9. (a) steel, in coils, from Sharon and Farrell, Pa., to Birmingham, Ala., (b) slit steel, in coils, from Birmingham, Ala., to Amory, Miss., and (c) fabricated steel pipe, from Amory, Miss., to Geneva, Ohio, under a continuing contract or contracts with True Temper Corporation, of Cleveland, Ohio; and

10. electrical tools and component parts for electrical tools, between Tarboro and Fayetteville, N.C., Hampstead, Md., ports of entry between the United States-Canada boundary line located at or near Ogdensburg and Wellesley Island, N.Y., under a continuing contract or contracts with Black and Decker Manufacturing Co., of Towson, Md.

Furthermore, in No. MC-119302 (Sub-No. 21), Miller Transfer and Rigging Co. Extension-Electric Tools (not printed), the Commission has found that an extension of the contract carrier operations authorized in No. 10 above would be consistent with the public interest and the national transportation policy. However, said permit has not yet been issued.

125 M.C.C.

No. MC-C-8507'

HARRY SCHREIBER, SCHREIBER FREIGHT CARRIERS, INC., SCHREIBER FREIGHT LINES, INC., W-P TRUCK LINES, INC., GERALD S. LESHER, AND DOROTHY H. LOUGHMAN D/B/A WAYNESBURG-PITTSBURGH LOCAL EXPRESSINVESTIGATION OF OPERATIONS AND REVOCATION OF CERTIFICATES

Decided September 30, 1976

1. In No. MC-C-8507 past operations by respondents found shown to have been in violation of sections 203(c), 206(a), and 222(c) of the Interstate Commerce Act; said violations found shown to have been willful in nature within meaning of the provisions of section 212(a) of the act; respondents required to cease and desist and thereafter refrain and abstain from the performance of all operations found in this decision to be unlawful; certificates in dockets Nos. MC-135305 and MC19000 and sub numbers thereunder, if any, suspended for a period of 45 days beginning 45 days from date of service hereof.

2. Respondents Harry Schreiber, and Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., found to have obtained full management and operational control of Dorothy H. Loughman, doing business as Waynesburg-Pittsburgh Local Express, in violation of section 5(5), of the act; order requiring divestiture entered.

Raymond P. de Member, Bernard Feuer, H. Neil Garson, and Sheldon Krupnick for respondents.

John J. Charuhas, Manuel A. Lojo, and Charles F. Riddle, for the Bureau of Enforcement, Interstate Commerce Commission. William A. Gray and John A. Vuono, for interveners.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

DIVISION 1, COMMISSIONERS MURPHY, GRESHAM, AND CHRISTIAN

MURPHY, Commissioner:

Exceptions to the initial decision recommended by the Administrative Law Judge have been filed by respondents, by the

'Also embraces No. MC-F-12368, Harry Schreiber, Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., W-P Truck Lines, Inc., and Gerald S. Lesher-Investigation and Control-Dorothy H. Loughman, d/b/a Waynesburg-Pittsburgh Local Express.

Commission's Bureau of Enforcement, and by interveners.2 Respondents replied to the exceptions of the Bureau and to those of interveners, and the Bureau and interveners each replied to the exceptions of respondents. Our conclusions do not differ substantially from those of the Administrative Law Judge. On reviewing the record and the contentions of the parties on exceptions, however, we believe sanctions should be imposed herein in No. MC-C-8507 in addition to those recommended.

BACKGROUND

In No. MC-C-8507, by order entered October 31, 1974, the Commission instituted an investigation under sections 204 (c) and 212(a) of the Interstate Commerce Act and section 2 of the Elkins Act into and concerning the motor carrier operations of Harry Schreiber, Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., W-P Truck Lines, Inc., Gerald S. Lesher, and Dorothy H. Loughman, doing business as Waynesburg-Pittsburgh Local Express, with a view to determining: (1) whether Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., (a) has been and is serving points outside the geographic scope of its authority, and (b) has been and is fraudulently seeking to evade or defeat regulation provided in part II of the Interstate Commerce Act for motor carriers; (2)(a) whether Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., or Harry Schreiber has been and is engaging in the for-hire transportation of property in interstate or foreign commerce without authority, and (b) whether Harry Schreiber or Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., W-P Truck Lines, Inc., Gerald S. Lesher, and Dorothy H. Loughman, doing business as Waynesburg-Pittsburgh Local Express have been and are participating in such violations, or whether Harry Schreiber, or Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., W-P Truck Lines, Inc., Gerald S. Lesher, and Dorothy H. Loughman, doing business as Waynesburg-Pittsburgh Local Express, have been and are fraudulently seeking to evade or defeat regulation provided in part II of the act for motor carriers; or, in the alternative, (3) "Parties which have been granted leave to intervene either prior to or at the time of hearing in the captioned proceedings include: B & P Motor Express, Inc., John Benkart & Sons Co,, Bond Transport, Inc., Carroll Transport, Inc., Eazor Express, Inc., Harchelroad Trucking Co., Helm's Express Division of Ryder Truck Lines, Inc., Interstate Motor Freight System, Lightning Express, Inc., J. Miller Express, Inc., Mooney Bros. Trucking Co., Moore-Flesher Hauling Company, Peerless Transport Corp., Pittsburgh & New England Trucking Co., Point Transfer, Inc., Ryder Truck Lines, Inc., Standard Motor Freight, Suwak Trucking Corp., W.S. Thomas Transfer, Inc., and Ward Trucking Corp.

