BEFORE THE FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PETITION OF UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. FOR

EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 16

OF THE SHIPPING ACT OF 1984 TO PERMIT

NEGOTIATION, ENTRY AND PERFORMANCE

OF SERVICE CONTRACTS

 

FMC Petition No. P __ - 03

 

 

 

 

 

 

July 25, 2003

 

J. Michael Cavanaugh

Holland & Knight LLP

2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 955-3000

 

Charles L. Coleman, III

Holland & Knight LLP

50 California Street, Suite 2800

San Francisco, California 94111

(415) 743-6900

 

Counsel for Petitioners

 


TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.          INTRODUCTION.. 1

 

II.          STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION REQUESTED.. 2

 

III.         JUSTIFICATION FOR EXEMPTION.. 3

 

A.        BACKGROUND.. 3

 

1.         UPS Corporate Profile. 3

 

2.         UPS International Parcel Shipping Service. 4

 

B.        PROPOSED UPS SERVICE CONTRACT OPERATIONS.. 7

 

C.        CHANGES IN OCEAN FREIGHT INDUSTRY SINCE ENACTMENT OF THE OCEAN SHIPPING REFORM ACT OF 1998, AND GROWTH OF INTEGRATED LOGISTICS SERVICES WARRANT USE OF SERVICE CONTRACTS BY UPS.. 8

 

1.         Emergence of the Integrated Logistics Industry. 8

 

2.         Consolidation of VOCCs. 10

 

3.         VOCC Ownership of and Control over OTIs. 10

 

4.         Service Contracts Now Dominate Bookings. 12

 

5.         Shipper Demand for Integrated Logistics Services. 13

 

6.         UPS Corporate and Service Characteristics Support Use of Service Contracts  14

 

D.        BENEFITS TO SHIPPERS WHICH THE EXEMPTION WOULD PROMOTE   16

 

1.         Lower Cost and More Efficient Services. 16

 

2.         Greater Reliability of Service Over Entire Range of Modes. 18

 

3.         Uniformity of Contract Attributes over Entire Route. 18

 

4.         UPS Will Offer Greater Port Security and Enhanced International Transportation Security Access for TSA and Other U.S. Security and Law Enforcement Agencies. 19

 

E.        THE EXEMPTION WOULD HAVE NO MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON COMPETITION.. 19

 

1.         VOCCs Would Benefit from Back-to-Back Service Contracting with UPS as an Integrated Logistics Service Provider. 20

 

2.         VOCC Volume, Capacity Utilization Rates and Efficiency Will Improve. 20

 

3.         UPS Service Contracts will Not Substantially Affect OTIs. 21

 

F.         THE EXEMPTION IS CONSISTENT WITH LEGISLATIVE INTENT IN ENACTING OSRA   21

 

G.        SHIPPER INTERESTS SUPPORT THE UPS PETITION.. 23

 

IV.        SUMMARY. 24


I.          INTRODUCTION

In accordance with the Federal Maritime Commission’s regulations at 46 C.F.R. §502.67, United Parcel Service, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, UPS Ocean Freight Services, Inc. ("UPSOFS") (collectively, United Parcel Service, Inc. and UPSOFS are referred to herein as "UPS") request that the Commission grant an exemption pursuant to Section 16 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (the "Act") to permit UPSOFS to utilize confidential service contracts with its shippers.

UPS is a worldwide surface and air freight carrier providing service as both an ocean transportation intermediary ("OTI") and non-vessel operating common carrier ("NVOCC"), as such are defined in the Act.  UPS transports substantial volumes of freight which move via vessel-operating common carriers ("VOCCs") in end-to-end connection with UPS's other transportation modes. 

Many of UPS's shippers, both large and small, depend on UPS both for transportation and full-service global supply chain management solutions, including features such as labeling and tracking of freight shipments, document processing, customs clearance, warehousing, "just-in-time" inventory delivery capabilities and specialized trade financing.  In order to fulfill shipper service requirements, and to meet competition from large vertically-integrated VOCC organizations that also own or control OTIs, UPS needs the flexibility to negotiate and perform confidential service contracts with shippers covering the entire end-to-end movement. 

