With Labor and Chassis Issues Addressed, PierPass Member Terminals Increase Throughput 46% in First Half of March
PierPass / http://www.pierpass.org/news/with-labor-and-chassis-issues-addressed-pierpass-member-terminals-increase-throughput-46-in-first-half-of-march/
LONG BEACH, Calif., March 18, 2015 —In the wake of a tentative labor deal announced Feb. 20 and the formation of a port-wide chassis pool on March 1, marine terminals at the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach moved 46% more cargo containers by truck during the first half of March compared with the same period in February, PierPass Inc. said today.
From March 2 through March 15, nearly 303,000 import and export containers moved by truck into or out of the terminals, compared to nearly 207,000 from Feb. 2 through Feb. 15, according to gate transaction data collected by PierPass. These include containers moved during day shifts and the OffPeak shifts managed by PierPass on nights and Saturdays. The OffPeak program diverts about half of port truck trips out of Monday-through-Friday daytime traffic while roughly doubling the capacity of the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports.
According to the Marine Exchange of Southern California, there were 30 ships waiting to be unloaded at the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports on Monday March 16, down from 36 on Feb. 26.
“The terminals are intensely focused on returning to normal operations as quickly as possible,” said John Cushing, president of PierPass, which represents the 13 container terminals at the two adjacent ports. “While much work remains to be done, we can report progress in accelerating cargo movement by mid- March.”
PierPass today also reported some progress in reducing transaction times for trucks at the terminals. Average truck turn times dropped during the month of February (most of which fell before the Feb. 20 labor agreement) compared with January. It took trucks an average of 49.6 minutes to complete one transaction (picking up or delivering a container) on the Peak (weekday daytime) shift in February, down from 60.9 minutes in January. On OffPeak shifts, turn times in February averaged 53 minutes, down from 55.8 minutes in January.
In another move to reduce the cargo backlog, two terminals have leased additional port-owned land in order to accept empty containers and make more room for imports and exports. A third terminal has leased additional land to where it is bringing loaded containers mounted on chassis ready for truckers to pick up.
Terminal operators continue to work with trucking companies and cargo owners to increase the use of free-flow, sometimes known as peel-off, a practice PierPass has promoted to reduce truck waiting times. Free-flow enables bulk delivery of large groups of containers destined for the same location, typically to a single cargo owner. The terminals pre-stage the containers in a separate stack. The cargo owner then sends a stream of trucks into the terminal and each truck takes the next container in the stack.
“We have been very proactive with different terminal efficiency tools that include our appointment system and peel-off piles,” said Rickey Childs, head of operations for Eagle Marine Services. “We continue to work with the trucking community for increased OffPeak utilization, especially during the second half of the shift when there is minimal truck activity at the gates.”
On March 1, three of the largest chassis leasing companies at the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports formed a gray chassis “pool of pools” intended to solve the chassis supply disruption that emerged last year after shipping lines sold their chassis to private leasing companies. The new system makes chassis interchangeable for truckers and terminals. The three leasing companies control about 100,000 chassis in Southern California.
Cargo Count Slides in February
Port of Long Beach / http://www.polb.com/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=1425&TargetID=1
Ongoing congestion caused 20 percent decline
Cargo terminals in February at the Port of Long Beach moved 20.1 percent fewer containers than the same month last year due to congestion issues faced by all West Coast seaports.
A total of 413,114 TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units) of containerized cargo were moved through the Port in February. Imports were recorded at 204,462 TEUs, a 24.7 percent decrease. Exports fell 22.9 percent to 110,711 TEUs. Empty containers saw a decline of 3.9 percent to 97,941 TEUs. With imports exceeding exports, empty containers are sent overseas to be refilled with goods.
The congestion issues that worsened in February played the biggest role in the cargo declines, just as they did in January, which had seen an 18.8 percent drop from the same month last year. However, the outlook is more promising. By the end of February, a tentative new contract for dockworkers was announced, federal regulators granted permission for Long Beach and its neighbor the Port of Los Angeles to collaborate on congestion relief, and private chassis fleets in the region agreed to pool their resources.
Last year, against which 2015 is being compared, was the third-busiest year in port history with a total of 6.82 million TEUs.
With an ongoing $4 billion program to modernize its facilities, the Port of Long Beach continues to invest in long-term, environmentally sustainable growth.
