FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

PETITION OF MAERSK LINE A/S FOR 

AN EXEMPTION FROM 

46 C.F.R. § 530.8 Petition No. P1-17

Served: July 19, 2017

BY THE COMMISSION: Michael A. KHOURI, Acting 

Chairman; Rebecca F. DYE, William P. DOYLE, and Daniel 

B. MAFFEI, Commissioners. 

ORDER GRANTING PETITION

On June 27, 2017, Petitioner Maersk Line A/S (“Maersk”) 

was attacked by a computer virus that, among other things, inhibited 

the operation of its service contract information system. As a result, 

on June 30, 2017, Maersk petitioned the Commission for an 

exemption from 46 C.F.R. § 530.8 “that would permit Maersk Line 

to apply service contract rates contained in new service contracts 

and amendments to existing service contracts retroactively to 

shipments received on or after June 30, 2017, for a period of up to 

twenty (20) days.” 

Because the requested exemption will not result in 

substantial reduction in competition or be detrimental to commerce,

we grant Maersk’s petition. 
Maersk Line A/S Petition for an Exemption 2

I. BACKGROUND

On June 27, 2017, Maersk was attacked “by the so-called 

Petya virus.” Pet. at 1.1 According to Maersk, the virus “severely 

inhibited” the system that stores Maersk’s service contract 

information and rendered Maersk unable to: (1) determine which 

service contracts and service contract rates were scheduled to expire 

at the end of June or early July, 2017; (2) identify which shippers to 

contact to extend or renegotiate expiring contracts and rates; and (3) 

electronically file service contracts and amendments with the 

Commission. Id.

On June 30, 2017, Maersk petitioned the Commission for an 

exemption “from the service contract filing provisions of the 

Commission’s regulations for twenty (20) days starting from the 

date of this petition.” Id. Maersk focuses particularly on 46 C.F.R. 

§ 530.8 and requests an exemption from that regulation “that would 

permit Maersk Line to apply service contract rates contained in new 

service contracts and amendments to existing service contracts 

retroactively to shipments received on or after June 30, 2017, for a 

period of up to twenty (20) days.” Id; see also id. (“By granting this 

petition, the Commission will allow Maersk Line to apply those 

rates which would have been agreed upon with customers in the 

absence of the cyberattack to shipments tendered during the period 

between June 30 and the date an appropriate contract or contract 

amendment is filed.”). Maersk asserts that the 20-day time period 

should provide it sufficient time to regain access to its service 

contract database and filing capabilities, identify expiring contracts 

and rates, and obtain agreement with shippers regarding the 

disposition of the expiring contracts and rates.

 1 Maersk subsequently indicated on its website that it understood the virus was 

called “Not Petya.” A.P. Moller-Maersk, Maersk continues the progress towards 

full recovery from the cyber attack on Tuesday 27 June (July 4, 2017), 

www.maersk.com/en/operationalupdate/general-information. 
Maersk Line A/S Petition for an Exemption 3

The Commission issued notice of Maersk’s petition and 

requested comments from interested parties on July 5, 2017. Notice 

was published in the Federal Register on July 11, 2017. No 

comments were filed. 

II. DISCUSSION

Exemptions from the Commission’s service contract 

regulations are governed by 46 U.S.C. § 40103 and 46 C.F.R. 

§ 502.92. See 46 C.F.R. § 530.13(b).

2 Both the statute and the 

regulation allow the Commission to exempt “any specified activity” 

of persons subject to the Shipping Act from the requirements of Part 

530 of the Commission’s regulations. 46 U.S.C. § 40103(a); 46 

C.F.R. §§ 502.92(a), 530.13(b). To grant an exemption, the 

Commission must find that “the exemption will not result in 

substantial reduction in competition or be detrimental to 

commerce.” 46 U.S.C. § 40103(a); 46 C.F.R. 502.92(a). 

Maersk requests relief from the service contract filing 

provisions of the Commission’s regulations, in particular 46 C.F.R. 

§ 530.8. Section 530.8(a)(1) provides, in pertinent part, that a carrier 

must file a service contract with the Commission “before any cargo 

moves pursuant to that service contract.” (emphasis added).3

Similarly, although not mentioned in the petition, 46 C.F.R. 

§ 530.14(a) provides that “[p]erformance under an original service 

contract may not begin before the day it is effective and filed with 

the Commission,” and performance under a service contract 

amendment may not begin until the day it is effective, as long as the 

amendment is filed within thirty days after the effective date. 

 2 Although Maersk bases its petition on 46 C.F.R. § 502.76 (now § 502.94) and 

46 U.S.C. § 40103, the applicable rule is 46 C.F.R. § 530.13. This regulation 

incorporates 46 U.S.C. § 40103 as well as “46 C.F.R. § 502.67.” Rule 67, 

however, has been moved twice, first to § 502.74, and now to § 502.92. 

3 Section 530.8(a)(2) of 46 C.F.R. requires that an amendment to a filed serviced 

contract be filed with the Commission no later than thirty days after any cargo 

moves pursuant to the amendment.
Maersk Line A/S Petition for an Exemption 4

The upshot is that under these regulations, a carrier generally 

cannot apply a service contract retroactively. But that is what 

Maersk seeks to do for the time period at issue: “In other words, 

rather than requiring customers to pay higher tariff rates to 

shipments tendered during this period, the grant of this petition will 

permit Maersk Line to apply service contract rates to such shipments 

that were agreed upon and filed after the date of cargo receipt 

without violating the Shipping Act.” Pet. at 1-2. Maersk argues that 

the requested relief “will not reduce competition or be detrimental 

to commerce, as it merely allows Maersk Line to provide service to 

its customers on the same commercial terms as it would have had it 

been able to conclude and file the appropriate contracts and contract 

amendments.” Id. at 2. 

We agree and find that the requested exemption will not 

result in substantial reduction in competition or be detrimental to 

commerce. Maersk seeks exemption from a small subset of the 

Commission’s service contract regulations, for a limited period of 

time, in order to approximate the status quo had the cyber attack 

never occurred. 

III. CONCLUSION

The Commission believes that the process requested by 

Maersk will adequately protect affected shippers and their rights. 

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, that Maersk’s Petition is 

GRANTED, provided that:

1. Upon granting of the Petition, Maersk completes all 

amendments within 20 days of the filing of the Petition (up to July 

20, 2017);

2. As soon as practical, but in any event no more than 30 days 

after execution, Maersk file any service contract amendments with 

the Commission;
Maersk Line A/S Petition for an Exemption 5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that this proceeding is discontinued.

Rachel E. Dickon

Assistant Secretary