Topic of the Week (1/31/25):
There's a lot of maritime news hitting at the same time! Tune in to hear my take on it all.
⚓ The Maritime Professor® presents By Land and By Sea Podcast 🎙️ - an attorney breaking down the week in supply chain
with Lauren Beagen (Founder of The Maritime Professor® and Squall Strategies®)
Let's dive in...
1 - Federal Maritime Commission - Petition Updates
2 - Secretary Sean Duffy confirmed as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/laurenbeagen_graves-statement-on-confirmation-of-sean-activity-7290094297683542016-yuY1?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
3 - Chairman Louis Sola named Federal Maritime Commission Chairman - let's get to know Lou...
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/laurenbeagen_president-trump-designates-chairmen-and-acting-activity-7287538740779003904-j80q?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
4 - New administration, new maritime initiatives: Panama Canal (and the FMC's role) and the Gulf of America
United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Hearing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM4oChRMqYk
-------------------------------
🔹The Maritime Professor® is dedicated to increasing collective knowledge of global ocean shipping through webinars and e-learning producing educational/e-learning content for maritime and supply chain professionals and businesses. This includes trainings and webinars for companies and their employees.
🔹Book a time to learn more: https://lnkd.in/gmyamTRh
🔹Sign up for our email list at https://lnkd.in/eqfZJShQ
🔹Look for our podcast episodes - NOW AVAILABLE:
https://lnkd.in/g4YUbxjs
❗As always the guidance here is general and for educational purposes only, it should not be construed to be legal advice and there is no attorney-client privilege created by this video or podcast. If you need an attorney, contact an attorney.❗
#ByLandAndBySea
🎙 Thanks for tuning in to By Land and By Sea by The Maritime Professor! If you enjoyed today’s episode, don’t forget to subscribe ⭐ and leave a review 📝.
📚 Want to dive deeper into maritime topics? Join our live webinars 🎧, explore our e-courses 💻, and expand your industry knowledge with online learning 🌍.
🚢 Need customized corporate training? We offer expert-led sessions tailored to your team’s needs!
🔗 Visit www.TheMaritimeProfessor.com to learn more and stay ahead in global ocean shipping! ⚓
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I got soul coming through, flying free.
Skies are blue, all the wavesare mixing room.
(00:22):
I got soul coming through,won't stop building a piece.
And On top of the world, whenyou see me, come, oh, everywhere
I go, I'm in the spotlight.
This is a good night I'm livingfor.
(00:44):
This is what it looks like Onthe tip of the world.
Good night, oh, oh, oh, oh, ohoh.
I'm living bold.
This is what it looks like.
I'm addicted to the world.
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh,oh, oh, oh, oh.
There's a lot going on, and allat the same time.
So I thought this week let's doa Captain's Log, let's look at
(01:06):
everything that's going on.
I'll give you my take on it all.
Hi, welcome, by land and by sea, an attorney breaking down the
weekend supply chain presentedby Maritime Professor me.
I'm Lauren Began, founder ofMaritime Professor and Squall
Strategies, and I'm yourfavorite maritime attorney.
Join me every week as we walkthrough both ocean transport and
surface transport topics in thewild world of supply chain.
(01:28):
As always, the guidance isgeneral and for educational
purposes only.
It should not be construed tobe legal advice and there's no
attorney-client privilegecreated by this video or this
podcast.
If you need an attorney,contact an attorney.
So usually we start with my topthree stories of the week, but
this week all stories are topstories, so let's get into it
with the captain's log, storynumber one.
(01:49):
We've been doing this for a fewweeks now where we've been
looking at different rulemakingsand the petitions that are
happening at the FMC.
We don't have a lot to report,but last episode we did talk
about a few updates that arehappening on these petitions.
So we have the detentiondemurrage billing requirements
rule.
There's a petition filedagainst it that started in April
of 2024.
(02:09):
So gosh, we're almost a yearsince that petition started and
it came down to standing andlacking authority.
The real issue, if we get intothe subject matter, kind of
hinges on this directcontractual relationship of the
motor carriers and whether theyshould be or could be directly
billed for detention.
(02:30):
To merge, as of the rule, ithas to be a direct contractual
relationship.
So it's either directcontractual relationship or
consignee, not both and nobodyelse, which means that motor
carriers and truckers have beenkind of eliminated from that
must pay or the bill gets sentto.
They can pay, but they don't.
They're not, they're not partof the who the bill gets sent to
(02:53):
, and that's kind of at issuehere.
So one of the interestingthings that happened in December
was we had a whole bunch oftrucking associations enter the
chat and basically said, look,we, we kind of think that this
is something that we don't hatethe way that this has turned out
.
We talked about that in aprevious episode, so go take a
look at that.
But you can also look at theirjoint amicus curiae brief, which
(03:17):
is a friend of the court, wherethey basically say look, this
is going to relate to us onceyou get through all the legal
procedural stuff.
We have something to say.
Go take a look at that.
That's pretty interesting.
But it's the World ShippingCouncil who filed this petition
against the Federal MaritimeCommission's final rule and it
kind of comes down to and I'mgoing to this is oversimplifying
(03:37):
it, but this is from theirreply brief the most recent
filing from the World ShippingCouncil.
I think that this kind of onesentence or two sentence kind of
summarizes their position wherethey say the fundamental
mismatch between reasoning andresult renders the commission's
actions both outside of itsstatutory authority and
arbitrary and capricious.
So they're saying, look, notonly was the statutory intent
(04:01):
here not for them to do thisrule in this way, but that, also
the way that they did it, is amismatch between reasoning and
their result.
Because the World ShippingCouncil, through kind of other
means, has said that theybelieve that there is a direct
contractual relationship withmotor carriers sometimes, and
yet the clarity on the rule wasthat motor carriers are removed
(04:24):
from it.
So the World Shipping Councilsaying, look, there's a mismatch
here.
And so therefore they're saying, look, this, this final rule,
is a little incomplete.
This, this isn't really gettingto the heart of what they were
supposed to do and they weren'treally supposed to be in this
area.
So that oversimplification,right, we've been talking about
this for so many weeks.
So either listen to previousepisodes or maybe we'll do a
(04:47):
deeper dive once we have thenext stage, which that's kind of
.
What I want to say here is thatthis petition has an oral
argument that's been scheduledfor March 13.
So in a few weeks about sixweeks we're going to be having a
little bit more clarity on whatsome of the issues are from an
oral argument perspective,because we've had the briefings
(05:08):
filed.
But now, every time you get anoral argument, it's kind of
interesting because you'll get alittle bit more of the life of
the case, so we're not going tohave a lot of updates until then
, but stay tuned for this oralargument that's been scheduled
for March 13.
The other petition that's outthere is the unreasonable
refusal to deal and negotiatewith respect to vessel space
(05:28):
accommodation.
So that was the other rule.
I've talked about this so much.
I really really reallyencourage any of my listeners to
go take a look at this rule.
Just take a look at it.
Look at the text of this rule.
This is a rule.
This is a rule that came outfrom the FMC, a regulation that
came out from the FMC.
It came out in September, Ithink it was the 23rd, so it
(05:48):
really kind of got snowed in bythe port strike that was
happening right around the sametime.
Right, that was only a weekbefore the port strike.
So I don't want this to dropoff anybody's radar.
I want you to pay attention tothis because this is a really
interesting rule, becauseanytime an agency is defining
things and that's what thebilling requirements for
detention to merge is all abouttoo it's about defining that.
(06:09):
But this is definingunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate with respect tobest-of-space accommodations.
So they're definingunreasonable and unreasonable
refusal.
Find out what that means to youand find out if it applies to
you or not.
This is one that you want topay attention to.
So I did mention in a previousepisode that there is a per
curiam order that the motion tobe dismissed be addressed.
(06:32):
There's a motion to dismiss.
Both of these petitions arekind of getting into the weeds
on legalese and legal procedure.
But there's a motion to dismissmeaning basically like throw it
out, we're done here, we're noteven going to.
This case should never havebeen brought.
And so they're going to behaving a briefing schedule on
just that motion to dismiss.
They want to.
(06:52):
The court wants the parties tokind of dive in on whether or
not so the FMC made a motion todismiss, on whether or not the
World Shipping Council even hasstanding to bring this petition
against them, basically saying,should it have been the
individual ocean carriers or canit be the World Shipping
Council on behalf of kind of theindustry of ocean carriers?
So there's a briefing schedule.
(07:13):
March 3rd is when thepetitioner's brief deadline,
march.
April 2nd is the respondent'sbrief and a replied brief is
April 23rd.
Final briefs are due May 14th.
So, similarly, it's going to bea while before we get a lot of
movement and a lot of clarityhere and again.
This is just on the motion todismiss, so that's kind of
delaying the movement toward theactual like meat and potatoes
(07:36):
of the case, right?
So the motion to dismisswhether this case should have
been brought at all is the onlything that they're going to be
really talking about in thisfirst stage.
So we're not even to theunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate definition, whetheror not this was too far, whether
this was just right, whetherthe FMC had the authority to do
this or not.
You know the congressionalintent, the congressional
(07:59):
language as part of OceanShipping Reform Act of 2022,
directing the FMC to do this.
All of that won't really be atissue yet.
It's kind of captured as thewhole petition.
But what we're going to see inthe next three months is just
this motion to dismiss and abriefing schedule related to
(08:19):
that.
So we'll see.
I also think there might be someinteresting case law on who can
bring these petitions, becauseto get some clarity over whether
the World Shipping Council onbehalf of the industry or if
this really should have beenindividually by ocean carriers,
that'll be an interesting.
That will be an interestinglittle thing to watch here.
But I'm ready for the mainpotatoes right, like I'm ready
(08:40):
for, like, the beef of this, ofthis case to through.
Because I've talked about thisunreasonable free will to
negotiate for a while, there'ssome things that feel like it
might have been too far for theFMC to be diving into business
practices of some of theseprivate companies, and so I've
(09:01):
often said I think the FMC doesa pretty good job of staying
kind of in that guardrails areaof government oversight.
