No. 15234 IN THE MATTER OF DIVISIONS OF FREIGHT RATES IN WESTERN AND MOUNTAIN-PACIFIC TERRITORIES Decided October 12, 1935 Upon reconsideration of findings in prior reports, 208 I. C. C. 299, and 203 I. C. C. 299, divisions of rates to and from points on narrow-gage lines of the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Company and the Colorado & Southern Railway Company excepted from basis of divisions of transMissouri rates previously prescribed. FOURTH SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OF THE COMMISSION BY THE COMMISSION: In the prior reports in this proceeding relating to divisions of joint rates to and from points in trans-Missouri territory, 203 I. C. C. 299, and 208 I. C. C. 299, we prescribed a new basis of divisions for trans-Missouri and western trunk-line railroad companies, consisting of a modified mileage prorate. In those reports no distinction was made between standard-gage and narrow-gage lines. A petition has been filed by respondents the Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Company and the Colorado & Southern Railway Company, praying for modification of the orders heretofore entered to provide that the prescribed basis of divisions shall not apply to joint rates on traffic originating at or destined to points on their narrow-gage lines. The Denver & Rio Grande Western has 736 miles of such lines and the Colorado & Southern 244 miles, about 29 and 24 percent of their respective total mileages. These petitioners call attention to a number of our decisions in rate cases in which we have authorized or prescribed higher rates for transportation over their narrow-gage lines than those for standardline application because of higher operating costs on the narrowgage lines and the expense of transferring freight at junction points. The western trunk-line respondents oppose the petition on the ground (1) that there is no evidence of record showing the higher operating costs mentioned in the petition, and (2) that such costs have never been given special weight in determining divisions on the traffic involved. Although it has not previously been contended in this proceeding that there should be a special basis of divisions of rates to and from points on the narrow-gage lines, a witness for the Denver & Rio Grande Western in testifying concerning the difficult operating conditions encountered by that carrier, relied upon as justifying the existing trans-Missouri divisions, submitted evidence showing that the physical conditions were more adverse and the operating costs consequently higher on the narrow-gage lines than on the standard-gage lines. It may be inferred that this is also true as to the Colorado & Southern. The record therefore confirms facts which have come to our attention in many other proceedings, for cxample, Ra'es on Petroleum Products, 167 I. C. C. 131, and justifies similar conclusions. The status of the narrow-gage lines under the superseded divisional agreements has slight relevance to the question whether such lines are entitled to special treatment in connection with the basis of divisions which we have prescribed. In Grand Junction Cham. of Com. v. Aberdeen & R. R. Co., 190 I. C. C. 233, we made findings which in effect authorized higher rates on fruit from points on narrow-gage lines in western Colorado than those which were prescribed from standard-line points. The extent to which joint rates to and from narrow-gage points subject to the divisions prescribed in this proceeding include some amount such as an arbitrary specifically to cover higher operating costs on the narrow-gage lines is not disclosed. In such cases, however, the portion of the rate added on this account should accrue to the carrier operating the narrowgage line, as in the case of an arbitrary authorized for a short or weak line, Southern Class Rate Investigation, 100 I. C. C. 513, 655. Since our findings and order did not provide for such treatment of the narrow-gage lines, it appears that they should be limited to apply to joint rates to and from points on standard-gage lines in order to permit the respondents to negotiate divisions of joint rates to and from points on narrow-gage lines which will be in harmony with the standard-line basis and conform to the principle governing special allowances to weak lines before referred to. If the controversy cannot be voluntarily adjusted, it may again be brought to our attention. We find that the basis of divisions of joint rates to and from points in trans-Missouri territory previously prescribed should be limited to joint rates to and from points on standard-gage lines, and the outstanding order will be amended accordingly. 211 I. C. C. No. 16250 INDIANA STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE v. BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. Decided October 12, 1935 On reconsideration, additional amounts of reparation found due to complainant's member the Hart Glass Manufacturing Company under prior findings, 188 I. C. C. 99, on carload shipments of silica sand from the Ottawa, Ill., district to Dunkirk, Ind. Prior reports, 153 I. C. C. 721, 155 I. C. C. 687, 188 I. C. C. 99, 208 I. C. C. 446. R. B. Coapstick for complainant. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON RECONSIDERATION BY THE COMMISSION: This case, in which the rates on silica sand from the Ottawa, Ill., district to destinations in Indiana are assailed, was one of the cases embraced in Industrial Sand Cases, 1930, 188 I. C. C. 99, in which we found the rates assailed unreasonable in the past. Further hearing to determine the amounts of reparation due complainant's members was held at Indianapolis, Ind., on March 12, 1934. Rates are stated in amounts per ton. In the report in this matter, 208 I. C. C. 446, we eliminated certain shipments received by complainants' member the Hart Glass Manufacturing Company at Dunkirk, Ind., namely, 14 shipments received prior to August 30, 1929, on which a rate of $2.39 was charged, and 153 shipments received thereafter, on which a rate of $2.28 was charged, the rate prescribed for reparation purposes in the prior report, 188 I. C. C. 99, being $2.20. The 153 shipments were eliminated on the theory that the $2.28 rate was prescribed by division 1, effective August 30, 1929, in the prior reports in this case, 153 I. C. C. 721, 155 I. C. C. 687, and the 14 shipments were inadvertently eliminated because listed in the same exhibit. Upon petition of complainant, to which defendants filed no reply, the case was reopened for reconsideration with respect to these shipments. It now appears that the $2.28 rate was established in error and that as a result of correspondence between complainant and defendants the rate was changed to $2.16 effective March 20, 1930, to conform to the findings of division 1. This $2.16 rate being from points on the narrow-gage lines, a witness for the Denver & Rio Grande Western in testifying concerning the difficult operating conditions encountered by that carrier, relied upon as justifying the existing trans-Missouri divisions, submitted evidence showing that the physical conditions were more adverse and the operating costs consequently higher on the narrow-gage lines than on the standard-gage lines. It may be inferred that this is also true as to the Colorado & Southern. The record therefore confirms facts which have come to our attention in many other proceedings, for example, Rates on Petroleum Products, 167 I. C. C. 131, and justifies similar conclusions. The status of the narrow-gage lines under the superseded divisional agreements has slight relevance to the question whether such lines are entitled to special treatment in connection with the basis of divisions which we have prescribed. In Grand Junction Cham. of Com. v. Aberdeen & R. R. Co., 190 I. C. C. 233, we made findings which in effect authorized higher rates on fruit from points on narrow-gage lines in western Colorado than those which were prescribed from standard-line points. The extent to which joint rates to and from narrow-gage points subject to the divisions prescribed in this proceeding include some amount such as an arbitrary specifically to cover higher operating costs on the narrow-gage lines is not disclosed. In such cases, however, the portion of the rate added on this account should accrue to the carrier operating the narrowgage line, as in the case of an arbitrary authorized for a short or weak line, Southern Class Rate Investigation, 100 I. C. C. 513, 655. Since our findings and order did not provide for such treatment of the narrow-gage lines, it appears that they should be limited to apply to joint rates to and from points on standard-gage lines in order to permit the respondents to negotiate divisions of joint rates to and from points on narrow-gage lines which will be in harmony with the standard-line basis and conform to the principle governing special allowances to weak lines before referred to. If the controversy cannot be voluntarily adjusted, it may again be brought to our attention. We find that the basis of divisions of joint rates to and from points in trans-Missouri territory previously prescribed should be limited to joint rates to and from points on standard-gage lines, and the outstanding order will be amended accordingly. 211 I. C. C. No. 16250 INDIANA STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE v. BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. Decided October 12, 1935 On reconsideration, additional amounts of reparation found due to complainant's member the Hart Glass Manufacturing Company under prior findings, 188 I. C. C. 99, on carload shipments of silica sand from the Ottawa, Ill., district to Dunkirk, Ind. Prior reports, 153 I. C. C. 721, 155 I. C. C. 687, 188 I. C. C. 99, 208 I. C. C. 446. R. B. Coapstick for complainant. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON RECONSIDERATION BY THE COMMISSION: This case, in which the rates on silica sand from the Ottawa, Ill., district to destinations in Indiana are assailed, was one of the cases embraced in Industrial Sand Cases, 1930, 188 I. C. C. 99, in which we found the rates assailed unreasonable in the past. Further hearing to determine the amounts of reparation due complainant's members was held at Indianapolis, Ind., on March 12, 1934. Rates are stated in amounts per ton. In the report in this matter, 208 I. C. C. 446, we eliminated certain shipments received by complainants' member the Hart Glass Manufacturing Company at Dunkirk, Ind., namely, 14 shipments received prior to August 30, 1929, on which a rate of $2.39 was charged, and 153 shipments received thereafter, on which a rate of $2.28 was charged, the rate prescribed for reparation purposes in the prior report, 188 I. C. C. 99, being $2.20. The 153 shipments were eliminated on the theory that the $2.28 rate was prescribed by division 1, effective August 30, 1929, in the prior reports in this case, 153 I. C. C. 721, 155 I. C. C. 687, and the 14 shipments were inadvertently eliminated because listed in the same exhibit. Upon petition of complainant, to which defendants filed no reply, the case was reopened for reconsideration with respect to these shipments. It now appears that the $2.28 rate was established in error and that as a result of correspondence between complainant and defendants the rate was changed to $2.16 effective March 20, 1930, to conform to the findings of division 1. This $2.16 rate being |