An exemption to permit UPS to offer service contracts subject to Section 8(c) of the Act and the Commission's service contract regulations is necessary and appropriate in light of industry developments since enactment of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 ("OSRA"), including ownership of OTIs by large VOCCs.  The proposed exemption is consistent with the intent of Congress in enacting OSRA in 1998.  Although Congress decided at that time to allow service contract authority only to VOCCs, there have been substantial changes in industry conditions since the Congressional deliberations in 1998.  UPS, with its large asset base and strong presence in the surface and air freight industries, does not exemplify the concerns that Congress expressed about expanding service contract authority during the OSRA debate.

The requested exemption will promote commerce, and will not result in any reduction of competition.  UPS will show that there is substantial support for this exemption among shippers.

II.         STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION REQUESTED

United Parcel Service, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, including UPSOFS, hereby request an exemption pursuant to Section 16 of the Shipping Act of 1984, as amended, 46 App. U.S.C. §1715 (the "Act"), to permit UPSOFS, a Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier as defined in Section 3(17) of the Act, to enter into and perform service contracts, as defined in Section 3(19) of the Act, in the manner permitted in and subject to the requirements of Section 8(c) of the Act and subject to the Federal Maritime Commission's regulations at 46 C.F.R. Part 530[1].

III.        JUSTIFICATION FOR EXEMPTION

A.        BACKGROUND

1.         UPS Corporate Profile  

UPS, a Delaware corporation, was founded in 1907.  UPS is the world's largest package delivery company and provider of specialized transportation and logistics services, serving some 200 countries worldwide. 

Statistics regarding UPS are set forth in Appendix "A" to the attached Verified Statement of Michael Gargaro ("Gargaro Statement").  UPS, with 2002 corporate revenues of $31.3 billion, has 360,000 employees.  UPS delivers some 3.4 billion packages and documents annually, including 13.3 million daily global deliveries, two million daily U.S. domestic air packages and documents and 1.2 million daily international packages and documents.  On a daily basis, UPS picks up from 1.8 million customers and delivers to an average of 6.1 million U.S. and international addressees and consignees.

UPS operates from 1,748 facility locations worldwide.  The company operates a fleet of 88,000 trucks and other vehicles, and 581 aircraft.  UPS flies nearly 1,900 daily air freight segments serving 364 U.S. airports and 405 terminals overseas.  Principal UPS air freight hubs are in the U.S., Canada, Europe and South and East Asia.  UPS capital expenditures average $2 billion annually.  UPS's transportation assets, including aircraft, vehicles, terminals and technology, exceed $25 billion on a cost basis and $13 billion on a depreciated basis.  Gargaro Statement, at 3 and Appendix "A."

UPS is a publicly-traded company.  Its shares, traded on the New York Stock Exchange, have a current market capitalization of $33.2 billion.

2.         UPS International Parcel Shipping Service 

            As international volumes have grown, UPS has increasingly relied on ocean common carrier services to move containerized shipments of parcels for its customers.  UPS combines ocean freight movements with its surface and air delivery capabilities to offer shippers the right combination of delivery times and economics for their needs.  To provide the most comprehensive service at all levels, UPS has also made strategic acquisitions, like that of the Fritz Companies, Inc., a full-service global freight forwarder, customs brokerage and warehousing firm.[2]

            UPS does not own or operate any vessels.  All UPS ocean freight is shipped via ocean common carriers, in many instances pursuant to service contracts entered and performed pursuant to the Shipping Act and the Commission’s regulations.  UPS's service contracts with VOCCs range in volume up to 10,000 20-foot equivalent units ("TEUs").  In other cases, depending on volume and routing, UPS ocean shipments move in accordance with VOCC tariffs, or they may be shipped under UPSOFS’s own NVOCC tariff[3] or through arrangements with other NVOCCs under their tariffs, or via other OTIs.  Gargaro Statement at 13.

            UPS moves approximately 300,000 TEUs of ocean freight annually.  UPS serves a number of larger ocean freight shippers moving up to 4,000 TEUs each year.   However, the majority of UPS's ocean movements are provided by shippers moving an average of about 350-500 TEUs annually.  Such smaller shippers are typically suppliers to larger manufacturers or retailers importing products from overseas sources to consolidation, manufacturing, assembly, warehousing and delivery points in the U.S.  Unlike bigger companies, these smaller shippers have few internal transportation or trade finance resources.  They look to UPS to provide a "portfolio solution" covering aspects of their business from vendor management, packing and bar code labeling for tracking and processing purposes, loading and transport, to customs clearance.  In many instances, UPS locates its own facility adjacent to the shipper’s consolidated freight terminal or factory, or next to the shipper’s customer’s facility, to provide "vendor-managed inventory services."  This allows the shipper's customer to avoid the cost of carrying inventory while still having access to goods on a timely basis as needed.  Gargaro Statement at 13-14.

