The Federal Maritime Commission’s FMC-18 form is “currently experiencing issues,” the commission said in a June 6 notice. The FMC said it’s “working on a solution” for the glitch in the application to become an ocean transportation intermediary.

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.

Commissioner Rebeccca Dye of the Federal Maritime Commission this week released the final report stemming from a two-year investigation of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the international ocean freight delivery system, which includes a dozen new recommendations to address supply chain and maritime logistics issues. The report, previewed by Dye last month (see 2205180056), has recommendations for mandatory FMC compliance officers, a clearer process for returning containers and a new investigation into carrier charges assessed through tariffs.

While most carriers that participated in the first round of the Federal Maritime Commission’s recent export audit have commendable export strategies, others have room for improvement, FMC official Lucille Marvin said. “I think that there is some work to do," Marvin told commissioners during a May 18 meeting. “The location of the exports, the location of the equipment -- none of this stuff is always in sync with each other. I think this is going to be an ongoing challenge that we have.”

The Federal Maritime Commission should require all ocean carriers and marine terminals to hire dedicated compliance officers, establish a clearer process for returning containers and launch a new investigation into carrier charges assessed through tariffs, Commissioner Rebecca Dye said. Dye, delivering a new set of recommendations during a May 18 FMC meeting, also said the commission should create a carrier-focused advisory committee and do more to support U.S. agricultural exports.

The Federal Maritime Commission is seeking comments on potential changes to its rules for Carrier Automated Tariffs, including whether carrier tariffs should be available “free of charge” and if the definition of co-loading should be revised to apply only to “less than container loads.” Other proposed changes described in the rule, released May 9, would allow non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) to “cross reference certain aspects of other carriers’ terms in their tariffs,” clarify NVOCCs’ ability to “reflect increases in certain charges passed-through by other entities without notice,” require that documentation must be annotated with the names of all NVOCCs involved in a shipping transaction, and “make other miscellaneous updates and clarifications.”

The Federal Maritime Commission needs cooperation from the trade and logistics community to engage in meaningful enforcement, FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei said. Speaking last week at the annual National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America conference, Maffei said that he has been frustrated that "a lot of people expect the FMC to intervene on the side of small shippers" and don't understand the limits of the commission's authority.

The Federal Maritime Commission will now require global ocean carrier groups 2M, Ocean Alliance and THE Alliance to provide “enhanced” pricing and capacity information, the FMC announced May 5. The new information requirement will give the FMC more data to assess the “behavior” of ocean carriers, including information on the pricing of individual trade lanes by container and service type. The FMC now also will receive more carrier data “regarding capacity management decisions,” the agency said.

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.

Hapag-Lloyd was ordered to pay $822,220 by a U.S. administrative law judge after a Federal Maritime Commission investigation determined the carrier imposed unfair detention fees, according to an April 22 decision. Hapag-Lloyd “acted unreasonably” by charging detention fees on a drayage provider that was unable to make appointments to return empty containers, the FMC’s Bureau of Enforcement said, and continued to impose the charges after they were disputed alongside “corroborating evidence.”