New York - Miami - Los Angeles Tuesday, February 27, 2024
  You are here:  Newsletter
Newsletters Minimize


February 13, 2013 - Summary of Master Contract
ILA Releases Details of the Master Contract, Subject to the Drafting of Final Contract Language and Acceptance by the ILA Membership

International Longshoremen's Association /

Subject to the drafting of final contract language and acceptance by the ILA membership, USMX and the ILA have agreed as follows:

  • The new Master Contract will expire on September 30, 2018.
  • The new Master Contract will not take effect until all local bargaining is concluded.
  • There will be a $1.00 per hour wage increase on October 1, 2014; another $1.00 increase on October 1, 2016 and another $1.00 increase on October 1, 2017.
  • New employees will start at $20.00 per hour.
  • The wage progression formula, which was in the Master Contract extension, has been shortened from 9 years to 6 years.
  • MILA which provides health care coverage at no cost to eligible employees will continue.
  • There will be a minimum coastwise guarantee of $211 million in container royalty for each year of the contract.
  • In addition, up to $14 million of administrative expenses will also be covered.
  • All container royalty over these amounts will be evenly split between USMX and ILA.
  • Container royalty will be centrally collected according to a plan that has yet to be finalized.
  • CR5 will continue with some changes to the amounts that can be received without application.
  • The Container Freight Station Fund will continue for both the operation of container freight stations and training with a contribution of 25¢ per ton in the first three years and subject to review in the last three years and a CFS subsidy adjustment in each of the six years.
  • The local fringe benefit contribution will increase by $1.00 per hour.
  • Random drug testing will be used in New York and New Jersey only if the Waterfront Commission agrees to stop testing ILA members.
  • New language has been negotiated to protect those who have been displaced due to new technology and automation.
  • Additional language has been negotiated to preserve chassis maintenance and repair work.
  • New language has been negotiated to beef up enforcement by the Jurisdiction Committee of ILA jurisdiction including a $10,000 fine in certain circumstances.
  • Additional jurisdiction language has also been negotiated.
  • Major damage criteria and maintenance jurisdiction have been expanded.
    USDA Proposes Updates to Plant Import Regulations

U.S. Department of Agriculture /

WASHINGTON, February 13, 2012--The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is proposing to make several amendments to update and streamline its regulations involving the importation of plants for planting.

“The importation of plants from foreign countries has greatly increased in the past 20 years and some of the regulations have not been updated,” said Rebecca Bech, deputy administrator of APHIS' Plant Protection and Quarantine program.  “These proposed changes are necessary to relieve certain restrictions, update existing provisions, and to make the regulations easier to understand and implement.”

Some of these proposed changes include requiring permits for the importation of certain coated or pelleted seeds, and providing for an alternate additional declaration on phytosanitary certificates that accompany plants from countries know to have potato cyst nematodes.  The proposed regulations also change provisions specific to certain countries, to ensure they reflect the latest information regarding quarantine pests detected in various places.  For example, they would add Turkey to the list of countries from which importation of certain plants is prohibited due to the presence of Chrysanthemum white rust; provide conditions for the importation of certain plants from Canada to address the presence of plum pox potyvirus in that country; and provide for the importation of carnations from the Netherlands.

These improvements will make the existing regulations current, provide a faster and simpler process for industry, and maintain the existing level of protections for U.S. agriculture. 

This action was published in the Feb. 12 Federal Register at!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2008-0071.   APHIS is seeking public review and comments on this proposed rule. Consideration will be given to comments received on or before April 15, 2013.

Comments may be submitted either by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal at!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2008-0071 or by postal mail/commercial delivery to: Docket No. APHIS-2011-0079, Regulatory Analysis and Development PPD APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD, 20737-1238.

Comments are posted on the website and may also be reviewed at USDA, Room 1141, South Building, 14th Street and Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C., between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. To facilitate entry into the comment reading room, please call (202) 799-7039.

With Agriculture Secretary Vilsack’s leadership, APHIS works tirelessly to create and sustain opportunities for America’s farmers, ranchers and producers. Each day, APHIS promotes U.S. agricultural health, regulates genetically engineered organisms, administers the Animal Welfare Act, and carries out wildlife damage management activities, all to help safeguard the nation’s agriculture, fishing and forestry industries. In the event that a pest or disease of concern is detected, APHIS implements emergency protocols and partners with affected states and other countries to quickly manage or eradicate the outbreak. To promote the health of U.S. agriculture in the international trade arena, APHIS develops and advances science-based st andards with trading partners to ensure America’s agricultural exports, valued at more than $137 billion annually, are protected from unjustified restrictions.

