# Appendix — United States v. Dixie Highway Express, Inc. > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385001_1018%3A2 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1967 - **Citation:** 389 U.S. 409 ## Text @ APPENDIX A States’ Disttet Court, Southern District of " Mississippi, Eastern Division - ¢ Civil Action No. 1273- Dra HigHway EXPRESS, ING, ET AL, PLAINTIFFS v. 3 eee STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. Before Joun Minor Wispom, Circuit Judge; Grurrin B. Bex, Circuit Judge; and bi bem Harorp Cox, . , Distriet J fudge. : 2 " C . “Per Curiam: This ‘suit was instituted for the re- view of a decision and consequent action of the Inter- ' state Commerce Commission in the award of a certifi- cate of convenience and necessity to a truck-carrier, ix - resulting in an opinon reported in 242 F. Supp. 1016 | and cOnsequent order vacating such action -of the Coniinission and Temanding the case to the Commission for further consideration and action not inconsistent with the order of the Court. The plaintiffs now move to enforce the judgment of: this Court under the All Writs Statute,* contending. that: the” action of. the Commission subsequent to remand. was in disregard, if not in violation, of the opinion. and. order of this Court. The defendants assail this procedure and con- tend: that a new suit should, be filed to review the new _ opinion, findings and order of the Commmlaninn anes *28 U.S.C, 104 a, $1681 oe * (1a): | — Qa - pursuant to such remand. We disagree with that view. ~ The universal rule is that every court has the inKerent power to enforce its judgment and decrees. The All ) _ Writs Statute appears as ‘a Congressional. reaffirma- - '. tior of that power. This-case- was remanded. to the _ Commission with instructions‘and with the view of affording it, an Opportunity to comply ‘with such instructions of this Court to enable the Court to ° ~ properly pass upon the questions presented. The Com- | mission: has made a detailed report with findings and - conclusions upon’ which to reaffirm its prigr deter- mination as to the public convenience and necessity for the service requested with ‘unimportant exceptions. _ It is, the considered Judgment of this Court that . such action of the Commission rectifies only part of the infirmity pointed out by the Conrt to inhpre and . 0xist-in the action of the Commission after remand. No further: evidence was received. or testimony heard by the Commission but it simply madé ‘its determina- -tion upon the prior‘tecord. In criticizing the order of the Commission for the issuance of a certificate ‘of public «onvenience and necessity, this Court pointed arbitrarily. A-healthy and;efficient operation is ex.’ a ok | “e as ’) ps. ” 3a : -. bremely important to the -pablie intereai:: Oasof the _ ‘basic 'ingrediénts in the determination: of public neéés-- sity is the inadequacy ‘of existing:service:\The national +. 7 transportatibn policy .is inte! led to promote economi-— ae _ @al and efficient serviee and 'wholesothe and t _ -eally ‘sound ‘economical conditions‘ in treumibortaiticn | ‘among thé ‘earriers.”. No'attempt' was made’ by ‘the Commission to comply: with that-‘requiremént ofthe .: ' Court; but the’ Commission ‘simply ‘rationalized that +° : these. protestants could nét improve their service or . ~ gould not furnish the service proffered by the’appli- . _ “eant, without offering protestants anopportunitytodo =~ go ahd ‘allowing them to decide whether or not they ‘wished to and:could furnish such ‘serviee. It is true *“\that these carriers do not ehjoy exclusjve: franchises, _ ‘but’ they .do have valuable: property rights and much money and property invested in facilities to properly ‘serve the public and thése carriers have a vested prop- erty right not ‘to be ‘competed with by: any carrier - ‘without a valid certificate of converiience and ment ‘sity or with an illegal certificate.’ . "While the rule of res judicata is not sunticahle to*- ‘administrative agencies, still: the fixed ‘policies and | well established guidelines of such. administrative * agencies must have stability: ‘artd eonsistency . and - ‘integrity. The invariable rule of the Commission is ¥ ”‘and: has been for a long: time that no certificate affect- - “ing’’the area of another’ carrier ‘will be isstied until _. that.other carrier‘ has been" ‘furpished an opportunity . - “either 'to itnprove or eotrect his service to stich route — ‘or'@ecide. whether he wishes to or, can furnish the ‘added service sought by ‘the applicant carrier. That o -peley, andl practice appears so constant and consistent So Prost. orginal onporation Ooriimissioh of State of Oklahoma, et a a 278 US 51 aN 277-87 Pe 4a > as to’ saiaitiadess a rule of property + may not. ~: ‘ violated by the Commission without doing: wiolence- to the due .process rights of these protestants, It is - . unthinkable that such a well established rule can be _ ignored with impunity. atewill by this Commission. As | Judge Brown said: “Our complex society now de; mands administrative agencies. The variety of prob- ~ lems dealt with make absolute cqnsistency, perfect — symmetry, impossible. And the law: reflects its good sense by not ‘exactingait. But law does not permit an agency to grant to one person the right to do that. a rt which it denies to another similarly situated."There | may not be a rule for Monday, another for Tuesday, *. a rule for general, application, but denied outright. in | a specific case.’’* Any other course would foster: and 7 . encourage, if not subsidize, arbitrary administrative fay gtion. This administrative agency is extremely i portant to the proper administration of our interstate _ commerce and they gerform their duties well with a “high degree of exptrtise and skill acquired from ja _ vagt knowledge of this subject. But even such an — ‘ agency may ,not disregard ‘and depart from welk : _ established and deep-rooted policies..and -practices . which’ appear as rulés of property belonging ‘to fran-— chise holders as muniments of title to such valuable _ property rights. ~ No overt act was done by the Cicnmthanifet toward : complying with this requirement of thé Court toward the rectification of the infirmities in its former action. The rationalization by the Commigsion in this pro- ceeding as to what ‘these protestants wished to do or could do toward furnishing such service to the public. ~~ “8 Mary Carter Péint Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, (SCA) 8 333 F. nisin nes cert. denied. 379 US 957, 85 S. 661. . ~ 6 ; ra Nene ae ab tlm pert in QO Spin RE Waa ies - Ba ae along. their routes did ‘not satisfy the ‘requirements of this Court in such, respect.’ j The motion of the plaintiffs will be sustained to the “extent indicated. ‘The findings and conclusions of the Commission ‘as to what any of these protestants wish . to:do. or could do or would do toward;furnishing such service will be stricken as inadequate. The consequent order of the Commission based ufion such erroneously - - applied principle of law will be vacated in its entirety. - The certificate issued“thereon ‘will Re cancelled. The Commission and its members and’ their successors will be enjoined from. issuing any certificate of g ne ienee and necessity to the applicant in ee ed | | and until the protestants (plaintiffs) are chaos a: redsonable opportunity to furnish such service and =~ ‘either advise the Commission that they'do not wish -to dé-so or -the Commission finds from experience, after a reasonable opportunity, that they are unable . and cannot furnish such service to the public.:There ~ will be-no taxation of cost. , 18th day of May 1967. ~ | y | : * Joan Minor WisDomM, United States Circuit J udge. - Grireo B. Be, - - United States Circuit J udge. | Hanoi Cox, wy — States District Judge. . . -& ° wd * - _ cated; 7; So) v.* APPENDIX B ar United States District Court, Southern District of | Mississippi, Eastern Division -” Qivil) Aetion No. ‘1273 Soe? hf Doae’ Hicrway “Express, ING., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS’ Vv. ri UNITED Sates or AMERICA, ET AL, DEFENDANTS | . FINAL DECREE _ ‘Tas. cause coming on for hearing before this spe- cial statutory .court, and the’ Court having rendered | -. Its opinion ‘eontaining its findings and conclusions, of . _ even date; > | © Tr 18 ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED by the Court: - — _' (1) That the plaintiffs’: motion to enforce judg- -ment herein.is sustained to-the extent herein indi- (2). That -the well Motor ‘Freight Lines, Inc:; ‘Extension-Atlanta _ and the certificate authorized and issued pursuant thereto to such carrier arg cancelled and annulled as invalid and void; ~ . ._ -. hee _ (3). That the’ Interstate Commerce Commission, each ef its members and their successors in offiee, are _.- hereby permanently enjoined. from issuing a certifi- t decision of. the Commission, dated Sanuary ..17;: 1966, is erroneous asa matter of law, © o and such decision and consequent judgment in its Ac- _ tion Number .MO-111 383 (Sub Number 16) Bras- cate of public convenience and necessity to the Bras- , well. Motor Freight Lines, Inc., on the application re- Ly~ + 7a | _port and order of the Chitaitionion, aforesaid. The Court expressly reserves full jurisdiction to issue any _ necessary process for the proper and necessary en- forcement of ‘this decree ; : ; (4) No costs are assessed. in. this ease. ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DEGREED, this 43th day of af May A.D. 1967. 7 : Begs yer : Jou, Maws.Wepom,.* 3: a i United ‘States Circuit J udge. | GrirFIn B. BELL, ! ee -. United States Circiit J udge. eer ‘« Harotp Cox,’ | pe 8 Tt rnanta — District Judge. t : \ ~ Ss é Sade me “ rian sity a — - - APPENDIX « Interstate Commerce Commission = No. MC-1968 (Sus—No, 7) BRaswELt Freicur Loves, Ino., EXTENSION—ATLANTA (Renumbered and Reentitled) | No. MC-111383 (Sus-No. 16) . | BRASWELL Motor Freiant Linzs, Inc., Extenston— ORES ee. use : Decided January 17, 1966 REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON FURTHER CONSIDERATION MourpHy, Commissioner: - : bis By application filed April: 28; 1960, as amended, Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc., of E] Paso, Tex., . . (formerly Braswell. Freight Lines, Inc., also of El Paso) seeks a certificate of public convenience and» necessity authorizing operation, in interstate or for- ) eign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, * By order of the Commission of May 5, 1964, in No. MC_-F- 8655, Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Ine.—Merger—Braswell Freight Lines, Inc,, the merger of .the operating rights and | properties of Braswell Freight Lines, Ync., into its parent.com--. pany, Braswell Motor Freight Lines, ‘Inc., was authorized. The ~ 3 _merger was consummated on July 1, 1964, By order of the. Commission, dated August ‘18, 1964, in response to an appro- . priate’ petition therefor, the Commission substituted Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc., as applicant in the subject: proceed- ing, and ‘the Proceeding was renumbered and reentitled as described above.. ie a ae ie a nts ae (8a) \ een ee ae 9a . of general commodities, with the visual exceptions, (1) over a system of regular routes extending between Jackson, Miss. Atlanta, and Columbus, Ga., and ices Birmingham and Montgomery, Ala., as described more fully in appendix A, serving all points. within 5 miles. of the routes sought, and all points within 15 miles of. —the } principal points situated on the routes, and (2) over two specified alternate routes, between ‘Birming- . ham and Columbus, and Birmingham and Montgom- ery, respectively, also as more. fully deseribed in ap- pendix A. The numerous motor carriers and railroads named in appendix J oppose the application, and are on hereafter referred to by their short. titles. : ‘BACKGROUND OF “THE PROCEEDING | ae significant feature of this proceeding i is the exten- sive shipper support for and rigorous opposition to the application as disclosed by the voluminous record . developed. here. The heartng extended over more than 14 weeks, and testimony in support of the application _ was adduced on behalf of more than 300 shippers and receivers, as well as 13 motor carriers which intend to "provide. connecting services in conjunction with appli- eant’s. operations over the proposed routes. The appli- © cation is opposed by 21 motor carriers and 11 rail - carriers. Additionally, five freight forwa}ders and the Southern Conference of Teamsters intervened i in Op- - position to the application. . Initially, the joint board recommen ded, that the ap- © plication be denied on the grounds (1) ‘that applicant - had failed to show that it is financially fit to provide . the ‘proposed service, and (2) that applicant had failed “ to establish’ both the operational feasibility of its pro- - posed schedules, as well as a substantial need for the | proposed service in view of the existing and pee 10a ". Services available, singly and: in various combinatioris, from authorized motor carriers sefving the affected | » territories. . “In thé” prior“ report;-at~95. M.C.C. 457, division 1 reversed the joint board and granted authority to applicant ‘substantially’ as requested, denying . only those portions of the application ‘involving (1) the transportation of dangerous explosives, and (2) serv- ice at all off-route points within 5 miles of the pro- posed routes and those within 15 miles of. certain specified points