FMC investigates ocean carrier chassis practices

On January 26^th, the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) launched an investigation related to possible non-compliance of the Shipping Act by ocean common carriers that may be unjustly and unreasonably restricting motor carriers (truckers) and shippers in their choice of chassis providers.

The FMC “seeks to determine whether ocean common carriers are using practices that directly or indirectly deprive truckers and shippers from negotiating and dealing with chassis providers. Any practices, whether through ocean common carrier association rules, service contracts, or other means, which unjustly or unreasonably restrict truckers and shippers from dealing with chassis providers may violate section 41102(c) of the Shipping Act.”

The Shipping Act prohibits ocean common carriers from refusing cargo space accommodations when available or resorting to “other unfair or unjustly discriminatory methods.” [46 U.S.C. § 41104(a)(3)].

Public comments must be submitted on or before March 27, 2026.

The FMC previously determined that it is unreasonable under section 41102(c) of the Shipping Act for regulations and practices to require motor carriers and shippers to use only the chassis provider designated by ocean common carriers (Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference v. OCEMA (FMC Feb. 13, 2024)), according to the law firm Husch Blackwell.

Ocean carriers sold off their chassis fleets to a small group of dominant chassis providers years ago.

Critics say that ocean carriers turned right around and leased the chassis to stipulated providers, leveraging volume and mandating at wheeled facilities (where the container is placed on a chassis before pickup) that chassis usage must align with their ocean carrier container. This term is called “box rules.”

Critics further say that ocean carriers maintain control in wheeled facilities because chassis usage is already predetermined before the vessel or train arrives, with box rules followed by gate rules, dictating which chassis can be used on a specific ocean carrier’s container - effectively preserving market power without owning the assets.

The American Trucking Associations (ATA) explains the effect: “Roadability/chassis safety was considered and approved by Congress and signed into law on August 10, 2005. Included in the measure (Section 4118) was the legislative language developed by the IMCC (Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference) led industry coalition of motor carriers, ocean carriers, and railroads. The law now mandates that intermodal equipment providers are legally responsible for the condition of their equipment and must establish and maintain systematic maintenance and repair programs, and only make available for driver/motor carrier interchange equipment that is Roadable-Safe.”

Furthermore, the IMCC conference has and will continue to support the requirement that chassis providers be responsible for and maintain, repair, and deploy equipment that is Roadable-Safe before it is offered for interchange. Unfortunately, FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) regulatory enforcement has to date been ineffective, and as a result, drivers are still being held responsible for chassis equipment deficiencies identified during roadside inspections that were not roadable when interchanged. The conference will therefore continue to press the agency to step up equipment audits and enforcement to improve the condition of the intermodal chassis fleet and ensure that CSA scores for intermodal carriers and drivers are not unfairly impacted by chassis-equipment deficiencies that should be charged to the equipment provider.”

To make matters even worse, critics say, the railroads, which have agreements with the ocean carriers, have not challenged the ocean carriers’ so-called ‘box rules’and “match” incoming ocean carrier containers on chassis provided by their designated chassis supplier at wheeled facilities. This practice is prevalent at railyards in Memphis and Chicago and at all wheeled and partially wheeled rail hub facilities across the United States. This results in delays and higher costs when the trucker provides their own chassis.

Several harbor truckers told AJOT that during the COVID crisis, there was a shortage of chassis and truckers were encouraged to buy and own chassis to ease the shortage and congestion at ports so as to reduce delays loading and unloading ships.

Today, these truckers say, they feel betrayed by the ocean carrier stipulation of chassis provider that discourages shippers from using trucker-owned chassis.

Peter Friedmann, Executive Director, Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC) represents many agricultural exporters, and he says: “The issue of chassis choice has been a big issue at AgTC meetings for years.”

He worries that “when shippers sign contracts with ocean carriers, they often don’t know that the choice and price of the chassis is buried in their contract. It is not broken out. The result is that the shipper may also not know that a trucker who owns their own chassis can deliver their container at a lower rate.”

Friedmann repeated the criticism that the problem is compounded for customers picking up and delivering chassis at rail yards, where railroads might stipulate that only the ocean carrier-provided chassis be utilized. The result could be delays and added costs if a trucker arrives to pick up the container with their own chassis.

While the ocean carrier agreement might stipulate delivery to a store or other destination, the railroads might impose demurrage charges on the shipper. The ocean carrier agreement with the shipper does not prevent this.”

A similar situation exists at container terminals at ports, he said.

The bottom line, Friedmann says, is: “What we need is for the shipper to have the choice of chassis provider.”

The IMCC says it will continue to pursue a business model chassis solution, which will:

• Promote enhanced intermodal freight transportation through a national pool of fully interchangeable chassis suitable for international ISO containers (“gray” chassis fleet).

• Provide intermodal freight stakeholders with a supply of safe, roadable chassis consistent with the requirements of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).
• Maximize chassis efficiency, utilization, and flexibility.
• Provide an efficient means for chassis purchasing, financing, distribution, servicing, maintenance, refurbishment, and retirement.
• Modernize the international container chassis fleet; and
• Make chassis available under the terms of the Uniform Intermodal Interchange and Facilities Access Agreement (UIIA).

Without action by the Federal Maritime Commission, trucker critics and Friedmann worry that the ocean carriers are reinforcing the strong relationship between ocean carrier and their one aligned IEP (intermodal equipment provider), perpetuating costs and delays, and capitalizing on a container transportation environment that works poorly for shippers and truckers but makes money for some.