            UPS also manages the flow of information and trade financial services that facilitate movement of parcel freight through its UPS Supply Chain Solutions Group.  UPS Supply Chain Solutions Group offers logistics, global freight, trade finance and consulting to enhance customers' business performance and improve their global supply chain management.  UPS Supply Chain Solutions can manage complex transportation networks, carriers and multi-modal shipments, and deliver orders anywhere through its global network.  UPS can put together the most effective solution for each shipper, using ocean, air, road, or rail.   UPS manages the transportation details for the shipper, including shipment booking, carrier routing, tariffs, customs and documentation requirements.  While the shipper's goods are in transit, the UPS information system provides visibility in the transportation process via the Internet, providing information on all aspects of the shipments.  Gargaro Statement at 13-16.

            For shippers whose goods can move most efficiently by ocean freight for all or part of the route, UPS has developed its UPS Trade DirectSM Ocean service.  This service is presently available from locations in Asia and Brazil for inbound shipments to the United States.   Trade DirectSM Ocean provides a port-to-door distribution center bypass delivery solution for U.S. importers that simplifies logistics management, reduces costs, and minimizes the risk of loss or product damage.  Gargaro Statement, Appendix "B."  Based on purchase order allocation and distribution information, UPS labels are placed on individual packages at the Customer's container freight station at the point of origin.  Packages from ocean containers arriving at a U.S. port are fed directly into the UPS small package delivery network upon arrival and clearance in the United States.  For larger deliveries, Less than TruckLoad ("LTL") service is also available.  Id.

            Examples of comprehensive, customized supply chain management solutions created by UPS for smaller shippers are described in the Gargaro Statement at 14.

UPS has future plans for expansion of all these services, and will constantly develop new, innovative service features for its shippers as the industry changes.

B.        PROPOSED UPS SERVICE CONTRACT OPERATIONS

            With service contract authority, UPS would be able to satisfy growing shipper demand to offer a single confidential agreement covering all aspects of UPS's global transportation and supply chain management services.  In a single comprehensive contract, UPS could provide unique, customized service packages to each shipper, charging rates appropriate to the specific needs and traffic flow of the shipper. 

Without service contract authority, this is impossible.  Rates are not confidential, and the parties cannot obtain the most efficient top-to-bottom pricing for the customized package of service features the shipper receives.  The parties cannot effectively cope with changes in ocean cargo volume.  Additionally, without the shipper's volume obligation provided by a service contract, UPS cannot reliably negotiate the best service and rate packages with VOCCs which would enable UPS to provide the optimal pricing for the shipper.

Under the requested exemption, UPS would implement its service contract business in accordance with the Commission's regulations at 46 C.F.R. Part 530.  UPS service contracts and amendments would be filed with the Commission and notices and essential terms would be published, as required in 46 C.F.R. §530.5 and §§530.8 through 530.12 and Appendix A.  UPS would be subject to the same regulatory requirements as other carriers using service contracts.

C.        CHANGES IN OCEAN FREIGHT INDUSTRY SINCE ENACTMENT OF THE OCEAN SHIPPING REFORM ACT OF 1998, AND GROWTH OF INTEGRATED LOGISTICS SERVICES WARRANT USE OF SERVICE CONTRACTS BY UPS

 

1.         Emergence of the Integrated Logistics Industry

            During the last five years, various world economic, competitive and technology factors, as well as improvement of supply chain management techniques and innovative service offerings by freight carriers in all modes, have led to the emergence of new integrated logistics services in place of traditional stand-alone or end-to-end multimodal freight services.  Increased international sourcing of components for manufactured goods, competitive practices in the field of production management and application of systems management technologies have caused supply chain management to become a crucial element of major multinational corporate strategies.

            Key considerations in supply chain management include cost controls, reduction of transit time to shorten order times and cut inventory carrying cost, predictability of transit times, tracking of goods to assure arrival and availability, streamlining of documentation and processing at international frontiers, automation of inspection, quality control and compliance systems, negotiable title documentation from upstream points in a form conducive to in-transit inventory financing, flexibility in routing, ability of carriers to assemble various multimodal services in a manner most advantageous to the shipper, and warehousing systems and locations to provide "just-in-time" deliveries either to the shipper or shipper’s customer.  Large multinational companies have developed methods to maximize their advantages at each level of the supply chain, enabling them to be highly competitive while improving profit margins. 