whether Dorothy H. Loughman, doing business as WaynesburgPittsburgh Local Express, has been and is engaging in unauthorized operations and whether Harry Schreiber, Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., W-P Truck Lines, Inc., and Gerald S. Lesher have been and are participating in such violations; and to issue such orders and take such other and further action as the facts and circumstances may appear to warrant.

In No. MC-F-12368 by order entered November 6, 1974, the Commission instituted an investigation under section 5(7) (subsequently redesignated section 5(8) by reason of P.L. 94-210, the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976) of the act into (1) whether control or management of Dorothy H. Loughman, doing business as Waynesburg-Pittsburgh Local Express, in a common interest with Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., may have been effectuated and may be continuing in violation of section 5(4) (now section 5(5)) of the act; and (2) whether respondents as named in the preceding paragraph may have effectuated or participated in effectuating such control or management. The Commission's Bureau of Enforcement was directed to participate in both proceedings. Also, as is indicated in footnote 2 above, certain carriers were granted leave to intervene in these matters on the basis of representations by them that they had knowledge of facts germane to these proceedings.

At the hearing only the Bureau and respondents adduced direct evidence pertaining to the issues involved. Certain additional testimony sought to be introduced by interveners after the close of respondent's case was rejected as constituting new evidence which should have been elicited in conjunction with the Bureau's presentation. After the hearing the parties were invited to file briefs setting forth their positions herein, and the initial decision was subsequently served on October 7, 1975.

The initial decision includes an exhaustive analysis of the evidence submitted by the parties. We find this factual summary to be correct in all material respects and, in all essential aspects, adopt it as our own. Because the exceptions of the parties relate essentially to the conclusions arrived at in the initial decision and the rationale in support thereof, the evidence elicited on the record herein will be restated only to the extent necessary for clarity of discussion.

125 M.C.C.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The parties. To facilitate an understanding of the issues involved, a brief description of the respondents follows: Harry Schreiber was, at the time of the hearing the owner of Schreiber Freight Lines, Inc., the holder of certificated authority as is set forth in footnote 4 below. He also held an interest in, or owned outright, certain airfreight forwarding operations licensed by the Civil Aeronautics Board, and one or more motor carriers ostensibly engaged in intrastate transportation operations in several jurisdictions. The latter firms are not parties to the instant proceedings. Schreiber Freight Carriers, Inc., holds no authority from this Commission. It is a respondent by reason of its having been identified in various shipping documents of record as a participant with other respondents in the transportation of certain shipments referred to below which were alleged to have been transported unlawfully. W-P Truck Lines, Inc., was a corporation apparently set up to enter into contracts with Loughman, on the one hand, and Harry Schreiber, on the other, by which control of the former was ultimately vested in the latter individual. It is a respondent by reason of its participation in these transactions. Gerald Lesher is a respondent by reason of his being president of W-P at the time of the formation of the aforementioned contracts. He was then also an officer or director in various other transportation enterprises owned or operated by respondent Schreiber and apparently had been so employed for some time. Finally, Dorothy Loughman's posture as a respondent derives from her participation in contracts with W-P as have been heretofore described.

The evidence.-Information submitted by the Bureau to satisfy its perceived burden of proof falls into three general categories. The first includes data describing 61 shipments, which were alleged to have been transported without appropriate operating authority therefor by respondents; and demonstrating the means whereby respondent Harry Schreiber had effectuated control of Loughman. The second includes evidence tendered for the purpose of establishing that these violations were not inadvertent. The third

'Evidence pertinent hereto includes the following: (1) documents submitted in prior Commission proceedings wherein respondent Lesher (as president of W-P) denied that any other carrier had an interest in W-P (and ultimately in Loughman) notwithstanding the existence of contracts vesting control thereof in respondent Schreiber; (2) correspondence embracing representations by Schreiber in unrelated matters that he is owner of W-P (which in turn (footnote continued on next page)