Tariff Changes: SDDC (Unintentionally?) Changes 70% SIT Rule
February 2, 2011 
3 Comments
Note: This is the fifth in a series of posts on the changes in the upcoming 2011 400NG and the 2011 International Tender. Please note that these articles are not intended to cover every change made, so TSPs still need to read the tariffs prior to filing rates. Also, these posts are based on our own interpretation of the tariffs, and we cannot guarantee that our interpretation will always be shared by SDDC, the PPSOs, or GSA.
The move to calculate delivery out of SIT on Block 18 of the GBL was the largest change in the 400NG involving SIT, but it was not the only one. There were a couple of other significant SIT related changes that were made in the latest version of the tariff, including a change to the rule that allows TSPs to place a shipment into storage when 70% of the transit time has elapsed.
I believe that SDDC intended the changes to the 70% rule to help clarify the rule, but they may have unintentionally changed it in the process. They added the following wording to the 2011 400NG on Page 26:
“If the requested direct delivery date exceeds the standard transit time, then SIT can be authorized once 70% of the standard transit time has been met and shipment arrives in the destination area…”
I believe that the intent of SDDC was to clarify that regardless of the requested delivery date, SIT could be authorized once 70% of the transit time had passed. However, by making it an “If” statement, they basically created a new requirement. With this wording, it appears that 70% of the transit time must pass AND the requested delivery date must exceed the transit time before SIT can be authorized. Hopefully, SDDC will recognize the potential problem this could cause, especially during peak season, and change this wording in a future update to the tariff.
There was one other change to this section worth noting. SDDC removed the wording “(some exceptions may apply -e.g., member becomes unavailable or unable to accept delivery)” from the tariff, and that section is unlikely that to be restored.
Do you think the change to the 70% rule was unintentional and will be reversed by SDDC? If not, do you think this change will cause problems during the upcoming peak season? Use your comments below to share your opinion.
Related Posts
- SDDC Considers Adjustment to 70% Rule for Peak Season - April 18th, 2011
- SDDC Makes Last Minute Adjustments for Peak Season - May 16th, 2011
- Will SDDC Bring Back SIT Saturation Notices? - April 21st, 2011
The 70% rule has been a constant problem with one of the bases in Southern California. They will enforce the rule, even if the member has stated in writing, either in the DPS system, or via email to the personal property office. I guess that falls under the deleted verbage regarding some exceptions. It gets frustrating to the van operator, because sometimes he has to wait 3 – 4 days.