 In The Press |
|
|
|
|
|
| CBP Designates Import Safety as a Priority Trade Issue nsf fees? |
|
| U.S. Customs and Border Protection has posted a notice announcing that it has designated import safety as a Priority Trade Issue (PTI). According to CBP sources, this is the first time that import safety has been designated as a PTI. Import Safety Designated a PTI to Ensure Unsafe Products Do Not Enter U.S. Import safety was designated a PTI in order to prevent unsafe products from entering U.S. commerce. The trade strategy to be utilized will include parties within the production and supply chain, domestic and foreign governments, and the international trade community. Enhanced Risk Analysis, Targeting, Tracking, and ACE to be Used According to CBP, the import safety PTI will safeguard public health and safety through more refined risk analysis, further developments in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), enhanced targeting and tracking, improved inter-agency and intra-agency communication and coordination, as well as continued partnerships with the trade community. CBP adds that it will work collaboratively and collectively with other government agencies, other foreign governments, and the trade to better define and assess risk through increased automation and the sharing of information and to encourage greater use of partnership and best practices to protect the U.S. consumer. According to CBP, as it and other agency and trade partners work with this initiative, the overall effect will allow for the continued flow of legitimate trade in products that are safer and healthier. |
|
|
|
| Oakland approves container tax |
|
| The rush to impose local taxes on shipping containers throughout the state took another step forward Tuesday, as the Oakland Board of Port Commissioners voted to enact fees passing through the city’s port. In approving the container tax mechanism, the seven-member board did not specify how much would be charged, who would ultimately pay the tax, or when it would be imposed. Port staff are expected to return recommendations on the details of the tax proposal by June. The commissioners also put off for study a proposal that would eliminate independent owner operators from the port’s drayage fleet. Currently, the majority of drivers in the Oakland port are independent owner operators. The port plans to use the collected container tax money to pay for programs to reduce diesel particulate matter from port-generated sources. Oakland, the third busiest container port in the state and the fourth in the nation, hopes to generate $520 million over the next several years for pollution reduction programs. When enacted, the Oakland container tax would become the third port authority in the state to levy a tax on containers. The ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles approved a $35 per TEU tax last year to pay for a truck drayage overhaul plan. Southern California port officials also approved a second $15-per-TEU tax late last year to help pay for infrastructure projects in the ports’ jurisdiction. California State Sen. Alan Lowenthal is also pursuing a $30 per TEU container fee that would affect containers moving through Long Beach, Los Angeles and Oakland. Lowenthal’s bill, tabled last year after the threat of a gubernatorial veto, reactivated the bill in the state legislature last month. |
|
|
|
| CPCS issues a final rule for flammability standards for clothing |
|
| Effective date of the final rule: September 22, 2008 The Consumer Product Safety Commission has issued a final rule, effective September 22, 2008, to amend 16 CFR Part 1610, the Standard for the Flammability of Clothing Textiles (the Standard), to better reflect current consumer practices and technologies and to clarify several aspects of the Standard. The CPSC states that the products regulated under the Standard are clothing and fabrics intended to be used for clothing. The Standard applies to all items of clothing, and fabrics used for such clothing, whether for adults or children, for daywear or nightwear. Excluded are footwear, interlining fabrics, and certain hats and gloves. The CPSC notes that the revisions discussed in this final rule would not affect the more stringent children's sleepwear standards in 16 CFR Parts 1615 and 1616. The publication of the final rule can be viewed at: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-5569.pdf |
|
|
|
| CPSC: Imported upholstery would require Fire Resistance test ns |
|
| Retailers would be responsible for test if they buy from abroad Gary Evans -- Furniture Today, 3/21/2008 7:53:00 AM GREENSBORO, N.C. — Retailers who buy upholstered furniture from abroad will be responsible for testing the products to make sure they meet a proposed U.S. flammability standard, a staff member of the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission said here Thursday. “Retailers who import are (considered) the same as a manufacturer. They will have to test and maintain records,” said Dale Ray, upholstery flammability product manager and a senior economist for the agency. His comments were part of an annual update on an ongoing effort to enact federal legislation that would set standards designed to reduce the number of deaths due to upholstery fires. The event was hosted here Thursday by the American Home Furnishings Alliance and was moderated by Joe Ziolkowski, executive director of the Upholstered Furniture Action Committee. According to Ray, overseas factories will not be responsible for meeting federal requirements when the legislation is enacted. The testing can be done overseas but the ultimate responsibility for keeping records will rest with the importer. Results would have to be in English and records must be maintained in the United States, either on paper or electronically. The effort to enact a flammability law has been going on for years. Ziolkowski noted that Thursday’s gathering was the 16th annual flammability workshop. This year Ray said there was “finally some real action news” about upholstery, adding that a draft of the proposed rulemaking had been approved on Feb. 1 and was