involved in the purchase transaction to the extent that it authorizes local towing and freighting operations between points on Puget Sound, and local towing operations along the Columbia River from its mouth to the confluence with the Willamette River, and along the Willamette River from Portland to the confluence with the Columbia River. The transaction does not contemplate any guaranty or assumption of the payment of dividends or fixed charges. Conditions for the protection of employees are not necessary.

Our findings herein contemplate that applicant, before recording the transaction, in its books, first shall submit the related journal entries for our consideration and approval; and that applicant shall file publications with respect to rates or charges as may be required under section 306 of the act, including notice of adoption, which shall specify as the date of adoption the date upon which title to the operating rights passes to applicant.

Section 5 (3) of the act provides that whenever a person which is not a carrier is authorized, by order under section 5 (2), to acquire control of any carrier or of two or more carriers, such person thereafter shall, to the extent provided by us in such order, be considered as a carrier subject to the provisions of the act relating to reports, accounts, and so forth, and issues of securities and assumptions of liability, applicable to the carriers involved in such acquisition of control. Upon the record before us we perceive no reason for including in our authorization herein any provisions subjecting A. Leppaluoto, R. S. Whaley, and H. A. Dent to regulations in respect of reports, accounts and so forth of carriers, or of the issues of securities and assumptions of liability of carriers. Section 5 (9) authorizes us to make such orders, supplemental to any order made under section 5 (2) from time to time, as for good cause shown we may deem necessary or appropriate.

On further hearing, we find that the purchase by applicant, and control through such purchase by A. Lappaluoto, R. S. Whaley, and H. A. Dent, of the portion of the operating rights of vendee, hereinbefore mentioned, are transactions within the scope of section 5 (2) of the act, as amended; that the terms and conditions are just and reasonable under the conditions specified herein; and that the transactions will be consistent with the public interest.

We further find that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform the common-carrier services in interstate or foreign commerce which vendor is authorized to perform; that transfer to applicant of the portion of said operating rights of vendor authorizing operation as a common carrier (1) by towing vessels in the performance of general towage between ports and points along the Pacific

coast and tributary waterways, except the Willamette River above Portland and the Columbia River above the mouth of the Willamette River, but not including local service between points on Puget Sound and between points on the Columbia and Willamette Rivers, and (2) by non-self-propelled vessels with the use of separate towing vessels in the transportation of commodities generally between ports and points along the Pacific coast and tributary waterways north of and including Coos Bay, but not including points on the Willamette River or the Columbia River above Astoria, or local service between points on Puget Sound, is consistent with the public interest; and that if the purchase is consummated applicant will be entitled to a certificate covering such operating rights.

We further find that present and future public convenience and necessity require extension of operations in interstate or foreign commerce as proposed by applicant except to the extent such operations are authorized to be transferred in Finance Docket No. 16866 herein, but no local service is authorized between points on the Columbia River; and that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform such service, and to conform to the provisions of part III of the act and the requirements, rules, and regulations of the Commission thereunder. Issuance of a certificate authorizing such extension of operations will be withheld pending notice from applicant that the transaction approved in Finance Docket No. 16866 has been consummated. The application in No. W-18 (Sub-No. 3), except to the extent specified above, will be denied.

Upon receipt of notice that the purchase transaction authorized in Finance Docket No. 16866 has been consummated, a second amended certificate including the rights to be acquired from Allman-Hubble Tug Boat Co. and those granted in No. W-18 (Sub-No. 3) will be issued to applicant superseding and canceling the amended certificate of October 20, 1947, issued to vendor in No. W-584, and the amended certificate of April 27, 1951, issued to applicant in No. W-18.

An appropriate order approving the finance transactions will be entered.

COMMISSIONER MITCHELL dissents.

285 I. C. C.

No. FF-148 (SUB-No. 4)1

REPUBLIC CARLOADING AND DISTRIBUTING CO., INC. EXTENSION-SOUTHEAST

Decided September 26, 1952

Upon reconsideration, findings in prior report, 285 I. C. C. 127, that extension of service by applicant as a freight forwarder of commodities generally (1) from points in Tennessee to 9 western and southwestern States, (2) from 9 north central States to points in Alabama and Florida, and (3) from 20 north central and northeastern States, and the District of Columbia to points in Georgia, is consistent with the public interest and the national transportation policy, affirmed. Order entered permitting the fifth amended permit and order issued April 1, 1952, to become effective.

Appearances shown in prior report.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON RECONSIDERATION

DIVISION 4, COMMISSIONERS MAHAFFIE, JOHNSON, AND MITCHELL BY DIVISION 4:

In the prior report, 285 I. C. C. 127, the Commission, division 4, found that the extension of applicant's present service 2 to include the forwarding of commodities generally (1) from points in Tennessee to 9 Western and Southwestern States,3 (2) from (9) North Central States and 11 Northeastern States and the District of Columbia

5

This report also embraces, for the purpose of giving effect to the determination herein, No. FF-148, Republic Carloading and Distributing Co., Inc., Freight Forwarder Application: No. FF-148 (Sub-No. 1), Republic Carloading and Distributing Co., Inc., Extension-Utah; No. FF-148 (Sub-No. 2), Republic Carloading and Distributing Co., Inc., ExtensionIllinois; No. FF-148 (Sub-No. 3), Republic Carloading and Distributing Co., Inc., Extension-Midwest Origins; and No. FF-144, Gulf Carloading Company, Inc., Freight Forwarder Application.

