The Federal Maritime Commission has received nearly 100 charge complaints and numerous questions related to the Ocean Shipping Reform Act since its enactment earlier this year, FMC official Lucille Marvin said during a Sept. 21 FMC meeting. She also said the agency is making progress on a range of OSRA provisions and other agency priorities, including one that will result in a set of best practices for chassis pools and another that will formally propose new demurrage and detention billing requirements.

The Federal Maritime Commission this week issued a notice that seeks public comments on the set of factors it should consider when determining whether an ocean carrier is violating shipping regulations by refusing vessel space to shippers. The FMC also seeks comments on how it should define “unreasonable” conduct by ocean carriers, specifically their “unreasonable refusal to deal or negotiate with respect to vessel space accommodation.” Comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking, which the FMC previewed last week (see 2209130040), are due Oct. 21.

The Ocean Shipping Reform Act (OSRA) will take time to implement, and the Federal Maritime Commission still needs companies to bring cases so it can effectively regulate ocean traffic, FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei said Sept. 19 during a panel discussion at the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America annual Government Affairs Conference.

The Federal Maritime Commission will soon seek public comments on the set of factors it should consider when determining whether an ocean carrier is violating shipping regulations by refusing vessel space to shippers. The effort, outlined in a notice of proposed rulemaking required by the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, also seeks to define certain “unreasonable” conduct by ocean carriers, specifically their “unreasonable refusal to deal or negotiate with respect to vessel space accommodation,” FMC said. The commission will accept comments up to 30 days after the notice is published in the Federal Register.

The Federal Maritime Commission should issue an emergency order requiring carriers and terminal operators to share more information on cargo availability with shippers and other carriers, more than a dozen motor carriers and logistics companies said. The companies, most of which move freight at the Port of New York and New Jersey, said inadequate information sharing has created an emergency that is hurting their operations and restricting cargo from moving efficiently.

Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

As the Federal Maritime Commission considers reversing its rulemaking from 2018, the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America is arguing that unreasonable practices should continue to be subject to enforcement only if they are "normal, customary and continuous."

The Federal Maritime Commission has made publicly available on its website its FY 2019 Service Contract Inventory Analysis, the agency said in a Federal Register notice. FMC said the analysis includes “Scope, Methodology, Findings, Actions Taken or Planned, and Accountable Officials.”

A U.S.-based shipper said a Taiwanese container shipping company violated Shipping Act regulations when it failed to supply agreed upon cargo capacity. MSRF, based in Illinois, said Yang Ming Transport “refused to provide more than a fraction of the cargo capacity that MSRF requested and needed” and violated the terms of their contract, forcing MSRF to buy cargo space on the “inflated” spot market. In an August complaint filed to the Federal Maritime Commission, MSRF said the FMC should investigate Yang Ming’s practices and order the container shipping company to pay “reparations.”

The National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America sent a letter to the Federal Maritime Commission last week requesting guidance on Ocean Shipping Reform Act regulations. In an Aug. 15 email to members, NCBFAA said it asked the FMC for more “clarity” on OSRA provisions that restrict common carriers from invoicing parties for detention and demurrage unless the invoice includes certain required information. The group also asked the commission about the fee dispute process; made “inquiries with respect to the treatment of ocean carrier vendors, such as railroads and chassis pools”; and asked about new, prohibited conduct for common carriers. NCBFAA asked FMC to explain “to what extent do these new prohibitions and requirements, especially for invoicing, apply to marine terminal operators, customs brokers, freight forwarders, breakbulk agents, and other entities assessing and invoicing” fees.