published in the Federal Register (73 Fed.Reg.11702) March 4, with both actions leading to the taking of public comments until May 19. “It’s conceivable that two years from today you might have a requirement,” said Ray, although he said there’s no set timetable. The current proposal focuses on smoldering ignition and gives manufacturers two options to meet federal requirements. One would require a smolder resistant cover fabric. The second would be the use of an interior barrier resistant to smoldering and open flame. Ray said he thought that 80% of today’s fabrics would pass the test, although some cellulosics are likely to fail while most synthetics would probably pass. Manufacturers and importers must make sure fabrics comply with the requirements, but once a fabric is tested it’s done unless its weave, weight or other elements are changed. “You do the product once,” Ray said. “You can manufacture that product for 10 years and it will pass.” The proposed standard places no restrictions on FR (fire resistant) chemicals, which have been getting negative news coverage generated by groups that include Friends of the Earth. The group recently published a brochure entitled “Killer Couches: Protecting Infants & Children from Toxic Exposure.” Bob Luedeka, executive director of the Polyurethane Foam Assn., said “hardly a day goes by” that he’s not fielding questions about chemical exposure, and said that many claims are unsubstantiated. He said such claims need rebuttal from FR producers. David Ryan, representing the National Textile Assn. Upholstery Fabric Committee, voiced opposition to the proposed standard, noting that many small mills don’t have the staff to do the testing required and that using barriers would be preferable. Ryan, director of quality for fabric source Craftex, said his company has 10,000 fabric constructions and would have to spend $2.5 million the first year on testing. The standard would “jeopardize smaller decorative fiber mills already threatened by imports,” he said. The meeting, which drew about 150 manufacturers, suppliers, laboratory representatives and a few retailers, dealt with technical aspects of the proposed standard but had its lighter moments too. Testing now requires that Pall Mall cigarettes be uses as an ignition device. But the market for the brand has dwindled and its maker, RJ Reynolds, is phasing them out in 2009 — which will leave testers without a source until a substitute is named. Ziolkowski suggested that labs can do what he did recently — he ordered five cases of Pall Malls to tide him over in future UFAC testing. |
|
|
|
| NYC Considers Proposal for Trucker Fee in High Congestion Zones |
|
| World Trade reports that a proposal currently under consideration in New York City would charge truckers $21 for driving in certain high congestion zones in Manhattan during peak hours, but truckers would be offered an exemption if they are operating low emission vehicles. (World Trade, dated March 2008, www.worldtrademag.com) |
|
|
|
| Trans-Pacific lines seeking to recoup fuel costs |
|
LONG BEACH, Calif. -- Citing favorable supply-demand economics, shipping lines that carry imports to the United States from Asia are determined to recover an increasing share of the costs they are incurring for rising bunker fuel and inland transportation charges. "Costs continue to dominate early discussions toward upcoming 2008-09 service contracts, which come up for renewal on May 1," the Transpacific Stabilization Agreement stated Monday. The TSA is a discussion agreement among 15 shipping lines that carry containerized imports from Asia. Bunker fuel prices in the Pacific basin averaged $530 per ton on March 10, up from $462 in early February and $295 at the beginning of 2007. TSA members are attempting to recover some of the increased costs through a floating bunker fuel surcharge. Inland transportation costs are likewise increasing, with intermodal rail rates up about 30 percent in the past year, the group said. Also, railroads are charging diesel fuel surcharges on top of the basic freight rate, as are many trucking companies. The shipping lines also warned of increasing port costs due to negotiation of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union contract, which expires on July 1, and a possible shortage of harbor drayage capacity, especially in Los Angeles-Long Beach. The two ports later this year will impose environmental restrictions on older trucks. All U.S. ports are preparing to implement the new Transportation Worker Identification Credential, which could reduce the number of harbor truck drivers if the federal government strictly enforces legal U.S. residency requirements. The TSA has established voluntary guidelines for its member lines for upcoming service contract negotiations with shippers. The TSA proposed an increase of $400 per 40-foot container to West Coast ports, $600 per-FEU for intermodal shipments from the ports and a $600 per-FEU increase on all-water shipments from Asia to the East Coast. TSA proposed a $400 per-FEU peak-season surcharge to run from June 1 through Oct. 31. The TSA is a discussion group that allows its members to meet and discuss rate actions with immunity from anti-trust laws. However, TSA has no enforcement powers and its member lines are free to take whatever rate actions they choose in confidential contract negotiations with customers. The TSA believes current supply-demand economics will allow member lines to move forward under the proposed guidelines. Container imports were actually down on-year in the first two months of 2008, and the TSA projects total growth this year will be 2 percent to 5 percent in the eastbound Pacific. Some lines have reduced vessel capacity for the traditional slack winter months. Although the lines will re-introduce most of that capacity into the trade for the summer-fall peak-shipping season, TSA is projecting a 3.3-percent increase in total capacity this year, with an effective increase of about 2 percent after limitation from infrastructure constraints and slower vessel steaming are factored in. |
|
|
|
