|
TRANSPORT stakeholders, especially truckers, breathed a sigh of relief after the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) indefinitely postponed the imposition of the gross vehicle weight (GVW) provision as the sole basis for determining truck load limit under Republic Act 8794 or the Anti-Overloading Law.
The DPWH, Philippine Ports Authority (PPA), Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and industry players are at loggerheads over the ideal limit.
"The enforcement of the restriction on trucks' gross vehicle weight limits starting May 1, 2011 as earlier announced by the DPWH is indefinitely deferred," the DPWH said in a memo sent out to stakeholders late last week.
The postponement stopped industry players, spearheaded by the Confederation of Truckers Association of the Philippines (CTAP), the country's biggest association of truck operators, from filing early last week a temporary restraining order on the implementation of RA 8794.
PPA and DTI are against the use of the GVW provision as this means less truck load limit than what is recognized internationally. Both agencies, however, have no issue with the existing 13.5 ton per axle weight limit.
PPA currently imposes a load limit of 12 tons for 10-foot containers; 22 tons for 20-foot containers; and 38 tons for forty-footers. Twenty-foot reefer vans, meanwhile, have an average load limit of 30 tons.
But under RA 8794, the maximum allowable GVW is 22 tons, including the tare weight of the container, and regardless of whether the shipment is in a 10-, 20-, or 40-footer or if it is in a reefer van or not.
Just like PPA and DTI, port operators International Container Terminal Services, Inc and Asian Terminals, Inc are pushing for the 13.5 ton per axle limit as the sole basis for determining the truck load limit. They claimed at least 60% of all containers that pass through their terminals will not be accommodated by trucks if the DPWH insists on adopting the GVW provision.
The DPWH said it is "working out arrangements with the PPA and DTI and other stakeholders in the synchronization of the weighing operations and the finalization of revised GVW limits for each truck/trailer type."
But it stressed that "the restriction on the allowable vehicle axle load of 13,500 kilograms shall be continuously enforced."
DPWH is giving itself until end July to decide on whether or not to impose the GVW. But if the GVW is adopted, the agency said it may increase the tolerance rate for excess weight to 20% from 5%.
Higher volume seen.
Meanwhile, truck operators expect cargo volume to increase up to 20% with the indefinite suspension of the GVW provision.
Since February, "volume declined by about 5% due to the wait-and-see mode of shippers but we expect volume to increase by about 10 to 20% as early as next month because of the suspension," CTAP president Ruperto Bayocot told PortCalls.
"Importers and shippers are worried about the GVW and with its deferment, we expect these shippers to go back to their usual shipping processes."
CTAP is strongly opposed to the imposition of the GVW because it is impractical and unrealistic. In a letter to Public Works Secretary Rogelio Singson last February, Bayocot said, "If unimpeded, it (the provision) could hurt the interests of cargo owners, shippers, truckers and other concerned sectors.
"CTAP strongly suggests that the 13.5 tons per axle rule be the sole basis in implementing RA 8794. We have stated before that truckers have upgraded their units to comply with this provision and their investment would go to waste if the GVW will be implemented alongside the 13.5 tons per axle rule."
If the GVW requirement is also pushed, only a handful of trucks will be able to comply, Bayocot said.
In a position paper, CTAP said only 40% of cargoes passing through major ports will be allowed to ply local roads; the rest will be considered overloaded. Reefers will not be accommodated at all since its average weight is more than 30 tons. -- PORTCALLS
|