You know, they kind of let theindustry take the lead for the
most part, but they want to makesure that it's not getting too
far into monopolistic oranti-competitive or kind of
distance I don't know how elseto say that right,
(09:23):
antiicompetitive or making itunfair for the industry, right,
that's what the FMC is reallytrying to do.
They kind of act as thatcompetition authority in most
regards where they're trying tomake sure that it's for the
benefit of the US importer,exporter and consumer.
And so what does that mean?
They're watching the market forimbalances that are not just
commercial, regular, general,you know, commercial competition
(09:46):
type things, but likemonopolistic behavior.
I say all that because I don'tknow this rule.
It just it's never totally satwell with me Unreasonable
physical deal and negotiate.
There's an export strategydocument that has to be filed
with the Federal MaritimeCommission.
I just want to know more aboutit.
(10:06):
Right, I want to know moreabout what they're looking at.
I was interested in thispetition so that we could see a
little bit more of thediscussions, we could see a
little bit more of the rationale, so we can see a little bit
more of the justification andhow that all hinges back to the
FMC's authority.
Because some of those thingsthat are required in this
regulation, this unreasonablerefusal to deal and negotiate,
is a little bit extra, it feelslike, and so I want I just want
(10:30):
to see the justification there.
So we'll see.
And again, just my opinion.
I can be convinced.
I just want to see some of thatdiscussion.
So take a look at this rule,this one I don't know this one
just take a look at thisunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate.
Everybody's obviously payingattention to.
Attention to merge.
Pay attention to theunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate too.
(10:50):
All right.
Story number two Sean Duffy hasbeen confirmed.
He is now SECDA.
He is the secretary of theDepartment of Transportation and
you know what, the more that Isit on this, the more I think it
really is a good thing, becauseone of the main tenants that
he's discussed in hisconfirmation hearing was that he
really wanted to focus onsafety, and he said safety kind
of as a blanket thing.
(11:11):
There's a lot of discussiontoward rail and aviation, and
this was all actually pre therecent aviation disaster, which
is so sad.
But you know he was, he wasinitially focused on safety in
his hearing.
And look, while this podcastdoesn't talk about all the modes
of transportation right, wedon't get too far into the rail
(11:31):
or the aviation side of things.
We do a little bit over theroad, trucking as it relates to,
and rail I guess, as they allkind of relate back to the
global ocean, shipping throughtransport of goods, but we
really focus a lot on maritime,and so I think a multimodal
secretary announcing that safetyis his top priority is in line
(11:52):
with maritime, because most allports probably all, but I would
have to confirm that but atleast most all ports around the
country have safety as their toppriority.
If you were to take a look atall the priorities of all the
ports, I can tell you, safety isusually number one, and so I
think that it's appropriate thatthe Department of
(12:12):
Transportation Secretary wouldalso be aligned with safety as
the top priority.
Everything else kind of flowsfrom that, whether it's consumer
facing or not safety right.
So I think that's a good thing,right?
I mean, you can't not like that, I think.
As a second priority, though, Ithink we're going to see, from
the maritime side of things,this alignment with the return
(12:33):
of the United States as amaritime power, and we've talked
about that before on thispodcast.
I think that this is somethingthat the SHIPS Act kind of
brought up, but I think we'regoing to see this shipbuilding
as a priority, and really we'realready seeing that in the Coast
Guard with their announcementthis week to fleet up their
icebreakers and they're ordering40 what was called big
(12:53):
icebreakers.
We need icebreakers.
We have two icebreakers in theCoast Guard large Arctic
icebreakers and usually one ison dry dock and the other one is
kind of getting fixed here andthere we have a third that's
just entered the fleet.
But 40 big icebreakers it's agood start.
It's what we need.
We really need icebreakers.
(13:14):
This is woefully.
This should have happened awhile ago.
But look, here we are.
The second best time foranything to happen is right now.
And so, look, I mentioned theCoast Guard shipbuilding for the
icebreakers.
It's not Department ofTransportation, right?
Well, here's a little, a littlefactoid.
They used to be Department ofTransportation.
(13:34):
Did you know that in 2003?
Coast Guard actually was movedout of Department of
Transportation into Departmentof Homeland Security?
No-transcript.
Looking at DOT, it kind of hasthis military service type
(13:57):
element to it as well from themaritime side of things, because
we have ready reserve fleet, wehave the, we have a seal of
command, we have a bunch ofthings that have military
elements to them.
Even our maritime academiesright, those are.
That's a service, those areservice academies.
So I think that that'll be aninteresting and probably a good
(14:20):
thing.
Return to this maritime power,where we will actually be a good
thing.
Return to this maritime powerwhere we will actually be
supporting and giving attentionto some of these things that
have been not paid attention toin a long time.
Right, it's no dig on recentadministrations, it's just
something that is.
It's about time.
So what does return to maritimepower mean?
(14:41):
Right, shipbuilding?
Of course we have a, we have avery good shipbuilding base, but
we just need to.
We need to return, we need toget more shipbuilding going in
the US.
Right, we do have shipbuildingcompanies out there and so we
can.
We can build more ships, we canget them active again and then
(15:02):
hopefully, that we can expandinto more shipbuilding
facilities and companies.
I also think fleeting up the USflag vessels right is going to
be part of this maritime power,at least more than the less than
100 vessels that we have now.
Perhaps this also means being acompetitor in the international
global commercial linershipping world right, all this
(15:23):
global ocean shipping and wenever talk about any US
companies being a major playerthere.
Maybe we will be right.
Maybe that's part of theintention here is that we can
get the US flag fleet to be acompetitor on the international
market of.
We could potentially have someof these tens, fifteens thousand
(15:44):
TEU vessels out there.
So if we can beef up ourshipbuilding, beef up our
commercial presence for US flagand I think that also means
infrastructure beef ups as wellWe've been talking about
infrastructure across thecountry, but I think
strategically increasinginfrastructure in our ports if
we're gonna become a maritimenation again, if we're really
(16:07):
gonna commit to being a maritimepower.
Anything that comes in and outfrom a vessel is going to need a
port, and the other thing thatI think we might see here
obviously right, obvious, Ithink the other thing we might
see is an increase in strategicports and increase in support
for strategic ports.
So these ports are kind ofready to flip from commercial to
(16:30):
military or just simply supportmilitary operations if needed.
It's kind of a differentdesignation for ports.
Did you know that they had thisother, different designation?
It does help to unlock somefunding opportunities for
infrastructure, but it also kindof has this intention of
supporting military efforts ifneeded.
Maybe we'll see more of that.
Maybe strategic ports issomething that we'll all be
(16:52):
talking a lot more about in thecoming months and years of this
administration.
But, like I said in the lastepisode, I can imagine that the
Maritime Administration may findmore of this military maritime
security theme.
I think the commercial will beimportant and I think ports are
obviously going to be important.
But I do think that we're goingto see more of a kind of
(17:13):
military or just maritimesecurity in that shipbuilding is
maritime security right, inthat, having fleets and vessels
and mariners.
That is the one piece that Ireally haven't heard a lot of
conversation about through allof this maritime prowess
conversation and discussion is Ido think that we need to really
(17:34):
focus on the mariners, becausewe need the ships to have the
mariners out there, but we needthe mariners to be able to fill
these ships right.
So another vote for whymaritime academies are so
important.
But I think that what we'regoing to see and I've said this
for a few weeks now, or a fewmonths almost, I think, at this
point that maritime securitywill be linked to national
security, and I'm excited aboutthat because it's been a while
(17:58):
since maritime has been part ofthe national conversation.
Besides blips here and there andI don't mean to diminish COVID
congestion as a blip, but itkind of was right.
When was the last time you hadtalked about maritime before
that and then after that,probably the port strike, right.
Those were probably the twomajor things, and that was the
past five years.
The United States hasn't talkedabout maritime much beyond
(18:23):
those major things happeningover the past few years.
Besides this and just besidesall the listeners here, right,
we love maritime.
So yeah, I don't know.
I think that the US has kind ofbeen hobbling along trying to
support its shipbuilding, its USflag fleet, and I'm loving the
idea of more attention and moresupport sent this way for
maritime, maritime security,maritime support, maritime
(18:44):
infrastructure, everything thathas to do with maritime, because
way back when, if you ruled theoceans, you ruled the world
Right, and it just feels like,while that may or may not still
be true, it's not not true.
That makes sense.
I think maritime is national,maritime security is national
security, and I'm encouraged tosee what feels like a theme
(19:07):
developing here of maritimesecurity, national security, on
the national conversation stage.
So, all right.
Story number three we have a newFMC chairman too.
We have so many, so many newleadership positions.
Right, it happens, everyadministration change, but here
we go, or at least party changes.
So let's get to know FMCcommissioner excuse me FMC
chairman Lou Sola.
(19:27):
There's actually a few thingsthat I didn't know about
chairman Sola that were put outin his press release announced
when his chairmanshipdesignation was announced.
So the FMC released their pressrelease and they kind of did
this overview of who ChairmanSola is and what his experience
has been.
I knew that he was from Florida.
I knew that he was.
I do know that he is veryinterested in kind of the cruise
(19:51):
side of things during COVIDcongestion years.
So he's been at the FMC since2019.
During the COVID congestionyears he was the lead on the
economic review study of cruiseships and what happened and
their economic impact.
And I think during the study itfound that even up to 150 miles
away there is economic impactfrom cruising Because, if you
(20:14):
may or may not know, the FMCdoes have a little bit of a
regulatory authority.
It's a smaller authority butit's a regulatory authority over
cruise ships and it has to dowith kind of their bond and
their financial requirements.
So they obviously don't getinto the operations of it all,
but it's enough that the thencommissioner, now Chairman Sola,
thought that it was worthwhileand it was a really interesting
(20:37):
study.
