Method · what we read, when we read it, and what we have not · 07/31/2026
AmericaPorts publishes what it has read, dates it, and lists what it has not
⚑ The short answer
- AmericaPorts publishes the date it read every source, not the date it published the page. A tariff read on one date and quoted six months later is a historical figure, and saying so is the difference between a reference and a blog post.
- AmericaPorts carries a five-level status on every figure, from a document we read ourselves down to a claim we believe but cannot cite. The lowest two levels never appear in a ranking column and never appear in the answer at the top of a page.
- AmericaPorts publishes its own list of unread sources. Seventeen named gaps, each with the number of pages it holds back. Not one page on this site is complete, and every incompleteness on it has a number you can look up here.
- AmericaPorts is paid nothing by anyone in this market. No port, terminal, carrier or intermediary has paid to appear or to be positioned, and no outbound link on this site is a referral link. If that ever changes, the rate goes on the page carrying the link, and a ranking position still will not be for sale.
Every figure carries the date its source was read17 named gaps published, with the pages each holds backNo paid placement · no referral link
Five statuses, and where each one is allowed to appear
AmericaPorts marks every figure with the kind of evidence behind it, because “fact-checked” is a claim and a status is a system. The two lowest statuses exist so that a figure we believe but cannot cite has somewhere to sit other than a ranking column.
Before the table · what we are paid
- Nothing on this site has been paid for by anyone in this market, and no outbound link is a referral link. Block four below states what would change if that ever changed.
- The statuses below are the whole ordering rule: a figure we have not read ourselves cannot enter a sorted column, however confident the market is about it.
| Status | What is behind it | Where it may appear | Example on this site |
|---|---|---|---|
| VERIFIED_PRIMARY | we opened the document ourselves — a carrier tariff, a port rule, a federal register extract | anywhere, including ranking columns and the answer at the top of a page | the first paid day of demurrage in nine carrier import tariffs, read 07/28–07/29/2026 |
| VERIFIED_SECONDARY | published by the party itself but read through its own web page rather than a filed document | anywhere, with the source named in the row | port authority volume releases |
| SERP_CONSENSUS | several independent pages agree and none of them cites a document | prose only, always attributed as consensus — never a ranking column, never the answer block | terminal handling ranges quoted by freight sites without a tariff behind them |
| NEEDS_PRIMARY | we hold a figure but the document that would settle it is unread | nowhere as a number. The cell says which kind of nothing it is | terminal storage rates — about 80 tariffs unread, gap A |
| DO_NOT_PUBLISH | the figure is unsafe to print at all: wrong denominator, lost method, or a rate that would be read as an offer | nowhere, and the reason is written down where the number used to be | counts of what other ranking pages publish, withdrawn until the capture is repeated — gap 0 |
A consensus figure never enters a column that is sorted. The ranking that prices the box takes only figures read from tariffs: the cost stack ranked port by port.
Why every number here carries a read date instead of a publication date
AmericaPorts carries the date a source was read rather than the date this page was published, because in this subject the source moves and the page does not. A tariff read in July and quoted in December is a historical figure, and only the read date tells you which one you are looking at.
Two documents on this site make the point better than an argument would.
A tariff that changed while we were reading it
The HMM import tariff in force expired 07/31/2026, and its successor amendment was already on file effective 08/01/2026 when we read the rule history on 07/29/2026. Two rate sets, both current depending on the day your box is on the ground.
HMM tariff rule history · read 07/29/2026
A federal rule that has been litigated since publication
The Federal Maritime Commission billing rule effective 05/28/2024 has been before the D.C. Circuit twice, and one decision touched who may be billed. Any page reciting the February 2024 announcement as current law is quoting a document that has since been argued over. What the invoice has to contain is on the federal rules your invoice has to meet.
46 CFR Part 541 · D.C. Circuit 09/29/2025 · reported 07/08/2026 · read 07/26–07/30/2026
So a figure without a read date does not go into a column on this site, and a figure whose source we have not opened does not become a number at all.
What we are paid, by whom, and what would change if that changed
AmericaPorts is paid nothing by anyone in this market. No port authority, terminal operator, ocean carrier, freight forwarder or licensed intermediary has paid to appear on this site, to be positioned on it, or to be left off it. No outbound link is a referral link, and there is no affiliate code on this domain.
- If that changes, it changes in public. The rate goes on the page carrying the link, at one rate, the same for everyone.
- A ranking position is not for sale at any rate. The order in every table on this site comes from what can be checked, and a paid line would be marked as paid and left out of the ordering.