While large shippers have led the way, the demand for such service features applies equally to many smaller or mid-sized shippers.  Large manufacturers and distributors often require small suppliers to locate their facilities adjacent to the big company's production center, in order to provide nearby availability of goods for inspection and "just-in-time" deliveries.  In other cases, smaller companies independently occupying profitable product market niches can take advantage of better supply chain management service features, if created in response to the needs of large-volume shippers.  Once the necessary capital investment and technology development has been undertaken by the carriers to bring a new service feature on line in response to big shipper demands, they can eventually make it available to shippers moving smaller volumes.  Gargaro Statement at 8-12.

The Commission has recognized the substantial impact of the growth of the integrated logistics industry on liner shipping.  See, Federal Maritime Commission, The Impact of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 (2001) ("FMC OSRA Report") at 14. 

2.         Consolidation of VOCCs

In the five years intervening since enactment of OSRA, there has been considerable consolidation among the VOCCs.  As the Commission has observed, the percentage of global containership capacity controlled by the 20 largest VOCCs has increased from about 50 percent in the period when OSRA was being legislated to well in excess of 80 percent today.  FMC OSRA Report, at 15.  In 1998 there were still a half-dozen larger carriers with relatively smaller market shares on most U.S. trade routes.  Today two such VOCCs – Maersk Sealand and APL – have substantial market power in several key US trades.  See Appendix "C" of Gargaro Statement.  There has also been considerable consolidation among the next layer of VOCCs just below these large companies.  As a result, the competitive landscape at the VOCC level has significantly changed from that Congress was addressing in 1998. 

3.         VOCC Ownership of and Control over OTIs

To meet shipper demands, larger VOCCs have now established, acquired or affiliated closely with OTIs providing upstream consolidation, forwarding and processing functions covering the full range of integrated logistics services.  These companies have very substantial asset bases, in the billions of dollars, and operate comprehensive global services.  See table at Appendix "D" of the Gargaro Statement.

            UPS faces substantial head-to-head competition from Maersk-Sealand and its affiliate Maersk Logistics International A/S, based in Copenhagen.  Maersk operates 281 vessels with a capacity exceeding 750,000 TEUs in worldwide liner services.  Maersk Logistics offers supply chain management, international forwarding, air freight, warehousing and distribution, vendor management, quality assurance, customs brokerage and information management services for its shippers.  Gargaro Statement at 18. 

            Another typical large, vertically-integrated competitor is APL.  Part of the NOL Group headquartered in Singapore, APL operates 74 vessels and 450,000 containers in worldwide liner trades serving over 100 countries.  APL's affiliate APL Logistics is the fastest-growing business unit in the NOL Group, with an impressive 29 percent annual expansion rate.  APL Logistics is a global leader in supply-chain management, offering forwarding vendor management, warehousing and consolidation services.  With services including consulting and advanced information technologies, APL Logistics now maintains 15 offices in 55 countries.  It also operates a system of more than 200 warehouses.  Gargaro Statement at 18-19.

            Other large VOCCs which offer comprehensive supply chain management services include Hanjin Line, Hyundai Merchant Marine, K-Line, NYK, Yang Ming, P&O Nedlloyd, CMA-CGM, Mitsui OSK and Zim Israel.  Still other large VOCCs are offering certain integrated logistics services to shippers through use of electronic portal systems such as INTTRA, GT Nexus and CargoSmart.  As many as 15 VOCCs participate in INTTRA.  Gargaro Statement at 18-20 and Appendix D.

            These large VOCCs that own and control OTIs and participate in portals have a significant advantage over UPS because of their ability to offer confidential service contracts to their shipper customers through the VOCC entity in their corporate group.  These VOCCs may quote specialized combinations of rates and service features, offering flexibility with respect to the ocean freight portions of their services that UPS as an OTI cannot match.  Gargaro Statement at 19-20.

            There has also been great consolidation among OTIs since 1998.  NVOCC and freight forwarding functions have been merged, leaving fewer independent forwarders or NVOCCs.  FMC OSRA Report, at 4, 31.  Surface freight carriers and railroads are now also beginning to offer supply chain management services.  Gargaro Statement at 20.