| USDA issues new rule to regulate Bouillon Cubes, Stocks, Dehyrated Soup Mixes, or Extracts |
|
| On January 28, 2008, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service amended the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal Product Manual (APM) on the entry requirements for certain bouillon cubes, stocks, dehydrated soup mixes or extracts. New Documentation Required When Product Labeled as Both Containing/Not Containing Animal Products According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection at the Port of Chicago, the APM amendment indicates that: • Bouillon cubes, stock, dehydrated soup mixes, and extracts with an original manufacturer’s label indicating that the product contains animal-origin ingredients are to be regulated according to the APM. • If there is additional labeling (e.g. stick-on label), stating that the product actually contains only artificial ingredients or non-animal ingredients, a government issued certificate must accompany the shipment attesting to this. The certificate must be issued by the national government of the country of origin, and it must be signed by an official of that government. • If a government certificate is not presented, the product is to be regulated as if it contains animal origin ingredients. (The actual text of the amendment appears on page 3-9-4 of the APM (as footnote 2 to Table 3-9-2) and reads as follows: “Bouillon cubes, stock, dehydrated soup mixes, and extracts with an original manufacturer’s label indicating that the product contains animal-origin ingredients, AND with additional labeling, applied with an adhesive (i.e., stick-on label), indicating that the product actually contains only artificial or no animal-origin ingredients, can be released if accompanied by a government of origin certificate stating that the ingredients or flavors are of non-animal origin (artificial).” ) |
|
|
|
| Negotiations begin on West Coast longshore contract nsf fees? |
|
| March 17, 2008 By Bill Mongelluzzo / The JOURNAL of COMMERCE ONLINE Negotiations begin Monday morning between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and the Pacific Maritime Association on a new West Coast waterfront contract. The current contract that was negotiated in 2002 will expire on July 1. By commencing the talks in mid-March, rather than mid-May as in past negotiations, the ILWU and PMA are sending a message to the trade community that they want to allow enough time to reach a contract without any labor disruptions. The 2002 contract negotiations tarnished the reputation of West Coast labor and management and accelerated the trend toward diversion of cargo to East Coast gateways. Those negotiations were marked by ILWU work slowdowns and a 10-day lockout by employers that ended only after President Bush intervened. Early indications from both sides are that they wish to avoid national attention and quietly reach a settlement. The ILWU and PMA will exchange their proposals Monday and, as in past negotiations, talks are expected to begin slowly and build in intensity as summer approaches. Unlike the 2002 negotiations, when employers were determined to bring revolutionary information technology and automation to the waterfront, no highly-controversial proposals are anticipated this year. Employers estimate they need at least another three years to fully implement the provisions of the 2002 contract. Additionally, a drop in container volumes and ILWU man-hours this past year due to the weak U.S. economy has impressed both sides on the need to avoid further cargo diversions. Issues such as work hours, wages, benefits and safety are likely to be on the table this year. The ILWU, with the most lucrative contract in blue-collar America, normally seeks modest wage increases. In the past, the ILWU has always insisted that there will be no reduction in benefits. Negotiations will be held in San Francisco, with major contract issues and safety negotiations likely to take place separately. |
|
|
|
| Employers reject ILWU stoppage request for May 1 |
|
| March 13, 2008 By The JOURNAL of COMMERCE ONLINE The president of the Pacific Maritime Association on Thursday said West Coast waterfront employers intend to turn down a request by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union to call an eight-hour stop-work meeting on the first work shift May 1 to protest the Iraq war. "Contractually, they've gone down the right avenue, but we are not going to agree to it," said James McKenna, PMA president. "PMA will respond to the union shortly.” The ILWU locals are permitted to call one stop-work meeting each month to discuss union business. However, the stop-work meetings must be conducted during the second work shift, when cargo activities at most ports are lightest. If the ILWU wishes to change the stop-work meeting time, the union must request permission. The ILWU has submitted its request in plenty of time to comply with the waterfront contract, McKenna said. Nevertheless, employers do not want all West Coast ports to be shut down for eight hours during the busy day shift on May 1, he said. |
|
|
|
| ILWU to strike May 1, 2008 in protest to Iraq war |
|
| February 22, 2008 John J. Sweeney, President, AFL-CIO 815 16th Street, NW; Washington, DC 20006 President Sweeney, ILWU delegates recently concluded a two-week caucus where we reached agreement on our approach for bargaining a new Pacific Coast Longshore Contract that expires on July 1, 2008. We expect talks to begin sometime in March and will keep you informed of developments. One of the resolutions adopted by caucus delegates called on longshore workers to stop work during the day shift on May 1, 2008, to express their opposition to the war in Iraq. We're writing to inform you of this action, and inquire if other AFL-CIO affiliates are also planning to participate in similar events on May 1 to honor labor history and express support for the troops by bringing them home safely. We would appreciate your assistance with spreading word about this May 1 action. In solidarity, Robert McEllrath, International President , ILWU |
|
<<Previous
Page
4 of 7
Next>>
|
|
|||||||
 |
|||||||
 |
||
|