Ban on Importation and Interstate Transport of Snake Species Expanded
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service / http://www.fws.gov
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has published a final rule in the Federal Register amending the list of large non-native snakes as injurious under the Lacey Act. This amended list, which becomes effective April 9, 2015, adds the following species:
• Reticulated python (Python reticulatus)
• DeSchauensee’s anaconda (Eunectes deschauenseei)
• Green anaconda (Eunectes murinus)
• Beni anaconda (Eunectes beniensis)
Background: In 2012, the Service published a final rule in the Federal Register which listed the first group of large non-native snakes as injurious species under the Lacey Act. Since March 23, 2012, the ban on importation and interstate transport covered:
• Python molurus (which includes Burmese python [Python molurus bivittatus] and Indian python
[Python molurus molurus])
• Northern African python (Python sebae)
• Southern African python (Python natalensis)
• Yellow anaconda (Eunectes notaeus)
The listing generally makes it illegal to import live specimens of these snakes into the United States. (Prohibited imports include shipments transiting through the United States on their way to other foreign destinations.) Interstate transport of any type (both commercial and with respect to personal pets) is also generally prohibited.
The listing does not prohibit the importation or interstate transport of dead specimens of these snakes or of products made from them. Nor does it affect the sale and possession of these snakes within a State.
Direct export with the required CITES permit is still allowed from either a designated port or other location with a designated port exception permit (DPEP) but any export must occur directly from the State where the snakes are present. Designated port exception permits will only authorize use of a port in the same State where the snakes are located, and issuance will depend on the availability of the inspection staff and other criteria. Snakes may not be transported between States by any means for the purpose of eventual export.
Action: Effective April 9, 2015, it will be illegal to import any live specimens, gametes, viable eggs, or hybrids of the species listed above into the United States or to transport these snakes, gametes, or eggs from one State to another (including transporting them for export) without a permit from the Service.
As of this date, these species may only be exported:
- Directly from a designated port in the State where the snakes are already located; or
- Directly from a non-designated port in the State where the snakes are located under a Service-issued designated port exception permit.
Flights carrying exports must be direct international flights to a foreign country that do not stop at an airport in another State. (Stopovers are allowed within the State from which the shipment is departing.)
Shipments moving by truck or rail to Canada or Mexico may not move through another State in transit to these countries.
Any export shipments that transit another State by air or land will be considered contraband subjectto seizure and forfeiture whether or not the exporter knew that such interstate transport would occur.
Those caught unlawfully bringing these injurious snakes into the United States or transporting them across State lines on or after this date face penalties that include up to 6 months in prison and fines as high as $5,000 for individuals or $10,000 for organizations.
Shipments that are in the process of being imported at the time of the effective date must physically arrive in the United States before April 9th; shipments that enter the country on or after this date will be subject to seizure.
United States and Canada Sign Preclearance Agreement
US Department of Homeland Security / http://www.dhs.gov/news/2015/03/16/united-states-and-canada-sign-preclearance-agreement
Will benefit travelers and trade by reducing congestion and increasing efficiency at the border
WASHINGTON – Consistent with the initiatives outlined in the 2011 Beyond the Border Action Plan, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson and Canadian Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Steven Blaney today signed the Agreement on Land, Rail, Marine, and Air Transport Preclearance Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Canada. This new agreement reaffirms the United States and Canada’s commitment to enhancing security while facilitating lawful travel and trade, and supersedes the existing U.S.-Canada Air Preclearance agreement signed in 2001.
“After years of hard work and negotiations, today we have one of the most significant, visible, and anticipated products of the Beyond the Border initiative – a major achievement that will produce significant benefits for the United States and Canada,” said Secretary Johnson. “This agreement will help facilitate the legitimate trade and travel that keeps our economy thriving as we maintain utmost vigilance to the security of our borders. We remain committed to our deep partnership with Canada, a true ally, neighbor and friend of the United States.”
“Our Government’s top priority remains creating jobs and opportunities for Canadians,” said Minister Blaney. “This historic new agreement builds on decades of successful preclearance operations in Canadian airports. It will enhance the security at our border and create jobs and growth in Canada by improving the flow of legitimate goods and people between our two countries.”
This Preclearance agreement – allowing for the immigration, customs and agriculture inspections required for entry into either country to occur on foreign soil – will reduce congestion and delays at the border and increase efficiency and predictability in cross-border travel, tourism and transportation. The new agreement provides officials of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) with the requisite authorities and tools to conduct their border security, facilitation, and inspection processes in the other country.