located on such routes. Subsequently; petitions by certain: protestants . for reconsideration were denied by Appellate Division 1, pursuant to its order of December 28, 1964, Thereafter, the ‘protestants identified in appendix — J hereto instituted a suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, -Easb— ern Division, in Civil Action No. 1273; to set aside and enjoin the enforcement of this decision. The Dis- trict Court, in Dizie Highway Exp., Ine. v.. United » States, 242 F. Supp. 1016, set aside the report and order of division 1 for want. of evidentiary support - and adequate findings, and remanded the proceeding | for further consideration in accordance with the views expressed.in its opinion, as discussed below. By our order of July. 19, 1965, the proceeding was reopened for further consideration. _ es, | en ee _ _ THE DISTRICT COURT’S MANDATE. - aie remanding the instant ‘proceeding for further consideration, the court. was’ critical. of the prior re- port in:a number : of .respects,. Basically, the court noted that in. reversing the joint board’s recommended denial, the division in the prior report had adopted _ the statements of fact in the joint board’s report, spe- . - —_ 3 OE REN ' bil a ae satanic ha = = tia : ciffeally finding theni tobe “comprehensive and’ én: jective,” and “correct ‘in all’ material réspects * * * ‘except as modified * * *.” In this ‘connection, the court: observed that— > The commission ge dealt wie a record throughout its report in vague and nebulous “terms. Without makingany finding of facts _ from the record to support its conclusions, it ! len death wh daie ane lem in its entirety in . generalities without favoring us with any “facts: to be found in: this record to sunport the. con- clusion which they reached. Although the com- - mission expressly adopted the board’s state-_ ments of fact as being correct in all material” _+ respects; and ‘without making any specific find-, ings by the. commission which are supported by this record, the commission has nevertheless _ proceeded to disapprove the sound conclusions. (of ‘the joint board); based on such findings to the contrary. (emphasis added ) : : Ja questioning the substantiality of the record evidence herein and the adequacy of the findings in the prior oe report to support the challenged grant of duthority to applicant, the. court found that the findings of the division in the prior. report had failed to rebut spe- cifically the directly contrary findings of the joint board. relating to the following factors: (1) the oper- - ational feasibility of applicant’s proposed schedules -and its ability to maintain serviee under these sched- ules under regular operating conditions; (2) ‘the sub- stantiality and sufficiency of the transportation needs - expressed by the supporting shippers and receivers; _.and (3) the adequacy of existing services and the ef- fect ‘of a grant ‘herein ‘upon, such ‘services, especially - the ‘new motor ‘carrier ‘services of Meréury and Road- : way which were instituted’ during the ‘course of the hearmgs herein. In conchiding that it was incumbent 6 — : 12a © ; | : _ Upon the Commission to support its reversal of the : . joint board with clear and specific findings, the court © - "o stated: ‘ } .* . ’ 7 aN ss iy _ While-it is recognized that there must neees- | - sarily be some limitation upon specifics in a _ finding of faéts which influence er control com- -- mission action, it would appear .. _ord and to make its.own determination thereon. It had a positive duty ... to make its findings | and conclusions from.the record with sufficient clarity and specificity to allow for an intelli- gent grasp and understanding of the basic facts >In the record relied upon by the commission to - support its conclusions and ‘ultimate decision. . hoary, Such findings and. conclusions by the Inter-- °° j : state Commerce Commission are ‘lacking in this Bos 5a . - ,€ase* * *, [Emphasis added.] . ae _. We recognize that the evidence in the instant pro- _ . _ ceeding was set forth in abbreviated form in the prior report, and that the joint board’s statements of faét - were found materially. correct and adopted, as modi- | ‘fied, but without a spelling out‘of. the modifications’ ‘effected therein. .At the time-of the prior report, as | _ now, ‘the board’s statements ‘of fact were considered _ to represent a very able marshalling of many of the _ - . material facts. Nevertheless, upon careful reexamina- —. _ tion of all the evidence of record we deem it necessary _ and proper to modify and, to some extent, supplement _ certain segments of the joint board’s statements of - ingly, and pursuant to the court’s directive, we believe _ ‘ ized to conduct operations in the transportation of - pegular routes between. Memphis, Tenn., Jackson, - roé, and Shreveport; La., Tulsa and Oklahoma City, ' major population’ centers. Under its present .method ice between authorized points in the transportation - Begments of the subject \application to the extent described ‘13a fact .in sii to - lesiaith and emphasize cmriain ‘salient evidentiary facts which in our judgment, were not accorded sufficient, or in some instances any. weight by the board in its initial report, and whieh “also were not spelled out in the prior report. Accord- that.a detailed restatement of the evidence’ should be made herein of sufficient length and. scope, and “with more than ordinary specificity,’’ to apprise the court. and the affected parties of the total evidentiary bases upon which our ultimate findings are predicated.’ | _ APPLICANT’S PRESENT, AND PROPOSED OPERATIONS - Present operations.—Applicant presently is author-: general commodities over an extensive network of. Miss., and New Orleans, La.;6n the east, and points «__ in the.greater Los Angeles, Calif., area on the west. These routes extend (hrough Louisiana, Oklahoma, — Texas, New Mexico, “and Arizona; and authorized _ " gervice points irtlude Baton Rouge, Alexandria, Mon- Okla.,. Dallas, Fort’ Worth, Houston, San Antonio, and El Paso, Tex., and Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz., as well as numerous ‘smaller points intermediate to these of optrations, applicant renders daily scheduled sery-__. “#No controvere)) remains at this stage, of the proceeding : ‘regarding the questions of applicants financial fitness to per- form the proposed service, certain procedural matters, fortherly~’ in, iggué, or the -partial\.denial in the -prior: repdrt’ of ' certain above. Consequently, no _ consideration neéd ba given. to these matters. in of 4] of" Igs-than‘tridklosid” shipmints,’ with’ all-and-de- mand ‘sétvite ‘afforded’ for: the ‘handling of truckdvad ‘and substantial ‘volume ‘quantities, ‘Terminal facilities are’ tndintained! ‘dt ‘all ‘principal ‘poltits as well ‘as at _ Many smaller communities within its presently served > territory. A single, léased-wire, teletype-citcuit system connecting all ‘major terminals is ‘maintained for the __. dispatching ‘of ‘equipment 'and coordinating of ‘service, and 'td facilitate tracing Wwheh ‘claim probléms: atise.. Applicant ‘operates’ a stibstintial fleet of ‘equipment, stationed ‘at ‘Warious points along the ‘present routes, ‘to assure yendition of, adequate. and expeditious _ Proposed pperation—A grant of the ‘reqwested _ authority ‘would enakle applicant, to, provides new serves aia the area’ embraced by this application: The economies in handling fraffic between’ points on the Proposed routes such as partial loads: destined ‘to Birmingham and - Montg. | *+ protestants lad always met their hobdd{g out. - a Os _* transit time. The applicant did not elect:to'es- - tablish through the probative evidence the fact that they are now maintaining these same schedules over their present operation, and to aa __ > its conclusion the joint board had to rely -on = mm ‘: data taken from the numerous exhibits filed in , } e een . .,* this application where (applicant) had partici- a 3¢ \* / .patedin the movement. Analysis.,of these ship-- - * a o : ments revealed that (applicant) had notalways -° - , made ‘the sehedules on: their present opera- See ~~, °¢ tion * * *. (emphasis added) © - io ye areas _-. Whe evidentiary support ‘uhderlying and clearly war- 5a - - a ot , dissatisfaction with such services, for the reasons out- lined above, are applicable to all the supporting ship- pers and receivers regardless of the traffic uanals | pasteattis into. which their movements fall. . Substantial © population and attendant industrial growth in the involved areas.—Evidence also was pre- -sented by applicant “pertaining to the population growth and attendant wide-spread industrial expan- sion taking place in both the area in which the pro- “posed routes are located in the. southeast, as well as the areas presently served by applicant. Appendix D. heréto sets forth, in chart form, a comparison in the growth of populations of the counties in which the. principal -points ‘on the ‘proposed and present ‘routes ate located opeurring between 1940:and 1960; (Appli: . fia cant sciticipates that this same economic growth would - | “ we - ‘ oa . \ >t ° s oe | ‘ +? 7 a 2 ) 30a enable. protestants generally to mairitain their present © volumes of traffic despite sonie diversion to applicant.) _ ' Degree of utilization by supporting witnesses of © existing services.—Despite the joint board’s finding to the contrary, ANCE analysis of the record clearly shows that a substantial number of the supporting shippers and receivers have utilized the services of the available single-line carriers as well as of numerous _ feasible combinations of carriers affording joint or. .: multiple-line services in an unsuccessful effort to move their traffic.in a- more expeditious manner possible. Many of these witnesses, in addition, have experi- mented with- -various gateway routings in order to:sub-- / ject: their traffic to a minimum of delays and other difficulties experienced 1 in the handling: of their traffic . by existing carriers, also to no avail. The only services ' that have not been utilized to any appreciable degree - are the newly instituted operations of Mercury and Roadway between the Atlanta-Birmingham area, on | - the one hand, and; on the other, Dallas-Fort Worth .. ‘and Houston, commenced during’ the “course of the ‘Hearings herein. Some ‘combinations of services and a routings have not been tested . or utilized to any ma--- - terial extent because they are considered patently im- soon practical as involving excessive circuity of routings or . an excessive number. of interchanges enroute. Further, @ number of the supporting witnesses have given up _ their efforts’ to improve their transportation service ‘and, while paying the freight charges. or reserving the right to control the routing, have permitted their ship- ‘ments to be routed by their consignors in.the hope tat the,latter will be able to obtain a more expedi- _ tious tleetoriation service. _- Significantly, an’ appreciable: number of apg sup- porting witnesses are familiar with applicant’s present scheduled service pertormed for them o on Gizeet. move- ‘- | Sla.. Q ments of their traffic as well as under joint. or mul- _‘. tiple-line arrangements, as described in apperidicés C_ ‘ - and J, and such service is characterized as expeditious ' alnd dependable. In- connection with the movement of | traffic in which applicant has participated under joint or multiple-line ‘arrangements, it appears that in many . instances, as reflected in the chart contained in ap- pendix C, the transportation difficulties experienced occur while. the freight is in the possession of other. participating carriers beyond applicant’s lines. Ac- cordingly, the involved shipper and receiver witnesses support applicant’s proposed operation in an éffort to obtain improvements in both the single and joint-line ‘services now available. While they recognize that ap- plicant’s proposal will not.provide a panacea for all-of their transportation problems in every instance, they consider that the proposed service would be free from ’ many of the deficiencies in the services of, and superior to the services afforded by, the existing carriers. ' As noted, 13 motor carriers support the application in order té compete and participate more effectively . in a greater volume of traffic handled to and from the areas they serve and those proposed to be and pres- ently served by applicant and beyond. If the: applica- © tion is granted, they propose to enter into appropriate interchange arrangements with * applicant to handle - such traffic in an improved joint-line service, interlin- ing at such points as Atlanta, ERNE Mont- gomery, Los Angeles, and Phoenix. OPERATIONS OF OPPOSING PARTIES ey “Opposing motor carrier. —Briefly, the opposing mo- ) tor carriers fall into two groups défined by the terri- - tories they are authorized to serve. One group is com- _ of those carriers holding authority to transport : Cy a 7 (32a general commodities over’ both regular. and irregular ~ routes in the three. States in which the proposed routes . are located: Some of these carriers operate over routes _ which traverse or parallel segments of the. proposed — . routes in Alabama, Georgia, and Mississippi. The-gar-~ - riers: in the second group. hold operating’ authorities _ paralleling portions. of applicant’s present as well as proposed. routes. Collectayely,.. these earriers provida some single-line service as well as considerable joint- line service’ throughout, the, affected: areas, utilizing