2 Pursuant to fourth amended permit and order issued March 3, 1950, in Nos. FF-148, FF-148 (Sub-No. 1), FF-148 (Sub-No. 2), FF-148 (Sub-No. 3), and FF-144, Republic Carloading and Distributing Co., Inc., is now authorized to operate as a freight forwarder of commodities generally (1) from points in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi to points in the United States east and north of and including Virginia, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania, (2) from points in the destination territory specified in (1) to all other points in the United States except points in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky. South Dakota, Montana, and Nevada, (3) from points in Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri to points in Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, California, Oregon, and Washington, and (4) from points in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin to points in Iowa, Minnesota, and Colorado.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Oregon, Texas, Utah, and Washington. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. • Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

to points in Georgia, and (3) from the North Central States specified in footnote 4 to points in Alabama and Florida, was consistent with the public interest and the national transportation policy. A fifth amended permit and order embracing authority for the extended service was issued April 1, 1952, to become effective July 21, 1952. Upon petition of the protestant, Acme Fast Freight, Inc., we reopened the proceeding for reconsideration, and the effective date of the fifth amended permit and order was postponed until the further order of the Commission.

Facts stated in the prior report will be repeated only where necessary to a clear understanding of the issues.

Applicant has engaged in service as a freight forwarder from and to certain territories since prior to May 16, 1942, when part IV was added to the Interstate Commerce Act. The States from and to which it is now authorized to forward commodities generally are designated in footnote 2. At present applicant provides for assembly at 28 stations in 12 States and for break bulk and distribution at 65 stations in 22 States. At these facilities it maintains 405 employees and 23 agents. To provide the proposed service from points in Tennessee, and to points in Alabama and Georgia, assembly or distribution stations would be established at Memphis, Birmingham, and Atlanta. The three Florida stations now maintained at Jacksonville, Miami, and Tampa for the distribution of shipments originating in Northeastern States would be used for the handling of shipments to be moved in the proposed operation from the North Central States to points in Florida.

7

6

Applicant is authorized to forward property from 15 States in which no assembly station is maintained, and to 18 States wherein no distribution station has been established. Operation from and to points in these States is provided through use of the services of motor common carriers. In 1950 applicant forwarded shipments aggregating 206,028 tons. This tonnage exceeded by 42.3 percent the volume handled in 1949.

Numerous shippers which already use applicant's service presented evidence in support of the extended rights sought. They have found its present service satisfactory and will utilize the proposed service from and to the additional territories when inaugurated. While most of the shippers asserted a preference for applicant's service, some criticized the services of other forwarders and expressed actual need

*Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia.

'Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming

try has expanded rapidly, from 14 sawmills and no plywood plant in 1950, to 43 sawmills and 8 plywood mills in operation or under construction, and 3 plywood mills being contemplated, in 1951. Current lumber production is estimated at about 1,000,000 feet per day. Highway connections from Crescent City to Grants Pass and Arcata are crooked and narrow, with severe grades, and weather conditions make highway maintenance difficult. During periods of heavy precipitation temporary load limits are imposed on the highways, which prohibit the transportation of commercial truckloads. The present development of the Crescent City Harbor precludes service by deepsea vessels, and the port is confined almost solely to barge movements. The principal market for lumber and lumber products is southern California. No regular common-carrier barge service is provided at that port and most lumber shipments have been transported by a contract carrier. The witness expressed the opinion that tug and barge service as proposed by the applicant would be advantageous to shippers at Crescent City, and that available and prospective tonnage would require applicant's services as well as those of all other authorized carriers.

Witnesses representing the ports of Pasco and The Dalles on the Columbia River testified with respect to the growth and expected future development of these inland ports. Particular attention was directed to the expansion of the canning industry in the area tributary to Pasco, and the possible construction of a large dam on the Columbia River immediately east of The Dalles for the development of electric power to serve industries in that area. The witnesses expressed the view that a direct tug-barge service such as proposed between The Dalles and Pasco and Los Angeles, San Francisco, and ports on Puget Sound would directly benefit their respective communities by affording water-carrier service to and from those large industrial centers.

Marketers of petroleum products in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana who presently ship by ocean tankers from Los Angeles to Portland and thence by way of applicant's service to Pasco for distribution to inland points are interested in the development of a tug-barge service from Los Angeles to the small ports along the Pacific coast such as Crescent City and Coos Bay. They believe that such a service would enable them to move petroleum products at lower costs to the areas tributary to such ports. Automotive accessories, tires, insecticides, and fertilizer materials shipped from points in California to the same areas, in the opinion of shippers of these commodities, might likewise be moved by barge to reduce transportation costs. A large California producer of asphalt was of the view that a market for his product could be developed in Oregon and Washington if adequate tug-barge service were available.