- Nothing here is a quote or a broker referral. We do not take enquiries, pass them on, or sell them.
Check any figure on this site yourself
AmericaPorts is checkable by design: every figure names the document it came from, and the documents are public. Here is where each class of them lives.
| What you want to check | Where it is published | What to look for |
|---|---|---|
| A demurrage or storage rate | the carrier's own US import tariff, filed and public | the rate line for the port group and the date the amendment took effect — carriers group ports themselves, and a port can sit in an unnamed residual group |
| A free-time rule | the port authority's tariff, by rule number | the numbered rule, the hour the count starts and whether the days are calendar or working |
| A port of entry code | US Customs and Border Protection | the port code list — a CBP port of entry is an administrative point and need not be on water |
| Whether an intermediary is licensed | Federal Maritime Commission | the Ocean Transportation Intermediary register: licence number, surety and bond. It covers the ocean leg only, and absence from it is not a finding about a road carrier |
| The federal billing rule | 46 CFR Part 541 on eCFR | the text as in force today, not a summary of the 2024 announcement |
| National container volumes | Bureau of Transportation Statistics | the Top 25 Container Ports series — the annual file behind most published rankings, and one we have not read yet |
Each port profile names the rules and releases it was built from: every US container port we cover. Each charge has its own page with the document that defines it: what each charge on the invoice is.
What we have not read yet
AmericaPorts publishes its own unread list, because a reference that names only what it knows is indistinguishable from one that does not know what it is missing. Seventeen entries, each with the number of pages it holds back. Not one page on this site is complete.
| Gap | What has not been read | Pages it holds back |
|---|---|---|
| A | terminal storage tariffs, about 80 terminals | 29 |
| B | port authority free-time rules, about 30 ports | 24 |
| D | monthly TEU from port authority releases | 15 |
| E | published dwell time and its definition | 14 |
| J | local fees: CTF, TMF, sustained import dwell fee | 14 |
| H | gate hours and appointment systems | 13 |
| F | a comparable drayage rate set | 8 |
| 0 | re-capture of the 385 corpus URLs and saved regexes | 7 |
| I | CBP port code and FIRMS lists | 7 |
| C | the annual BTS Top 25 Container Ports file | 3 |
| G | chassis pools and per diem | 3 |
| P | 46 CFR Part 541 as in force plus two D.C. Circuit decisions | 3 |
| K | UN/LOCODEs and coordinates for a real map | 2 |
| L | drayage carriers and brokers by port | 1 |
| Q | CBP and PGA hold types with their deadlines | 1 |
| R | carrier rollover and guaranteed-loading terms | 1 |
| M and N | fresh SERP capture for the new cluster and the baseline AI-visibility measurement | 0measurement work rather than a page-level block |
counted from the page map, regenerated 07/31/2026
One entry is about our own measurement rather than someone else's document. Gap 0 is a re-capture of the corpus this site measured, with the per-page markings that did not survive. Until it is repeated, every statement of the form “N of the pages that rank for these queries do X” is withdrawn from the site rather than repeated from memory.
What each port is willing to publish about itself is ranked on its own page, and the ports that publish least are not the cheapest — they are simply the least checkable: what each port is willing to publish.
Corrections, including the ones we caught before publishing
AmericaPorts keeps this log numbered, and the numbering is load-bearing: other pages cite an entry here by its number, so entries are appended and never renumbered. All thirty are printed below. This site has never been live, so no reader has ever seen any of these. Six of them are nonetheless marked as having reached a built page rather than being caught in a draft, and that mark is the part worth reading.
Five of them — entries six to ten — are one finished page correcting another. Nine more, entries eighteen to twenty-six, came out of a single day of transcription: six carrier tariffs that had been sitting unread on our own disk were read line by line, and what they said corrected pages this site had already built — an Oakland reefer median that fell from $600 to $490, a rate that turned out to be for a twenty-foot box standing in a ranking of forty-foot boxes, and eight ports described as unnamed by tariffs that named them. The last three are the same work carried further: a page of that file whose header we had not been reading, a comparison whose whole argument the fuller reading had killed, and eight rate lines a string-matching bug had been dropping out of every median on the site. That is the reason for publishing the log at all — one that only ever names drafting slips is saying the finished work was never re-read.
