Key Ports Appeal to Congress for Power to Regulate Trucks

This story appears in the Aug. 24 print edition of Transport Topics.

The battle over how to best accomplish clean-truck programs for drayage fleets has moved from California ports and courtrooms to the halls of Congress.

The ports of Los Angeles, New York/New Jersey and Oakland, Calif., are lobbying for changes to federal law that would give them the power to set truck emission standards and regulate drayage. The ports have sent letters to key legislators.

The initiatives follow American Trucking Associations’ federal court victories this year that blocked the Port of Los Angeles from imposing a portion of its own port commerce rules. The focus now is on the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, which includes language on trucking safety and on the highway funding reauthorization process.

“The purpose of our advocacy efforts is to find a means to protect states’ and ports’ rights to continue to manage their own properties and

implement environmental and security programs without the trucking industry twisting the [FAAA Act] to block us in a way Congress never intended,” Port of Los Angeles spokesman Arley Baker told Transport Topics on Aug. 20.

The neighboring Port of Long Beach is not taking part in this action.

“We had always anticipated if [Los Angeles] were not successful in the courts that they would make an attempt on Capitol Hill,” said Tim Lynch, a senior vice president at ATA, which opposes changes in the current federal pre-emption of such changes.

Lynch said, “The manner in which they want to change the [FAA] language goes way beyond the perceived problems at the Port of Los Angeles.”

New York/New Jersey port leaders sent a letter July 30 to Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) seeking FAAA Act changes “to enable ports to improve efficient utilization. These changes would not mandate that ports accept specific programs, but would enable ports . . . to implement innovative programs that improve environmental, safety and congestion conditions.”

“With [highway] reauthorization coming up, the opportunity to promote the necessary improvements to ports and goods movement infrastructure is before us,” Port of Oakland spokeswoman Marilyn Sandifur said.

The ports’ lobbying stances varied on driver status, a key issue in the court case, where Los Angeles sought to ban owner-operators and require draymen to become company employees. That step would make it possible for the Teamsters union to organize them.

Oakland’s plan, crafted in June, is not intended to include an employee driver requirement, Sandifur said.

New York/New Jersey spokesman Ron Marsico declined to comment on the driver issue.

At this stage, all sides are laying out their agendas.

“We have advised congressional offices that ATA’s [legal] effort was not aimed at the Clean Truck Program but at the effort to ban owner-operators, and the effort to repeal the federal pre-emption,” Lynch said.

Under federal law, state and local agencies are pre-empted, or  blocked, from dictating commercial terms to maintain smooth-flowing interstate commerce.

Baker said Los Angeles is “working with lawmakers to update the federal framework to allow ports to contribute to national clean air goals,” working with the Coalition for Clean & Safe Ports.

ATA’s Lynch said, “We are running into a misperception [in meetings with Congress] that we objected to the Clean Truck Program. When we explained that we didn’t object, several offices expressed surprise.”

Fred Potter, director of the Teamsters Port Division, said the union backs ports’ efforts “to stimulate the economy, spur environmentally sound future expansion, and level the playing field for companies to compete responsibly.”

The New York/New Jersey leaders have urged giving ports the ability, “if they so chose, to implement innovative programs that improve environmental, safety and congestion conditions.”

Oakland officials said they want the FAA law changed to allow exceptions for safety, environmental and operational programs to avoid a future patchwork of regulations.

“If every port and city and local government could decide what to do with transportation,” said Curtis Whalen, executive director of ATA’s Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference, “there would be no interstate commerce.”

Baker acknowledged that Los Angeles retained former Rep. Richard Gephardt as a Washington lobbyist.

Whalen questioned the hiring of lobbyists as the city faces worker layoffs, saying, “If I were a local out there, I’d be raising questions.”

“The port and city operate under separate budgets,” Baker responded. “We are self-funded. We also have invested over $100 million in subsidies to help drayage providers buy cleaner trucks. Of course, the ATA doesn’t object to this public funding stream.”

ATA has allies in the shipping community, led by the National Retail Federation, which sent a July 27 letter signed by 29 other organizations to Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

“We understand a campaign is under way to persuade Congress to grant to local governments the ability to regulate the harbor drayage industry,” that letter said. “We urge you to reject efforts to rewrite longstanding federal trucking rules.”

An Oberstar spokesman said the chairman hasn’t yet taken a position on the port trucking issue and isn’t likely to do so before Congress reconvenes next month.

Lautenberg’s office didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Staff Reporter Eric Miller contributed to this report.