The issue of “box rules” is back in the spotlight in the United States, with a new initiative from the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC). To summarize: some road carriers and shippers believe that they are still, in many terminals, forced to use “designated” chassis, rather than freely choosing their supplier — or using their own equipment.
According to several stakeholders interviewed, these practices continue to incur hidden costs: lost time, operations transferring containers from one chassis to another, artificial congestion, and ultimately a bill that impacts the entire chain. The issue is not new: during periods of high tension, these rules have exacerbated dysfunctions, multiplying “unnecessary” trips and operational frictions.
The FMC is launching a new phase of consultation today, motivated by recurring complaints and the idea that the practices observed on the ground do not reflect the spirit of previous decisions. Areas such as Memphis, Chicago, Savanna, or Los Angeles are cited as points where the operational reality remains difficult for drayage operators.
Despite this, the sector is not getting carried away. Many doubt that a new cycle of comments will be enough to quickly evolve a system where responsibilities, contracts, and economic interests are intertwined. One thing is certain: behind a technical term (“box rules”), the entire question of port fluidity and the freedom of choice for operators is at stake.