| # | When | What was wrong | Why it was wrong | What changed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 07/30/2026pre-publication | a row reading '0 pages state when the clock starts' stood inside a table of measured values | no such measurement exists — the flag was never part of the corpus measurement | row removed; replaced by a paragraph saying the measurement does not exist, plus the three-tariff table that demonstrates the disagreement directly |
| 2 | 07/30/2026pre-publication | '+13% year on year' sat beside the Los Angeles total throughput | the growth figure belongs to loaded imports, not to the total | the figure moved to its own quantity; the volume table now uses the calendar year so the rows are comparable |
| 3 | 07/30/2026pre-publication | the four conditions of the FMC billing rule presented as current law, sourced to a February 2024 announcement | the rule has been before the D.C. Circuit twice since, and one decision touched the billed-party provision | the recitation removed until 46 CFR Part 541 is read directly; pages now publish the codification, the fact of litigation, and a link to the text |
| 4 | 07/30/2026pre-publication | the query-allocation filter matched 'car' without a word boundary and silently dropped five queries containing 'cargo' and 'carrier' | a tooling defect that removed real demand from the plan without any signal | regex corrected, allocation rebuilt, the cannibalisation check re-run across all 49 pages |
| 5 | 07/30/2026pre-publication | the Los Angeles Clean Truck Fund Rate was recorded as $10 per TEU and nothing more | the rate is $10 per TEU and $20 for a container longer than 20 feet, so a forty-foot box was understated by half | both figures carried wherever the fee appears; the terminal handling ranking now cites this entry by number as the site's own precedent for the per-TEU trap |
| 6 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the West Coast ranking called Oakland and the Northwest Seaport Alliance the only two ports on this site whose volume figures share a period and a measure, and forbade any comparison with Los Angeles on the ground that it carried only calendar 2025 and the first half of 2026 | Los Angeles publishes June 2026 as well — 1,002,734 TEU of which 530,558 loaded imports — so the comparable set is three ports in one month, and all three are on that coast | the claim, the answer block, the method lines, two answers and the blocked patterns rewritten for three ports; the ban now names Long Beach, which is the one port of the four with no June figure |
| 7 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the New York against Norfolk comparison called New York the widest intra-port spread in the country | at 4.9 times it is the second widest; Miami and Port Everglades is 5.5 times, and both spreads come from split billing rather than from price | changed to second widest wherever it appears, with an explicit instruction in the contract never to write New York as the widest |
| 8 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the Oakland against Los Angeles comparison held only Oakland's +7.7% and rightly refused to set it against the Los Angeles +13% | an absence rather than an error: Oakland also publishes +11.1% on full imports, the same measure and the same month as the Los Angeles figure, so a comparable pair existed and was not shown | the +11.1% added and the pair published, with the caveat that one port says loaded imports and the other full imports and that we have read no definition from either; the original refusal of the +7.7% left standing |
| 9 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the Oakland profile said no other port release separates a total, full imports and full exports | the Northwest Seaport Alliance makes the same split; what is unique to Oakland is that its figures reached us, not that it publishes them | the claim narrowed from making the split to holding the numbers |
| 10 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the Oakland profile said three of the nine port profiles return neither a questions block nor an AI overview | with the alliance profile built it is four, and a count was the weaker statement in any case | replaced by the line itself: all four profiles with a single query return neither, all five with more than one return both, and there is no exception in either direction |
| 11 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the licensed-intermediaries hub said nine of the eleven port profiles on this site carry no register count | three of them carry one — Los Angeles and Long Beach share the metro figure and Savannah has its own — so eight are uncounted, and the same sentence had said so two clauses earlier | changed to eight in the answer block, the coverage note, the fact and the blocked pattern; the index table now shows the uncounted eight as two rows rather than asserting a total |
| 12 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the licensed-intermediaries hub published 3,273 records in the FMC freight forwarder list and 9,030 in the NVOCC list, taken from the register's web counters on 26 July 2026 and flagged as not recomputed | the register's own download had been on disk since 28 July and answers what the counters cannot — and the forwarder counter is not even the same unit, counting trade-name representations where the file counts organisations | recomputed from the FMC OTI download by a script that reproduces: 3,263 organisations with the forwarder role, 9,120 with the NVOCC role, 2,588 carrying both, and 5,205 of 9,795 holding a licence number — the count the page had said could come only from the file |