            4.         Service Contracts Now Dominate Bookings

            Largely due to regulatory changes brought about by OSRA, such as elimination of the “me-too” requirement for similarly-situated shippers, as well as the attractiveness of confidentiality provisions, service contracts are now the overwhelmingly predominant rate-setting vehicle in U.S. ocean commerce.  More than 80 percent of all liner cargo now moves under service contracts.  FMC OSRA Report, at 2.  In certain trades, shippers are now moving virtually 100 percent of their traffic via service contracts.  Id. at 17.

            Service contracts have affected cargo movements of both large and small shippers.  The Commission’s 2001 OSRA survey of service contracts showed that 60 percent of them have minimum volume commitments of 100 TEUs or less.  Id., at 18.

 

5.         Shipper Demand for Integrated Logistics Services

With the explosive emergence of the modern integrated logistics industry, and with even modest-sized shippers having critical supply chain control needs, competitive multi-modal carriers must provide innovative and comprehensive transportation services to satisfy shipper demand.  As the world's largest parcel carrier, UPS has developed a substantial transportation asset base and technologies to fulfill these needs, as have many of its major competitors among the ranks of VOCCs and OTIs.  Gargaro Statement at 21-3, 25.

            The rapidly advancing need for integrated supply chain management services also comes at a time when many smaller shippers are pinched by economic forces to downsize and outsource their shipping and logistics functions.  Shippers of all sizes have had extra pressure arising from the need to comply with complex new regulatory requirements, such as the U.S. Customs Service 24-Hour Rule, and new regulations of the Homeland Security Department and Transportation Safety Administration.  These shippers have difficulty keeping up with regulatory developments and meeting these compliance demands with their own staff.  Many shippers would prefer to turn to the expertise of an OTI which has invested in the training and compliance systems necessary to meet all requirements.  However, they cannot make full use of such an organization without giving up the benefits of having confidential arrangements and greater rate flexibility under ocean carrier service contracts.  Gargaro Statement at 24-5. 

            While sophisticated OTIs may seek to provide the type of “one-stop shopping” necessary to fulfill all of a shipper’s traffic and compliance needs, the unacceptable complication in this approach is the requirement for use of NVOCC tariffs in lieu of service contracts.  Use of tariffs is cumbersome and inefficient.  Given the highly-competitive environments in which many shippers operate, and thinner margins that are possible, if not required, with modern supply chain management, it can be very disadvantageous for these shippers if their competitors and customers have ready access to this rate component of their cost structure.

6.         UPS Corporate and Service Characteristics
Support Use of Service Contracts

 

a.                  UPS Has Substantial Assets and Net Worth

                                    to Assure Performance

UPS has the financial wherewithal to stand behind service contract commitments to shippers.  It is a large public company, with annual revenues in excess of $31 billion.  UPS’s transportation system assets have a cost basis of $25 billion.  UPS’s capital expenditures have averaged $2 billion annually since 2000.  Shippers can be confident UPS will faithfully perform its time-volume shipping obligations.  Gargaro Statement at 2-3.

b.                  UPS Is a Major Freight Carrier by

                                    Air and Surface Transport Modes

 

UPS has the experience and expertise to provide reliable multimodal transportation services.  UPS is the world’s largest package transportation and delivery service, delivering 3.4 billion packages and documents annually, utilizing its fleet of 88,000 vehicles and over 500 aircraft.  Much of UPS’s annual 300,000 TEU’s of ocean freight is processed end-to-end with other UPS modes.  Gargaro Statement at 13, and Appendix "A".

c.                  UPS Offers Comprehensive and Innovative Integrated Logistics Services to Large and Small Shippers

 

UPS services include its innovative Trade Direct SM Ocean program, offering fully-integrated supply chain management for ocean freight.   UPS Supply Chain Solutions provides full vendor management and integrated logistics services, as well as trade financing. (See Gargaro Statement, Appendix B.)

Because of the size and diversity of the UPS shipper base, UPS can also work closely with various ocean carriers to mutual advantage.  In the Transpacific trades, for example, UPS utilizes some dozen carriers, including not only the largest companies but also the smaller VOCCs.  UPS's parcel customers supply chain management needs dictate the quickest possible transit times.  Accordingly, UPS places a premium on ability to offer "next available departure" status for these shippers whose cargoes utilize ocean services.  By having relationships with the broadest range of VOCCs, UPS has available the greatest range of sailing dates and times in this trade.  Because of its significant, stable volume and ability to process shipments expeditiously, UPS is able to arrange more favorable terms with VOCCs to improve transit time that even substantial shippers might not be able to obtain based on their own traffic volumes.  Gargaro Statement at 16.

