Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission et al.
476 U.S. 355 (1986)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The Communications Act of 1934, specifically 47 U.S.C. § 152(b), expressly denies the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to pre-empt state regulation of depreciation practices for the purpose of setting rates for intrastate telephone service.
Facts:
- Telephone companies use the same physical plant and equipment to provide both interstate communication services, regulated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and intrastate communication services, regulated by state public service commissions.
- Depreciation is an accounting method for allocating the cost of a capital asset over its useful life and is a significant component of the revenue requirement used to set utility rates.
- In 1980 and 1981, seeking to promote competition and technological advancement, the FCC issued orders mandating new, accelerated depreciation methods for telephone carriers.
- These new methods included replacing the 'vintage year' grouping with the 'equal life' approach, using the 'remaining life' method instead of the 'whole life' method, and treating the cost of 'inside wiring' as an expense rather than a capital investment.
- The Louisiana Public Service Commission, along with commissions from numerous other states, declined to adopt the FCC's new depreciation methods for the purpose of setting rates for local, intrastate telephone service.
Procedural Posture:
- The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) petitioned the FCC for a clarification of its 1981 depreciation order.
- The FCC initially issued a memorandum opinion stating its order did not pre-empt state commissions for intrastate ratemaking purposes.
- On reconsideration requested by telephone companies, the FCC reversed its position, holding that § 220 of the Communications Act automatically pre-empts inconsistent state depreciation regulations.
- The Louisiana Public Service Commission and other state commissions petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for review of the FCC's reconsideration order.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the FCC's pre-emption order, reasoning that state regulation could not be allowed to frustrate the federal policy of ensuring an efficient national telecommunications network.
- The Louisiana Public Service Commission and others (petitioners) appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Communications Act of 1934 authorize the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to pre-empt state regulation of depreciation methods used for calculating rates for intrastate telephone service?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Brennan
No. The Communications Act of 1934 does not authorize the FCC to pre-empt state regulation of depreciation for intrastate ratemaking. Section 152(b) of the Act serves as an explicit denial of federal power, stating that 'nothing in this chapter shall be construed to apply or to give the Commission jurisdiction with respect to... charges, classifications, practices... for or in connection with intrastate communication service.' The court interprets the terms 'charges' and 'practices' as encompassing depreciation. This specific jurisdictional limitation on the FCC's authority over intrastate matters overrides the more general grant of authority over accounting and depreciation in § 220 and the broad national policy goals of § 151. An agency may not expand its power in the face of a direct congressional limitation on its jurisdiction. The fact that telephone plant has a dual-jurisdictional use does not necessitate federal pre-emption, as the Act's 'separations' process is designed to allocate costs between interstate and intrastate jurisdictions, allowing for different regulatory treatment of each portion.
Analysis:
This decision strongly reinforces the 'dual regulatory system' established by the Communications Act, affirming significant state authority over intrastate ratemaking. It establishes the principle that a specific statutory limitation on an agency's jurisdiction, like § 152(b), cannot be overcome by citing a more general grant of statutory authority or broad policy objectives. The ruling significantly limited the FCC's ability to impose uniform national economic policies on local telephone service, preserving the states' role in balancing local interests, such as consumer rates and carrier financial health.
Unlock the full brief for Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission et al.