So go take a look at that ifyou have anything to do with
cruising.
But the FMC did this economicimpact study.
I think it was for cruise ships, but so Chairman Sola, he's
been there since 2019, like Isaid, I'm going to read part of
the announcement that hereleased or the FMC released, so
(20:59):
this is a quote from him.
It said I am humbled bypresident Trump designated me
chair, just designating mechairman and I am grateful for
his confidence in my ability tolead the federal maritime
commission.
There are many ways thecommission contributes to the
competitiveness of Americanbusinesses access to foreign
markets for us vessels andcompanies and economic growth
for the nation.
We will continue that importantwork while looking for more
(21:19):
instances where applying theauthorities of the commission
helps US companies and consumers.
So I kind of, the first timethat I read this, I kind of read
this as we're continuing theimportant work while looking for
more instances where applyingthe authorities of the
commission helps US companiesand consumers Applying the
authorities of the commission.
So obviously right, thecommission does have a strong
(21:42):
competition authority.
You know the anti-competitive,any monopolistic behavior.
That's kind of the tenant ofthe Shipping Act.
But we've talked about this afair amount.
When I was actually theinternational affairs attorney
at the FMC this a fair amount.
When I was actually theinternational affairs attorney
at the FMC, this was part ofwhat I was familiar with was the
(22:04):
section 19 authority andforeign shipping practices act.
So this is something that Ikind of my my mind kind of went
to when, when he said lookingfor more instances when we're
applying the authority to thecommission helps us companies
and consumers.
We'll talk.
We'll talk.
Talk about that a little bit ina minute here.
But he wrote a press releaseresponding to the investigation,
the ongoing investigation intoSpanish ports under this kind of
(22:27):
discriminatory activity review.
That's something that's part ofthe Section 19 authority of
Merchant Marine Act of 1920 andthe Foreign Shipping Practices
Act.
He weighed in on that.
So I think that we might see areview of discriminatory
activities of foreign countriesbe something that the FMC might
(22:49):
start to look at more and again.
We're going to talk about thatagain in a minute.
Continuing on with theannouncement, though, of
Chairman Sola.
The announcement said ChairmanSola had a distinguished.
Continuing on with theannouncement, though, of
Chairman Sola.
The announcement said ChairmanSola had a distinguished career
as a soldier, entrepreneur andpublic servant.
Before he joined the commission, he served in the US Army for
12 years specializing incounterintelligence.
How did I know that?
Following his military career,he worked in consulting before
(23:15):
launching a company specializingin yacht and mega yacht sales.
Prior to joining the FMC,chairman Solis served as
commissioner of the FloridaBoard of Pilot Commissioners.
I love this right, because thisis a new perspective at the FMC
Counterintelligence, I think isgoing to be a really interesting
piece, especially if we see aSection 19 of foreign shipping
practices emphasis or attentionat the FMC.
(23:36):
But I think that this is coolthat he worked with board of
pilot commissioners so he kindof understands some of the
operations and some of thesupporting roles that happen
around a port, but then alsospecializing in yacht and mega
yacht sales.
I think that that's anothervery important area, not
necessarily directly under thepurview of the FMC, but I love a
total maritime approach tomaritime leaders in the industry
(23:59):
, right.
So I think that these are goingto be.
I just thought that that wasinteresting.
But there's also somethingabout Chairman Sola that I
didn't know that I also foundinteresting from his larger,
from his larger announcement hislarger from his larger
(24:20):
announcement where it talksabout he has actually spent some
time in Panama.
So I'm going to read throughsome of his some of his bio from
the chairman's bio on the FMC'swebsite.
So, like I said, he was swornin January 2019.
He was actually a candidate forFlorida's 24th congressional
district in his hometown ofMiami Florida, so he's from
Miami Florida.
(24:40):
Chairman Sola was previouslyappointed by then Governor Rick
Scott to serve as commissionerto the Florida Board of Pilot
Commissioners in 2015.
And as the commissioner of theBoard of Pilots, chairman Sola
was responsible for licensingand regulating Harbor pilots and
served on the probable causepanel for marine accidents.
Like I said, totalunderstanding of the industry.
I think that it's importantthat you get different aspects
(25:03):
and different experiences withinthe maritime industry.
Between 2005 and 2018, chairmanSola was a licensed ship and
mega yacht broker who served asCEO of Evermarine and as an
executive with prestigiousyachting firms Northup and
Johnson Yacht and Campers andNicholson.
Between 1998 and 2004, chairmanSola served as a consultant with
(25:23):
Berkshire Capital and Arden andPrice, while raising his family
in the Panama Canal Zone.
I did not know that.
I didn't know that he raisedhis family, that he lived in the
Panama Canal Zone, he says.
During this time, he authored,among other things, studies for
the Inter-American DevelopmentBank regarding the creation of a
Central American Index Fundthrough the region's equity
markets.
Chairman Sola also developedinternational finance strategies
(25:45):
focusing on the maritime sectorin Latin America, including
ports, free trade zones and shiprepairs, as well as management
of greenfield projects.
So this is interesting projects.
So this is interesting right?
He has some Panamanian andcertainly some business
understanding of the PanamaCanal zone and of Latin America
maritime sector.
This is starting to kind ofmake some more sense.
(26:08):
I don't know.
I think that this is.
We're going to talk about thisa little bit more in a second.
Let me continue on.
It says Chairman Sola served inthe US Army between 1986 and
1997 as a strategic debrieferand as a counterintelligence
agent.
He served the US Army'sintelligence and security
command in Munich, germany, andafter the fall of the Berlin
Wall, by strategicallydebriefing refugees from Eastern
(26:30):
Europe.
Subsequently, chairman Solaserved the US Army Southern
Command as a Spanish linguistinvolved with
counterintelligence activitiesin Panama during the war on
drugs in the 1990s.
So he was a Spanish linguistfor the US Army Southern Command
with counterintelligenceactivities in Panama.
Here's another Panamanianconnection here.
(26:51):
He also earned the US Army'sparachutist badge airborne and
was awarded the HumanitarianService Medal for his efforts
during the Cuban refugee crisis.
He's also received the NationalDefense Service Medal, the
Joint Meritorious Unit Award,the Army Commendation Medal and
has received the ArmyAchievement Award three times.
(27:12):
He is a two-time graduate ofthe Defense Language Institute
Foreign Language Center forSpanish and German.
I mean I didn't know all thisstuff.
I mean I was always impressedby all commissioners, really,
but this is impressive stuff.
And do you see this theme ofthe Panama coming through a few
(27:33):
different times?
It sounds like he understandsit on not just a kind of surface
level, but he understands it ona deeper level and so it kind
of makes sense.
This is starting to align right.
So Chairman Sola earned hisassociates in history from
Parkland College, his bachelor'sin management from Nova
(27:54):
Southeastern University, amaster's in international
finance from the University ofIllinois, and served as an
adjunct professor at FloridaState University between 1999
and 2001, where he taughtclasses in small business
finance entrepreneurship.
He says he's an avid fan ofMiami Marlins baseball and has
two children.
So these are interesting thingsthat I did not know Chairman
(28:17):
Sola had under his belt.
Now let's continue on, becausewe're going to talk a little bit
more about Panama, but let'sswitch over.
But congratulations to ChairmanSola.
I think he's going to do afantastic job.
He's already been there since2019.
So he does have a good amountof kind of baseline
understanding what the FMC isand what they can do.
(28:38):
Obviously, the FMC, as we allknow, is something that has, and
so you can always be learningmore and more and more about the
FMC.
So I'm excited to see where hetakes the agency.
I think he'll still be kind ofstepping into his role as
chairman for a little bit, butI'm encouraged.
I think that he has a lot ofimpressive background history
(29:00):
and a lot of really excitingexperiences that.
I'm interested to see how heuses those in his chairmanship.
All right, story number fourit's only been two weeks since
President Trump's inaugurationand we already have had some
maritime issues arise, right.
Obviously, we've been talking alot about projections on how I
think maritime issues will bepart of the administration, but
(29:21):
I think if you listen to thispodcast, you already knew that
maritime was on his mind, right.
But I think we're going to seesome interesting and US forward
happening things.
So newly confirmed Secretary ofState Marco Rubio is on his way
to the Panama Canal as hisfirst overseas trip.
I think he's going to get theretomorrow or he's traveling
today.
It's actually been kind ofinteresting to see mainstream
media as part of this Panamatrip, because I can't tell you
(29:46):
how many times I just keephearing this Panama Canal is
really big.
Well, yeah, yes, it is.
So I like that.
Anytime maritime hits nationalnews is another opportunity for
society to learn a little bitmore about maritime, but I think
this is interesting and, to befully transparent, all of this
attention on the Panama Canal.
(30:06):
I'm still looking into thedepths of the history here
myself, right, I'm still lookinginto the depths of the history
here myself, right, I obviouslyhad some kind of baseline
understanding of the PanamaCanal and the agreements and how
it was built and all of that.
But I'd like to dive more intoit and I've been challenging
myself to do that.
But there was a hearing thisweek in the Senate, so it was.
The Senate Committee onCommerce, science and
(30:26):
Transportation convened a fullcommittee hearing titled
Examining the Panama Canal andits Impact on US Trade and
National Security.
It was on Tuesday, january 28th.
In case you want to go, look atthe recording.
They keep the recording up.
I'll put a link to therecording, but it was in the
morning.
So it said this hearingexamined the importance of the
Panama Canal to the Americaneconomy and our national
security, focusing on thecanal's role in US trade, the
(30:49):
challenges of capacitylimitations and rising fees, and
the potential dangers posed bythe involvement of China and
other foreign powers.
They had four witnesses and twoof them were FMC commissioners,
or well, they had Chairman Sola,so designated as chairman
Technically you can still callhim commissioner, but he's the
chairman of the commissioners,designated as chairman.
Technically you can still callhim commissioner, but he's the
(31:11):
chairman of the commissioners.