the Memphis, Jackson, or New Orléans gateways, re- , spectively. Our reappraisal of. that; portion of thee. record’ involving protestants’ operations persuades us” that: the Joint board’s summaries concerning each - “opposing carrier, as set forth in appendix F to its . report, fail to disclose a complete portrayal of the respective services afforded by these carriers in the af- ' . fected areas, and of f their conipetitive positions in such - areds. In the circumstances, and mindful of the court’s _ directive,a ‘comprehensive restatement involving a:de- -. geription of the authorities of, and. types ‘of service afforded by each of these carriers is.set forth in ap- pendix K, and need not be repeated. here, except to - note that none of. the motor protestants | ‘can provide the extensive sitigle-line-service proposed, by applicant between points on the ,routes applied for, on the one | - hand, ‘apd, on the other, points on applicant’s present ‘routes in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas inter- ‘ mediate to Jackson and'to Dallas-Fort. Worth, | Opposing railrouds and. freight forwarders. —Rail : services, which extend over a-‘rietwork of routes ihromebort the ‘proposed area, and services -provided ~ der freight forwarder arrangements, generally have orded slow and inconsistent transit-time operations _ to the extent utilized by many éf the supporting ship- pers. dnd | Teceivers, The operations of the involved | — 3 | | ay 4 ' and, if found excessi freight forwarders init are. “the equivalent of per those of the opposing railroads, because they utilize’ _. rail carload service and’ rates: from origins, to. break- - bulk points, from 1 which motor carrier service is used for distribution. Urider forwarder arrangements, suffi- cient. shipments ini ially must be consolidated, into a _ rail carload before the rail. cars are dispatched ' mM. reg- ular train service. | Opposing shippers —Three eae presented evi-. Fi in opposition to the proposed operation. Two are located at Columbus, and one at Montgomery, and — collectively they distribute their merchandise at points . throughout the affected terfitories. They generally ‘ have found the single and joint-line services afforded “sf by Dixie and some of the other presently available car- riers to be adequate for their requirements, although - one of the shippers at Columbus has been receiving customer complaints — regarding Dixie’s transit-time ’ service, This shipper is not familiar wifh the transit- time handling: of sare gael by the carriers utilized, would utilize applicant’s, p®- - posed service instead. The opposing Montgomery - shipper honors no other customer routing but “Dixie,” ‘and would not be willing to test applicant’s proposed mS service regardless of, the quality. ‘of. its SRE RHM., | = ‘DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS a vauneeiiaias ‘of this magnitude, itis: critical to 7 a fair and proper determination of the merits of. the See. . instant application that we not be overwhelmed by _» the-sheer numerical abundance of either supporting shippers and receivers or opposing carriers. Rather, we must-concern ourselves with determining the-extent and reasonableness of the overall transportation needs established by the segment. of.the shipping ‘and re- , Goyeee he ‘ ceiving public asserting a neda for this , applicant’ service and the ability of existing service in the area to meet the requirements. of these shippers. Keeping these, danientals in focus, we are con: -Vinced upon furt er consideration of all evidence of record that. applicant has met its burden of establish- ing a clear and substantial: need for the proposed “service, to the extent set forth’ in the findings herein. © The dissatisfaction with existing transportation facili- - ‘ties on the part of-the affected shipping and receiving public supporting the instant application stems’ from © several * distinct-sgrvice deficiencies experienced by these businesses on a recurring basis. In part, these deficiencies relate to pickup arid delivery delinquencies impeding the expedition. with which the freight of many of the affected ‘shippers and receivers has been " handled. Another source of dissatisfaction on the part of numerous supporting -witnesses concerns excessive handling in transit. of their traffic in many instances .. - under joint. or multiple-line arrangements, resulting in delays through interchange, loss and damage to shipments of fragile and perishable lading, and trac- ing and claims difficulties. The service deficiency most frequently experienced by the supporting shippers - and receivers, however, and upon which their support of the instant application substantially i is predicated, involves the inconsistent and excessive transit times to which their traffic is subjected. In fact, the extraor- dinary amount of support’ for applicant’s proposal . by the affected segment; of the shipping and receiving ‘public can be characterized as impressive, not from . any numerical abundance of witnesses involved, but, pather; from the substantial volume of traffic moving between the points and over the routes: affected by the ‘instant application which their businesses repre- ~ sent and which a preponderance of thé evidence _ x & s « SiR 35a éatablishes: is not Bean handled with the dispateh. or .. consistency. that reasonably may be> expected under normal operating conditions. — We believe that the shipping and receiving. public is entitled. to: consistent scheduled ‘transportation | servi¢e so that the arrival and departure times ‘of their, shipments can be. predicted with reasonable certainty. Otherwise, such vital matters affecting the conduct .and sales promotion of their businesses ‘as _> dmaintenance of production schedules, control of lim-’ ited inventories, ability to, purchase at ,markets . affo quality merchandise’ at reasonable prices — and from which adequate service ‘is available, actom- modating customer requirements for timed deliveries, and taking advantage of short term discourits and payment after arrival of goods must suffer. See, e.g., “MR. & R. Trucking Co. Extension—Atlanta, Ga., 82 —. M.C.C. 473, aff’d. Atlanta-New Orleans Motor Freight ; _ v. United States, 197: F. Supp. 364. The instant record ‘is teplete with instance wherein the supporting ship- pers and receivers have been and are critically ham- pered, in the conduct of one or more of these vital factors affecting their respective businesses because of the described deficiencieS in -the transportation - services utilized. As a result; the efforts of.a majority . Ne of these shippers and receivers to remain effectively —~ conipetitive in the areas of their. operations, and to exploit new sources of supply and markets of distri- bution, haye been materially impedéd. In addition, the severe economic harm: suffered by a marked ‘number of the supporting witnesses through loss of accounts and orders, attributable to the deficiencies experienced -in the transportation facilities utilized, further and = yividly attests to the validity and urgency of the suip- porting shippers’ and receivers’ desire for a more expeditious, and consistent motor service of the type ' 277-878—67——4 __ ‘ : ~ ; 360 here oan Considering - the experiences of: these _ supporting, shippers, it is apparent that their com- a - plaints concerning existing transportation services ' .are well-founded and reasonable. : We are fully cognizant that the affected a areas are. served bya large, number of. carriers authorized to — perform operations. throughout various portions of ‘these territories. In this connection, however, and despite. the joint. board’s contrary finding in this respect, we ‘have found tliat ‘the record clearly estab- lishes. that a substantial number of the supporting shippers and receivers have made a conscientious and - serious effort to utilize all of the direct motor services, . . with the exception of the relatively new Roadway and ~ Mercury operations, considered separately below, as well as: numerous feasible combinations | of motor sérvice | available, in. an attempt: to improve their transportation. facilities and expedite the handling © of their. traffic, without achieving. this result. Simi- larly, long-distance Shipments, frequently are ten dered to. various rail-carriers and freight forwarders, - but, the same service deficiencies: generally are experi- enced in such instances. Complaints about all of the described service deficiencies ‘have been registered by. ° s;@ IMmarked ‘number ofthe involved shippers and re- eeivers experiencing these transportation problems on . a recurrent basis, to at least 30 of the carriers utilized _ with no. appreciable improvement. in _ these omgntial ' elements of service... ; Where, as here, both sinatsline and the most fea- sible combinations of jéint and multiple-line services, as well as the services afforded by the.rails and under freight; -forwarder arrangements, have . been investi- - gated and utilized, by an appreciable number of sup- porting witnesses, and found wanting. in’ the material | _ Tespectg hereinabove described, we consider this to be v taf” — 378 “* caihinai representative effort. on the part. of the. involved shippers and receivers to enable us accurately to evaluate, the overall quality of the existing | trans- portation services in-the involved areas.. In our opin- . . ion, protestants have not demonstrated. that. they can | be depended .upon to: provide. the: type of service of — which they. claim to be capable, at least for the sub- stantial. segment of the shipping. and receiving public represented: in this proceeding, We conclude, there-. - fore, that the conduct and promotion of the businesses of the supporting witnesses are being hampered by - material deficiencies in. existing transportatien facili- ties; ‘that protestants’ overall services provided for these; witnesses in the affected areas have not meas- ured upto a quality. of service. that can be classified - as reasonably adequate ; and that. au grization of the * proposed service will inject needed improvements in -” the transportation services presently available to the . supporting shippers and. receivers .in these areas. There is ample evidence that many of the sup- porting: witnesses are satisfied users of applicant’s present operation, enjoying consistent. and expeditious . _ scheduled seryice between’ the points now served by ~ applicant. A® noted,:no showing of record has been made that. Mplicant will: be unable to afford similar - service between the proposed points, and between such ‘points and those on and beyond its present routes. On ‘the contrary, we have found that the feasibility of the- proposed schedules has-been reasonably established. We are persuaded that operations under the proposed service will: result in significant reductions in the transit times presently consumed by. existing transpor- tation facilitieg in handling shipmetits ‘moving both in ‘single and joint-line service between points in the af- - fected areas, and in multpple-line service between . . «2 en OL TE —— ate points ‘in the affected areas, on the one naan and, on the other,. points beyond,* to the substantial benefit of the supporting witnesses. In‘ addition to affording an expeditious and dependable’ service for this segment of the affected shipping and receiving public, the pro- posed service also will enable-many of these witnesses to increase their sources of supply and. markets of dis- tribution, with an accompanying and substantial in- crease in.their volumes of traffic moving from and to points in these areas shown to be ee marked ‘population growth. . ‘Having determined that a need exists for the pro- | | posed sérvice, and that the overall service pattern in . the involved areas is below the level of quality: to which the affected shipping and reeeiving public rea- sonably ‘is entitled, there remains for consideration the, question of whether a. grant of the requested. authority would so endanger ox impair the operations of existing: carriers, as claimed by them, as to be con- trary to the. public ‘interest. In discussing this aspect of the proceeding, one significant factor -should be noted at the outset, namely that the potential: volume _- of. traffie which the proposed service reasonably can be expected to generate in the affected areas -will ‘add : substantially . to the already heavy ‘volume of freight . * The traffic of the. -supporting witnesses’ presuatly moving be- tween points in the affected areas, on the one land, and, on the other, points beyond the scope of appli¢ant’s present and pro- posed routes, is that traffic to which the prior report had refer- "ence in its finding that “*.