Additionally, by dealing with both large and small VOCCs, UPS is able to enhance the utilization and competitive reach of the smaller carriers.  This improves competition in the trades, strengthening the ability of these smaller carriers to offer better terms.  Gargaro Statement at 24-6.

However, without service contract authority, UPS cannot achieve its potential higher level of competitive efficiency.  The inability to provide confidential rates is a disincentive to shippers, and there is not sufficient shipper obligation on cargo volume to enable UPS to negotiate the most advantageous rates with VOCCs.

D.        BENEFITS TO SHIPPERS WHICH THE EXEMPTION WOULD PROMOTE

 

As explained in the Commission's decisions addressing Section 16 exemptions, the Commission has authority and broad discretion to consider and grant exemptions, provided the exemption (i) is not detrimental to commerce and (ii) does not result in a reduction in competition.  Petition of A.P. Moeller-Maersk Line for an Exemption from the Notice Requirement of 46 C.F.R. §530.9, Docket No. P5-99, 28 S.R.R. 1209, 1999 WL 1294890 (F.M.C.) ("Maersk Line").[4]  UPS's proposed exemption would be beneficial to commerce for many reasons.

1.         Lower Cost and More Efficient Services

            With service contract authority, UPS will be able to improve utilization of its capital base and its transportation equipment and systems in the air and surface modes, and to integrate and unify them better with its ocean freight services.  Service contracts would also provide UPS with cargo volume obligations from its shippers which would enable it to negotiate more favorable rates and terms with ocean carriers.  These factors would enable UPS to offer more competitive pricing and more advantageous service packages for shippers of all sizes throughout its system.

            Many of UPS's shippers, especially smaller customers that do not have in-house resources, need specialized "bundled" combinations of service features.  It is far more efficient, and results in pricing closer to market, if UPS and the shipper can negotiate individualized service contracts with confidential rates based upon the particular services the shipper requires.  With service contracts, UPS will be able to provide those specific services the shipper wants – and only those services the shipper needs – in a customized package at a price tailored  to the shipper's unique situation.  This promotes better utilization of both the shipper's and UPS's equipment, personnel and other resources. 

As shown in the Commission’s 2001 survey, confidential service contracts have created greater flexibility in pricing policy.  FMC OSRA Report, at 59-60.  Service contracts, as a concept, were designed to permit ocean transportation service providers with greater flexibility in packaging and pricing their services to shippers.  Service contracts are now the predominant means of rate setting.  Carriers surveyed by the Commission indicate that individual service contracting has enhanced rate competition.  FMC OSRA Report, at 19-22.  The growth of service contracts resulting from OSRA has created an environment more conducive to business transactions, particularly due to the availability of confidentiality.  Carriers using service contracts pay closer attention to internal cost factors and individual service requirements in their relationship with shippers.  Id., at 21.

2.         Greater Reliability of Service Over Entire Range of Modes

            Service contracts would enable UPS to provide a more efficient and productive flow of cargo through the entire intermodal movement. 

            Improved efficiency in the UPS system will also indirectly benefit VOCCs and rail carriers.  Service contracting at the shipper level would help UPS deliver more stable volumes of such traffic to VOCCs and railroads.  As a cargo source for VOCCs, UPS in turn enters service contracts with these carriers, allowing benefits of these contracts to flow back-to-back through to all participants in the integrated transport system.  UPS ocean freight volume increases slot utilization for all VOCCs in the major ocean trades, and UPS trailer on flatcar shipments help VOCCs to reduce equipment imbalance problems.  Gargaro Statement at 2, 26.

3.         Uniformity of Contract Attributes over Entire Route

With service contract arrangements, UPS can provide greater uniformity of contract terms, including insurance, per-package loss value limitations and other features, over the entire door-to-door route.  UPS could use a single bill of lading containing such terms.  This is not currently possible to the degree shippers want through the use of NVOCC tariffs.  Gargaro Statement  at 11-12.

 

4.                  UPS Will Offer Greater Port Security and Enhanced International Transportation Security Access for TSA and Other U.S. Security and Law Enforcement Agencies

 

The core feature of the UPS freight system is its technology.  One of the most significant value-added elements UPS provides supply chain management customers is shipment labeling, tracking and monitoring.  Because of its substantial volume of international traffic in other modes, UPS is also a leader in development of efficient systems for compliance with new security and inspection requirements imposed by Customs, Homeland Security and other agencies. 

