5. Such further specific conditions as we, in the future, may find it necessary to impose in order to restrict applicant's operation to service which is auxiliary to, or supplemental of, rail service.

Upon petition of applicant and intervener, The Pennsylvania Railroad Company, herein called the railroad, and by our order of July 26, 1941, we reopened the matters for further hearing solely to determine whether condition 3 should be modified. Thereafter, we referred the matter to a joint board for further hearing and the recommendation of an appropriate order thereon accompanied by the reasons therefor. Further hearing has been held. Certain motor carriers appeared in opposition to the modification requested but offered no evidence. Issuance of a report and recommended order by the joint board was waived, and we shall proceed to a discussion on the record as made.

Applicant asks that condition 3 be modified to eliminate the requirement that the shipments have, in addition to movement by applicant, a prior or subsequent movement by rail. In lieu thereof, it asks that a limitation be inserted prohibiting the handling of shipments by motor vehicle between Logansport and Indianapolis, Ind., Louisville, Ky., and East St. Louis, Ill., or to or through or from more than one of these points.

All of the routes authorized in the prior report are in Indiana except one extending to East St. Louis and another extending to Louisville. The evidence is that while the rail-haul condition has permitted efficient and economical handling of 98.3 percent of the shipments transported by applicant over the routes involved, it has detrimentally affected the handling of the remaining 1.7 percent of the shipments. This is particularly true in connection with shipments moving from a point in one State to relatively nearby points in another State. For example, a shipment originating at Louisville consigned to Scottsburg, Ind., a distance of approximately 35 miles, can be handled under the rail-haul requirement only by continuance of local way-freight train service, which the authority granted was intended to avoid, or by moving the shipment by rail in through-train service to Indianapolis, a distance of 130 miles, and then hauling it back by truck to Scottsburg, a distance of 100 miles. Either method of handling is uneconomical and inefficient.

The facts here presented are similar to those in Kansas City S. Transport Co., Inc., Com. Car. Application, 28 M. C. C. 5, wherein the Commission eliminated a similar rail-haul condition and in lieu thereof imposed a so-called key-point condition, such as applicant suggests, prohibiting the handling of shipments between certain named points or to or through or from more than one of the points. Similar relief will be accorded here.

At the further hearing, protestant motor carriers expressed a fear that, if the rail-haul condition were eliminated, it would enable applicant to engage in motor-vehicle service in direct competition with that of existing motor carriers. Protestants, however, overlooked the fact that applicant does not handle shipments directly for the public. Its service is confined solely to the performance of a substituted service for the railroad, in the handling of less-than-carload traffic moving at rail rates and on rail billing, and the service authorized in the prior report is so limited by condition 1.

The purpose of a key-point condition is to prohibit the transportation of shipments by motor vehicle between points having throughtrain merchandise-car service. Such service is economical and efficient, and there is no need for, and public convenience and necessity do not require, the substitution of truck service therefor. As before stated, applicant asks that a key-point condition be imposed naming Louisville, Indianapolis, Logansport, and East St. Louis, as key points. Applicant does not specifically show what the situation is in this regard with respect to other points on the rail lines of the railroad, but the evidence indicates that Terre Haute, Vincennes, and Richmond, Ind., have through-train serivce, and should also be included as key points. Under the circumstances, these additional points will also be included as key points.

On further hearing, we find that condition 3 in the findings in the prior report, 21 M. C. C. 405, should be modified as follows:

3. No shipments shall be transported by applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle between any of the following points, or to or through or from more than one of said points: East St. Louis, Ill., Louisville, Ky., and Logansport, Terre Haute, Indianapolis, Richmond, and Vincennes, Ind.

An appropriate order will be entered.

A certificate has been issued in these applications, which applicant will be expected to surrender on or before the effective date of the order we shall enter, whereupon an amended certificate conforming to the foregoing findings will be issued.

42 M. C. C.

No. MC-C-205

INTERMOUNTAIN-COAST MOTOR FREIGHT

TARIFF

BUREAU v. GEORGE A. SIMS AND MILTON K. SIMS, DOING BUSINESS AS SALT LAKE TRANSFER COMPANY

Submitted May 12, 1942. Decided August 9, 1943

1. Motor common carrier class and commodity rates, minimum 1,000 pounds, maintained by defendants, motor common carriers, between Salt Lake City, Utah, on the one hand, and Blackfoot, Boise, Idaho Falls, and Pocatello, Idaho, on the other, found to be unlawful because such rates apply on transportation defendants are not authorized to perform, and ordered canceled.

2. Motor common carrier all-commodity rates, minimum 10,000 pounds, between the same points found not shown to be unreasonable or otherwise unlawful.

K. Tracy Power and Ralph L. Shepherd for complainant and inter

veners.