* * a large percentage of shipments moving between points in the considered territories still require three (on) four in en route.” (95 M.C.C. 457 at 463), whieh finding was enged by: the court, While the proposed service, if initiated, undoubtedly will reduce the number of in- _terchanges required to handle, such traffic, this is but one factor in our overall Il consideration and resolution of the issues herein. & ness from New @rleans; and none ‘from Memphis and Houston, were preserited, because applicant’s proposal does not contemplate a service that would appreciably benefit shippers and ‘receivers at these particular points. os, Further, the fae a clearly supports the finding in the prior report that other carriers se . x involved areas, such as.Dixie, for example, hay ~ fos a —_—— + — > rf 7 ; Sees : | -bihtier” to Featite’ gubstantian’ nieientied in’ ‘teamn’ aid _ revyenués;" ‘oF, ‘at! ‘Yeast’ Haive'' ‘gbntinued ‘to opérate at - - the’ same fever’ ‘éf' business, even ‘subsequent: ‘to theau- _ thorizatidn “of additional eompetitive: ‘sétvieds" from tine’ to‘ time inéluding the new Roadway and: Mereury - operativiis! In the’ ‘circumstancés, we are unable’ to . discerii' ‘any: evidence ‘of record’ that’ “indicates with — appreciable precision the voltime: ‘of ‘traffic 'that” pro- ~téstants other than Roadway and Mereniy would lose, ,and to “whiat': degree theit operations would be ‘ad- versely’ affected, 1! the’ proposed ‘service’ is instituted: — With’ ‘respect ‘ to the’ ‘newly. instituted” igérviees Of .. Roadway’and’ Mercury, the large volume of Atlarita . “and Birmirghan—Dallas and Fort Worth traffic gen-. erated by these expedited services ‘shortly after their : initiation,’ and’ ‘primarily handled for ‘shippers’and = - | receivers dther than ‘those supporting ‘the instant’ ap- ' plication, attests! dogertly: to. the existence ofa sub-- | stantial ‘ainount’ of traffic: at these ‘points ‘aloné that can: materialize | through’ the institution ‘of ‘at. ‘ini- ._ __ proved ‘tratisportation: service. We have~ pointed’ ‘out — - previously ‘that’ the institution of applicant’s proposed servide reasonably tah be expected to generate ‘a: sini: larly’ substantial ‘volume’ of ‘traffic on ‘the part of at _ : least the supporting shippérs and’ receivers here; ‘both . in the ‘area’ served by Roadway ‘arid Mercury, and in _ thé’other area’ affected ‘by the’ application. We are — cognizant, of course, . ‘that ‘the ‘ services of Roadway ‘ atid Mercury. instituted’ at' the! ‘time of the hearings . --Herditi have ‘afforded ‘neéded improvetients in existing — ___ series ‘for: an’ ‘appreciable ‘segment of the’ shipping, 14 ‘public whose ‘fréight moves’ betweett the | ‘Atlanta and Birmingham area, on, the one hand;' ‘and, oti ‘the’ other, the ‘points ‘ti’ the east Texas atta served - by these” ‘cartiers. ‘Nevertheless, Tas’ demonstrated : overail reserit ‘aiid: potential: ‘voluttie ot seashie avails en sh pt corvinees "is that the opera: abe. at tidiis ‘of Roadway aiid’ Mereury do not) répresént:a suf: ficient quantum: of. motorgeat ier sérviee to! meet all of - the establialied ‘transportation’ réquiremerits’ ‘of the.af-. ome . fected shipping: and-‘receiving public'in this ¢o . Gially’ ‘expanding ‘area }: ‘and, therefore, ‘that’ the ini: tiation of, the proposed ‘servive' itr this area would be - inthe) public ‘interest; Compare Roadway Exp., Ino., i. Ext: —Birmingham, oxo Hotston, 82'-M.0.C::.689 705.' Further, ‘the’ new op: ein SEE tastants offer no atswer to the transportation diffi- 7 culties. experienced by a’ large segment of the suppert-. ing -shippers' and’ receivers at: ‘points ‘in Mississippi, s Louisiana, ' ‘western ‘Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Cali- - fornia, atid portions Por Alabama, whieh are not served directly hy either of these carriers.’ bei In the circumstances, ‘we - loasehe that the dear - and substantial: benefit: to: the affected shipping and ' -receiving public that would result from making avail- able the improved. service here’ proposed warrants the . grant, of authority. set.forth below. The reasonable . egmpetition that the proposed. service, can be. expected — a in all of the affected, areas should, in- ; arn a sérve. as.effective detérrent to future deterio- . rations service which. are contrary to. the public interest, Moreover, we: are. convinced _ that carriers » sueh, as, Roadway: ard Mercury. haye the power. in : their hands, through . femur goad to_ offer. expedited . sexvice in their authorized areas, to minimize any Mees 9, trafiic lk Pay oui ~gervice, | route;. ‘authority, grain Seta ay i air } ud COREE and) betyygen ‘Bin ingham - 1 2 AERA tet te ne a . > a) . al a ‘Spealiaaienes on the: wisn that. ‘i hasic tests, ‘of = @ '_ alternate-route’ ‘proof -liave net been met.. The fact . that applicant. presently | does not have appropriate’ , p \service routes. ta- which, the ‘proposed. alternate routes '. Ore ? at}: iii by: rer Aixttiet consideration, we find that the present | and future public: eényenierite and necessity requiré . Operation’ ‘by applicant, dy interstate or foreign’ corti? general conitnoities WB oy ‘those of uriusual’ nf Bening be = sikkso dpe bey ater 1G ie From Fae Gren f tee 0 = ‘to the __junetion ‘of U. OSH E 11, thente over U.S.'E 5 3 a eag r way 28 to’ & ‘gp « a. 7 ie ham, ‘Ala; over U.S. eo un to’ Attalbe, ie : ones over U.S. Highway 411 to junction of. U.S, _ © Highway 41, thence over U.S. Highway. 41 to Atlanta, '. - @a, and return: over the: same’ route, serving: all | intermediate points; (3). between Jackson, Mjss..and =. Atlanta, Ga., from Jackson, Miss., over U.S..Highway, | - 80. to Tuskegee, Ala, thence over U.§. Highway. 29 “a ag > . té@ Atlanta, Ga., and «return. over: the same. route, | a | gérving all intermediate points; (4) between: Tuskegee, Ala., ‘and Atlanta, Ga.,. from Tuskegee, : -Ala., over a - . U.S. Highway 80 to Columbus, Ga., thence over ‘Alter- Bi nate -U.S.. Highway 27 and Georgia Highway ‘85 to ata Manchester, Ga.,. thenée’ over Georgia Highway 85E (= to Woodbury, Ga., thence over Géorgia Highway 85 to Atlanta, Ga., ‘and teturn over the*same route, . - serving” all intermediate points; and (5) vefween - _ Opelika, Ala., and Columbus, Ga., from Opelika, Ala., . over U.S. Highway 280 to Columbus, ‘Ga., and -return over the same route, ‘ser¥ing all intermediate points. _ We further find that: pe sot is fit, willing, and able properly: to perform such service and to conform | tothe wequirements of the Interstate Commerce Act - « . _. and our rules and yegulations thereynder;thatacer-—— =i ss _ . tifieate authorizing such operations should be granted, | a _ and that the application in ore Reepeets should Ph be-denied.., | es Upon - compliance by aatnlieaas with the Santa ments. of sections 215, 217, and 221(c) of the act and “a _ With. our rules and ‘regulations’ thereunder, within thes = 3 time specified in.the order entered ela herein Wier - an appropriate certificate. will be; beet di An, sppnipriatd order will be hues 3 pays While I agape with, the majority that ay ig no- easonable heals for approving the alternate route au- Me. Nw e s as | Ge thority sotight by apni the. grounds saihdiia in > : | Rae apport of denial ‘theréof, among others, ate equally eee ct to-warrarit denial of:the application’ in. its i ae ty. The grant’ of authority is. now predicated a | . & detailed restatement of the evidence - se, Bo of f etificient length Bnd scope: . 2? (emphasis added) | ‘a ‘Leen "fe apprise the Court and the parties of the'total evi. Renee ae | lary facts which were accorded sufficient “weight” port.the ultimate findings. I have’ no: dispute - 7 2 | ah the proposition that the fact finding ‘tribunal ‘has wl Bas. 3 exclusive’ jurisdiction to determine the weight to ‘ac- ~ i ae cord the’ évidencé if the absence of.error as a matter = of law. Such ‘weight, however, is not to be predicated ; pon the size of the record, the number of witnesses it favor of or in, opposition to. the authority s sought, the length ‘of time eonsumed » ‘by: hearings, briefs and other .pleadings. or ‘similar other matters, but upon ee . €videntiary facts of record to‘support a determination : tae 7 that’ public’ vénvenienceand necessity ‘requires’ ap-_ mn oe _ _proval'of the proposal: The conclusion herein reached -- ox re Gs not, in ‘my ‘view, on such facts and bee : _____._}--—_ constitutes errpr’as 8 matter of:law: >. | : Spe inj ‘the grant of authority: will enable this eas a licant' to” perform Single-line and conn line - | 2 stevie which ‘has been and is being provided by.exist ing-carriers, both singly and collectively, upon’ a: rea- - ponably adequate and similar basis. “Prensit time and ee facilities offered. by presently authorized mo- oe 006d: However, protestants, more ‘current service ex- oe - hibits gene ect more favorable. transit: times ’ than those. ited’ by ‘applicant’s’ ‘suppérting ‘wit- . nesses. for peti during ‘1959’ and 1960. ‘Applicant’s caer ae ' . ‘offer to’ provide” additional ’ operating” ‘schedules is sects a upon’ the’ speculative | ‘contingency of what : ae as ° Sale the vehusits of traffic warrants, On, thi! ‘tle hand) : many of -the’protestants have made. this evéeality,grith -& corresponding snbstantial. increase in, the. volume of traffic handled. Under such. cireumstances, most allega: | tions of protestants’ inferior service te: applicant's ie supporting shippers are contrary to: fact, Where sueh did oceur, they .were exceptions. to protestants’ cus- tomary. and lawfully required practices and: sition tions under the act to provide reasonably. adeqiiate . service in the movement of less-than-truckload ship- ments., I ‘would, thergfomy deny the appheatidh 5 in. ats . entirety. | hoe CoM MISSIONER Sanam dissenting: ae _ Ido not agree that, the exhibits conned iw. the ‘supporting shippers purporting to show ‘‘the over-all- pattern of transit-time service existing in the affected _ areas’’ were ‘‘¢ompiled through the use-of-valid.sam- pling techniques.’’ Moreover, the quoted statement of . _‘a supporting witness ‘“‘“* * * the. transit times ** * were ‘not checked by. me. when the; bill was pulled” (emphasis supplied) is meaningless. In my opinion a — ' need .for service moe Sed. ais an ie engin ae 7 not atts established. . A pendix A Authority sought: e | » Operations in. interstate or foreign commerce as a. cemmon carrier by motor -véhicle over regular routes. transporting general. commodities, except com modities of unusual value, livestock, household. goods, commodities. in bulk,’ and those _requiring., special equipment, over the following des¢ribed routes, sefv- ing all. intermediate. Leen and: een. -off-route hy Sverre n a ‘Regular Routes: . - Between Jackso _Mass., and Athoites: Gas: KY Roi Jaékson, ., over U.S: Highway 80'to the. : junetion of “U.S. Highway 11, thence - over U8 ; Highway 11 to Birmingham, Ala:, thence-over US. . Highway 78 to. Atlanta, Ga., and 1 ‘over the same --Poute, serving all interm points and all off-route points: within’5 ‘miles Of the inditated portions of: the ; fied highway and all off-route points within Meridian, Miss.; ae, nee, m, Ala., and Atlanta, Ga. : 7 ~ Between Birmingham, Ala., and Atlanta, Ga. : ee From: ‘Birmingham Ala., over U S: Highway 11 to. a, ‘Ala., thence over U.S. Highway: 411 to: june ion of U.S. ’ Highway 41, thence over U.S. Highway y, 41 to ‘Atlanta, Ga:, and return. over the’ same route, o ors serving : all intermediate points and all off-route points within 5 miles of ‘the indicated portions of the above. specified highways and all off-route ints within 15 miles of Birmingham and Gadsden, Ala., and erorag] Gere Between ‘Frickadin: Miss., and ‘Atlante, Ga.: Tuskegee, Ala., thence over U.S. Highway 29, to Atlanta, Ga., and: return over the same route, serving all intermediate points and all off-route points within 5 miles-of the indicated portions of the above specified | _ highways’ and. all-off-route points ‘within 15 miles of Meridian, Miss, a and ‘Montgomery, ‘Ala., and — Gay?" si ecitah 7 | «Between ‘Tuskegee, Ala., ‘and Atlanta, Gai FRCS | ‘Prom: Tuskegee, Ala.,over U.S. Highway 80 to . : Cotatsibes, G@a;thenep over Alternate U.S.’ ‘Highway 27 and Georgia Highway 85 to Manchester, Ga., thence over —— — 85E to ne Ga., > ’ From Jackson, Miss., over U.S. Highway 80 te i a Ee aS Ae om then sco cia ible 66 bo Aina; at + Agent ovek the! gaia fone, serving all intermediate - points and all “off-route: poitits ‘within 5 milés' of ‘the _. tridicated portions ‘of the above: spetified highways aiid” — ail ff-route poirits | within be ‘anilet: of: Cotantin’ ‘and z Atlanta, Ga. ‘fps cay eit “Between Opelika, Ala. sane onkeina: Gali « e From’ Opelika; Ala. over U8! mueepiden. ‘to gt i Cotininbus , and, return over thé Same route; serv- - ing’: ‘all Anitermediate points’ and all -offtreute points within! 5 niles of the indicated: portions of t a above specified. highway and all, off-rouite’ points w r 15 illee of Columbus, Ga. applicant seeks iatiniirthe' $6" operate’ ove the 3 following alternate — for te sappear7 B convenience i: dice ae - : : ALTERNATE ROUTES ‘Salonen Birminghata, Ala.,. and ces estes . _From Birmingham,, Ala., over,.U.S; Highway 31 ae Montgomery, Ala., and return over the same route. Between Birmingham, Ala., and Columbus, Ga.: From Birrhingham, Ala,,. over US. Highway. 280 : At Cphntvas, Ga,,-aind return over the e same route. BN : A ppendiz B © Sunmary of appendix 21 to eaehibit % ahead by — . .«, applicant, showing transit-time service performed by ss Gpplicant.on. 1,745 direct and joint-line movements .,. for representative periods between pomie.,en parti nent segments of its presently authorized routes. _ Appendix 21, sponsored by applicant, (fhe: first 12 Y pages) is an ‘abstract of - representative , shipments abeing between Dallas, Tex., and J. ackson, Miss., dur-— Be . ing thesmonthe of Apeil and: June, 1960, in applicant’ . operations. The purpose of these first 12 pages af the — exhibit, iste show applicant’s experience .in’n , ing its scheduled service performed: on traffic moving ‘between Dallas and Jackson, a distance of 4f1,miles. The distance between Dallas and’ Jackson, is compar able to that between Jackson and Atlanta, Ga.,Qn ithe — 819 shipments jmoving: between Dallas and Jackson:for the period reported, as shown in, this exhibit, the serv-- ine is overnight, except that a shipment dispatched on | ‘ridlay: moved. over, Saturday. and. Bunda end,was delivered ons Monday. "The last 15 pages of appendix 21:also, show rep- _* resentative.shipments; for March 1960; moving: be- tween other. points.on. applicant’s. existing routes, ip *° order to further establish that applicant maintains : its present, scheduled. service. (as set. forth in ap- lices. 