Service contracts will enable UPS to streamline both shipper contracting and the freight documentation and tracing process to a higher degree.  This will enable shippers to utilize better UPS's know-how with respect to processing, which in turn will facilitate compliance with new U.S. Customs regulations in the post-9/11 era.  This will allow for a higher degree of security with respect to shippers, carriers and cargo.

E.        THE EXEMPTION WOULD HAVE NO MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON COMPETITION

 

The second part of the threshold test under Section 16 is that the proposed exemption will not be detrimental to commerce.  Maersk Line, 28 S.R.R. at 209; COSCO, 28 S.R.R. at 147.  The proposed UPS exemption would stimulate competition at many levels of the international transportation industry, rather than harming it.


 

1.                  VOCCs Would Benefit from Back-to-Back Service Contracting

                        with UPS as an Integrated Logistics Service Provider.

 

As the Commission noted in COSCO, 28 S.R.R. at 149, allowing a carrier greater flexibility is likely to increase rather than decrease competition among carriers.  Service contracts have, as their fundamental feature, greater flexibility for both the carrier and shipper.  By permitting a major transportation company such as UPS to enter service contracts upstream with shippers and downstream with VOCCs, more shippers, at smaller volume levels, will have cargoes moving under advantageous service contracts than would otherwise be possible.   This in effect extends the market reach of the VOCCs to greater ranges of shippers, and allows them to price and tailor their services more closely to all segments of the market.  It also enables smaller VOCCs that do not have affiliated OTIs or the resources to provide integrated logistics services to participate in greater volumes of traffic, leveraging off UPS’s capabilities.

2.                  VOCC Volume, Capacity Utilization Rates and Efficiency Will Improve.

 

UPS moves substantial volumes of containerized ocean freight.  UPS contracts with many VOCCs in each trade in order to have available the best range of sailings to satisfy the "next available departure" requirements UPS has with many of its shippers.  The distribution of UPS freight across this spectrum of carriers will improve utilization of all VOCCs in each trade.  Freight volumes available to larger VOCCs will be more reliable, due to the provisions of UPS’s own service contracts with those carriers.  Moreover, UPS practices for prompt loading and departure of containers, and processing of containers at UPS facilities, will speed the throughput of cargo in each carrier's system, reducing demands on the carrier’s own cargo handling infrastructure.

3.                  UPS Service Contracts will Not Substantially Affect OTIs.

 

The proposed exemption would not have any undue competitive impact on NVOCCs or other classes of OTIs.  The large OTIs that are part of vertically-integrated VOCC organizations already have, in essence, the same authority as UPS seeks.  Other large independent OTI organizations focused in forwarding and brokerage activities, which are mainly based outside the United States and do not own or operate their own fleets of transportation equipment, are in a somewhat different market niche than UPS, which is first and foremost a parcel delivery operation using its own transportation assets.  Smaller OTIs, especially forwarders, which typically do not own or operate transportation assets, are in very different business than UPS, and in fact are frequently UPS customers themselves.  These smaller entities are not direct competitors of UPS, and many of them would benefit from better UPS efficiency which would result from authorization of service contracts.

F.         THE EXEMPTION IS CONSISTENT WITH LEGISLATIVE INTENT IN ENACTING OSRA

 

The proposed exemption is consistent with the legislative intent expressed in OSRA.  UPS is both a substantial entity able to assure reliable performance of obligations to shippers and to bargain effectively with VOCCs, and is also a large transportation company with a significant capital base in air and surface transport equipment, systems and know-how.

During the process of legislating OSRA, Congress considered the possible extension of service contract authority to NVOCCs and other OTIs.  See, S. Rep. No. 105-61 at 4, 19, 23 (1997).  However, Congress chose not to do so for several reasons, including principally concerns that many OTIs are not large or well-capitalized companies, which might lead to inability to perform volume-based contracts, and an awareness that most of the larger OTIs were non-U.S. companies that might gain a competitive advantage.  See, 144 Cong. Rec. S3192, S3200 (daily ed. April 3, 1998) (statement by Sen. Breaux), 144 Cong. Rec., S3305, S3307 (daily ed. April 21, 1998) (statement by Sen. Breaux), 144 Cong. Rec. H7011, 7016 (daily ed. August 4, 1998) (statement by Rep. Clement).