So Chairman Sola and thenCommissioner Dan Maffei.
So just recently chairman nowhas moved to commissioner.
So you had Dan Maffei, lou Sola, and then you had the president
and CEO of the World ShippingCouncil, joe Kramick, so he was
kind of talking from the oceancarrier perspective.
And then you had EugeneKantorovich, so he's a professor
with Scalia Law School, withGeorge Mason University.
(31:34):
It was a really interestingpanel and I would really
encourage you to go take.
It's a pretty long discussionbut like, look at the recording,
kind of jump around.
The questions kind of moved allaround from very informed
questions.
Obviously there were some thatwere like well, especially to
the FMC commissioners, well,that's not exactly under our
(31:57):
statutory authority.
It's always kind of funny towhenever senators or congressmen
are talking to commissioners.
It's a little bit funny becausesometimes there's a disconnect
between, well, what is the FMC'sauthority zone and then what is
MARAD's authority zone, andit's not always well understood.
I'll just say but it was, itwas.
(32:18):
They did a pretty good joboverall, but the conversation
really jumped around from thehistory and the agreement of the
exchange of the Panama Canal toquestions about the drought.
We've been talking about thedrought and all the surcharges
that were being reportedly paidto jump the line during that
time.
Do you remember we heard somegiant numbers on?
You know there was.
You could get in the queue, theline, to get through the canal
(32:40):
and then you could actually paythe authority extra to jump the
line.
Remember we heard at least oneinstance of that.
They talked about that a littlebit.
They talked about thesignificance and the impact of
the terminals or the ports ateither end of the canal.
This is part of that Chinadiscussion, that China
conversation and the ability ofkind of what that means.
(33:00):
What do those canal terminalsand ports mean for the actual
canal itself?
Are they associated with it?
Are they not?
I encourage you to go listen tothis.
It really was pretty interesting.
It gave me some kind of jumpingoff points to do a little bit
more research.
As you know, I always love tosee the direct language, so I'm
going to be pulling up thisagreement and this transfer of
(33:22):
the Panama Canal language myselfso I can kind of take a dive
through it.
Maybe I'll do a deeper dive onthat.
That'll be one of our episodesubjects.
But look, why the FMC?
Right, why was the FMC on thisand why two commissioners?
Why did we have half of thepanel as FMC reps here?
Panama?
(33:50):
They were there the fall Ithink it was August, september
time, I believe and they weretrying to learn more about the
canal and the impacts of thedrought and its role in global
ocean shipping generally andreally kind of the way that the
canal being such a majorthroughway, it's, like I said,
its role in global oceanshipping.
Another piece to take away,though so obviously there's
global ocean shipping.
It might feel a littletangential there.
(34:11):
But the other thing to takeaway on why the FMC may be
partially interested andinteresting to this new
administration is because of thelarge hammer in their toolbox.
I talked about this just thelast little section the Foreign
Shipping Practices Act andSection 19 of the Merchant
Marine Act of 1920.
These laws give the FMC theauthority to kind of correct
(34:31):
unfavorable conditions, and sothe FMC has this anti-monopoly
you know authority where theyreally are, this competition
authority.
But they also have this thingwhere and I'm going to read 46
USC.
So from the US Code, section42101, regulations of Commission
.
I'm going to read it and I'mgoing to break it down for you.
But I'm going to read it.
(34:52):
So it says A unfavorableconditions To further the
objectives and policy set forthin Section 50101 of this title,
the Federal Maritime Commissionshall prescribe regulations
affecting shipping in foreigntrade, not in conflict with law,
to adjust or meet general orspecial conditions unfavorable
to shipping in foreign trade.
So the FMC can make regulationsaffecting shipping in foreign
(35:16):
trade to adjust or meetunfavorable conditions.
So basically they can writetheir own regs if they think
that there are unfavorableconditions out there to shipping
in foreign trade.
I mean, the connecting of thedots here is that if the Panama
Canal is somehow creatingconditions that are unfavorable
(35:40):
to shipping in foreign trade, tocorrect that by trying to
either put a fine on Panama orturn away any vessels that have
a Panamanian flag.
Those are some of those thingsthat are allowed and delegated
(36:02):
to the FMC under statutoryauthority through the Sporn
Shipping Practices Act orSection 19 of the Merchant
Marine Act.
That's what this is saying.
So continuing on, whether in aparticular trade or in a
particular route or in commercegenerally.
So trade lane, trade route orjust general unfavorable
conditions.
(36:22):
So this is including intermodalmovements.
Intermodal, that's notnecessarily only maritime
movements, intermodal, that'snot necessarily only maritime
right Intermodal movements,terminal operations, cargo
solicitation agency services,ocean transportation,
intermediary services andoperations, so OTIs, which is
NVOC, season freight forwardingand other activities and
services integral totransportation systems and which
(36:44):
arise out of or result fromlaws or regulations of a foreign
country or competitive methods,pricing practices or other
practices employed by owners,operators, agents or masters of
vessels of a foreign country.
So the pricing practices pieceis the piece that I'm going to
kind of hone in on here.
One thing that I've recentlyread is that those fees during
(37:08):
the drought that you had to pay,or just fees generally to
traverse the Panama Canal, it'sbeing reported.
And I only say it's beingreported because I've never
actually seen it happen.
I don't have independentconfirmation of this is how I'm
framing this.
Confirmation of this is how I'mframing this.
(37:31):
It's being reported that theChinese get that reimbursed for
those fees where the US doesn't,and so that.
And it's being reported.
So that, I think, makes all ofthis make a little bit more
sense to me, right?
So if you have Panama, creatingspecial conditions unfavorable
to shipping and foreign trade,right through potentially kind
(37:52):
of unfair pricing practices,which is another two words in
here.
The FMC can create, canprescribe regulations to correct
that.
So it says under B.
So that was all A Under B.
Initiation of regulation underB.
So that was all A under B.
Initiation of regulation A.
Regulation under subsection A,which we just read, may be
(38:16):
initiated by the commission onits own motion or on the
petition of any person,including another component of
the US government, so the FMCcan just do their own
investigation.
So that's kind of I think whatthey were doing when they went
down to Panama to go take a lookat what's going down there the
drought, everything kind of howit was all.
Take a look at what's goingdown there the drought,
everything kind of how it wasall, how it all interplays with
globalization, shipping.
But then they were also lookingat is this something that we
need to be reviewing from aunfavorable conditions
(38:38):
standpoint?
Doesn't this all kind of make alittle bit more sense now, like
the pieces are coming togetherand I don't know right.
I don't know where exactly thisall goes and I don't know if
that's what they were doing orif they were just, if it was
just, you know, an honest let'sjust look, and I think that's
where they are, let's just look.
I think that the FMC for themost part stays very fair, for
(39:02):
the most part, fair in how theyreview things.
They want to get kind of thefull picture, the total picture,
and I've been saying for awhile that, at least since the
election, that I anticipatedthat the FMC, with this new
administration, might be lookingat this authority a little bit
more and might be dusting thisoff a little bit.
(39:23):
Right, because the Section 19authority and the foreign
shipping practices Authorityreally hasn't been used much.
We saw it with Canada recently.
We saw it with Spain.
We talked about that on thispodcast before that.
We saw the FMC actually has anongoing investigation into Spain
(39:45):
on the denial of certain cargovessels calling at the ports in
Spain, but that's something thatthe FMC is looking at and so I
don't know.
I could see that as being aninteresting authority that the
administration wanted to learnmore about.
All right, the second majormaritime related thing with this
new administration is theofficial renaming of the Gulf of
(40:07):
Mexico to the Gulf of Americaand honestly I mean, look, I'm
already kind of smiling about it.
I don't hate it, I mean sure.
My legal mind immediately wentto okay, well, what does that
mean?
For, like lease agreements, isa name switch going to mess
anything up?
Because I'm sure all like thisis no way would anybody have
ever guessed that this might'vehappened.
And any of those contracts say,I'm sure they say Gulf of
(40:32):
Mexico, they don't say Gulf ofMexico or whatever it might be
named in the future.
But look, my thought was, look,these multi-year leases for oil
and gas.
I don't think that's going tomatter, right?
I think that I think a shift inname is going to be more of
kind of a I don't know, thosecontracts are probably based on
latitude and longitude anyways,because they need to be more
(40:52):
precise than just Gulf of Mexico.
But as a general thing, achanging of the name of the Gulf
of to the name Gulf of America,I'm kind of coming around to it
.
I don't know.
What do you think?
I came across a t-shirt theother day of like this Florida
retiree.
It looked like sitting on thebeach in Florida with a big sign
above saying welcome to theGulf of America and there was
(41:14):
just something about it, I don'tknow.
It just made me smile, look,and I've read that we have the
longest country coastline onthis particular body of water.
So I mean that makes sense.
Right, that makes sense thatperhaps it might be called the
Gulf of America instead of theGulf of Mexico.
And it looks like US CoastGuard and NOAA National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administrationthey keep the nautical charts,
(41:38):
they're already following suitand they're changing nautical
charts and updating it.
And the Coast Guard is updatingtheir public messaging to
identify the body of water asthe Gulf of America.
So I mean, that's it, folks, Ithink that's it.
It's called the Gulf of America.
And look, you can't tell me thatthe next time you're down on
the Gulf you won't make somemention of the like.
(41:59):
Here we are, this is the Gulfof America, and I challenge you,
if you don't have like a littlesmile on your face about it, I
don't know how this is all goingto play out.
Like I said, the legal mind inme is still a little bit
apprehensive of the whole thing.
I'm a little bit like okay,okay, but here we are, gulf of
(42:20):
America.
Most of the time I hear peoplecall it the Gulf anyway.
So I'm not exactly sure that,besides this little blip of
interest, it's going to changemuch in the long term Other than
, like I said, my legal brain oflike these contracts.
So I don't know it's, it iswhat it is.
I don't hate it.
I don't know it's a yeah, Idon't know.
