1940 was to eliminate jurisdictional overlaps in Fed- 
eral regulatory authority, the growing use of through 
rates to cover a combination of foreign and domestic 
transport services is blurring the regulatory boundary 
established by the 1940 Act between foreign and 
domestic commerce. Jurisdictional disputes in this 
area are likely to continue until authority in this 
area is more precisely allocated either through judi- 
cial interpretation of existing law or enactment of 
new legislation. 
Other Regulatory Responsibilities of ICC and FMC 
Beyond the activities carried out by the Interstate 
Commerce Commission and the Federal Maritime 
Commission relating to the economic regulation of 
water carriers, various additional regulatory duties 
are discharged with respect to other aspects and 
components of the water transportation system. As 
indicated in the previous section, Part III of the 
Interstate Commerce Act grants authority to ICC 
to regulate many services provided in conjunction 
with water transportation in addition to the line haul 
itself. In ‘this same area, under the terms of the 
Shipping Act of 1916, the FMC exercises extensive 
authority in the regulation of marine terminal opera- 
tions carried out in conjunction with waterborne 
common carriage in foreign commerce and in con- 
junction with domestic interstate ocean and Great 
Lakes commerce. In this capacity FMC promulgates 
rules and regulations governing the activities of 
terminal operators and conducts surveillance, investi- 
gates charges, and renders decisions relating to dis- 
criminatory rates, practices, and other illegal activ- 
ities. All U.S. terminal operators serving common 
carriers by water must publish and file tariffs with 
FMC specifying rates, charges, rules, and regula- 
tions governing their services. Furthermore, agree- 
ments between and among terminal operators and 
common carriers which affect or limit competition 
must be filed with and approved by FMC before 
receiving antitrust immunity under Section 15 of the 
Shipping Act. 
Interestingly, it is ICC rather than FMC which 
has responsibility to help assure that offshore oil 
ports and related storage facilities are operated 
as common carriers. Under Section 8 of the Deep- 
water Port Act of 1974, authorized offshore oil 
facilities must be operated on a common carrier 
basis subject to ICC regulation in order to be eligible 
for a Department of Transportation license. If there 
is reason to believe that a licensed facility is not be- 
ing operated in compliance with this requirement, an 
appropriate investigation and proceeding before ICC 
may be initiated. 
Freight forwarders in domestic commerce (except 
in the noncontiguous domestic trades) are also regu- 
lated by ICC under the terms of Part IV of the 
Interstate Commerce Act, which was added to the 
basic legislation in 1942. Under the provisions of 
Part IV such forwarders are generally required to 
“, . . charge reasonable rates, refrain from unjust 
discrimination, file their rates in tariffs, etc.” 41 Al- 
though regulated domestic forwarders may employ 
water carriers in the provision of line haul trans- 
portation services, it is much more common for 
domestic forwarders to use rail or truck services. In 
the domestic trades, freight forwarders assume the 
responsibilities of a common carrier and are regu- 
lated as common carriers. 
In foreign commerce and in the noncontiguous 
domestic trades, FMC exercises Federal regulatory 
authority over so-called Non-Vessel Operating Com- 
mon Carriers (NVOCC), which are business entities 
analogous to the domestic freight forwarders regu- 
lated by ICC. Basically, an NVOCC can be de- 
scribed as a person or firm which holds itself out 
(by the establishment and maintenance of tariffs, 
by advertisement solicitation, or otherwise) to pro- 
vide transportation for hire by water in commerce 
subject to the jurisdiction of FMC; which assumes 
responsibility or has liability imposed by law for the 
safe transportation of shipments; and which arranges 
in its own name with underlying water carriers for 
the performance of such transportation whether or 
not owning or controlling the means by which such 
transportation is effected. Although an NVOCC is © 
essentially the same kind of entity as the domestic 
freight forwarder regulated under Part IV of the 
Interstate Commerce Act, FMC does not place 
special restrictions on NVOCC operations, as is the 
case with ICC regulation of domestic freight for- 
warders. A non-vessel operating common carrier is 
afforded the same status as a vessel operating com- 
mon carrier in terms of FMC regulation. 
In addition to its regulatory authority over 
NVOCCs, FMC also licenses and regulates inde- 
pendent ocean freight forwarders, which, unlike the 
domestic forwarders regulated by ICC, assume no 
common carrier responsibilities and therefore file no 
tariffs or transportation rates. Independent ocean 
freight forwarders serve merely as export agents for 
other persons. FMC authority in this area was pro- 
vided under the terms of a 1961 amendment to the 
Shipping Act, which authorizes the Commission to 
license forwarders subject to its jurisdiction and to 
regulate their activities to assure compliance with 
_ Federal shipping statutes. Ocean freight forwarders 
are required to be licensed by FMC after a finding 
“William L. Grossman, op. cit. note 29, p. 114. 
V-24 
