Seeing through the rhetoric

In exasperation over the U.S. Court of Appeals' March 20 ruling in favor of ATA, the Natural Resources Defense Council said, "This decision places in jeopardy the clean air goals at the ports, as well as every port infrastructure expansion project that relies on clean trucks. We're going to vigorously fight to protect these truck plans in court. Properly maintained, well-managed goods movement at the ports is good for business and good for the health of people living in port communities."

Perplexed by the Council's statement, 3PLwire.com notes:

"The funny thing is, I would venture a guess that the ATA and the trucking interests in the ports would agree completely with the last sentence of that paragraph. I can't find any indication that the trucking industry is challenging any of the environmental elements of the Clean Truck Program, apparently has no problem with the drayage truck registry or the upgrading/replacement of older trucks, etc. It's only the concessionary agreements, particularly the employee-driver mandate, that ATA opposed."

ATA's response: Exactly!

In ATA's challenge of the CONCESSION PLAN, not the Clean Truck Plan, the Court deemed that the Concession Plan was unconstitutional and posed a "good deal of economic harm" to those subjected to it. ATA has always supported the environmental initiatives at the Ports.

The trucking industry is committed to the environment and seeks legislation to enact more sustainable industry practices. For more information, visit www.trucksdeliver.org