This agreement will:
- Allow for the consideration of requests for new preclearance locations across all modes;
- Enable exploration of co-location at small and remote ports, if desired;
- Provide updates to the Air Preclearance Agreement to better reflect the post 9/11 operating environment, including policies and tools utilized at domestic ports of entry;
- Enable Canada to request that the United States regularize existing U.S. immigration pre-inspection sites – for example at cruise, rail and ferry terminals in British Columbia;
- Enhance authorities for preclearance officers including the ability to carry firearms, defensive tools, and restraint devices to the same extent that Host Party officers are permitted to carry in the relevant operating environments;
- Address officer privileges and immunities through a shared jurisdictional framework in which the sending country may generally exercise primary criminal jurisdiction for acts committed by its officers in the performance of official duties in the Host country; and
- Retain the civil and administrative prosecutorial jurisdictions for preclearance officers provided for in the current Air Preclearance Agreement.
Given the groundbreaking nature of the agreement, the United States and Canada must enact legislation for it to be implemented. The Civilian Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act was introduced in the last Congress, and we are hopeful of its reintroduction in this Congress. Currently, the 2001 U.S.-Canada Air Transport Preclearance Agreement continues to apply.
Preclearance is the process by which CBP Officers stationed abroad screen and make admissibility decisions about passengers and their accompanying goods or baggage heading to the United States before they leave a foreign port. CBP officers do, however, retain the authority to inspect passengers and their accompanying goods or baggage after arriving in the United States. CBP officers currently conduct preclearance operations at eight Canadian airports: Calgary, Edmonton, Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Winnipeg.
This agreement achieves a key component of the Beyond the Border: A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness Action Plan. On February 4, 2011, President Obama and Prime Minister Harper released the Beyond the Border Declaration, articulating a shared vision in which our countries work together to address threats at the earliest point possible while facilitating the legitimate movement of people, goods and services across our shared border. The Action Plan outlines the specific steps our countries intend to take to achieve the security and economic competitiveness goals outlined in the Beyond the Border Declaration.
Press Release – FAA Proposes Civil Penalties Against Three Companies for Alleged HazMat Violations
Federal Aviation Administration / http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=18375
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes civil penalties ranging from $66,000 to $82,500 against three companies for allegedly violating Hazardous Materials Regulations.
In each case, the FAA alleges the shipments were not accompanied by shipping papers to indicate the hazardous nature of their contents and were not marked or labeled in accordance with the Hazardous Materials Regulations. The FAA also alleges the companies failed to ensure their employees received required hazardous materials training and did not provide emergency response information with the packages. Additionally, the FAA alleges Bridgewater International and Crow Works did not properly package the shipments.
The cases are as follows:
$82,500 against China Express International Express Changzhou Branch of Changzhou City, Jiangsu Province, China. The FAA alleges that on June 12, 2014, China Express offered a shipment containing one Lithium-ion battery pack to United Airlines for air transportation. U.S. Customs & Border Protection discovered the shipment at Chicago O’Hare International Airport and alerted the FAA.
China Express has 30 days from receipt of the FAA’s enforcement letter to respond to the agency.
$67,070 against Bridgewater International, Inc., of Woods Cross, Utah. The FAA alleges that on September 19, 2014, Bridgewater offered a shipment containing polyester resin, acetone, organic peroxide and construction adhesives to FedEx for shipment by air. Workers at a FedEx sort facility discovered the shipment when some of the contents leaked, including the polyester resin.
Bridgewater has asked to meet with the FAA to discuss the case.
$66,000 against Crow Works, LLC, Killbuck, Ohio. The FAA alleges that on September 8, 2014, Crow Works offered a shipment containing petroleum mineral spirits, rubbing alcohol, flammable aerosols and paint to FedEx for shipment by air. FedEx workers discovered the shipment and alerted the FAA.
Crow Works has communicated with the FAA about the case.
FTC Videos Advise What to Do if Your Email is Hacked or Malware Attacks Your Computer
Federal Trade Commission / https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/03/ftc-videos-advise-what-do-if-your-email-hacked-or-malware-attacks
Your email has been hacked – what do you do?
Your computer has been hijacked by malware – how do you get it back?
Whether you’re unsure or you’re the person your friends always turn to with these kinds of questions, the Federal Trade Commission has created two videos, in English and Spanish, to help.
To learn what you should do, watch
Hacked Email: What to Do and
Hijacked Computer: What to Do.