AAPA Opts Out of Ports' Efforts to Regulate Trucking

During a meeting of its Legislative Policy Council this week, the American Association of Port Authorities said that it would not be a part of the efforts by the ports of Los Angeles, Oakland and New York-New Jersey to regulate

truck drayage operations, according to reports by the Journal of Commerce.

The Ports of Los Angeles, Oakland and New York and New Jersey have taken action to urge Congress to intercede and change the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, which prohibits states from enacting and enforcing laws that are "related to" motor carrier prices, routes, or services in order to maximize competitive forces in the trucking industry. These ports wish to have the authority to regulate trucking operations at the ports, such as security, congestion and the environment, the JOC reports.

However, the AAPA has voted to opt out of the movement, saying that the ports already have enough authority to ban older trucks, the JOC says.

The JOC reports that there are outside interests at play in the ports efforts, such as labor, environmental and community groups, looking to gain more control over trucking operations at the ports.

Susan Monteverde, vice president of government relations at AAPA, told the JOC that the ports currently can regulate the vehicle, not the carrier, and if these ports want to be have control over the way carriers do business at their harbors, the law must be altered.

In October, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles celebrated the one-year anniversary of their Clean Truck programs, announcing they are on track to reduce truck-related emissions by 80 percent, two years ahead of schedule. Since inception, the programs have purged the roads of more than 2,000 polluting trucks, with more than 5,500 clean trucks in operation today.

This improvement in emissions at the ports was one of the main reasons the AAPA opted out of the efforts, Monteverde told the JOC. She said that with the emissions reductions, there was not enough reason to pursue a change in the law.