California anti-idling bill worries terminal operators

California anti-idling bill worries terminal operators    Terminal operators and their legislative advocates in California are decrying a bill progressing through the state Senate that would impose penalties on terminal operators if trucks idle outside their gates for longer than 30 minutes.
   Senate Bill 1829, authored by California Sen. Alan Lowenthal, would impose a fine on terminal operators of $250 when a truck idles or queues for longer than 30 minutes outside of a terminal or a $250 fine for trucks that idle or queue for longer than 30 minutes inside the terminal. It also imposes a fine of $750 if one tries to “circumvent the law” by diverting truck traffic or requiring drivers to turn off their engines.
   It was scheduled to be voted on Monday in Sacramento by the state Senate’ s Committee on Environmental Quality.
   The bill is an attempt by Lowenthal to close a loophole in a bill he wrote in 2002 that required terminal operators to eliminate lines of idling trucks. The 2002 bill, which was signed into law and went into effect in January 2003, exempted terminal operators who set up appointment systems for container pickups or kept truck gates open during nights.
   Soon after the first bill became law, trucking firms noted that turnaround times in the terminals didn’t diminish — rather the lines just moved inside the terminals, a problem Lowenthal said he wanted to address.
   But the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, a terminal operator and ocean carrier advocate, is rounding up support to defeat the bill, saying it would unfairly punish terminal operators for the actions of truckers they don’t control.
   PMSA said a number of factors outside the control of terminal operators affect how quickly a truck can move in and out of terminals, including: improper documentation; hazardous cargo documentation; special handling for reefers; size of the terminal/speed limits; time spent on personal breaks; security requirements; familiarity/productivity of ILWU.
   Terminal operators have also said that shippers and trucking companies often wait until the last day of free time (terminals in Los Angeles and Long Beach allow import boxes to sit in terminals for four days for free) to pick their containers, causing congestion on that day.
   PMSA also said the bill doesn’t address its intent — to reduce pollution – because it penalizes terminals if drivers shut off their engines.
   A legislative consultant to the transportation industry also said the bill should be defeated.
   “This particular Lowenthal bill creates a half-hour window within which to begin and end all truck transactions at all container marine terminals in the State of California,” Ronald L. Signorino, president of the New Jersey-based Blueoceana Co., wrote in an e-mail response to the bill. “If, somehow, a particular truck transaction does not come in under the one half hour allotted time frame, the terminal operator is guilty of a statutory offence and is to be fined $250.”
   Calling the bill “overkill,” Signorino said it is of particular concern because of the ramifications it could have on trade through California, but also because it could signal similar legislation in other port areas.
   “It is fairly said that California sets the environmental standard other states will follow in the future,” Signorino wrote. “If that is so, then it is perhaps reasonable that marine terminal operators conducting business in other states participate in the shaping and molding of this particular California Senate Bill through any means possible. If this one gets through as is, doing business as a marine terminal operator in California will become exceedingly more difficult, to the point that many will wonder why they would want to do business there at all. Once such a circumstance happens there, it may be coming to you, as well.”