            In the five years intervening since enactment of OSRA, these conditions have changed in very substantial ways.  First of all, as noted above, there has been considerable consolidation among the VOCCs.  See Appendix "C" of Gargaro Statement.  As a result, the competitive landscape at the VOCC level is materially different than the one confronting Congress in 1998.  Secondly, the larger VOCCs now have their own affiliated large, well-capitalized OTIs providing upstream functions covering the full range of integrated logistics services.  Many other VOCCs provide supply chain management services similar to UPS's with the use of electronic portals.  See Appendix "D" of Gargaro Statement.  The Commission has observed that such comprehensive changes in the industry may require further scrutiny and may properly be the subject of an exemption proceeding.  FMC OSRA Report, at. 48.

            While Congress did not extend service contract authority to OTIs through OSRA, it also expressly and quite wisely recognized that conditions in U.S. ocean trades change rapidly, and that flexibility is necessary to avoid unnecessary regulatory restraints and to promote more efficient services.  As a result, Congress broadened the ability of the FMC under Section 16 of the Shipping Act to grant exemptions to statutory or regulatory provisions to meet changing circumstances.  S. Rep. No. 105-61, at 30.[5]

            UPS believes the circumstances described above justify the requested exemption.  The exemption will permit UPS, as an innovative U.S. company which has developed a strong global service network, to meet the needs of shippers, leverage more fully its transportation assets and multimodal services, and to compete more effectively in global commerce.  Given UPS's large capital base and history of reinvestment in transportation assets, there is no risk of non-performance of service contracts in the manner Congress feared when it withheld authority from OTIs.  The exemption will also enable UPS, as a U.S. company, to meet fairly the energetic, well-financed competition now existing from large vertically-integrated VOCCs and OTIs.

 

 

G.        SHIPPER INTERESTS SUPPORT THE UPS PETITION

Shippers with whom UPS has discussed the exemption have agreed to support this petition.  Support letters from these shippers will be provided as a supplement to this petition for the Commission’s consideration.

IV.       SUMMARY

For the foregoing reasons, UPS submits that the requested exemption to permit UPS to utilize service contracts, subject in all respects to Commission regulation, is a fully-justified and sound policy.  It is within the Commission's  discretion to grant the exemption, which satisfies statutory requirements.  Accordingly, UPS respectfully requests that the Commission grant its approval.

                                                Respectfully submitted.

                                                _________________________________

                                                J. Michael Cavanaugh

Holland & Knight LLP

2099 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 955-3000

 

Charles L. Coleman, III

Holland & Knight LLP

50 California Street, Suite 2800

San Francisco, California 94111

(415) 743-6900

 

Counsel for Petitioners

July 25, 2003


 

WAS1 #1192404 v9



[1]  UPS assumes that if the exemption is granted, its service contracts would be regulated and filed with the Commission pursuant to service contract rules in Part 530 rather than the tariff rules in Part 520 of the Commission’s regulations.  To alleviate any concern that UPS, which is not a VOCC, would not be subject to all service contract rules in Section 8(c) of the Act and 46 C.F.R. Part 530, the Commission may impose a condition to this effect on the requested exemption.

[2]    UPSOFS, formerly known as Fritz Transportation International, was part of the Fritz Companies, Inc. group acquired by UPS in 2001.  Gargaro Statement, at 1.

[3]  UPSOFS is a licensed NVOCC (FMC License No. 016871N).  Its NVOCC tariff is available at http://globalview.fritz.com/fmci/fmcirates.go and http://rates.descartes.com.

[4] Also see Petition of Hamburg-Sudamerikanische Dampfschiffahrtgesellschaft Eggert & Amsink for an Exemption from the Notice Requirement of 46 C.F.R. §530.9, Docket No. P4-99, 28 S.R.R. 1206, 1999 WL 1294891 (F.M.C.); Petition of China Ocean Shipping (Group) Company for a Limited Exemption from Section 9(c) of the Shipping Act of 1984, Docket No. P1-98, 28 S.R.R. 144, 147, 1998 WL 309053 (F.M.C.) ("COSCO").

[5] Prior to OSRA, in addition to the required findings that there would be no detriment to commerce or undue anti-competitive impact, Section 16 also required the Commission to determine that the exemption would not substantially impair effective regulation by the Commission or be unjustly discriminatory.  See, e.g., COSCO, and Petition of China Ocean Shipping (Group) Company for a Limited Exemption from Section 9(c) of the Shipping Act of 1984, Petition No. P1-98, Order Amending Procedure for Compliance with Exemption, 29 S.R.R.199, 199, fn.3, 2001 WL 503700 (F.M.C.).