Port Surveillance News: CPSC Stops Nearly 3M Units of Violative Imported Products in 3rd Quarter of Fiscal Year 2012

U.S. Consumer Safety Product Safety Commission /

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) investigators continued to improve the agency’s ability to enforce product safety compliance at U.S. ports by stopping nearly three million units of consumer products that violated U.S. safety rules from reaching consumers in the 3rd quarter of fiscal year 2012.  This was nearly three times the number of violative units stopped in the previous two quarters combined.

In the 3rd quarter, CPSC investigators screened more than 5,700 different imported consumer products and identified 420 of the screened products as being noncompliant with CPSC’s safety rules. 
From October 2011 through June 2012, through their combined efforts, CPSC investigators and their U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) counterparts have prevented about four million units of violative and hazardous imported products from entering the domestic stream of commerce and ending up on store shelves.
According to a joint release issued by CPSC and CBP, during the past four years, at least 2,400 different toys and children's products, making up more than two million individual units, have been stopped at the ports because of the presence of safety hazards or the failure to meet federal safety standards.
“Strong standards and vigilant port surveillance have advanced consumer safety by reducing the number of items needing to be recalled from the marketplace,” said CPSC Chairman Inez Tenenbaum.
Toys and children’s products continued to make up the bulk of products stopped by CPSC investigators and CBP officers in the third quarter. Products with levels of lead exceeding federal limits topped the group and were followed by those with phthalate levels in excess of federal limits. Toys and other articles with small parts that present a choking hazard for children younger than 3 years old rounded out the top three products stopped. A significant number of fireworks being shipped to the U.S. for Independence Day activities nationwide were fourth on the list of total products stopped in the third quarter.

In the first two quarters of fiscal year 2012, CPSC and CBP screened about 6,600 imported products at ports of entry, identified about 560 different consumer products that were in violation of U.S. safety rules or found to be hazardous, and prevented more than one million units of violative or dangerous products from reaching consumers.
CPSC has been screening products at ports since it began operating in 1973. The agency intensified its efforts in 2008 with the creation of an import surveillance division and again in 2011 with the creation of the Office of Import Surveillance.


CPSC Import Stoppage Report
 3rd Quarter, FY 2012

Baltimore CBP Finds Surprise in Celery Seed Shipment

U.S. Customs & Border Protection /

Baltimore – U.S. Customs and Border Protection Office of Field Operations agriculture specialists at the port of Baltimore discovered that a shipment of celery seed from India was heavily infested with Khapra Beetle on Feb. 7. The CBP agriculture specialists did not find any live insects but immediately collected specimens of the dead insects and sealed the container.

The specimens were forwarded to a U.S. Department of Agriculture entomologist who confirmed them Friday as Trogoderma granarium, commonly known as Khapra Beetle. The importer was issued in Emergency Action Notice requiring the 500-bag, 55,000-pound shipment of celery seed to be re-exported or destroyed. The importer chose to have the shipment re-exported.

The Khapra Beetle is considered one of the world’s most destructive insect pests of grains, cereals and stored foods and remains the only insect in which CBP takes regulatory action against even while in a dead state.

“Khapra Beetle is one of the most invasive insects CBP agriculture specialists encounter,” said Ricardo Scheller, CBP Port Director for the Port of Baltimore. “And we take our mission to intercept these destructive pests and protecting America’s agricultural industry very seriously.”

The Khapra Beetle is labeled a ‘dirty feeder’ because it damages more grain than it consumes, and because it contaminates grain with body parts and hairs. These contaminants may cause gastrointestinal irritation in adults and especially sickens infants. Khapra Beetles can also tolerate insecticides and fumigants, and can survive for long periods of time without food.

According to the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, previous infestations of Khapra Beetle have resulted in massive, long term-control and eradication efforts at great cost to the American taxpayer.

California implemented extensive eradication measures following a Khapra Beetle infestation discovered there in 1953. The effort was deemed successful, but at a cost of approximately $11 million. Calculated in today’s dollars, that would be about $90 million.

Related information:

( USDA Restricts the Importation of Commercial and Noncommercial Quantities of Rice from Countries Where Khapra Beetle Is Known to Occur  )

 CBP agriculture specialists have extensive training and experience in the biological sciences and agricultural in spection. On a typical day, they inspect tens of thousands of international air passengers, and air and sea cargoes nationally being imported to the United States and seize 4,919 prohibited meat, plant materials or animal products, including 476 insect pests.