(42:41):
Golf of America, we'll see, allright.
Well, that's it for this week.
Keep it here for all theupdates on all the things that
you need to know about globalsupply chain.
As always, the guidance here isgeneral and for educational
purposes.
It should not be consideredlegal advice directly related to
your matter.
If you need an attorney,contact an attorney, but if you
have specific legal questions,feel free to reach out to me at
(43:02):
my legal company, squallStrategies.
Otherwise, for the non-legalquestions, the e-learning and
general industry information andinsights, come find me at the
Maritime Professor.
For the non-legal questions,the e-learning and general
industry information andinsights, come find me at the
Maritime Professor.
If you like these videos, letme know, comment, like and share
.
If you want to listen to theseepisodes on demand, or if you
missed any previous episodes,check out the podcast by Landon
(43:24):
by Sea If you prefer to see thevideo.
That website this year.
So stay tuned, it might look alittle nicer.
It's very bare bones.
I'm so sorry about that, butuntil next week.
This is Lauren Began, theMaritime Professor and you've
just listened to, by Land and bySea.
See you next time you.
I got soul coming through, flying free.
Skies are blue, all the wavesare mixing room.
(00:22):
I got soul coming through,won't stop building a piece.
And On top of the world, whenyou see me, come, oh, everywhere
I go, I'm in the spotlight.
This is a good night I'm livingfor.
(00:44):
This is what it looks like Onthe tip of the world.
Good night, oh, oh, oh, oh, ohoh.
I'm living bold.
This is what it looks like.
I'm addicted to the world.
Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh,oh, oh, oh, oh.
There's a lot going on, and allat the same time.
So I thought this week let's doa Captain's Log, let's look at
(01:06):
everything that's going on.
I'll give you my take on it all.
Hi, welcome, by land and by sea, an attorney breaking down the
weekend supply chain presentedby Maritime Professor me.
I'm Lauren Began, founder ofMaritime Professor and Squall
Strategies, and I'm yourfavorite maritime attorney.
Join me every week as we walkthrough both ocean transport and
surface transport topics in thewild world of supply chain.
(01:28):
As always, the guidance isgeneral and for educational
purposes only.
It should not be construed tobe legal advice and there's no
attorney-client privilegecreated by this video or this
podcast.
If you need an attorney,contact an attorney.
So usually we start with my topthree stories of the week, but
this week all stories are topstories, so let's get into it
with the captain's log, storynumber one.
(01:49):
We've been doing this for a fewweeks now where we've been
looking at different rulemakingsand the petitions that are
happening at the FMC.
We don't have a lot to report,but last episode we did talk
about a few updates that arehappening on these petitions.
So we have the detentiondemurrage billing requirements
rule.
There's a petition filedagainst it that started in April
of 2024.
(02:09):
So gosh, we're almost a yearsince that petition started and
it came down to standing andlacking authority.
The real issue, if we get intothe subject matter, kind of
hinges on this directcontractual relationship of the
motor carriers and whether theyshould be or could be directly
billed for detention.
(02:30):
To merge, as of the rule, ithas to be a direct contractual
relationship.
So it's either directcontractual relationship or
consignee, not both and nobodyelse, which means that motor
carriers and truckers have beenkind of eliminated from that
must pay or the bill gets sentto.
They can pay, but they don't.
They're not, they're not partof the who the bill gets sent to
(02:53):
, and that's kind of at issuehere.
So one of the interestingthings that happened in December
was we had a whole bunch oftrucking associations enter the
chat and basically said, look,we, we kind of think that this
is something that we don't hatethe way that this has turned out
.
We talked about that in aprevious episode, so go take a
look at that.
But you can also look at theirjoint amicus curiae brief, which
(03:17):
is a friend of the court, wherethey basically say look, this
is going to relate to us onceyou get through all the legal
procedural stuff.
We have something to say.
Go take a look at that.
That's pretty interesting.
But it's the World ShippingCouncil who filed this petition
against the Federal MaritimeCommission's final rule and it
kind of comes down to and I'mgoing to this is oversimplifying
(03:37):
it, but this is from theirreply brief the most recent
filing from the World ShippingCouncil.
I think that this kind of onesentence or two sentence kind of
summarizes their position wherethey say the fundamental
mismatch between reasoning andresult renders the commission's
actions both outside of itsstatutory authority and
arbitrary and capricious.
So they're saying, look, notonly was the statutory intent
(04:01):
here not for them to do thisrule in this way, but that, also
the way that they did it, is amismatch between reasoning and
their result.
Because the World ShippingCouncil, through kind of other
means, has said that theybelieve that there is a direct
contractual relationship withmotor carriers sometimes, and
yet the clarity on the rule wasthat motor carriers are removed
(04:24):
from it.
So the World Shipping Councilsaying, look, there's a mismatch
here.
And so therefore they're saying, look, this, this final rule,
is a little incomplete.
This, this isn't really gettingto the heart of what they were
supposed to do and they weren'treally supposed to be in this
area.
So that oversimplification,right, we've been talking about
this for so many weeks.
So either listen to previousepisodes or maybe we'll do a
(04:47):
deeper dive once we have thenext stage, which that's kind of
.
What I want to say here is thatthis petition has an oral
argument that's been scheduledfor March 13.
So in a few weeks about sixweeks we're going to be having a
little bit more clarity on whatsome of the issues are from an
oral argument perspective,because we've had the briefings
(05:08):
filed.
But now, every time you get anoral argument, it's kind of
interesting because you'll get alittle bit more of the life of
the case, so we're not going tohave a lot of updates until then
, but stay tuned for this oralargument that's been scheduled
for March 13.
The other petition that's outthere is the unreasonable
refusal to deal and negotiatewith respect to vessel space
(05:28):
accommodation.
So that was the other rule.
I've talked about this so much.
I really really reallyencourage any of my listeners to
go take a look at this rule.
Just take a look at it.
Look at the text of this rule.
This is a rule.
This is a rule that came outfrom the FMC, a regulation that
came out from the FMC.
It came out in September, Ithink it was the 23rd, so it
(05:48):
really kind of got snowed in bythe port strike that was
happening right around the sametime.
Right, that was only a weekbefore the port strike.
So I don't want this to dropoff anybody's radar.
I want you to pay attention tothis because this is a really
interesting rule, becauseanytime an agency is defining
things and that's what thebilling requirements for
detention to merge is all abouttoo it's about defining that.
(06:09):
But this is definingunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate with respect tobest-of-space accommodations.
So they're definingunreasonable and unreasonable
refusal.
Find out what that means to youand find out if it applies to
you or not.
This is one that you want topay attention to.
So I did mention in a previousepisode that there is a per
curiam order that the motion tobe dismissed be addressed.
(06:32):
There's a motion to dismiss.
Both of these petitions arekind of getting into the weeds
on legalese and legal procedure.
But there's a motion to dismissmeaning basically like throw it
out, we're done here, we're noteven going to.
This case should never havebeen brought.
And so they're going to behaving a briefing schedule on
just that motion to dismiss.
They want to.
(06:52):
The court wants the parties tokind of dive in on whether or
not so the FMC made a motion todismiss, on whether or not the
World Shipping Council even hasstanding to bring this petition
against them, basically saying,should it have been the
individual ocean carriers or canit be the World Shipping
Council on behalf of kind of theindustry of ocean carriers?
So there's a briefing schedule.
(07:13):
March 3rd is when thepetitioner's brief deadline,
march.
April 2nd is the respondent'sbrief and a replied brief is
April 23rd.
Final briefs are due May 14th.
So, similarly, it's going to bea while before we get a lot of
movement and a lot of clarityhere and again.
This is just on the motion todismiss, so that's kind of
delaying the movement toward theactual like meat and potatoes
(07:36):
of the case, right?
So the motion to dismisswhether this case should have
been brought at all is the onlything that they're going to be
really talking about in thisfirst stage.
So we're not even to theunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate definition, whetheror not this was too far, whether
this was just right, whetherthe FMC had the authority to do
this or not.
You know the congressionalintent, the congressional
(07:59):
language as part of OceanShipping Reform Act of 2022,
directing the FMC to do this.
All of that won't really be atissue yet.
It's kind of captured as thewhole petition.
But what we're going to see inthe next three months is just
this motion to dismiss and abriefing schedule related to
(08:19):
that.
So we'll see.
I also think there might be someinteresting case law on who can
bring these petitions, becauseto get some clarity over whether
the World Shipping Council onbehalf of the industry or if
this really should have beenindividually by ocean carriers,
that'll be an interesting.
That will be an interestinglittle thing to watch here.
But I'm ready for the mainpotatoes right, like I'm ready
(08:40):
for, like, the beef of this, ofthis case to through.
Because I've talked about thisunreasonable free will to
negotiate for a while, there'ssome things that feel like it
might have been too far for theFMC to be diving into business
practices of some of theseprivate companies, and so I've
(09:01):
often said I think the FMC doesa pretty good job of staying
kind of in that guardrails areaof government oversight.
You know, they kind of let theindustry take the lead for the
most part, but they want to makesure that it's not getting too
far into monopolistic oranti-competitive or kind of
distance I don't know how elseto say that right,
(09:23):
antiicompetitive or making itunfair for the industry, right,
that's what the FMC is reallytrying to do.
They kind of act as thatcompetition authority in most
regards where they're trying tomake sure that it's for the
benefit of the US importer,exporter and consumer.
And so what does that mean?
They're watching the market forimbalances that are not just
commercial, regular, general,you know, commercial competition
(09:46):
type things, but likemonopolistic behavior.
I say all that because I don'tknow this rule.
It just it's never totally satwell with me Unreasonable
physical deal and negotiate.
There's an export strategydocument that has to be filed
with the Federal MaritimeCommission.
I just want to know more aboutit.
(10:06):
Right, I want to know moreabout what they're looking at.
I was interested in thispetition so that we could see a
little bit more of thediscussions, we could see a
little bit more of the rationale, so we can see a little bit
more of the justification andhow that all hinges back to the
FMC's authority.
