all available expertise in ecological, economical, and social areas. -Increased Freight Rates and Charges, 341 I.C.C. 288 (313-14, 316)*.

The NEPA impact statement is designed to assure that Federal agencies investigate and give weight to significant environmental effects caused by their action, to require development of less damaging alternatives, and to assure that effects are made known to the public before action is taken. The CEQ Guidelines seek to allow an agency to assess potential effect of a considered action so that adverse effects may be avoided, and environmental quality restored or enhanced, to fullest extent practicable. While the Commission endeavors to develop fully the record in its proceedings, limited funds and personnel as well as nature of the subject matter preclude its direct gathering of any significant amount of environmental data; however, it has used all practicable means and measures to evaluate environmental considerations to the fullest extent possible. Also, as the Commission must depend on the parties to a proceeding to furnish substantially all needed information, and as it does not believe Congress intended it to go beyond the "practicable" when enacting NEPA, it will continue to direct the parties to supply information necessary for proper evaluation of environmental issues coming within its jurisdiction.--Id., pp. 318-19.

Thus, the Commission's duty under NEPA to develop the extent of impacts of the surcharge and proposed selective increases will, in its judgment, be entirely satisfied by full consideration of the basic environmental questions presented by the parties: (1) whether increased rail rates will divert traffic from the railroads to other transportation modes in degradation of the human environment, and (2) whether proposed rate increases will adversely affect shipment (and hence, recycling) of secondary materials. Evidence of record convincingly shows that, despite approved increases, secondary materials will continue to move by rail about as they have for many years; it also shows that, without those increases, railroads will not be able economically and efficiently to provide the shipping public with service it requires. Railroads must move freight at reasonable rates and where practical, should promote shipment of secondary materials; to direct them to do more is to require that they bear their customers' environmental burdens which, financially, most lines are not able to assume. Also, it is the Commission's statutory duty to prevent the carriers from pursuing any course which might jeopardize their total ability and duty to serve.--Id., pp. 319-21.

Mere assertion that approval of the selective increases will tend to divert traffic to truck movement, thereby further despoiling the environment, is no basis for so deciding. While the trend of traffic has been away from railroads, recent marked shifts in traffic patterns fairly cannot be attributed to railroad pricing policies. Truck transportation long has been noted as offering certain advantages over rail movement; at the same time, railroad service to some extent has been deficient. Also, shippers' demand for rail service varies, being much greater for some commodities than for others and more pronounced for shorter distances than for longer; and as to some freight categories, truckers and barge lines have proved to be forceful and effective competitors of the railroads. In such competitive context the threat of diversion resulting from approval of railroads' proposal fails to agree with reality, for it is unlikely that railroads will avail themselves of the permissive

authority to increase rates and charges except to the extent that levels of truck and barge line rates enable them to do so without losing the traffic.-Id., pp. 321-25.

However, even assuming, arguendo, that the rail increases would tend to divert traffic to truck transportation, it does not thereby follow that the environment will be further despoiled; at best, the data on relative polluting effect of train and truck operations is fragmentary and inconclusive. Sufficient probative data are not available or published to permit a reliable comparison of exhaust emission characteristics, fuel consumption, and noise levels of locomotives and trucks, although it appears that they are not markedly dissimilar. Nevertheless, in analysis of economic and regulatory aspects of increases proposed in various commodity groups, environmental factors are given careful consideration. Based on that analysis, the Commission is persuaded that prior recent general increases in rail rates and charges have not substantially affected the use, consumption, or shipping of secondary materials, and that increases currently authorized will have no significant adverse effect on the quality of the human environment.-Id., pp. 325-28.

RULES OF PRACTICE

Historical Note

By $305 of the Act of February 5, 1976, 90 Stat. 53, the Commission is required, within 360 days after the date of enactment of the Act, to submit to Congress an initial proposal setting forth rules of practice for the conduct of all adjudicatory and rulemaking proceedings involving railroads. After comment by the Administrative Conference of the United States, the Commission shall submit a final proposal, which shall take effect if not disapproved by either house. Not less than every 3 years, the Commission shall review the rules so adopted and shall revise such rules as it considers necessary.

Rule 49. Modified procedure; content of pleadings.--Rule 49 permits argument in a statement filed under modified procedure. In the instant proceeding, the thrust of protestant's objections went to the weight to be accorded the evidence, not to its admissibility, and applicant's affidavits indicate that the pleadings were mailed in the usual manner. Accordingly, the motion to strike was overruled for the reasons (a) that the pleadings in question comply substantially with the reopening order and the General Rules of Prac tice, (b) that no sufficient cause appeared for striking such pleadings, and (c) that applicant is entitled to consideration to their merits.-Jet Forwarding, Inc., Freight Forwarding Application, 340 I.C.C. 337 (340)*.