Cosmetic Labeling and Label Claims

U.S. Food & Drug Administration /


The following information is a brief introduction to cosmetic labeling requirements. For a more thorough explanation of cosmetic labeling regulations, see FDA's Cosmetic Labeling Manua1l2 and the cosmetic labeling regulations3 themselves (21 CFR parts 701 and 740). Firms also may wish to discuss their labeling needs with a consultant.

Proper labeling is an important aspect of putting a cosmetic product on the market. FDA regulates cosmetic labeling under the authority of both the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act4 (FD&C Act) and the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act5 (FPLA). These laws and their related regulations are intended to protect consumers from health hazards and deceptive practices, and to help consumers make informed decisions regarding product purchase.

It is illegal to introduce a misbranded cosmetic into interstate commerce, and such products are subject to regulatory action. Some of the ways a cosmetic can become misbranded are

  • its labeling is false or misleading
  • its label fails to provide required information
  • its required label information is not properly displayed
  • its labeling violates requirements of the Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 [FD&C Act, sec. 602; 21 U.S.C. 362]

Does FDA pre-approve cosmetic product labeling?

No. Neither the FD&C Act nor the FPLA requires cosmetic labeling to undergo pre-market approval by FDA. It is the manufacturer's and/or distributor's responsibility to ensure that products are labeled properly. Failure to comply with labeling requirements results in a misbranded product.

Some labeling terms you should know

Before proceeding with a discussion of labeling requirements, it is helpful to know what some labeling terms mean:

  • Labeling. This term refers to all labels and other written, printed, or graphic matter on or accompanying a product [FD&C Act, sec. 201(m); 21 U.S.C. 321(m)].
  • Principal Display Panel (PDP). This is the part of the label most likely displayed or examined under customary conditions of display for sale [21 CFR 701.10].
  • Information Panel. Generally, this term refers to a panel other than the PDP that can accommodate label information where the consumer is likely to see it. Since the information must be prominent and conspicuous [21 CFR 701.2(a)(2)], the bottom of the package is generally not acceptable for placement of required information, such as the cosmetic ingredient declaration.

Is it permitted to label cosmetics "FDA Approved"?

No. As part of the prohibition against false or misleading information, no cosmetic may be labeled or advertised with statements suggesting that FDA has approved the product. This applies even if the establishment is registered or the product is on file with FDA's Voluntary Cosmetic Registration Program6 (VCRP) (see 21 CFR 710.8 and 720.9, which prohibit the use of participation in the VCRP to suggest official approval). False or misleading statements on labeling make a cosmetic misbranded [FD&C Act, sec. 602; 21 U.S.C. 362].

What about therapeutic claims?

Promoting a product with claims that it treats or prevents disease or otherwise affects the structure or any function of the body will cause the product to be considered a drug under the FD&C Act, section 201(g). FDA has an Import Alert in effect for cosmetics labeled with drug claims7. For more information on drug claims, see Is It a Drug, a Cosmetic, or Both? (Or Is It Soap?).

How should products be labeled if they are both drugs and cosmetics?

If a product is an over-the-counter (OTC) drug9 as well as a cosmetic, its labeling must comply with the regulations for both OTC drug and cosmetic ingredient labeling [21 CFR 701.3(d)]. The drug ingredients must appear according to the OTC drug labeling requirements [21 CFR 201.66(c)(2) and (d)] and the cosmetic ingredients must appear separately, in order of decreasing predominance [21 CFR 201.66(c)(8) and (d)]. Contact FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research10 (CDER) for further information on drug labeling.

What languages are acceptable?

All required labeling information must be in English. The only exception to this rule is for products distributed solely in a U.S. territory where a different language is predominant, such as Puerto Rico. If the label or labeling contains any representation in a foreign language, all label information required under the FD&C Act must also appear in that language [21 CFR 701.2(b)].

What labeling information is required?

The following information must appear on the principal display panel:

  • An identity statement, indicating the nature and use of the product, by means of either the common or usual name, a descriptive name, a fanciful name understood by the public, or an illustration [21 CFR 701.11].
  • An accurate statement of the net quantity of contents, in terms of weight, measure, numerical count or a combination of numerical count and weight or measure [21 CFR 701.13].