7 and 8 to exhibit’ 7) over. these routes.. The serv ected in ‘calendar ‘days “is ‘a ‘follows: , “ay. From El Paso ‘to Los Angeles, the service: tras Mat besa! hari fe 55 ‘shipments, ‘except where Sétur- y and’ y, intervened, ‘the’ service was. third ‘pocaig delivery on’ ‘Monday: s* es (2) From Los Angeles to ‘Dallas, the eidtrA0h? ti third morning on. 15k shipments, _Tegardless of | whether or not a Sunday or a Saturday and Sunday “\intervened sand ‘on 40 hients where Saturday and ‘Sunday intervened, and delivery was made. on Mon- day morning; the service was fourth morning delivery. 18) From Dallas ‘to: Tueson, the service on’52 ship- ments “was second morning; and.on ‘20 shipments, third morning where a Saturday and Sunday, inter- “vened and the . shipment was. delivered. on Monday ; ‘and thurth am morning on 8 shipeenes where 3 Satar ton. © : ; 7 Mot ~ day end Sunday intervened. and delivery was made - - on Monday.’ rom’ ‘Dallas: to’ Phoeniz, the derrhde ‘on rst was second’ morning ‘delivery} and ‘on’ 24 shipments} whére a Sunday @f a’Satutiay ‘and ‘Sun- day intervened, and delivery was made’ on Monday, wre ie ‘thé. service was third morning delivery. . ele ‘(5) From Houston td Eos Angelés, the deere’ ae Siac 67 shipments was third morning even though a Sun- -’ day or a Saturday and Suntlay may have intervened, and on 17 .shipments, the service was. fourth morn- : ing where a Saturday .and Sunday intervented, and “ae the shipments were delivered on Monday. . . (6) From Los ‘Angeles to El. Paso, on 140 ‘ehip- nients the sérvice was second morning. and on 3 ship- ments the service was third morning. On 8 shipments - the service was next day, and on 18 shipments, where a Saturday and ‘Sunday intervened and a shipment was delivered | on Monday, the service was- third morning. “ % (7) From Dallas to Los Angeles, on 201 adituendats ‘the service was third morning whether or iot'a Sun- - day or Saturday and Sunday intervened. On 12 ship- . ments, the service was second morning with a Sunday _ intervening, and on 56 shipments where delivery was — * made. on’ Monday, and a Saturday and Sunday inter- ° Yened, thé service was fourth pena | 4 s joint, or multip 23? 7 A in € transit time on its, segment of ine movements in which it par- .. Hetpated, as, shown on. service eahibits of 40 of. the. supporting witwesses.. V's ° a ¢ heat: : re Exhibit, ; : mmo ve Paint & oyplv Oo- simovercsansbiiens “Montgomery, ARosanse: peters ‘m0, 2 shipments 206. Zar*_ shreveport $0 Jckdon, ai _ Ineloding Saturdsys end Sundays: ¢ A " ‘Craieler PARR DD, onnconcacencecsseccscsccqeryecese Montgomery, Als. ...- “td 135 ” pepe, 4452 “2 thiipmentel.s0°@aye-New Orleans to Salles ths) andr * G0 miles). s reese e ocr iat ‘Montgomery Serum. Caching FET Siniijeisety: ate Chas ae | 5201 -" 2 shipments-1.00 day-Dalles to Jackson,exclnding = “eget vy Eee es tile . Saturdays and Sundeyx 1 cece geen day- . : >: Dallas to M>mphis. ih ie as Southeastern Sanitary Supply Company Pease ..« Montgomery, Ada. ...--. - 176 5628 Sp ee aM pa ae pia” arr Comey: dpveccccedpececracesoaece ‘Tucson, Arig.-......--- 39 7487 ered on ia. a ., United ere looney 1202 A Los Anges, Clit... @m 24 72,580 Jefferson.....>.... . Birmingham.......... 034,864 «186 = 558,928 = 21.5". 450,930 Scalitieanmelanconan _ JOpelika......2.22.. 40,754 104 45,0738 236 36,455 - \@ Auburn . a ' Marengo. ........---- Demopolis. ........-.. 27,008 _ &1 . 20,404 17.5 35, 736 Montgomery... ....... Montgomery .......- 168, 210 21.8 138, 965. 21.5 114,420 Ruseell..........-.-- Phenix City..,...:--. 46,351 148 40,366 128 © 35,775 . Tuscaloosa........-.. Tuscaloosa. ......-.-- 100,047, 15.9 94, 002 23.7 76, 036 | eR 1,284,849 ........ RIE. neecsees: 919, 496 ne SRO Phoenix............-- * 663;510 100.0 881,77. 782 186,193 TS EN 265,009 By 1,216 72,838 RET Stall IE 46,235 651 28,008 44.9 19,328 - i ~~ cat 975,405 2.4. 800,902 ......... 278,387 Cation : Los Angeles.......... Los Angeles.........- 6,088,771 45.5 4,151,687 40.0 2,785,648 ee SE BDI pecmcgnsnnee 703,925 225.6 *216,224 65.4 130, 760 a, 6,742,006 ........ 4,367,911 ......... 2,916,408 SS Eto Marietta............. 114.1% . 847 81,880 6.6 «38,272 Dele... (Atlanta_.........-.- 256,782 883 136,30 669 86,042 I cictlacnisaken Eo adenine 556,326 17.5 478,572 .5' 302,886 Floyd Rome '€2, 130 99 @290 120 $6141 Muscoges.....:...-- -- Columbas.......... -- 188,02 «= 8h4- «108,088 S| 75,404 ORE iovcccshisécnne LeGrange.-.....--.s- 47, 189 —5.3 49, SAL 13.6. 43,879 Total......------ 1,202,206 -...-.20 0 haan 608, 614 aie Te RR ; FS . . ? o ‘ : 2 a ae . me CHART SHOWING COMPARISON IN GROWTH OF POPULATION OF COUNTIES IN. WHICH PRINCIPAL POINTS ON PROPOSED AND PRESENT ROUTES OF APPLI- AR IEE ORT TE n? ns renee neiles Aah 3 Percent : ° County. , City - 2. +8. 1050 1940 > increase . _ Louisiens . > % (Parishes) Caddo NORTE (Shreveport .......... 228, 859 26.8 176,547 17.5 150,208 +, (Bossier City Nee ; ° : ie on East Baton Rouge... (Baton Rouge........ 230, 058 45.4 ° 158,236 70.0 88,415 West Baton Rouge... tc . Seasenens - 14,796 26.1 11, 738 42 ° 11,98 Jefferson.........-.... (New Orleans......... 208,700 10.0 103,878 1060 ~ 60,427 ’ Ofleans........-..:-- Ban age” ~ giles 627,525° 910.0. 570,445 15.3 496,587 Yineoin.:........--.. PRMIOR. ccbicccegacd 98,535 10.7 25, 782 40 ©6984, 790 Ouachita...........-. Momres...p.~5.. e Texas ‘ So ccniinabien San Antonio. .......- 687, 151- 37.3 500, 460 480. ~ 338,176 ‘Prescs............:.: IE canbaconapnon 44, 805 16.9 38, 300 423° 26,977 Dallas_....../....:-: A a5: statemtinny 951, 627 54.8 . 614,700 -5AS. 908,566 Denton........-- [a re 47, 482 14.7 41,365 2.9 - 38,688 SS ee ee ae , Odeasa.............-4 90,905 116.1 42,102 17.7 18/083 ST Pied.....-.--..22. El Paso-........ neevne 314,070 61.1 194, 968 488 181,087 es oe Houston . ...:-.-.---- 1,243,158 S41 806701 S25 528,98 ; * Howard........../.- Big Spring. ::...-.-.-: . 40,139 50.2 26, 722 27.8 22,990 MoLennan........:-- See ee 150, 001 153 - 130,194 27.8 101,88 x Reeves....- ee lle RR | unhasonen’ 17, 644 50.2 11, 745 6.7 +806 Tarrant _........---- Fort Worth... ........ 538, 495 49.1 961,268 @0.2 225, 821 . | a Ee Abilene. .......:----+ 101, 078 50.5 68,370 48.5 . 44,147 Midland. ........-- EE 67,717. 1626 25,785 1220 ~» 11,722 Ne , Dilla tae ©” Siesta 9 957,854 _.....-- 1, 884, 787 *Source—1961 Rand-McNally saniuesm U.8. Buresu of Census, US. : Census of Popalation— 1940, 1950, and 900. — . 54a a o ! Appendiz E 03 AtwoaR TARY + | ALPHABETICAL LIST BY STATE AND CITY OF THE CITIES IN WHICH BUPPORT- a. ING 8HIPPERS AND RECEIVERS ARE LOCATED, THE NUMBER OF INDUSTRIES : AND BUSINESSES REPRESENTED AT SUCH POINTS, AND THE POPULATION , oF SUCH POINTS DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARING HEREIN ; . No. of businesses Name of city or town or industries - Population 4 ~ ve represented ; Alabams _° 6 + IIR acti ticensctiiiicnitlinnats diliibinlnlitablessannietinitinis 2 16, 261 Birmingham.......... Sidhe Ditlipansiiiilnin sealants inincainscnaert 2 - 940, 687 ' Gaia wha wnp nwcdctdiisenecinidenicnswdstinastccoscnsseqnece - 1,887 ¢, BERING a oi. 5 a cdndp ns 2 ncn si enc nnckcncdcccnnsccccanecs 18 184, 308 Opdike - 22.2... 200 2-0s 22 e+ 4-222 - eee owen e eee goocccece 2 15, 678 i nntnGctiinscecnbidatawcccs punhnenannndtien didi tatnguenunens 1 28, 385 athens on wadcinaiinensaneniihnisandnspiaibublioinmasnamnaeee 2. 63, 370 ne cinwinniches neeneanad scinenehitaitiantntenne 3 1,750 : IEC A Aiislictieenepmianntints iiadhintdiskoigtennnicil ‘ 4. 2, 932 rh} : Arizona 9 © ; — een Seaceainnieniplapenncninginnisintiiinntioanadis - 2: 439, 140 Tueson Shep osce ee Siteetameats Ag 5 mealies ra | este: iim inainteain rie - 7 212, 802 e California ' 13 piste 3 Los Angeles area... ......-..... whit. cnceasci Dattccagee Leeueaeee 13 3, 041, 940 : ue. Georgia a ©. 4, EE ieeiaaniaieanapineeninadndgpeneuiciinaibaninapnsaiaansebianinial 17 487,445 I icin ctinitianngnndibsninceenntidneininwinaitetaniiiiaten a 9,340 * (Glasto) . 5.2... .. occ cenn eee cnc cen ee cece ence se nn on nensqeces . e 2; 672 NS iiss cnn cddintithininssdunicncvcntitalibienspercsespens 5° 116, 779. {Dalton)........ sentsicinnenicicttint Guiianeaennniadieg silinliiihsioae 2 - 17,868 BD iidactnonnndiacibanscnesnenecen biinditinenieegenengphen 3 32, 226 (Bwainfberd) .............-..-2---0-nnncieqcececcossoencceeecess 1 6,043 (Thomson) merece e- Qa nee en ewe n nen cee n ee eeee Bnew rece owen ceces 1 pone ____ 4, 522. | > Wille Bits. ....ic.....~2.:05..--.-202- eae Je 1 3,450 * ———- Louisiana 89 ner “Alexandria: __....- Sessile aiehcaieelontlaneecsasaeciianiesaabonanssiniel 7 40,279 - Baton Rouge -.....- dliinanismichiitabaemmtbinaialnie Seongedatens oe % ., 152,419 IIIS Skins cn tinaienncedindines aeolian iisnennnenets ee 1, 668 Farmerville..- -.- Ree CS TS Re) > SOR 7 Me Ca at: ae 2,727 i cthind auncitiinkbooonsesebiooceoetl bhybbuasconguanepens _ 4, 257 Siinfen.......5...-...... Siecasntes hitenecniii finitinanmemeneennen 4 12, 785 I Gincens tli kdagunpebahibewnnntindiqhitneyeivneiivian 15 . 52, 219 New Orleans... - - -...-..--------+-----------0-ne2----+--2--7-2 & 627, 525 . PE Sie ccccctiiccdicaccactaddeccenchbbyitveseusecceseuss 1 3, 965 r. ne gS iiecnsnnlinbs ET NS, PREC e 953 ° . eS. SR 0 SialieincDnnbbitiaanmanntigayeceinn 6 13, 901 ° shreveport @withdra diendndeilienanandilbetbibeneeenesinrnen f 21 164, 372 . Pid Risen dete diiwecchubnliiphacitinisihannkasyesouey | 6, 437 * OS a ee Cee ee et . i on: e 5Ba ; Appendie. PF 72 SUMMARY OF SUPPORTING ‘SHIPPER ‘AiD ‘RECEIVER : ron EVIDENCE*- Ace Neon’ SiBi Company; Birniitighim,, Ala, re- ceives several shipments. monthly. frgm Oklahoma. ' City, Okla. Houston and Dallas, Tex;"ind Atlanta, Ga. Shipments from Daljas, all.of which are special: — orders, are handled generally by Transcon, but this _ service is considered unsatisfactory because ‘of slow transit times, such as 5.57 days, afforded_on—Dallas. - originated shipments: Delays experienced in receiving shipments prevent edntrol of limited inventory. Con- signe# needs 48-hour service. Expeditious and reliable ~ motor service, such as here proposed; would help con- signee. to increase es business: out of Dallas by 10 - percent. . Miller Wire Works, Ticebabliaes, Ala:, ditsi two to duiee shipments per week, weighing 7,000 to.8,000 | ‘pounds, to such points as Jackson, Miss., Shreveport, La., Houston, Fort Worth, Abilene, and El Paso, Tex,, and to some points in New. Mexico. Especially concerned. about prompt service on shipments to El Paso and to points along applicant’s present. routes between Dallas-Fort Worth and El, Pasé. Has uti- - lized a number of named protestant carriers’ interline: . - services, but such services have not been satisfactory generally to. meet witnesses’ needs because of slow times-in-transif to which its shipments have been sub- jected. Complaints have been made to Ryder and . Campbeli 66 about slow service, and, in turn, have 1 The testimony of supporting witnesses representing 68 sepa- : rate business teary was stipulated’ as being. representative. of the evidence adduced by those parties actually testifying 1 in sup- port, and is not included in the summary herein. ~ 3 « (Bip been’ seheiionl iene customers at some Texas points, Time element highly important. Has tried, to better its ”_gervice: by changing the carriers utilized with no‘im- | ‘ proyement in service experienced thereafter, - "Thompson Fabricating Company, within Birming- ham commercial zone, makes five to six shipments per moiith to such points as Abilene, Austin, Waco, and - “QOdessa,' Tex., Beall Air Force Base, Calif., and At- _—lanta and Augusta, Ga. Shipments range ‘from 100 . pounds to a truckload. Campbell 66 has been originat- ing carrier, and its service is unsatisfactory. For ex- ample, one shipment to Abilene took 11 days by. my carrier. Several customer complaints about this rier’s. service have been received. Another. shipm bt _ to Austin was lost in transit, and difficulty was had in. tracing the shipment which finally was located in pos- session of Sunset Motor Lines in El Paso. Campbell 66 ‘interchanged this shipment with Strickland at = Memphis.: These shipments described above all were - destined to a named customer: This customer has been. lost, and company not invited to bid on. any more projects. Encountered difficulties on shipments to At- _lanta. Baggett refused to pick up a-truck load the day called because fo flat or rag-top trailer available. No - carrier has solicited or offered. service on shipments‘ ‘ to West Texas. * | McQueen Foundry & Supply. Company, Birmine- ham, Ala.,.ships to Texas, Oklahoma, and. New Mex- ico, as’ well as to other States. Witness stated existing . “service out of Birmingham not sufficient to permit him. to compete with. other suppliers in the northern part : of the country. Had bad experience 6n shipments to Amarillo, lost business because-of delays. Trouble also had in. connection with shipments to contractors in : Houston, Columbts and San_ Antonio, -Tex. Worst trouble with less-than-truckload. shipments to Texas. | Oo” Camnipasig does not ¢ desire to. use its own equipment but has been com] lied to do so in some cases—usés 6Wn - - trick when ‘te” has return haul. Considers ‘that pto- posed service would substantially ificrease company’s business into Texas and Oklahoma markets, and will j 4 also be used, in preference to company’s own equip- . - ment. Transit time highly iriportant because’ ‘of pen- alty clauses, if timed deliveries not met, in contrac- _. tors’ contract. work. Fifty percent of shipments to ° _ Texas and Oklahoma go to acme job, and ais pit, ip -warehouse.. .. Thomas Foundries, I ne., Birmingham: Ala., ships - to Los Angeles and West Coast, also ships to Hoiiston, Tex., Jackson, Miss., New. Orleans, Baton Rouge | and | Monroe, La. Shipments to West Coast unsatisfactory ‘on account of interchange delays experienced in utiliz-- ing motor carrier service, so that company has resorted to air ‘freight which is too expensive. Transcon. has ‘. furnished inadequate equipment on occasion. Transit time highly important because in furnishing wearing _ parts preakdowns:are experienced involving expensive equipment. About 50 percent of shipments are emer- gency, If proposed service is available could increase - business done >in California. Shipments vary from - - 100 ‘to 28,000 pounds. Ninety ee, ‘of traffic is less-than-truckload, oe) _ Southern Sash of Montgomery; Ted: “Montgomery, Ala., ships to Atlanta and to such other points as. . Los “Angeles, Houston, ‘and New Orleans. Has about \ five shipments per month weighing from 200 to 3,000 _ pounds.. Leaves routing to shipper, but could request | other routing. Most shipments, however, are inbound from Los Angeles, Houston, and’ New Orleans. Has used three-line haul from. Houston to Montgomery. ‘Has fried different routings from Los eed ‘such L © j 4 \é 508 | as T.I.M.E.