Rule 101. Petitions for rehearing, reargument, or reconsideration. Commission held that under Rules 101 (g) (1), 101 (e), and 102 of our General Rules of Practice applicant's petition is incorrectly and untimely filed. Furthermore, inasmuch as applicant has failed to specify any new factual matters it would introduce, it apparently does not desire a further hearing pursuant to Rule 101 (b). Protestants' petition to file "newly discovered evidence" is denied as such evidence has not been shown relevant to the matters at issue.--CTI-Container Transport Internat., Frt. Forwarder Applic., 341 I.C.C. 169 (180-81).

Rule 247 (d) (3). Protests and request for hearing.--Commission reversed prior denial since the examiner relied on evidence in an exhibit that properly d been excluded from the record because of protestant's noncompliance with le 247 (d) (3) regarding full disclosure in its protest of the scope of its terest in the proceeding.--Chieppo Petition for Modification of Certificate, 7 M.C.C. 358 (378)*.

Rule 247 (d) (6). Applicant's allegation that protestant Import Freight d not appear at hearing and is thus no longer a party to these proceedings is t justified. Protestant Lyons controls Import Freight and Lyons did appear d actively participated in the hearing. It would be hypertechnical to exclude port Freight. Applicant's allegations that protestants' reply to exceptions not supported by evidence are without merit.--CTI-Container Transport Interit., Frt. Forwarder Applic., 341 I.C.C. 169 (178-80) .

TABLE OF CASES

Aaacon Auto Transp.--Petition for Declaratory Order, 117 M.C.C. 402-204 (b), n. 7 automobiles

Administrative Ruling No. 76, 117 M.C.C. 433--§209 (a) (1), n. 1

Allied Chemical Corp. v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co., 341 I.C.C. 266--§1(5), . 573; §8, n. 128

Aluminum Co. of America v. Admiral Merchants Motor Frt., Inc., 337 F. pp. 674--§16 (2), n. 8; $16 (3), n. 120; $205 (g), n. 5

Aluminum Co. of America v. Burlington Truck Lines, Inc., 343 F. Supp. 66--§16(2), n. 8, 22, 26

Annual Reports of Class I Railroad Companies, 341 I.C.C. 205--$20 (1), n. 11

Armour & Co., Et Al. v. Sioux City Term. Ry. Co., Et Al., 341 I.C.C. 118-1(6), n. 680; $3(1), n. 136; $4 (1), n. 38; §8, n. 180

Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co. v. John Sexton & Co., 339 F. Supp. 1202-1(6), n. 538; $6(7), n. 5

Boucher--Investigation of Operations, 117 M.C.C. 480--§204 (c), n. 250

Braswell Motor Freight, Inc. v. United States, 336 F. Supp. 709, sustainng order in No. MC-71459 (Sub-No. 18 TA), Hopper Truck Lines, Palo Alto, alif.--§17 (6), n. 10; §210a, n. 1; 28 USC §2325, n. 7

Brinke Freight Forwarder Application, 341 I.C.C. 670; affirming 326 .C.C. 322 which was vacated and set aside in 335 I.C.C. 861-§410 (c), n. 25, ¡c.c.

Buanno Transp. Co., Inc., Ext.--Gloversville, N.Y., 117 M.C.C. 700, reversng prior report and order of April 5, 1972 (not printed) --§207 (a), n. 30 general

Burggrabe Truck Lines, Inc. v. Beaufort Transfer, 117 M.C.C. 567-§206 (a) (1), n. 57; $208 (b), n. 1, 7

Chandler Trailer Convoy, Inc., Ext.--Lexington Trailers, 117 M.C.C. 653, partially reversing prior report of December 15, 1971 (not printed) --§207(a), n. 25 commodity description; special service; $207 (a), n. 25 economy and efficiency

Chieppo Petition for Modification of Certificate, 117 M.C.C. 358, revising in part prior decision and order of December 4, 1970 (not printed)--$208 (c), n. 3 special operation; RP 247 (d) (3)

Citrus Fruits, Ariz. and Calif. to Eastern States, 341 I.C.C. 622--§1(5), n. 23; $3(1), n. 140

Collins, Ford, Longacre, Patterson--Investigation, 117 M.C.C. 628--$204 (c),

n. 250

Conahan Extension--Pennsylvania, 117 M.C.C. 488--§207 (a), n. 6 tacking, 25 fitness

CTI-Container Transport Internat., Frt. Forwarder Applic., 341 I.C.C. 169--§402 (a) (5), n. 1; $410 (c), n. 25, 26; RP 101, 247 (d) (6)