The following information must appear on an information panel:

  • Name and place of business. This may be the manufacturer, packer, or distributor. [21 CFR 701.12].
  • Distributor statement. If the name and address are not those of the manufacturer, the label must say "Manufactured for..." or "Distributed by..." [21 CFR 701.12].
  • Material facts. Failure to reveal material facts is one form of misleading labeling and therefore makes a product misbranded [21 CFR 1.21]. An example is directions for safe use, if a product could be unsafe if used incorrectly.
  • Warning and caution statements. These must be prominent and conspicuous. The FD&C Act and related regulations specify warning and caution statements related to specific products [21 CFR part 740]. In addition, cosmetics that may be hazardous to consumers must bear appropriate label warnings [21 CFR 740.1]. Flammable cosmetics are an example.
  • Ingredients. If the product is marketed on a retail basis to consumers, even it it is labeled "For professional use only" or words to that effect, the ingredients must appear on an information panel, in descending order of predominance. [21 CFR 701.3]. As an alternative, when cosmetics are distributed on a mail-order basis, the package mailed to the consumer may contain readily visible instructions for locating the ingredient declaration, such as in a product catalog (currently interpreted as including a website), or instructions for requesting a copy of the ingredient declaration. Mail-order distributors must respond promptly to such requests [21 CFR 701.3(r)]. Remember, if the product is also an OTC drug, its labeling must comply with the regulations for both OTC drug and cosmetic ingredient labeling, as s tated above.
    Port Authority Approves Second Phase of Delta's Terminal 4 Expansion Project at John F. Kennedy Airport

Port of Authority NY & NJ /

PA Commissioners approve carrier's $175 million initiative for an 11-gate extension and lease amendments as part of overall $1.2 billion project

The Port Authority's Board of Commissioners has authorized $175 million for the second phase of Delta Air Lines' project to expand Terminal 4 at John F. Kennedy International Airport. The Board also amended the airline's existing airport lease to relocate a portion of the carrier's current operations at Terminal 2 to the expanded facility.

The Board's announcement today is a follow-up to the board's August 2010 Phase I approval of Delta's overall $1.2 billion to expand Terminal 4 and cease operations at the decades-old Terminal 3, which will be removed to accommodate aircraft parking.

Under the supplemented tenant agreement, Delta would spend roughly $175 million to construct an 11-gate extension at the end of Terminal 4's Concourse B, relocating the airline's domestic regional jet operations from Terminal 2. Delta would increase its leasehold at Terminal 4 by approximately 2.4 acres and have preferred use of the new gates there.

Delta also would develop a bus operation and a new bus station at Terminal 4 for connecting passengers between Terminal 2 and Terminal 4, under the project authorization. In addition to the $175 million, Delta has committed an additional $5 million for information technology improvements.

Delta's second phase project is anticipated to create 770 direct and indirect jobs, with $52 million in wages and $259 million in overall economic activity.

"Delta's expansion of JFK's Terminal 4 underscores the Port Authority's commitment to partnering with the private sector to modernize our aging assets and continue to stimulate economic growth in the region,' said Port Authority Chairman David Samson. "This $1.2 billion project will provide a modern, first-class terminal for passengers at JFK, as well as create good-paying jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars in economic activity."

"Delta is one of the major aviation players at our New York City airports and their continued investment at JFK speaks volumes about this airport's future,' said Port Authority Vice Chairman Scott Rechler. "We applaud this commitment and look forward to watching Delta's continued growth at JFK and its positive impact on the region's economy."

"Delta's additional investment in the Terminal 4 expansion project at JFK is an appreciated and welcome continuation of ongoing efforts to modernize this vital gateway to the region,' said Pat Foye, the Port Authority's executive director. "Expanding Terminal 4 will create needed short- and long-term jobs, while further enhancing passengers' travels in a state-of-the art terminal while en route to their destinations."

"Growth at one of our major airports helps our entire airport network meet the future needs of the New Jersey-New York region,' said Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni. "Delta's growth reflects the continued importance of this region's aviation system and bodes well for future expansion at not only JFK, but Newark Liberty and LaGuardia airports as well.'

Expansion of Terminal 4 fits into the Port Authority's Central Terminal Area Redevelopment Program, which has sought to modernize passenger terminal facilities at JFK over the past 15 years.

Completion of Phase I of the Terminal 4 expansion is expected this May, allowing Delta to move its Terminal 3 operations to the expanded Terminal 4. Phase II of the project would commence at that time.

  Copyright © 1997-2023 C-Air Privacy Statement | Terms Of Use