| 13 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the count of licensed organisations for Los Angeles with Long Beach was published as 464 for the metro, on eleven pages, sourced to the FMC download | no boundary for that metro was recorded anywhere, and none reproduces the figure: a whole county gives 1,044, the whole state 1,328, the two port cities alone 86, and no contiguous ZIP range gives 464 at all | the boundary was written down as the rule already used at Savannah — the place names the port's own berths are addressed at — and the count redone from the same file: 95 across Los Angeles, Long Beach, San Pedro, Wilmington and Terminal Island. Both baskets are now printed beside their numbers |
| 14 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the terminals catalogue said two of the fifteen terminals on one carrier's pass-through list were already recorded, and that thirteen names sat unextracted in a file on disk | three were recorded — the same page's own table carried LBCT with that carrier's pass-through clause — so twelve names were unextracted rather than thirteen, and the predicted doubling of the index was overstated on the strength of it | the tariff was re-read and all fifteen transcribed by a script that fails unless it finds fifteen pairs; the index went from twenty-three entries to thirty-two, which is thirty-nine per cent and not a doubling, and both the forecast and the outcome are now printed on the page |
| 15 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | the terminals catalogue said one carrier prices TTI, SSA Terminal A, APM and WBT as a single group across San Pedro Bay and never divides them by harbour, and four rows carried a port column reading not checked yet | the group's own name divides them — “TTI or SSA Terminal A in Long Beach, CA, or at APM or WBT Terminals in Los Angeles, CA” — and this site's own transcription of that line had carried the harbours all along | the four rows now name their harbour, two in each; a second carrier's directory read the same day puts the same four on the same two sides independently. The finding they support is stronger for it: a cheaper group holding two berths in each harbour spans the port boundary more clearly than an unsplit group did |
| 16 | 07/31/2026pre-publication | this site published on eight pages that every line-demurrage-only row in the entire nine-tariff reading sits at New York and New Jersey, and that no tariff names Baltimore at all | this tariff was transcribed line by line on 31/07/2026. Its own port grouping puts the same split-billing arrangement at four ports — New York with three named terminals, Baltimore, Miami and Port Everglades — and at the rail ramps, and it names Baltimore in a rate line at $165 | the tariff was transcribed; the quantifier now reads extracted before 31 July 2026 wherever it appears, Baltimore carries its first tariff line, and the arguments that leaned on the exclusivity are flagged for re-checking rather than quietly kept or quietly deleted |
| 17 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | this site treated split billing — the carrier invoicing line demurrage while the terminal invoices storage separately — as a property of New York, and after the ZIM transcription as a property of four East and Gulf coast ports. It also said in as many words that no line-demurrage-only row appears at any West Coast port | one of the nine tariffs lists fourteen locations where the terminal operator invoices storage directly, and five of them are on the West Coast: Long Beach Container Terminal, APM and West Basin at Los Angeles, SSA at Seattle and Oakland International Container Terminal | split billing is published as what the documents show it to be — a widespread arrangement across both coasts and at least four carriers, not a New York peculiarity. The West Coast sentence is replaced rather than softened, and it was written by this desk on 31 July, one day before the document that contradicts it was transcribed |
| 18 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | the free-time line of the CMA CGM tariff was read only in the form «4 FREE DAYS» | the export half of the same file writes «10 FREE WORKING DAYS» against «7 FREE CALENDAR DAYS» in the neighbouring column, and eight such lines were dropped. At Hawaii the export demurrage clock runs in working days while the detention clock beside it runs in calendar days — on one page, in one table | all three forms are read and the convention is recorded per column; a check fails if any table with tiers arrives without its free days |
| 19 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | the MSC tariff was read for its terminal list, and its three rate tables were recorded as row labels without the amounts | the amounts were in the document all along. Their absence is what let a twenty-foot rate stand in a forty-foot ranking, and it hid the fact that MSC uses the two standard words in the opposite sense from every other carrier | all three tables transcribed with their rates and checks: import detention, per diem and the Port Everglades tariff. MSC calls the box inside the terminal detention and the box outside per diem; the other eight tariffs call those demurrage and detention |
| 20 | 08/01/2026had reached a built page | the CMA CGM tariff was read with a tier pattern that matched only the capitalised form, «From 5th To 9th» | the document writes the tier four ways — «To» sixty-seven times, «to» five times, «Onwards» and «Onward» — and the five lowercase tiers were dropped. One of them was the FIRST paid tier of the Californian reefer, so this site published $600 for a working reefer at Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland where the tariff says $485 | the pattern accepts both cases; a check now counts tier labels in the document and fails unless the same number is parsed. The reefer median for Oakland fell from $600 to $490 and the national reefer median from $550 to $505 |