Diamond Transp. System, Ext.--Wis. and Okla. Origin, 117 M.C.C. 706-$204 (e), (f), n. 10; $220 (d), n. 2

East Express, Inc., Ext.--High Point, 117 M.C.C. 383, partially reversing prior decision and order, September 26, 1968 (not printed) --§204 (b), n. 7; $207 (a), n. 6 truckloads

General Increase, East--South Territory, 341 I.C.C. 735--$216 (g), n. 10, 65

Georgia Intrastate Freight Rates, 1969, 341 I.C.C. 778--§13 (4), n. 50, 62

Graham Extension--Port Huron, Mich., 117 M.C.C. 412, partially reversing prior report and order of February 3, 1972 (not printed) --§206 (b), n. 18 public convenience and necessity; $216 (a), n. 10

Great Lakes Exp. Co. v. National Transit, 117 M.C.C. 735--§206 (a) (1), n. 25; $208 (b), n. 1

Great Lakes Ship Owners Assn. v. Chicago & N. W. Ry., 341 I.C.C. 272; affirming, in part, 337 I.C.C. 287-NTP, n. 5 destructive competition

Greenstein Trucking Co. v. United States, 343 F. Supp. 194, sustaining Greenstein Trucking Co. Extension--St. Paul, Minn., 113 M.C.C. 489--§207(a), n. 6; $212 (a), n. 30; 28 USC §2325, n. 40

Home-Pack Transport, Applic. for Forwarder Permit, 340 I.C.C. 98, modifying prior decision and order of March 24, 1969 (not printed) --§402 (b), n. 30; $410 (b), n. 18

Honolulu Freight Service, Ext.--California, 341 I.C.C. 657, modifying order decided December 9, 1971--5410 (c), n. 25; §410 (e), n. 30

Hopper Truck Lines, Palo Alto, Calif., No. MC-71459 (Sub-No. 18 TA), see Braswell Motor Freight, Inc. v. United States, 336 F. Supp. 709

I.C.C. v. Howard, 342 F. Supp. 1112--§203(b), n. 40, 60 territorial; $222 (b), n. 11

I.C.C. v. Schaetzel, 339 F. Supp. 1345--§203 (b), n. 50; §222 (b), n. 11

Ill.-Pac. Coast Transportation Co., Ext.--Three States, 117 M.C.C. 455, reversing prior report and order of March 1, 1972 (not printed)--§207 (a), n. 25 existing service adequate

Increased Classification Ratings on Blankets, 341 I.C.C. 760--§216 (b), n. 704; §216 (g), n. 10

Increased Freight Rates and Charges, 1972, 341 I.C.C. 288, prior report 340 I.C.C. 358; preliminary injunction denied, Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (S.C.R.A.P) v. United States, 353 F. Supp. 317--§1(5), n. 261, 350 various commodities; §13(1), n. 29; §15 (7), n. 35; 42 USC §4332, n. 5

Indian Bow Truck Lines, Ltd., Extension--15 States, 117 M.C.C. 671, modifying prior report and order of December 10, 1971 (not printed) --§207 (a), n. 25 general

In Re Penn Central Transportation Company, 337 F. Supp. 779, prior report 334 I.C.C. 25--11 USC $205, n. 2, 6

n. 67

Institute of Scrap Iron & Steel v. Aberdeen & R. R., 341 I.C.C. 771--§1 (6),

International Joint Rates and Through Routes, 341 I.C.C. 246; affirming 337 I.C.C. 625--§1(1), n. 52; §6(1), n. 35

International Transport, Inc. v. United States, 337 F. Supp. 985, sustaining International Transport, Inc.--Investigation, decided October 26, 1971 (not printed), which affirmed 108 M.C.C. 275 following remand for further consideration in 318 F. Supp. 763, affirmed C & H Transp. Co., Inc. v. I.C.C., 409 U.S. 904--$212 (a), n. 1; APA, 5 USC, burden

Interstate Contr. Car. Corp. Ext.--Confectionaries, 117 M.C.C. 396, continuing proceedings held open in prior report, 114 M.C.C. 817--$203 (a) (15), n. 1

Jenkins Truck Line, Inc., Extension--Gentry, 117 M.C.C. 725--§206 (b), n. 15 amissions; n. 22 weight of evidence

Jet Forwarding, Inc., Freight Forwarding Application, 340 I.C.C. 337, amplifying 337 I.C.C. 72--§410(c), n. 25; GRP 49

Jones Truck Lines, Inc., Ext.--Atlanta, Ga., 117 M.C.C. 586; modifying 114 M.C.C. 571--$207 (a), n. 25