1

Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Dye

Ocean Transportation Intermediary

Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

December 12, 2012

Executive Order 13563

• I supported the Commission’s Plan for the 

Retrospective Review of Existing Rules, 

including the matter before us today, because 

it was undertaken under the high standards of 

Executive Order 13563.

• I understand that the staff is considering 

adjusting the timeline for the plan, and I will 

have suggestions that respond to the public 

comments that we received on the Plan.

• The purpose of the Retrospective Review, as 

we stated in our request for comments, is to 

review our existing significant regulations to 
2

determine whether they should be modified to 

make the Commission’s regulatory program 

more effective and less burdensome in 

achieving our regulatory objectives.

• The Commission emphasized the position of 

the Administrator of the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs at the Office of 

Management and Budget that when 

implementing retrospective review plans, 

agencies should give high priority to reforms 

that will promote economic growth, 

innovation, competitiveness, and/or job 

creation.

• These reforms should include those with the 

greatest potential to produce significant 

quantifiable cost savings and significant 

quantifiable reductions in paperwork burdens.

• Agencies should give special consideration to 

reforms that would reduce, simplify, or 
3

harmonize regulatory or reporting 

requirements imposed on small business.

• I was very pleased to see that our Plan 

expressed the Commission’s intent to reflect 

stakeholders input in reviewing our existing 

regulations.

• The explanation of the Commission’s Plan 

states that one of the motivating factors for 

the Commission’s review of our OTI licensing 

and financial responsibility rules is the 

potential for savings from improvements and 

updates that could reduce the time required to 

complete license applications and streamline 

the review process.

• I am concerned that the proposal before us 

does not adequately justify the need for the 

regulatory changes included in this package, in 

light of the Commission’s stated objectives 

under Executive Order 13563.
4

Define the Problem

• The best way to develop an effective 

regulatory solution is to carefully define the 

problem, or the harm that we intend to 

reduce.

• The package of proposals before us does not 

contain the evidence to support a conclusion 

that they are necessary to reduce harm in the 

international supply chain.

• The only demonstration of actual harm in this 

proposal relates to household goods and was 

contained in Commissioner Khouri’s Fact 

Finding 27 Investigation.

• In the public comments on our Regulatory 

Review, several areas of demonstrable harm 

were discussed, especially regarding the 

inflexibility of Commission service contract 
5

filing requirements and the need to eliminate 

tariff filing requirements.

• I support making changes to reduce the harm 

resulting from these current regulatory 

regimes and to make our systems more 

efficient and less burdensome.

• Finally, because the ocean transportation 

intermediary industry is made up of thousands 

of small businesses, the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act requires us to consider equally effective 

alternatives to any regulatory proposals.

Small Business Regulatory Burden

• A recent Wall Street Journal article, noted with 

concern, the huge number of Federal proposed 

regulations that have been issued just 

recently. Many of these regulations are 

continuing to slow our economy and prevent 
6

small businesses from putting more Americans 

to work.

• We must carefully target our reforms to 

promote economic growth, innovation, 

competitiveness and job creation.

• Thank you, Mr. Chairman.