-Cole to Montgomery, cand applicant (to. Jackson)-Dixie (to Montgomery), but, has not found ‘adequate routing because shipments are too long in transit. Shipment’ routed through the Memphis gate- way often are afforded. 10-days. transit time,, for example, Transit time als@ has been excessive on. shipments routed through the Jackson gateway. Time in transit highly important begpuse full run of sizes -” eannot be carried in stock, are made on special order, | - and eustomer wants them promptly:.On account \of | time-in-transit service presently experienced, company is unable to discount its invoices as received arithin 10-days discount periods In undertaking to trace ship- ments, company found routing’ not followed,:and’ in-._ formation ¢ould not be obtained. Tracing experience - with Jack ‘Cole, Dixie, and A-NO-has not been ‘satis. - factory. Shipmertts are susceptible to- dainage':by transfer of lading through excessive handling. in transit. Company has’ experienced loss and damage ‘to freight and difficulty with payment of damage claims, particularly in utilizing service of A-NO. No satisfactory service has been found, and company needs proposed service. There have been occasions -when materials have been ordered by customers, then cancelled and purchased elsewhere. If needed service ‘was available, sales and tonnage could.be increased. © Eimco Corporation, Birmingham, .Ala., receives . shipments inbound, for stock and emergency purposes, primarily from Salt Lake City, Utah,’ and also from pertinent Texas points and from New Orleans."Out- . bound shipments are made every day to. points in - Texas and Oklahoma, with an average weight of 200 . pounds, Transit time is highly important because ahip- ments generally consist of repair parts used in connec- - tion with. government evntract work, road building, e ‘ 608 ee. ; \ ~~, end; industrial. plant operations ‘that reqnire timed ae to prevent plant shutdowns, Applicant’s pro- -. posed. service, affording gprompt and reliable sched- - ne service is desired by shipper. Witness sponsored: — ibit No. 12, showing 27 representative shipments covering ‘a 12 month period. This exhjbit depicts. an . average transit time of over 4 days on shipments from . Dallas handled by Transcon. Company also has expe- — Tienced: difficulty in tracing shipments. Two,. three, and sometimes four shipments per week originate in Dallas, .and complaints have been made to the carriers utilized, both. on inbound and’. outbound etegmnante, with no improvement in service. - | Nelson Company, Montgomery, Ala., makes ship- . ments to points in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Shipments to Texas points have been ‘to _. Dallas, Fort Worth, Waco, Huntsville, Housten and Abilene;. to Louisiana, to such points as Monroe, Alex- _ andria, Baton Rouge, Shreveport, and Springhill. i? -. Lost customer at Springhill, because of poor. service. Service has not been ‘satisfactory to meet , Witnesses” needs, resulting in customers purchasing “elsewhere. - _ Complaints have been made to Dicie- locally. Transit ‘time is important. Has experienced difficulty on ship- ments from Montgome Columbus, Georgia. Claim service is slow benuse Hizia sends claims t8 connect- ing carriers to worry about. Needs and would use _ proposed service if made available. Also business could be doubled in the Texas-Louisiana area if service was | -. Umproved. - — Smith Textile Company, q ackson, Mise, _ receives shipments from the Carolinas, Georgia, and Virginia. | It receives'a great many ‘shipmenta from Atlanta, - as‘ well as from Rome and Calhoun;.Ga. Atlanta is a - gateway on shiptients from the Carolinas and Vir- " “ginia. — are received ~ Witness apon | 0 618 ot ee nae exhibit N 0. 13 chewing excessive aan indensistent ‘transit times affordéd on 72 repfffesentative shipments ‘for first-9 months of 1960. For example, on service by ‘Dixie: from Atlanta and. Birmingham, the.average transit times afforded on shipments listed in this ex- hibit were 4.50 days and 3.20 days, respectively. Ship- “ ments ange in weight from 46 to. 1/5 pounds. Dixie and numerous other carriers: have used on’ shiji- ments from Atlanta as well as those passing through | - ‘Atlanta. Transit time is important to maintain inven- © ‘tory: ; control. Witness stated the propgsed overnight ‘service from both Atlanta and Birmingham to Jackson is needed. Used Atlanta as a secondary market. At- tempts have been. made to improve the. service by call- ing the transportation companies and asking them'te ‘improve it,” and complaints have been made to the. carriers, but.these have produced no results. ‘Witness ‘also. concerned. with’ adequate. delivery . On . numerous shipments, when traced, the shipmentS were __ ‘found in Jackson on: trailers which had not ‘been un- -- ‘loaded and delivered. Shipments are made outbound all over the south, many going to points on the present ‘Braswell System. Applicant handles westbound ‘ship- -. : ments and such service considered quite adequate. - Anderson ‘Electric Corporation, Birmingham, Ala:, rhakes shipments from Birmingham and Leeds; Ala., . Leeds being in the Birmingham commercial. zone, to , Dallas, Houston and El Paso, Tex., Bos Angeles; i * Calif, Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz. In fact, every city ‘or miinic ipality that has a utility.is a potential cus- | tomer. Shipments to.Texas points move practically 4 every. day, to Arizona about every 2 yeeks, and the - same to Los Angeles. Witness routes most shipments. Witness interested primarily i in service from Birming-. ham to Texas and harrare west-thereof. Time in transit - 4s. very ee and the weupany: needs nbpiioont' ae : 7 ™ Se «4 . \ . . aa ek dow - . oe a _. California points, nor to Texas points othe 62a proposed service, because the business is high") com- ~ ‘ petitive and time in transit is: of the:.essence.: Has _ experienced lost and damaged shipments moving into the Los Angeles area, Customers in Ballas and | Houston lost because of slow transportation service. , ~~ =“ Ryder handles some shipments, and sometimes moves _ _ them through ‘the Memphis gateway, and sometimes -through the Shreveport gateway. Chief competitors — are located in St. Louis and also in California, Wit- ness believes the proposed service would enable : his company to meet this competition. St. Louis, has a number of single-carriers te. Texas’ points and into . Caljfprnia and Arizona points. There.is no single-liné. ‘carrier service from Birmingham to Ee ge akg eee r than to oy Fort Werth, Dallas, Beaumont, and Houston. If- the ( ? proposéd service were available, witness believes busi- . U) ness couf, be increased in Texas and Arizona each‘by * = . 25 percent: (representing $29),000 a year in’ Texas, ’ $50,000.a year. in Arizona) sand in California by 60 ‘ percenf.. Consideration has been given te using the company’s “own trucks in order to cut down, transit time on shipments to Texas-and for economical rea- sons. Universal Carloading is. used when possible, but. _has not been satisfactory ‘to meet need, time in transit ° . . being too long under such forwarding arrangements. The witness was rot familiar with the servicés gf Transcon’ and T.I.M.E. to the Arizona points ayd.,Lés ' ‘Miller Foundry Company, Birmingham, Ala., has ’ shiprfients to Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and’Norman, _ Okla., New Orleans, and Atlanta, Ga., Baton Rouge, | Lake Charles, La.,. and Jackson, Miss. The titness usually’ called Jack ‘Cale apeeny for routing and was’ advised to use- Jones ck Line to. Memphis” Has used ,Ryder to Baton Rouge and to Jackson. Hag 8 e.°. Fa x . > . tA ; a _o jees hawe not enabled 638 ee © no: “complaints on service with any ‘of the movements described. | \Allegheny-Ludlum Steel Dempiong, Taian Ale; principally interested in shipments to a Soints, such as Baton Rouge, New Orle Landis, Minden, Ruston and Shreveport, but was flso intér- ested. in | in shipments to/Vicksburg, Winona 'and Jack- -— son, Miss. The company has ’béen using”Dixia, Ryder, Hoover, and ‘Campbell 66. These transpottation serv- compete with other producers | in the. Lotisiana area. Has competitors in” New Orleans, Memphis, and ‘Houston,’ and shipments to such points as those men- tioned have. been unsatisfactory because not fagt -—>~enough. Faster service would put: the company in a n. - better competitive position with its competitors at the points named.. Its business: in Louisiana and Missis- © es sippi could be increased, and éspécially by being dble ~ to regain customers which it has lost, such as two customers in particular where the volume of one was $12,000 and of another was $10,000 per year. There is: about $300,000 worth of business in Louisiana, and the witness believed that this company would beable to obtain 25 percent to 30 percent of that business if the . proposed service was avaiJable. “ kis Simon & Mogilner, Birmingham, Ala., has some 10 _ to’ 20 shipments per week to Louisiana; 100 per- week’ - | to Texas, 20'to 25 per weék to Arizona, a few to Salt Lake City, and from 120 to 125 shipmentsper week to -- os: Angeles: Shipments range from'60 to 200° pounds each. Approximately 500,000. te 600,000 ‘poinds per year are shipped to California.. California shipments’ - _~ have moved-by Transcon and several of the freight ‘forwarders. Service on such ‘shipments has not been satisfactory because’ of slow delivery. Numerous com- ~ plants have ‘been received from California customers . company to effectively. te fe and an effort’ has been made to improve that serviee. _ Fifth-morning service to California is needed. Service . on shipments to Oklahoma points, such as Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Ardmore,.and Norman has not been. satisfactory also because it is.too slow. This shipper has used’ Transcon.and Ryder on shipments to Texas ' points, and -has made frequent complaints to those carrters about the service.. Trouble has béen encoun- ' tered ‘on. shipments requiring delivery by specified dates.’ Witness had difficulty.on a shipment:to San — - Luis Obispo which moved by Western’ Carloading and gould not be found, requiring duplication of the shipment: by air freight, which cost over $2,000. ‘Wit- ness stated company’s business could be increased. in — Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and especially California points, if applicant's 8 proposed service was * made.available. This increase would come from regatn- ing lost customers, as well as by obtaining new ac-. _ counts. California business, which presently runs from $400,000 to $500,000 per year could be increased by 20 percent, Texas business, which approximates $400,000" yearly, could be increased 25 percent, and Louisiana business, which runs approximatély $200,000 yearly, could by increased some 20. pereent. The company has . competitors in California as well as Fort Worth, tia _ Dallas-and San Antonio, Tex., and if better service was available, the company would be in a better — a tive position. .. ‘Gold Bond Stamp Company; Momive, La., deals -in | | freight ‘which ‘is ‘subject :to damage by excessive handling, and. has: experienced damage’ and loss on ‘shipments. Shipments from Atlanta twice a week - Yange from*700 to’ 1,000 pounds ‘each. Presently uses Bowman and Burks. Sponsored exhibit 15 showing 7 Bi sicvere csarhad —— received trom Atlanta, via’ 8 4 Pe eo a Memphis easing and afforded’ an -average transit . time ‘of 4.43 days. Service unsatisfactory because too slow, not delivered on proper date, and never know when shipments will arrive. Transit time very impor- - -. tant,’ Complaint has been made to Bowman and Burks, but service has not improved. Open to receive ship- ments 6 days a week during normal business hours. Proposed service would be convenient: and be ‘used. ‘When business ° started, investigation was made of’ motor carrier service, and Bowman and Burks were selected as being “ probably best choice.” For that, rea- son, although the witness knew of various other ¢ar- . riers‘ and their services, thay had not been used. _ House of Carpets, Midland, Tex., receives shipments on average of one shipment per -day from ‘yarious points in North and Seuth Carolina, as well as Dalton, Ellijay, Chamblee, Calhoun, Rome -and Cartersville,. _ Ga. Shipments range from 150 to 800 pounds. In the — - past has used rail service as well-as Ryder, Transcon and T.I.M.E. Various carriers used in effort to get better and more consistent service. Transit time impor- tant to make deliveries and to fill contract jabs. Spon- - sored exhibit 16 showing all of its (106) shipments (48 by rail, the remainder by motor carrier) between December 1959 and ‘October 1960, which were sub- | _ jected to transit times ranging between 3.and 10 days, . and averaging: approximately 8.50 days. A large num- ber of carriers: and combinations: have been used. Service unsatisfactory, takes ‘too long. Proposed serv- ice needed. Complaints-have been made to various car- riers, but. no improvement ‘in service.. Consistency of service important for inventory- control. Open for de- - _ livery. 