Because some of those thingsthat are required in this
regulation, this unreasonablerefusal to deal and negotiate,
is a little bit extra, it feelslike, and so I want I just want
(10:30):
to see the justification there.
So we'll see.
And again, just my opinion.
I can be convinced.
I just want to see some of thatdiscussion.
So take a look at this rule,this one I don't know this one
just take a look at thisunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate.
Everybody's obviously payingattention to.
Attention to merge.
Pay attention to theunreasonable refusal to deal and
negotiate too.
(10:50):
All right.
Story number two Sean Duffy hasbeen confirmed.
He is now SECDA.
He is the secretary of theDepartment of Transportation and
you know what, the more that Isit on this, the more I think it
really is a good thing, becauseone of the main tenants that
he's discussed in hisconfirmation hearing was that he
really wanted to focus onsafety, and he said safety kind
of as a blanket thing.
(11:11):
There's a lot of discussiontoward rail and aviation, and
this was all actually pre therecent aviation disaster, which
is so sad.
But you know he was, he wasinitially focused on safety in
his hearing.
And look, while this podcastdoesn't talk about all the modes
of transportation right, wedon't get too far into the rail
(11:31):
or the aviation side of things.
We do a little bit over theroad, trucking as it relates to,
and rail I guess, as they allkind of relate back to the
global ocean, shipping throughtransport of goods, but we
really focus a lot on maritime,and so I think a multimodal
secretary announcing that safetyis his top priority is in line
(11:52):
with maritime, because most allports probably all, but I would
have to confirm that but atleast most all ports around the
country have safety as their toppriority.
If you were to take a look atall the priorities of all the
ports, I can tell you, safety isusually number one, and so I
think that it's appropriate thatthe Department of
(12:12):
Transportation Secretary wouldalso be aligned with safety as
the top priority.
Everything else kind of flowsfrom that, whether it's consumer
facing or not safety right.
So I think that's a good thing,right?
I mean, you can't not like that, I think.
As a second priority, though, Ithink we're going to see, from
the maritime side of things,this alignment with the return
(12:33):
of the United States as amaritime power, and we've talked
about that before on thispodcast.
I think that this is somethingthat the SHIPS Act kind of
brought up, but I think we'regoing to see this shipbuilding
as a priority, and really we'realready seeing that in the Coast
Guard with their announcementthis week to fleet up their
icebreakers and they're ordering40 what was called big
(12:53):
icebreakers.
We need icebreakers.
We have two icebreakers in theCoast Guard large Arctic
icebreakers and usually one ison dry dock and the other one is
kind of getting fixed here andthere we have a third that's
just entered the fleet.
But 40 big icebreakers it's agood start.
It's what we need.
We really need icebreakers.
(13:14):
This is woefully.
This should have happened awhile ago.
But look, here we are.
The second best time foranything to happen is right now.
And so, look, I mentioned theCoast Guard shipbuilding for the
icebreakers.
It's not Department ofTransportation, right?
Well, here's a little, a littlefactoid.
They used to be Department ofTransportation.
(13:34):
Did you know that in 2003?
Coast Guard actually was movedout of Department of
Transportation into Departmentof Homeland Security?
No-transcript.
Looking at DOT, it kind of hasthis military service type
(13:57):
element to it as well from themaritime side of things, because
we have ready reserve fleet, wehave the, we have a seal of
command, we have a bunch ofthings that have military
elements to them.
Even our maritime academiesright, those are.
That's a service, those areservice academies.
So I think that that'll be aninteresting and probably a good
(14:20):
thing.
Return to this maritime power,where we will actually be a good
thing.
Return to this maritime powerwhere we will actually be
supporting and giving attentionto some of these things that
have been not paid attention toin a long time.
Right, it's no dig on recentadministrations, it's just
something that is.
It's about time.
So what does return to maritimepower mean?
(14:41):
Right, shipbuilding?
Of course we have a, we have avery good shipbuilding base, but
we just need to.
We need to return, we need toget more shipbuilding going in
the US.
Right, we do have shipbuildingcompanies out there and so we
can.
We can build more ships, we canget them active again and then
(15:02):
hopefully, that we can expandinto more shipbuilding
facilities and companies.
I also think fleeting up the USflag vessels right is going to
be part of this maritime power,at least more than the less than
100 vessels that we have now.
Perhaps this also means being acompetitor in the international
global commercial linershipping world right, all this
(15:23):
global ocean shipping and wenever talk about any US
companies being a major playerthere.
Maybe we will be right.
Maybe that's part of theintention here is that we can
get the US flag fleet to be acompetitor on the international
market of.
We could potentially have someof these tens, fifteens thousand
(15:44):
TEU vessels out there.
So if we can beef up ourshipbuilding, beef up our
commercial presence for US flagand I think that also means
infrastructure beef ups as wellWe've been talking about
infrastructure across thecountry, but I think
strategically increasinginfrastructure in our ports if
we're gonna become a maritimenation again, if we're really
(16:07):
gonna commit to being a maritimepower.
Anything that comes in and outfrom a vessel is going to need a
port, and the other thing thatI think we might see here
obviously right, obvious, Ithink the other thing we might
see is an increase in strategicports and increase in support
for strategic ports.
So these ports are kind ofready to flip from commercial to
(16:30):
military or just simply supportmilitary operations if needed.
It's kind of a differentdesignation for ports.
Did you know that they had thisother, different designation?
It does help to unlock somefunding opportunities for
infrastructure, but it also kindof has this intention of
supporting military efforts ifneeded.
Maybe we'll see more of that.
Maybe strategic ports issomething that we'll all be
(16:52):
talking a lot more about in thecoming months and years of this
administration.
But, like I said in the lastepisode, I can imagine that the
Maritime Administration may findmore of this military maritime
security theme.
I think the commercial will beimportant and I think ports are
obviously going to be important.
But I do think that we're goingto see more of a kind of
(17:13):
military or just maritimesecurity in that shipbuilding is
maritime security right, inthat, having fleets and vessels
and mariners.
That is the one piece that Ireally haven't heard a lot of
conversation about through allof this maritime prowess
conversation and discussion is Ido think that we need to really
(17:34):
focus on the mariners, becausewe need the ships to have the
mariners out there, but we needthe mariners to be able to fill
these ships right.
So another vote for whymaritime academies are so
important.
But I think that what we'regoing to see and I've said this
for a few weeks now, or a fewmonths almost, I think, at this
point that maritime securitywill be linked to national
security, and I'm excited aboutthat because it's been a while
(17:58):
since maritime has been part ofthe national conversation.
Besides blips here and there andI don't mean to diminish COVID
congestion as a blip, but itkind of was right.
When was the last time you hadtalked about maritime before
that and then after that,probably the port strike, right.
Those were probably the twomajor things, and that was the
past five years.
The United States hasn't talkedabout maritime much beyond
(18:23):
those major things happeningover the past few years.
Besides this and just besidesall the listeners here, right,
we love maritime.
So yeah, I don't know.
I think that the US has kind ofbeen hobbling along trying to
support its shipbuilding, its USflag fleet, and I'm loving the
idea of more attention and moresupport sent this way for
maritime, maritime security,maritime support, maritime
(18:44):
infrastructure, everything thathas to do with maritime, because
way back when, if you ruled theoceans, you ruled the world
Right, and it just feels like,while that may or may not still
be true, it's not not true.
That makes sense.
I think maritime is national,maritime security is national
security, and I'm encouraged tosee what feels like a theme
(19:07):
developing here of maritimesecurity, national security, on
the national conversation stage.
So, all right.
Story number three we have a newFMC chairman too.
We have so many, so many newleadership positions.
Right, it happens, everyadministration change, but here
we go, or at least party changes.
So let's get to know FMCcommissioner excuse me FMC
chairman Lou Sola.
(19:27):
There's actually a few thingsthat I didn't know about
chairman Sola that were put outin his press release announced
when his chairmanshipdesignation was announced.
So the FMC released their pressrelease and they kind of did
this overview of who ChairmanSola is and what his experience
has been.
I knew that he was from Florida.
I knew that he was.
I do know that he is veryinterested in kind of the cruise
(19:51):
side of things during COVIDcongestion years.
So he's been at the FMC since2019.
During the COVID congestionyears he was the lead on the
economic review study of cruiseships and what happened and
their economic impact.
And I think during the study itfound that even up to 150 miles
away there is economic impactfrom cruising Because, if you
(20:14):
may or may not know, the FMCdoes have a little bit of a
regulatory authority.
It's a smaller authority butit's a regulatory authority over
cruise ships and it has to dowith kind of their bond and
their financial requirements.
So they obviously don't getinto the operations of it all,
but it's enough that the thencommissioner, now Chairman Sola,
thought that it was worthwhileand it was a really interesting
(20:37):
study.
So go take a look at that ifyou have anything to do with
cruising.
But the FMC did this economicimpact study.
I think it was for cruise ships, but so Chairman Sola, he's
been there since 2019, like Isaid, I'm going to read part of
the announcement that hereleased or the FMC released, so
(20:59):
this is a quote from him.
It said I am humbled bypresident Trump designated me
chair, just designating mechairman and I am grateful for
his confidence in my ability tolead the federal maritime
commission.
There are many ways thecommission contributes to the
competitiveness of Americanbusinesses access to foreign
markets for us vessels andcompanies and economic growth
for the nation.
We will continue that importantwork while looking for more
(21:19):
instances where applying theauthorities of the commission
helps US companies and consumers.
So I kind of, the first timethat I read this, I kind of read
this as we're continuing theimportant work while looking for
more instances where applyingthe authorities of the
commission helps US companiesand consumers Applying the
authorities of the commission.
So obviously right, thecommission does have a strong
(21:42):
competition authority.
You know the anti-competitive,any monopolistic behavior.
That's kind of the tenant ofthe Shipping Act.
