Opinion ID: 445219
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: ICC Authority Over Decisions of State Commissions

Text: 20 The Staggers Act specifically reserved to the state jurisdiction over intrastate rail rates, but with significant specific limitations: 21 A State authority may only exercise jurisdiction over intrastate transportation provided by a rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission ... if such State authority exercises such jurisdiction exclusively in accordance with the provisions of this subtitle. 22 49 U.S.C. Sec. 11501(b)(1) (emphasis added). The ICC must review the standards and procedures used by the state commissions to ensure that they are in accordance with the standards and procedures applicable to regulation of rail carriers by the [ICC]. Id. Sec. 11501(b)(3)(A). State rail regulation thus must conform to the Interstate Commerce Act, as amended by the Staggers Act. 23 The ICC has a duty to assure that intrastate regulatory jurisdiction is exercised in accordance with the [federal] standards. Id. Sec. 10101a(9) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the ICC is required to review the standards and procedures of each state commission in order to determine whether they comply with federal law. Id. Sec. 11501(b)(2), (3). Those states which do not comply will not receive ICC certification and may not regulate intrastate traffic. Id. Sec. 11501(b)(4)(A). In addition, and more importantly for our purposes, even after the states are certified, their regulatory decisions may still be subjected to ICC review: 24 Any rail carrier providing transportation subject to the jurisdiction of the [ICC] ... may petition the Commission to review the decision of any State authority, in any administrative proceeding in which the lawfulness of an intrastate rate, classification, rule, or practice is determined, on the grounds that the standards and procedures applied by the State were not in accordance with the provisions of this subtitle. The Commission shall take final action on any such petition within 30 days after the date it is received. If the Commission determines that the standards and procedures were not in accordance with the provisions of this subtitle, its order shall determine and authorize the carrier to establish the appropriate rate, classification, rule, or practice. 25 Id. Sec. 11501(c) (emphasis added). This continuing ICC supervision was necessary, in the eyes of Congress, given the prior history of the inadequacy of intrastate rates as set by state public service commissions, to ensure that the price and service flexibility goals of the [Staggers] Act are not undermined by state regulation of rates, practices, etc., which are not in accordance with these [federal] goals. H.Conf.Rep. No. 96-1430, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 106 (1980), reprinted in 1980 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News 3978, 4110, 4138; see H.R.Rep. No. 96-1035, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 61 (1980), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1980 p. 3978 (estimating $400 million shortfall in railroad revenues for 1977 alone, due to disparity between interstate and intrastate rates). Congress intended to stop the evil of interstate traffic rates being forced to subsidize intrastate carriage. In this particular case the ICC's review revealed a situation which authorized it to set aside the order of a state commission since the standards and procedures applied by the State were not in accordance with the provisions of [the Staggers Act.] 49 U.S.C. Sec. 11501(c). 26 We recently held in Utah Power & Light Co., supra, at 734, after extensive analysis of the Staggers Act and its legislative history, and in particular the text and background of section 11501(c), that the ICC has broad authority to review state commission rate decisions. The ICC's section 11501(c) jurisdiction is not of a limited appellate nature, but in a proper case is plenary, and may allow the ICC to delve into the factual record before the state agency. Id. 27