Milton H. Love for defendants.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

DIVISION 2, COMMISSIONERS AITCHISON, SPLAWN, AND ALLDREDGE BY DIVISION 2:

Exceptions were filed by complainant and supporting interveners to the order recommended by the joint board, and the defendants replied. Our conclusions differ somewhat from those recommended by the joint board.

The complainant is an incorporated association of motor common carriers, of Salt Lake City, Utah. By complaint filed August 28, 1940, it alleges that certain class, commodity, and all-commodity rates maintained by the defendants, George A. Sims and Milton K. Sims, copartners, of Salt Lake City, doing business as Salt Lake Transfer Company, a motor common carrier, between Salt Lake City, and Blackfoot, Boise, Idaho Falls, and Pocatello, Idaho, are unjust and unreasonable, and unduly preferential and unjustly discriminatory, in violation of section 216 of the Interstate Commerce Act; and that they contravene the national transportation policy declared in the act.

42 M. C. C.

The Pacific Inland Tariff Bureau and the Portland Traffic Association, both of Portland, Oreg., intervened in support of the complaint. We are asked to prescribe rates no lower than those maintained by the motor common carriers who are parties to the complainant's tariff. The rates of such carriers will be referred to as complainant's rates. Rates and charges will be stated in amounts per 100 pounds and are those in effect prior to the general increases which became effective in March 1942.

Orange Transportation Company, Inc., Garrett Freightlines, Inc., and Pacific Intermountain Express Co., hereinafter called Orange, Garrett, and Pacific, respectively, and the defendants, transport general commodities between Salt Lake City and the Idaho points, and these carriers, except the defendants, are parties to the complainant's tariff. The defendants are authorized to transport only truckload shipments between Salt Lake City and the four Idaho points, with no service to intermediate points. The other motor carriers mentioned transport both truckload and less-than-truckload shipments to Blackfoot, Boise, Idaho Falls, and Pocatello, and intermediate points. Orange's operations are principally between Salt Lake City and Idaho points; Garrett's operations extend to Los Angeles, Calif., and Portland; and Pacific's operations extend to Denver, Colo., and Los Angeles, but not to Portland.

The three types of rates assailed are: Class rates, minimum 1,000 pounds, which are divided into first, second, third, and fourth class; so-called column commodity rates, minimum 1,000 pounds, which are divided into columns A, B, C, and D; and so-called all-commodity rates, minimum 10,000 pounds. The following table compares the assailed rates with the corresponding less-than-truckload class and column rates, and certain commodity rates, minimum 10,000 pounds, hereinafter called miscellaneous-commodity rates, maintained by complaint between the same points:

They are also authorized to transport machinery, boilers, pipe, building materials, special commodities of unusual size and weight, and household goods, in truckloads, as common carriers, and to perform certain motor contract carrier operations between certain points set forth in Salt Lake Transfer Co. Common Carrier Application, 12 M. C. C. 43, and Salt Lake Transfer Co. Extension of Operations, 19 M. C. C. 807 and 27 M. C. C. 383. The defendants also perform pick-up and delivery service in Salt Lake City, Utah, for the railroads.

42 M. C. C.

1 Complainant's column rates apply north-bound only.

Defendants' class and column rates are subject to a minimum of 1,000 pounds.

• Minimum 10,000 pounds.

The class rates are subject to the ratings contained in the national motor freight classification, and, although the defendants' class rates are designated as truckload, minimum 1,000 pounds, they are governed by the less-than-truckload ratings. The articles accorded column A, B, C, and D rates are said to be rated generally first, second, third, and fourth class, respectively, in the governing classification. The defendants' column rates apply on approximately 275 articles and complainant's column rates apply on about 400 articles, excluding from both totals the number of articles which are included in a generic description. The defendants' all-commodity rates apply on all articles shown in the governing classification, except as indicated in footnote 2.2 The complainant's miscellaneous-commodity rates, minimum 10,000 pounds, which are the same as the defendants' all-commodity rates, apply on approximately 55 articles, counting articles included in a generic description as one article.

The defendants' and complainant's rates include pick-up and delivery services. Under the complainant's tariff, allowances of 5 cents for pick-up and 5 cents for delivery are made to consignors and consignees when they perform these services for the carriers on less-thantruckload shipments. Defendants do not provide for such allowances. Generally, the complainant's rates are on a parity with the rates of the rail lines. The defendants' class and column rates are approximately 10 percent lower than the corresponding rates of the complainant, except that the column D rates from Salt Lake City to Boise are the same. The complainant's rates were generally increased 10 percent

Articles over 25 feet in length, over 8 feet in width, or over 9 feet in height; boilers, set up; contractor's outfits and supplies; dragline outfits; explosives; harvesters; locomotives; machinery; pipe; power shovels; smokestacks; stills; threshers; tanks and parts thereof; tractors; transformers; household goods; structural steel, set up or with two or more pieces joined together; and a number of articles included in the generic description "building materials."