| 21 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | six of the nine import tariffs were held as PDFs and never transcribed line by line, so eight ports carried no median and the pages said the tariffs declined to name them | the tariffs did name them; the documents were ours to read and had not been read. Charleston, Baltimore, Jacksonville, Oakland, Houston, Mobile, New Orleans and Tampa were all named or priced by group | all six transcribed; 159 rate lines across fifteen ports now sit in port_matrix.json, and every port on the site carries a median with the number of lines behind it |
| 22 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | the CMA CGM tariff was read into 59 blocks, 24 of which came from pages 13-19 of the document | those pages are the EXPORT tariff. Export rates were sitting in an import data set with no port group name | pages without an import header are skipped; 34 import blocks across 12 port groups remain, and a check fails if a block arrives without a group |
| 23 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | rows in the CMA CGM tariff were assembled by rounding each word's vertical position to a fixed grid | a row whose words straddle a grid boundary was cut in half: Baltimore lost its only rate entirely and California lost the amounts from seven tiers of thirteen | rows are built from overlapping word rectangles instead of a grid, and a check fails if any tier arrives without its three rates |
| 24 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | three Jacksonville rate blocks were attributed to Houston, and six blocks of Hapag-Lloyd's split-billing group to Wilmington | section headings were detected by indent, and a long enough heading starts further left; the split-billing group has no city-and-state heading at all | headings are detected by their content rather than their indent, and the split-billing group is recognised by the phrase that ends it |
| 25 | 08/01/2026had reached a built page | MSC's rate at Port Everglades was published as $65, and Miami with Port Everglades ranked as the cheapest port group in the country at a median of $262 | $65 is MSC's rate for a TWENTY-foot container, and every other figure in the ranking is for a forty-foot box. The comparable MSC figure is $110 | the forty-foot rate is transcribed with a check that fails if it stops being $110; the group's median is $262 and the cheapest median in the country is New Orleans at $257 |
| 26 | 08/01/2026had reached a built page | eight pages said every line-demurrage-only row in the whole reading sits at New York and New Jersey | true of the four tariffs transcribed at the time, not of the ten. Of 22 such rows, five are at New York, four at Baltimore and six at West Coast ports | the claim is restated with the count and the date it was true, on every page that carried it |
| 27 | 08/01/2026pre-publication | the carrier-tariffs page said no terminal storage appears in any of the nine documents, and gave the reason as storage being the terminal's charge on the terminal's tariff. The transcription behind it read free days as a single convention across the whole CMA CGM file | the first half is right and the second half is too wide. One of the nine does publish a storage rate — CMA CGM, $175 per container per day after one free day — on a page of its own in each half of its file. It is not terminal storage; it is the carrier's charge for its box standing in a trucker's yard. And the free-day convention is not one: the header of every page states its own, and the two storage pages count free days in calendar days while the demurrage pages count them in working days. The transcription had captured neither, so the storage rate sat in the data unpublished and its clock was assumed to run like demurrage's | the parser now reads the free-day convention and the water-port clause off each page header; seventeen new checks hold the reading, taking the transcription to 70 and the comparable slice to 59, and among them that the clause stands on thirteen of the nineteen pages and on neither storage page. The rate is published as table F of the price ranking and on the demurrage page, labelled as the trucker's yard and kept apart from terminal storage, which remains gap A. The carrier-tariffs sentence keeps its claim and gains the caveat, because the word alone would mislead |
| 28 | 08/01/2026had reached a built page | the New York against Norfolk comparison argued that New York is named in twelve rate lines and Norfolk in none, and that the $90 between their medians therefore measured enumeration rather than price. Its proof was that Norfolk carried exactly Savannah’s median, range and spread, because the same six group lines priced both. The title, the H1 and the answer block all rested on it | true of the four tariffs transcribed when it was written, false of the nine. Six of Norfolk’s nine lines name it outright, across five carriers — COSCO, Yang Ming, HMM, ONE and Hapag-Lloyd twice — and its figures moved to $270 over nine lines, $165 to $310, 1.9 times. Savannah is $265 over eight, so the identity the proof rested on no longer holds either | the thesis was rewritten rather than patched, and the new one is stronger because it survives the fuller reading. Both ports are named; what differs is the grain. New York is priced terminal by terminal — Maher, APM, Port Liberty, PNCT, Newark — and Norfolk once per carrier as one port. Hapag-Lloyd proves it inside a single document: $465 at Maher against $625 at every other New York terminal, and one $310 for Norfolk. The $160 that one carrier writes between two New York berths is larger than the $90 between the two ports, so the headline survives with a different proof: the port is the smallest variable on the page. Nineteen figures on the page were recomputed from the slice, among them the ceiling $390 that had been $625 since the transcription |