But we've talked about this afair amount.
When I was actually theinternational affairs attorney
at the FMC this a fair amount.
When I was actually theinternational affairs attorney
at the FMC, this was part ofwhat I was familiar with was the
(22:04):
section 19 authority andforeign shipping practices act.
So this is something that Ikind of my my mind kind of went
to when, when he said lookingfor more instances when we're
applying the authority to thecommission helps us companies
and consumers.
We'll talk.
We'll talk.
Talk about that a little bit ina minute here.
But he wrote a press releaseresponding to the investigation,
the ongoing investigation intoSpanish ports under this kind of
(22:27):
discriminatory activity review.
That's something that's part ofthe Section 19 authority of
Merchant Marine Act of 1920 andthe Foreign Shipping Practices
Act.
He weighed in on that.
So I think that we might see areview of discriminatory
activities of foreign countriesbe something that the FMC might
(22:49):
start to look at more and again.
We're going to talk about thatagain in a minute.
Continuing on with theannouncement, though, of
Chairman Sola.
The announcement said ChairmanSola had a distinguished.
Continuing on with theannouncement, though, of
Chairman Sola.
The announcement said ChairmanSola had a distinguished career
as a soldier, entrepreneur andpublic servant.
Before he joined the commission, he served in the US Army for
12 years specializing incounterintelligence.
How did I know that?
Following his military career,he worked in consulting before
(23:15):
launching a company specializingin yacht and mega yacht sales.
Prior to joining the FMC,chairman Solis served as
commissioner of the FloridaBoard of Pilot Commissioners.
I love this right, because thisis a new perspective at the FMC
Counterintelligence, I think isgoing to be a really interesting
piece, especially if we see aSection 19 of foreign shipping
practices emphasis or attentionat the FMC.
(23:36):
But I think that this is coolthat he worked with board of
pilot commissioners so he kindof understands some of the
operations and some of thesupporting roles that happen
around a port, but then alsospecializing in yacht and mega
yacht sales.
I think that that's anothervery important area, not
necessarily directly under thepurview of the FMC, but I love a
total maritime approach tomaritime leaders in the industry
(23:59):
, right.
So I think that these are goingto be.
I just thought that that wasinteresting.
But there's also somethingabout Chairman Sola that I
didn't know that I also foundinteresting from his larger,
from his larger announcement hislarger from his larger
(24:20):
announcement where it talksabout he has actually spent some
time in Panama.
So I'm going to read throughsome of his some of his bio from
the chairman's bio on the FMC'swebsite.
So, like I said, he was swornin January 2019.
He was actually a candidate forFlorida's 24th congressional
district in his hometown ofMiami Florida, so he's from
Miami Florida.
(24:40):
Chairman Sola was previouslyappointed by then Governor Rick
Scott to serve as commissionerto the Florida Board of Pilot
Commissioners in 2015.
And as the commissioner of theBoard of Pilots, chairman Sola
was responsible for licensingand regulating Harbor pilots and
served on the probable causepanel for marine accidents.
Like I said, totalunderstanding of the industry.
I think that it's importantthat you get different aspects
(25:03):
and different experiences withinthe maritime industry.
Between 2005 and 2018, chairmanSola was a licensed ship and
mega yacht broker who served asCEO of Evermarine and as an
executive with prestigiousyachting firms Northup and
Johnson Yacht and Campers andNicholson.
Between 1998 and 2004, chairmanSola served as a consultant with
(25:23):
Berkshire Capital and Arden andPrice, while raising his family
in the Panama Canal Zone.
I did not know that.
I didn't know that he raisedhis family, that he lived in the
Panama Canal Zone, he says.
During this time, he authored,among other things, studies for
the Inter-American DevelopmentBank regarding the creation of a
Central American Index Fundthrough the region's equity
markets.
Chairman Sola also developedinternational finance strategies
(25:45):
focusing on the maritime sectorin Latin America, including
ports, free trade zones and shiprepairs, as well as management
of greenfield projects.
So this is interesting projects.
So this is interesting right?
He has some Panamanian andcertainly some business
understanding of the PanamaCanal zone and of Latin America
maritime sector.
This is starting to kind ofmake some more sense.
(26:08):
I don't know.
I think that this is.
We're going to talk about thisa little bit more in a second.
Let me continue on.
It says Chairman Sola served inthe US Army between 1986 and
1997 as a strategic debrieferand as a counterintelligence
agent.
He served the US Army'sintelligence and security
command in Munich, germany, andafter the fall of the Berlin
Wall, by strategicallydebriefing refugees from Eastern
(26:30):
Europe.
Subsequently, chairman Solaserved the US Army Southern
Command as a Spanish linguistinvolved with
counterintelligence activitiesin Panama during the war on
drugs in the 1990s.
So he was a Spanish linguistfor the US Army Southern Command
with counterintelligenceactivities in Panama.
Here's another Panamanianconnection here.
(26:51):
He also earned the US Army'sparachutist badge airborne and
was awarded the HumanitarianService Medal for his efforts
during the Cuban refugee crisis.
He's also received the NationalDefense Service Medal, the
Joint Meritorious Unit Award,the Army Commendation Medal and
has received the ArmyAchievement Award three times.
(27:12):
He is a two-time graduate ofthe Defense Language Institute
Foreign Language Center forSpanish and German.
I mean I didn't know all thisstuff.
I mean I was always impressedby all commissioners, really,
but this is impressive stuff.
And do you see this theme ofthe Panama coming through a few
(27:33):
different times?
It sounds like he understandsit on not just a kind of surface
level, but he understands it ona deeper level and so it kind
of makes sense.
This is starting to align right.
So Chairman Sola earned hisassociates in history from
Parkland College, his bachelor'sin management from Nova
(27:54):
Southeastern University, amaster's in international
finance from the University ofIllinois, and served as an
adjunct professor at FloridaState University between 1999
and 2001, where he taughtclasses in small business
finance entrepreneurship.
He says he's an avid fan ofMiami Marlins baseball and has
two children.
So these are interesting thingsthat I did not know Chairman
(28:17):
Sola had under his belt.
Now let's continue on, becausewe're going to talk a little bit
more about Panama, but let'sswitch over.
But congratulations to ChairmanSola.
I think he's going to do afantastic job.
He's already been there since2019.
So he does have a good amountof kind of baseline
understanding what the FMC isand what they can do.
(28:38):
Obviously, the FMC, as we allknow, is something that has, and
so you can always be learningmore and more and more about the
FMC.
So I'm excited to see where hetakes the agency.
I think he'll still be kind ofstepping into his role as
chairman for a little bit, butI'm encouraged.
I think that he has a lot ofimpressive background history
(29:00):
and a lot of really excitingexperiences that.
I'm interested to see how heuses those in his chairmanship.
All right, story number fourit's only been two weeks since
President Trump's inaugurationand we already have had some
maritime issues arise, right.
Obviously, we've been talking alot about projections on how I
think maritime issues will bepart of the administration, but
(29:21):
I think if you listen to thispodcast, you already knew that
maritime was on his mind, right.
But I think we're going to seesome interesting and US forward
happening things.
So newly confirmed Secretary ofState Marco Rubio is on his way
to the Panama Canal as hisfirst overseas trip.
I think he's going to get theretomorrow or he's traveling
today.
It's actually been kind ofinteresting to see mainstream
media as part of this Panamatrip, because I can't tell you
(29:46):
how many times I just keephearing this Panama Canal is
really big.
Well, yeah, yes, it is.
So I like that.
Anytime maritime hits nationalnews is another opportunity for
society to learn a little bitmore about maritime, but I think
this is interesting and, to befully transparent, all of this
attention on the Panama Canal.
(30:06):
I'm still looking into thedepths of the history here
myself, right, I'm still lookinginto the depths of the history
here myself, right, I obviouslyhad some kind of baseline
understanding of the PanamaCanal and the agreements and how
it was built and all of that.
But I'd like to dive more intoit and I've been challenging
myself to do that.
But there was a hearing thisweek in the Senate, so it was.
The Senate Committee onCommerce, science and
(30:26):
Transportation convened a fullcommittee hearing titled
Examining the Panama Canal andits Impact on US Trade and
National Security.
It was on Tuesday, january 28th.
In case you want to go, look atthe recording.
They keep the recording up.
I'll put a link to therecording, but it was in the
morning.
So it said this hearingexamined the importance of the
Panama Canal to the Americaneconomy and our national
security, focusing on thecanal's role in US trade, the
(30:49):
challenges of capacitylimitations and rising fees, and
the potential dangers posed bythe involvement of China and
other foreign powers.
They had four witnesses and twoof them were FMC commissioners,
or well, they had Chairman Sola,so designated as chairman
Technically you can still callhim commissioner, but he's the
chairman of the commissioners,designated as chairman.
Technically you can still callhim commissioner, but he's the
(31:11):
chairman of the commissioners.
So Chairman Sola and thenCommissioner Dan Maffei.
So just recently chairman nowhas moved to commissioner.
So you had Dan Maffei, lou Sola, and then you had the president
and CEO of the World ShippingCouncil, joe Kramick, so he was
kind of talking from the oceancarrier perspective.
And then you had EugeneKantorovich, so he's a professor
with Scalia Law School, withGeorge Mason University.
(31:34):
It was a really interestingpanel and I would really
encourage you to go take.
It's a pretty long discussionbut like, look at the recording,
kind of jump around.
The questions kind of moved allaround from very informed
questions.
Obviously there were some thatwere like well, especially to
the FMC commissioners, well,that's not exactly under our
(31:57):
statutory authority.
It's always kind of funny towhenever senators or congressmen
are talking to commissioners.
It's a little bit funny becausesometimes there's a disconnect
between, well, what is the FMC'sauthority zone and then what is
MARAD's authority zone, andit's not always well understood.
I'll just say but it was, itwas.
(32:18):
They did a pretty good joboverall, but the conversation
really jumped around from thehistory and the agreement of the
exchange of the Panama Canal toquestions about the drought.
