean air” and “no soot” law for commercial trucks. That was mandated in 2003, and you can not get a Ca “Cab” card (registration), without passing. This program was designed solely to reduce the pollutants in the harbor areas. I guess you live around there, so you must have figured out that you can remove all of the harbor pollution, and it won’t make one iota difference in downtown, the Valley, or any of the Inland Empire areas.”
I worked Containership, Containeryard operations for 35 plus years in that harbor area. I live in the Inland Empire for the past twenty years many of those years commuting the 72 miles each way to work there. Yeah, I figured it out.
“Because a truck is an older model, doesn’t mean it’s a POS. Of course, the ugliest ones are going to run the ports, it’s the cheapest paying freight there is.”
Thus my commentary about the NEW Peterbilts I HAVE SEEN with NON ENGLISH SPEAKING Mexican Owner/Operators (O/O’s) hauling freight that cannot possibly pay for the trucks, the expensive options one can observe the trucks loaded with as well support them and their families. Are you aware of the lines at the terminals? Are you aware these guys are lucky to handle a load or at a stretch two a day because of the lines, the waiting, the traffic, etc.?
Regarding the museum pieces on the other end of the spectrum, I have had more than once the opportunity to dodge the parts laying in the streets that have fallen off those trucks as well have had, again more than once the opportunity to link a chain to an axle, a bumper (if the truck had one) of a dead truck to pull them out of the way so we could continue our operations to service other trucks.
“And you know this how? You do know that one must pass an english proficiency test to obtain a Commercial Drivers License, don’t you? 100 signs, 50 conversational situations. Writing to the degree that they must be able to understandably fill out government and industry required forms, including their log book.”
You are quoting theory versus reality. Try holding a conversation with all too many of them. It’s total futility. Sometimes one is compelled to envision adapting heavy equipment to move the trucks in unorthodox manner. Some have done so. All too many DON’T SPEAK ENGLISH, and that is an indisputable fact.
“California is the most rigid and has the highest rate of enforcement in the Country. The CHP does do a fantastic job at inspecting trucks and drivers in California. In all of my years, I’ve never seen a more through, knowledgeable, and professional enforcement agency.”
I’ve reread and reread my commentary, but cannot find anything I posted that denigrated the CHP. I will NOW state that the CHP personnel are as hamstrung to Political Correctness as are every other Government organization, thus are only as good as the backing they receive from the Courts. Repeat offenders continue to operate in the harbors and on the highways regardless of how thorough, knowledgeable, or professional the CHP are.
“No, it’s not really. It’s CARB. California Air Resources Board.”
I haven’t first hand knowledge of whom came up with the brilliant idea to tax $35.00 per unit to finance truckers, but my bet is CARB is simply a tool, seeing as how the State Legislature has attempted many multiple occasions since the early 1970’s to implement that tax without success (decried by International Containership Owners and Operators), and has much to do with it. That tax is simply a sleight-of-hand revenue grab by the State under the guise of repayable “loans” (thus a constant source of new revenue) to the truckers for new equipment. That means another source of funding the Democrat controlled Legislature will have to throw away on unnecessary Social programs, thus once again toss responsibility to control their spending addiction further down the road. This costly ruse will drive International Shipping concerns to Mexico, and those International concerns will force the issue of cross border, open border, NAFTA Superhighway we all dislike for good reason. The International Containershipping operators will simply move to Mexico. Mexico is well on its way to developing the infrastructure in anticipation of just such a move already.
“Sure they do. The average interest rate for trucks is 15%, and that’s for good credit borrowers on new trucks. Used trucks start at 15% and go up to the State maximum of 12% “add on” which, depending on the length of the loan, is 21-29% apr. Besides, name an industry that doesn’t receive some relief for government imposed hardships? Now name one that is such a intricate part of our National infrastructure.”
I am guilty of “Profiling”. As recently as last year I was involved in a situation in which I set up and operated a temporary CY for a Transcontinental Intermodal organization that needed to “adjust” their operation to make it more profitable, by reducing their costs. To save them even more costs I operated the equipment myself (My experience operating heavy equipment handlers goes back to 1954), therefore I worked one on one with the Intermodal truckers of which easily 99% were Mexican O/O’s. I am not talking about conventional accepted Finance Industry loans, and if you think the World is just that cut and dried, black and white then you need to get out into it and see for yourself what I’m talking about.
“Quite honestly, it’s none of your business how or why they have nice trucks and haul, what you think is, cheap freight. Don’t forget, OTR truckers spend 9-11 months a year on the road. Nice isn’t a luxury, it’s a requirement.
Everybody has a different level of profitability. A guy who saved up and put 30 or 40K down on a new truck, has a great driving record, his wife does the books and taxes, he eats out of the truck, he may just break even at $1.20 pm. While another with an older paid for truck, may break even at .95pm. Another may need 1.40 just to break even. Right now is very, very bad for these guys. Fuel alone, is running independents over 30%. Just so you know, many of those “Peterbilts” are older models. Peterbilts (3xx series) are, for all practical purposes, timeless. I might mention, so are Kenworth’s W900’s, and Freightliner’s “Classics”. You can walk in and buy nearly any part for any of these off the shelf, even if they are 30 years old.”
It’s every bit my business and yours as well as these Mexican truck O/O’s I’ve discussed are being financed through illicit means either directly, or indirectly by Criminal Enterprise based in a foreign country. Yes I am guilty of “Profiling”. You get out there and open your eyes working with these people as I did and tell me otherwise.
I am not discussing over the road truckers. I’m discussing local harbor Container operations here, therefore your last commentary is irrelevant.
“The ATA report I read stated that the hope was, and it is only a hope, that the market and the other states will adopt these standards Nationwide, which should bring down the costs.”
“Bring down the costs”. Brilliant! Why doesn’t anybody ever pay attention to the fact that ultimately all these “standards” end up inflating costs to consumers? Tunnel vision.
Perhaps this related article and my response at post #12, (scroll down) will assist you in understanding where I fit into the Trucker Respect category.
Thanks for your response to my statements. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.
Sorry about the formatting on my return commentary. I am not a real proficient ‘puter guy. I had it all formatted nicely on the “word”, but it came out messed up in the posting.
My response to papasmurf has a little bit of something for everyone that posted to this article. Sorry about the formatting.
“Sorry about the formatting on my return commentary.”
You should be horse whipped! (said the lysdexic guy) LOL
I’ll respond to your response later. peace
True. That’s a lot of revenue.
I note I forgot to put in the link to my post I referenced near the end of that dissertation. Siiiiiiigh wasn’t a good morning.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1972504/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.