| 29 | 08/02/2026had reached a built page | the comparable slice behind every price on this site was built from 159 rate lines, and the medians published for New York and New Jersey, Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland were taken over those lines | eight of the lines never reached it. The slice matches a carrier’s port groups by exact string, and six keys in that map had been truncated mid-word — «...Terminals (Ex», «...Maher (MA» — so they could never match the group names in the transcription. Every HMM line for New York, Oakland and San Pedro Bay was dropped silently. A seventh line, priced for terminals in both harbours, was credited to Long Beach alone although its own name divides it — the same defect entry 24 corrected in the terminals catalogue and which had never reached this map. Found by chasing $130, a figure printed on five pages and absent from the slice | group names are matched by prefix, the two-harbour line is credited to both, and the reading is 167 lines. Four medians moved: New York and New Jersey $360 to $355 over fourteen lines, Los Angeles $285 to $275 over sixteen, Long Beach $295 to $280 over sixteen, Oakland $275 to $255 over thirteen. Four control values were re-derived from the transcription rather than fitted to the new output, and no control over a rate read from a document moved at all — the fix is additive. 73 figures in prose and 41 in page metadata were recomputed, and the New York against Norfolk comparison now reads $85 where it read $90 |
| 30 | 08/02/2026had reached a built page | this site said in about forty places that a carrier tariff «declines to distinguish» a port — that Oakland, Baltimore, Charleston, Jacksonville and Houston were named by no rate line at all, that not one of the nine tariffs named a Gulf port, and that Seattle with Tacoma could carry no median because one carrier’s line is not a sample. Two page theses rested on it: the Gulf ranking was titled «Not One Has a Tariff Line», and the West Coast ranking called Oakland named by no line | true of the four tariffs transcribed when those pages were written, false of the nine. Every port in the slice is named outright by at least three carriers: Oakland by five across thirteen lines, Baltimore by five across nine, Seattle with Tacoma by five across nineteen, Houston by four, Charleston and Jacksonville by three each, and all four Gulf ports by three or more. The transcription of 01/08/2026 reversed the claim and the sweep never reached these pages | the claim is gone from sixteen contracts, replaced by what the documents say — how many carriers name each port and over how many lines. The Gulf ranking is retitled and its thesis rewritten: four ports, 33 rate lines, all named, and New Orleans the cheapest of either coast at $257. Seattle with Tacoma publishes a median of $260 over nineteen lines, and what stays blocked there is a figure for either harbour ALONE, which no tariff prices apart. Where a claim was true it was left: Georgia’s second deepwater port is still named by no line, and that sentence stands |
our own pre-publication review, 07/30–07/31/2026
Found a figure that is wrong or out of date? Write to corrections@americaports.com with the page and the source. A correction that changes a number goes in this log with its date, and the number it replaced stays visible in the entry.
What AmericaPorts is not
- AmericaPorts is not a port authority, a port association, a terminal operator or a federal agency, and it is not affiliated with any of them. The domain is a .com named after a country, which is exactly why this line is first.
- Not legal advice. A description of a federal rule is a description of it, and the rule as in force on your date governs.
- Not a quote and not a brokerage. The tariff and the bill of lading in your own file decide what you owe, not a number on this page.
- Not a live feed. Every figure is as of the date beside it, and a rate can change the day after it was read.
Who writes this
The author of everything here is americaports.com. That is a decision rather than a placeholder: the work is signed by the publication, and the structured data on every page names the publication as the author, not a person. What it means in practice is that the desk which reads the tariffs is accountable for every figure through this page — the status behind it, the date it was read, and the numbered corrections log above, which is where a mistake ends up with its date attached.
A named author with a biography that can be checked outside the site is a stronger signal than a publication byline on a subject that touches money and federal rules, and this page does not pretend otherwise. What is offered instead is narrower and harder: every figure names the document it came from and the day we opened it, so the work can be checked without trusting the name on it.
Why a publication byline and not a person. A name adds authority only if it can be verified, and an invented or unverifiable one subtracts it. Rather than attach a placeholder person to a page about federal rules and other companies’ tariffs, this site signs with the entity that is actually accountable and publishes the method, the sources and the corrections that let you audit it. If a named author is added later, they will appear here with the date they took the work over, like every other change on this site.