We've been talking about thedrought and all the surcharges
that were being reportedly paidto jump the line during that
time.
Do you remember we heard somegiant numbers on?
You know there was.
You could get in the queue, theline, to get through the canal
(32:40):
and then you could actually paythe authority extra to jump the
line.
Remember we heard at least oneinstance of that.
They talked about that a littlebit.
They talked about thesignificance and the impact of
the terminals or the ports ateither end of the canal.
This is part of that Chinadiscussion, that China
conversation and the ability ofkind of what that means.
(33:00):
What do those canal terminalsand ports mean for the actual
canal itself?
Are they associated with it?
Are they not?
I encourage you to go listen tothis.
It really was pretty interesting.
It gave me some kind of jumpingoff points to do a little bit
more research.
As you know, I always love tosee the direct language, so I'm
going to be pulling up thisagreement and this transfer of
(33:22):
the Panama Canal language myselfso I can kind of take a dive
through it.
Maybe I'll do a deeper dive onthat.
That'll be one of our episodesubjects.
But look, why the FMC?
Right, why was the FMC on thisand why two commissioners?
Why did we have half of thepanel as FMC reps here?
Panama?
(33:50):
They were there the fall Ithink it was August, september
time, I believe and they weretrying to learn more about the
canal and the impacts of thedrought and its role in global
ocean shipping generally andreally kind of the way that the
canal being such a majorthroughway, it's, like I said,
its role in global oceanshipping.
Another piece to take away,though so obviously there's
global ocean shipping.
It might feel a littletangential there.
(34:11):
But the other thing to takeaway on why the FMC may be
partially interested andinteresting to this new
administration is because of thelarge hammer in their toolbox.
I talked about this just thelast little section the Foreign
Shipping Practices Act andSection 19 of the Merchant
Marine Act of 1920.
These laws give the FMC theauthority to kind of correct
(34:31):
unfavorable conditions, and sothe FMC has this anti-monopoly
you know authority where theyreally are, this competition
authority.
But they also have this thingwhere and I'm going to read 46
USC.
So from the US Code, section42101, regulations of Commission
.
I'm going to read it and I'mgoing to break it down for you.
But I'm going to read it.
(34:52):
So it says A unfavorableconditions To further the
objectives and policy set forthin Section 50101 of this title,
the Federal Maritime Commissionshall prescribe regulations
affecting shipping in foreigntrade, not in conflict with law,
to adjust or meet general orspecial conditions unfavorable
to shipping in foreign trade.
So the FMC can make regulationsaffecting shipping in foreign
(35:16):
trade to adjust or meetunfavorable conditions.
So basically they can writetheir own regs if they think
that there are unfavorableconditions out there to shipping
in foreign trade.
I mean, the connecting of thedots here is that if the Panama
Canal is somehow creatingconditions that are unfavorable
(35:40):
to shipping in foreign trade, tocorrect that by trying to
either put a fine on Panama orturn away any vessels that have
a Panamanian flag.
Those are some of those thingsthat are allowed and delegated
(36:02):
to the FMC under statutoryauthority through the Sporn
Shipping Practices Act orSection 19 of the Merchant
Marine Act.
That's what this is saying.
So continuing on, whether in aparticular trade or in a
particular route or in commercegenerally.
So trade lane, trade route orjust general unfavorable
conditions.
(36:22):
So this is including intermodalmovements.
Intermodal, that's notnecessarily only maritime
movements, intermodal, that'snot necessarily only maritime
right Intermodal movements,terminal operations, cargo
solicitation agency services,ocean transportation,
intermediary services andoperations, so OTIs, which is
NVOC, season freight forwardingand other activities and
services integral totransportation systems and which
(36:44):
arise out of or result fromlaws or regulations of a foreign
country or competitive methods,pricing practices or other
practices employed by owners,operators, agents or masters of
vessels of a foreign country.
So the pricing practices pieceis the piece that I'm going to
kind of hone in on here.
One thing that I've recentlyread is that those fees during
(37:08):
the drought that you had to pay,or just fees generally to
traverse the Panama Canal, it'sbeing reported.
And I only say it's beingreported because I've never
actually seen it happen.
I don't have independentconfirmation of this is how I'm
framing this.
Confirmation of this is how I'mframing this.
(37:31):
It's being reported that theChinese get that reimbursed for
those fees where the US doesn't,and so that.
And it's being reported.
So that, I think, makes all ofthis make a little bit more
sense to me, right?
So if you have Panama, creatingspecial conditions unfavorable
to shipping and foreign trade,right through potentially kind
(37:52):
of unfair pricing practices,which is another two words in
here.
The FMC can create, canprescribe regulations to correct
that.
So it says under B.
So that was all A Under B.
Initiation of regulation underB.
So that was all A under B.
Initiation of regulation A.
Regulation under subsection A,which we just read, may be
(38:16):
initiated by the commission onits own motion or on the
petition of any person,including another component of
the US government, so the FMCcan just do their own
investigation.
So that's kind of I think whatthey were doing when they went
down to Panama to go take a lookat what's going down there the
drought, everything kind of howit was all.
Take a look at what's goingdown there the drought,
everything kind of how it wasall, how it all interplays with
globalization, shipping.
But then they were also lookingat is this something that we
need to be reviewing from aunfavorable conditions
(38:38):
standpoint?
Doesn't this all kind of make alittle bit more sense now, like
the pieces are coming togetherand I don't know right.
I don't know where exactly thisall goes and I don't know if
that's what they were doing orif they were just, if it was
just, you know, an honest let'sjust look, and I think that's
where they are, let's just look.
I think that the FMC for themost part stays very fair, for
(39:02):
the most part, fair in how theyreview things.
They want to get kind of thefull picture, the total picture,
and I've been saying for awhile that, at least since the
election, that I anticipatedthat the FMC, with this new
administration, might be lookingat this authority a little bit
more and might be dusting thisoff a little bit.
(39:23):
Right, because the Section 19authority and the foreign
shipping practices Authorityreally hasn't been used much.
We saw it with Canada recently.
We saw it with Spain.
We talked about that on thispodcast before that.
We saw the FMC actually has anongoing investigation into Spain
(39:45):
on the denial of certain cargovessels calling at the ports in
Spain, but that's something thatthe FMC is looking at and so I
don't know.
I could see that as being aninteresting authority that the
administration wanted to learnmore about.
All right, the second majormaritime related thing with this
new administration is theofficial renaming of the Gulf of
(40:07):
Mexico to the Gulf of Americaand honestly I mean, look, I'm
already kind of smiling about it.
I don't hate it, I mean sure.
My legal mind immediately wentto okay, well, what does that
mean?
For, like lease agreements, isa name switch going to mess
anything up?
Because I'm sure all like thisis no way would anybody have
ever guessed that this might'vehappened.
And any of those contracts say,I'm sure they say Gulf of
(40:32):
Mexico, they don't say Gulf ofMexico or whatever it might be
named in the future.
But look, my thought was, look,these multi-year leases for oil
and gas.
I don't think that's going tomatter, right?
I think that I think a shift inname is going to be more of
kind of a I don't know, thosecontracts are probably based on
latitude and longitude anyways,because they need to be more
(40:52):
precise than just Gulf of Mexico.
But as a general thing, achanging of the name of the Gulf
of to the name Gulf of America,I'm kind of coming around to it
.
I don't know.
What do you think?
I came across a t-shirt theother day of like this Florida
retiree.
It looked like sitting on thebeach in Florida with a big sign
above saying welcome to theGulf of America and there was
(41:14):
just something about it, I don'tknow.
It just made me smile, look,and I've read that we have the
longest country coastline onthis particular body of water.
So I mean that makes sense.
Right, that makes sense thatperhaps it might be called the
Gulf of America instead of theGulf of Mexico.
And it looks like US CoastGuard and NOAA National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administrationthey keep the nautical charts,
(41:38):
they're already following suitand they're changing nautical
charts and updating it.
And the Coast Guard is updatingtheir public messaging to
identify the body of water asthe Gulf of America.
So I mean, that's it, folks, Ithink that's it.
It's called the Gulf of America.
And look, you can't tell me thatthe next time you're down on
the Gulf you won't make somemention of the like.
(41:59):
Here we are, this is the Gulfof America, and I challenge you,
if you don't have like a littlesmile on your face about it, I
don't know how this is all goingto play out.
Like I said, the legal mind inme is still a little bit
apprehensive of the whole thing.
I'm a little bit like okay,okay, but here we are, gulf of
(42:20):
America.
Most of the time I hear peoplecall it the Gulf anyway.
So I'm not exactly sure that,besides this little blip of
interest, it's going to changemuch in the long term Other than
, like I said, my legal brain oflike these contracts.
So I don't know it's, it iswhat it is.
I don't hate it.
I don't know it's a yeah, Idon't know.
(42:41):
Golf of America, we'll see, allright.
Well, that's it for this week.
Keep it here for all theupdates on all the things that
you need to know about globalsupply chain.
As always, the guidance here isgeneral and for educational
purposes.
It should not be consideredlegal advice directly related to
your matter.
If you need an attorney,contact an attorney, but if you
have specific legal questions,feel free to reach out to me at
(43:02):
my legal company, squallStrategies.
Otherwise, for the non-legalquestions, the e-learning and
general industry information andinsights, come find me at the
Maritime Professor.
For the non-legal questions,the e-learning and general
industry information andinsights, come find me at the
Maritime Professor.
If you like these videos, letme know, comment, like and share
.
If you want to listen to theseepisodes on demand, or if you
missed any previous episodes,check out the podcast by Landon
(43:24):
by Sea If you prefer to see thevideo.
That website this year.
So stay tuned, it might look alittle nicer.
It's very bare bones.
I'm so sorry about that, butuntil next week.
This is Lauren Began, theMaritime Professor and you've
just listened to, by Land and bySea.
See you next time you.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!