6 days a week. Difficulty in getting shipments delivered to Midland because held on docks of carriers . at OdessathBecause of a meerinb, loses about one 66 sale per week, which would amount to approximately . eo $400 a sale..Delivermg carriers at Midland other than _ Braswell would.be Merchants Fast Motor Lines, Sun- set: Motor Lines, Curry Truck Line, and the T & P. __ » Fact-O’Bake Paint Shop, Baton Rouge, La., receives ‘shipments frdm Atlanta monthly or more: often rang- ' ing in weight from 500 to 7,000 pounds, @Witness ‘ sponsored exhibit 17. consisting of six representative. shipments from J uly through October 1960. afforded transit times ranging from 5 to 12 days. This service on shipments from Atlanta not satisfactory because no consistency in delivery time, and transit time too long. Various combinations of .¢arriers used (e.g. Dixie-Huff, A-N O-England, Dixie-Herrin, Transcon- applicant) but what is needed between Atlanta and Baton Rouge is 3 days service. Complaint made to Ryder concerning slow delivery service. Swenson-Clyburn Contract Supply, Baton Rouge, La.,. receives four to’ ten shipments a month from Atlanta and Calhoun, Ga., ranging from 25 pounds: _ to 2,000 pounds. Has used A-NO, Ryder, Huff and Garig. Transit tinie important to meet customer dead- lines. Shipper’s exhibit 18 showed six representative - bills from December 1959 to October 1960. Transit —. time not.satisfactory to witness; as shown on this exhibit (average transit time: 6.50 days): by such - earriers as A-NO-Huff, Dixie-Huff, Ryder, ete. Ship- ments should be received in 3'days out‘ of Atlanta, particnlarly less-than-truckload shipments, Complaints: have been made to the carriers that have been used but no improvement. . Believes business - could be in- ereased by at least 10 percent if proposed service by applicant from Atlanta wes available. Has no objection to’ interchange service if it is good. Has not tried avery possible carrier interchange service. — 672 Welders pon Comparty, Baton Rouge,. La., re- porate ‘from two to three shipments a month from , Atlanta, and prefers to purchase at this point rather - _ than: other sources of supply because of lower prices.. F Witness sponsored exhibit 19 covering 11 representa-: ~ tive shipments for period from J. anuary to June 1960; and. reflecting transit times averaging 6 to 8 days. The interline service received from A-NO-Garig, Couch, and Huff is -not satisfactory. Complaints have been - Gnade to the shipper because tt was felt shipper should . know the best routing without success. Hag experi-- _ enced difficulty in getting DELIVERY OF SHIP- MENTS AFTER THEY ARRIVE IN Baton Rouge, so the delivering carriers have been: requested toleave. . the shipments on their dock where.they may be picked up. Has used air freight on occasion because of slow transit time of motor carriers. Air’ freight is too expensive. Witness has not utilized every possible © * service now available. Shipper handles ee and tracing of shipments. —- bi ohe - .Bes-Pak Company, Montgomery, Ale, miakés ili ments to Los. Angeles, North Ridge, and San Diego; Calif., Phoenix, -Ariz., and Houston and Dallas, Tex. "Fron March to. September each year, one shipment | per _ week ranging from 300 to 400 pounds: is made to each ~ _of the points named, Time in transit. is important in| eonnection with this seasonable business. Dixie handles most shipments from. Montgomery ; however, Roadway, Jack Cole, and Baggett are also used. Service received has not been satisfactory. It takes too long to get to ' destination. Commodity. sold is highly compe itive. Needs fourth | morning service to California if it is to. remain in the competitive market. Fourth morning’ to Phoenix would-be satisfactory and is needed. Second morning te Dallas is needed and would, elimiimte 277-878—67——-6 : 3 68a >. mecessity of. maintaining a warehouse .inventory.- at i _ Dallas. Shipments are susceptible to damage from _ - handling. in transit, and if damaged ‘are? unsalable. If better service available to points inthe west, company’ Gould ‘increase~its-business,. Has complained . to Dizie on several occasions to try to improveservice, ~ but no improvement experienced:i we _ Alaga Syrup-Company and W. W. Pickle Company, - Montgomery, Ala. Witness was traffic manager for both companies. Both companies make shipments to Ruston,. Minden, Shreveport, and Monroe, La., Los Angeles and San ‘Francisco, - Calif.;. Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio and El Paso, Tex.; . Phoenix, Ariz.; Portland, Oreg., and Seattle, Wash. Ships to their own warehouses and to wholesale gro- cery warehouses mostly by rail in carload - lots. Dis-_ . . tributes out. of own warehouses in company-owned trucks. Also receives bettles from Oklahoma City, . Okla., and Jackson, Miss. Witness stated they would | continue to use their own trucks. Witness had. not used all of-the available motor services. Montgomery Fair Company, Montgomery, Aia., isa . retail department store. Shipments are routed by nu- _ Merous carriers. into Montgomery by, use of a routing guide. Shipments are received from California and Texas, and from Atlanta, Calhoun, La Grange, Colum- -bus, and Rome, Ga., and points in Louisiana and Mis- sissippi. Exhibit.20 sponsored by: this witness, covers 50 representative shipments for the: period July, Au- _ £ ist-and September, 1960, depicting average times. in. _ wansit ranging from 2 to 7 days on shipments origi- nating at points on the proposed routes, to 8-11 days on: West .coast-originated shipments. Inbound freight . Is subject to damage by excessive handling in transit: - Time in transit is important to accommodate promo~ tional sales. - ee eS Re 69a, American — Paper: Tube Company, Port Gibson; Miss., makes shipments to Opelika, Langdale and La- nett, ‘Ala., West Point and La Grange, Ga.,.and to.other _ points in N orth and South Carolina, Georgia and Ala- — ' bama. Shipments are made daily ranging from 200 to - 300 pounds. Time in transit is important because a — ‘day lost in transit is a costly thing to. the customer. Complaints have been. received from nearly.all cus- - tomers about the transportation service. Service has’. -not been satisfactory because of long delays experi- enced in utilizing joint-line services’ of Dixie, Delta, Ryder, Overnite, and Johnson. Four specific examples of such delays experienced i in August and September 1960,: were cited as representative. Has. experienced some improvement since began using: applicant as originating carrier, and since changing from Delta. - ‘He knew of Deaton Truck Lines, but considers that . Deaton is not interested in his traffic, stn interested only in tryckload shipments. | Clement-Braswell, Inc., Minden, Ia. receives ship- ments from Montgomery and Gadsden, Ala. Spon- sored exhibit 21, showing eight (all of the) shipments covering a period of 12 months and reflecting transit times ranging from 3 to 8.75 days. Most: materials ' shipped are emergency in nature, consisting of re- placement parts on equipment that. is broken down, * and the customer needs the trailer back in operation: - The witness has specified Dixie-Braswell routing, yet — the shipments come in by Couch from -Montgomery. Four of. the eight shipments shown on exhibit 21 were routed Braswell, but Dixie gave them to Couch. Has - tried to find better routings: out of Montgomery .in or- . der to get’ ‘better service, but has been unable to do so. Company -is interested in having at least a second ‘mornIng service ) From both renwranr3 and atone: 700 ae, . : : na oe more Sor. products pemeree in Dallas than : 7 . when purchased in the Alabama area. . Royal. Crown’ Bottling Company, Baton Rouge; a. - - receives shipments from Columbus, Ga., at least. twice. a month. Shipments moved some by Dixie to New Or- leans, and “Huff to Baton Rouge: Dixie is the only carrier out of Columbus to New Orleans, and there is no direct service to Baton Rouge. Time in transit - is important. Witness sponsored exhib 22 showing _ eight representative bills from August 1959 to Octo- | ber 1960, depicting an ‘average transit time of 5.40 days on six of these, shipments. On, the other ‘two, the transit time shown is from New Orleans only, as 1.59 days. The present service is not satisfac- tory. By reason of sgew transit-time service, shipper * has been inconyenienced and forced to borrow syrup ‘from New Orleans because of delays in transit. This is both undesirable and expensive. Witness has not uti- « lized all the present interchange service available be- cause excessive handling in its products in transit eauses breakage. F4 ' Misstssipm Plastics Division of Brookpark, Inc., - Port Gibson, Miss., interested primarily withthe best ‘available routings on shipments into Virginia, Phila-. delphia, New. York and Boston because customers ‘have been complaining. to the home office. Sponsored exhibit 23 showing 35 representative shipments from . PortGibson ‘to such points as Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Newark, and Norfolk. All shipments were originated by applicant . at Port Gibson and handled by applicant in overnight or same day service ‘- to Meniphis,’ but the delivering carriers’ service from Memphis to destination involved from 5 to 12 days transit time. Shipper would desire: applicant’s: pro- posed service from Port Gibson to Atlanta, as. the more direct saitiitd in order to connect with. such : 71a earriers there as Mason & —_— or Roadway for movement beyond. | ’ oR. C. Cola Bottling Casmnii Tulsa, Okla., receives . Shipments weekly and sometimes more often from Columbys and Atlanta, Ga.,-and from the Carolinas. - Such shipments average 600 to 700 pounds each. — Sponsored. exhibit 24 showing all (47) shipments coyv- - ering the period March through October, 1960," -sub- jected to transit times averaging 5.32 days in the case of shipments originating at Atlanta and Columbus. _ Two rail.shipments from Atlanta took an average of - 15 days in transit. Witness stated transit time is im- — ‘portant and a regular and consistent service ‘is need- .. ed. The service experienced, such’ as shown by exhibit “24, is unsatisfactory. Leaves routing to shipper, al-- though has right to route, honored by shipper. pos ‘Bartlett-Collins Company, Sapulpa'(Tulsa), Okla., makes shipments daily to Georgia, Alabama, North and South Carolina; Some of the points where .ship- ments made aresAtlanta, Columbus and Macon, Ga., Dothan, Montgomery and ‘Biygningham, Ala., and ~ points through Atlanta gateway to Virginia and: the Carolinas. Presently using B & B Lines as ‘originat- - "ing carrier in ‘connection with’T. I.M.E. and Transcon.. Service unsatisfactory because too many carriers in- | volved, requiring three-line service to ‘most points. Transit time is important because of fast. turnover of stock. Complaints have been received ‘from customers — about motor carrier service to Alabama and Georgia points; Has two direct lines to Atlanta and one to '- Birmingham, none to other points. Carriers with cir- © - euitous routes cannot be. ‘used. Has used applicant to » Mississippi and Louisiana’ ‘points not here involved , and found such service to be reliable and dependable. | ' Breneman-Hartshorn, Inco ed, Dallas, Tex., re- ’ geives shipments from Atlanta twice a. week, — \ Ss . X . AN . Be 72a ee : 2,000 pounds or more. Sponsored exhibit 26 showing 17 representative shipments. covering’ period . from — Ji anuary 1950 to August 1960, and showing total aver- _ ‘ age'transit time: of 4.65. days, as handled by Dixie- prea and other combinations. On applicant’s. por. — on of. these ‘movenients, expeditious time-in-transit © “ was afforded from Jackson to Dallas: Service from Atlanta: too slow and, thus, unsatisfactory because of . limited inventory. Fora time, in June, 1960, :ship- ments: had a routing of Dixie in combination with | ‘applicant. but this was changed without authorization. . Complaints were made to Dixie about this. Dixie advised in response‘to a letter that it would . honor routing; but Dixie“has not done so: Company-owned ° trucks. bring shipments from Oswego, N ew York 'to Atlanta, Ga. iy, oe —— T.’ W. Williamson, Fuderporated; ‘Tulsa, Okla., makes shipmerits) into Georgia and Alabama points, some of which are Rome, Columbus, Acworth, Atlanta, Bremen, Fayetteville, La Grange and’ Marietta, Ga., * and Anniston, Birmingham and Selma, Ala., and also to Meridian, ° Miss. Shipmenits are ‘made from one a” day to 25 a week. Transcon and T.I.M.E. have been . used both directly and in interline as required. Transit ‘time is important because in oilfield: business every- thing i ig wanted yesterday. Service proposed by appli- cant is needed: and would be used. : Teakte, Incorporated, a divisjon of Republic Appi. ; once, Dallas, Tex., makes shipments to Birmingham, ents so- moving. Time in transit — is very important. Applicant’s proposed service would - ored exhibit 32 list- - ‘ / Ps ceived : the ‘day after delivery. Complaints have been... _ ‘made to T.IME.,. and some improvement in service ~ experienced thereafter, but‘not ona consistent and de-. _pendable basis. The services of; T.0.M.E. and Trans- - ; 77a. : _ con considered unsatisfactory and insufficient in tran- git. times provided. to meet shipper’s. needs. such as maintaining limited inventory, and ta maintain effec- tive competitive standing. Business is open for receipt of. freight on Saturdays as well as the other work days '". of the week. , . - _.Laun-Dry Supply. Company, El Paso, Tex., has. a branch office and warehouse at. Albuquerque, N. Mex. ' Shipments aré received from a number of Georgia points, including Atlanta. Shipments from La Grange. and. Thomaston, Ga., average 3 or 4'a ‘month, from Atlanta, 4 or 5 a week, from East Point, Ga., 4 or 5a month. Time in transit is important from the stand- ‘point of maintenance of invantory control with a con- - stant change occuring in color and type of merchandise . dealt in.-Has uséd T.I.M.E. and freight forwarders, but such service do riot afford dependable and prompt transit. times. Finds at times that he must use air freight. Consistency of service is important. The pro- posed service would cut down the transit. time and be ’ renumeratiye to the company, saving at least $3,000 or $4,000. year in telephone calls, tracing, and utiliza- tion of air freight service. Witness has attempted to. ~ improve service by using various lines and every. fnethod. of combination presented to-him. Even so, he | had not been able to obtain satisfactory service. Wit- ; ais ness sponsored exhibit 33 listing 131 bills eovering pe- ried: December. 1959: through October 1960, and repre- senting: approximately 90 percent of bills for period — covered on shipments that moved by, motor carrier. — _ This exhibit depicts average, transit ti es afforded on ‘ the shipments listed as ranging from 6 to 7.47 days. — Bl Paso Towel Supply Company, El Paso, Tex., re- | _- eeives shipments from Columbus, Dallas, Griffin and La Grange, Ga., Durham, .N.C., Fairfax, Ala. and © + nS Ae | on Ante ‘from Greer Mohawk and Lyman, 8.0. Shipments ‘te: ceived daily range from 100 'to 2,000 pounds. Witness . = - sponsored exhibit 34 listing 65 representative bills cov- ' ering period ‘October 1959 through September 1960, and showing average transit times on 25 shipments — originating at Alabama and.Georgia points on the proposed routes as approximately 7 days. Almost all carriers have been tried, and T.I.M.E.-is presently being used. The Company routes its. shipments, - and time in transit is very important. The fastest service that can be obtained is needed because of competition and to handle-many emergency orders. Uses all types of carriers, including freight forwarders and.rail, and various combinations of carriers have been used, with- out finding- carrier affording prompt and consistent ‘service: Purcliases needed merchandise from supplier. at Los Angeleg albeit at premium pfices because gets needed second day service from applicant in such in- stances. The witness desires. thé service ‘proposed -by applicant, because one or 2 days difference in transit time is very important. The service of T:I.M.E. is de= pendable, but needs shorter transit time. Has notified his shippers not to use rail service. Believes that, busi- - ness ‘could be increased by 10 to 15 percent if proposed service aygilable. = é | MOST bites Jiffy Products. Co., Dallas, Tex., makes shipments _ from Dallas principally to Birmingham and Atlanta; usually monthly. Shipments are emergency or -stock, and are usually large, but sometimes. range from only 100 te 500 pounds. Carriers used have included Red Ball, East Texas, Transcon, Strickland, Southwestern, and Herrin. These services have not been satisfactory: For éxample, on a shipment.of 600 pounds made J aly _15, 1959, to Birmingham, by: Transcon, the shipment » Was found a’month later on Transcon’s dock. A ship: ment of 425 pounds given-to Red Ball on July 29, 1959, - - i ; F * _ Zia: "Was ore and wi of: it did. not arrive entil, § days” after the other portion of the shipment.had arrived. A shipment by Lranscon to Atlanta on June 2, 1959, ar- - rived in Atlanta 8 days later. Service.of. Transcon dis: - continued because of this type of service. ..- - | Krueger Air Conditioning Company, Tu Aris, 9 ace to Atlanta, Rome, Macon and Columb&; Ga., Birmingham and Montgomery, Ala., &nd to Columbia, 8.C. Shipments are. routed. to Jackson; Miss., . by applicant, and that service’is dependable. Connecting. line service from Jackson into the area has not been - ' satisfactory. The fastest service in point of time with the least amount. of handling | is needed. .Shipments _are susceptible to damage. in transit, Routes all ship- ments unless. routings specified by customer, Leaves . routing beyond originating. carrier to that earrier. Has; made no ‘investigation: of all. of the interline | * carriers available at Mempliis, .- . . Jacome’s. Department Stores, Enc., Tucson, aa, receives shipments from Atlanta, Marietta, Fairmount, Dalton, Commerce and Claxton, Ga. Alexander: City, _ Ashford; Ashland and Haleyville, Ala. Carriers used - have been freight forwarders, railway ‘ express, Texas- Arizona, Transcon and T.I. ME., with freight for- warders heing used most frequently. Time in transit hag averaged | from 6.00'to 15.00 days as. reflected in ‘exhibit 35, listing .39- representative. bills: covéring ‘period Febrilary, 1960 through October 1960, Consist- ency of service, is, important for promotions, -adver-- tising, and inventory : planning. A, consistent service affording reasonably expeditious times in transit has — not been obtained. Transcon has no agent.in Tucson. _ ‘T.ILM.E, ‘has not been: found to be satisfactery or dependable. tq shipper. Shipments are received on’ Saturday, the same as any other day, of ig Witness: routes his ‘shipments. — to purchase in Q ae | Gedigia arid Alabama markets because of price factor: Desires applicant’s proposed ‘servicé and if. available : . would ‘use it’ aiid increase volume of business oerguat- ing in soutfieast markets. . Tex Manufacturing Company,. El Piss, Tex., ‘re- ceives shipments from Georgia (e. &—Coluintnis) and the Carolinas through the Atlanta gateway. Some ‘are received weekly: and some are received. monthly, rang- ing from 1,000 to 15,000. pourids. If material not available, employees are idle and salaries paid for | no work. Has used many motor carriers, including . T.I.M.E., Bowman, RCA, Overnite, ‘Texas-Arizona, and Ryder. Exhibit’ 36, showing service on 41 repre- Sentative’ ‘shipments handled by various combinations of motor carriers, was sponsored by this witness. For . examp)e, seven’ ‘shipments from Columbus were sub- jected to an’ average of 7.85 days in transit by’ Dixie- T.I.M.E., and GHE-T.I.M.E.-These services, including the time in ‘transit, have ‘not been satisfactory to _ shipper, have ‘created bottlenecks, and ‘at times have ~ required payment for goods. before they are received. Tracing has been difficult. Loss of sales has been experienced as result of available transportation "service. Witness had ‘difficulties with T.I.M.E. trying to trace shipments arfd get informatiori. During one period it was found there were-shipments on T.I.M.E.’s dock at El Paso that: employees in: the office did not know about. Shipments are received 6 days a week. © Bird & Son, Shreveport, La., receives inbound ship-- ments, from Ensley, Ala., and Atlanta and Griffin, Ga. Shipments from other ' origin points could’ move ° through ‘Atlanta gateway.: Witness sponsored exhibit 87 listing 21 representative bills covering shipments for the "period ‘January through October 1960, and ranging int rere from 16 to 4,820 eae Transit Sla . hs time is , important to ‘witness, but the exhibit reflects _ inconsistent and’ excessive times afforded. For exam- ple, on 6 shipments handled by Ryder from Birming- | ham, the average transit,time was 3.33 days, and on 5 shipments from. Atlanta handled. by Ryder and by Dixie-Couch the average transit time was 6 days. Com- pany also has prgblem in connection | with outbound - shipments which(are made-in truckload quantities of 30,000 pounds and move to such points as Anniston, - Aubtxn, Eutaw, Gadsden; Leeds (Birmingham), Mont- gomery, Phenix City, Tuskegee, and Union Town, Ala. ' For the period January 1 to Octobér 21, 1960, a total of 93 truckleads were ship pped to, the ‘points: ‘men- — . tioned. The company has used its own trucks because direct carrier service is ‘not available. If applicant's proposed. service was available, it would. -use that serv- ice and discontinue private carriage. Prefers to use _. motor carriers. Attempts have e Agen made to use mo- tor carriers to mentioned: points for’ the last 7. or 8 years. Carriers used are T.S.C., Braswell, interlining with Dixie. Vicksburg, Ji ackson and Meridian, Miss., have been used as gateways because this i is the most ~ direct routing. Applicant‘bas been used to points on its - present lines. _, Industrial Textile Company, Los Angeles, | Calif, re- ceives shipments daily from all cotton textile mills in the Georgia, Alabama, North and-South Carolina areas. Routings are specified. Western Carloading has been used on most shiPments because success -has not been experienced with rail or trucks due to the number ~ of interchanges. Transcon and T.1.M.E, have been used - on some shipments from Georgia. Witness sponsored exhibit 38 listing 14 representative bills covering period February through October 1960 showing excessive times-in-transit Badass ranging from. 7 to ul days.. Se 82a 2 ‘Time in transit extremely important’to witness. If ap- * plicant’s proposed service was available, it would be used, and the company could increase its purchases in ‘the Georgia and Afabama markets and such service _ would, be very helpful. Great Lakes Screw Corporation, Dallas, Tex., makes shipments to Montgomery, Ala., and Atlanta, Ga., and | points in southern Georgia. At present is shipping only to Waycross, Ga, Shipper had no recent ship-. ments to Montgomery and.other Alabama points be- cause the transportation service’ available to. him at Dallas has prevented him from being able to effec, tively meet competition at, other origins. Witness had received-a letter. dated March 10 from Dealers Supply in Atlanta, saying that the reason no business had been — done with him ‘at Dallas, was on account of the trans- portation service from Dallas. Applicant’s proposed service would be used if it was available, and shipper. .- would. be able to develop markets and meet gompeti- tion in that area. _ S Wolf Manufacturing Company, Waco, Tex, receives — raw materials inbound and ships finished products out- bound. Shipments are received from such points as Anniston, Opelika and Alexander City, Ala.,.points in - North and South Carolina, and, from such points as Trion and Gainesville, Ga. Receives from one to 12 shipments,a week, ranging in weight from 200 to 2,000 » pounds, Witness sponsored exhibit 39 listing to 49 representative shipments covering period from Decem- ber 1959 ta September, 1960, and. showing transit times ranging from, 4, to°9-days. Various. combinations of ieee ak Naery Ale Te TG LEP Sil Stree motor carriers have heen used from: points in Alabama, ‘Georgia and the Carolinas, Service. not satisfactory: to Ww tness because time in transit is big element. Expe- riences. lost shipments and claim difficulties. Appli- am glass Witness sponsored exhibit 80 .coverin tween. December eon a adie 4960, showing, ayer- age transit time of 4.46 days. and representing about 50, percent, of shipments, out ‘of Atlanta. Desires 2-day service. Consistency. of time in transit is very impor-~ tant in. connection with stock control and to keep cus- . tomers happy. Has found. it necessary very, frequently. _ to trace.on Gouch’s service in particular, and. has com- plained to this carrier. Reveives. shipments ; all day, 6 days a week.. Received eustomer complaint in letter from Atlanta account. Has utilized applicant’s service / presentative shipments he- _ a 96a from California points, and found such service depend- able and reliable... } - . Davis Foundry &, Machine Works, Rome, Ga., ‘makes shipments to Mississippi points. All shipments be accommodated in an ordinary van-type vehicle. - Some shipments are also made to Alabama, Louisiana and Texas; transit time is important. Inbound ship- . ments are received from New Orleans and’ Birming- ee ham. Shipments from Birmingham have. moved Es through Atlanta for, interchange to. Rome, and some- ' times are. routed. through Chattanooga, Tenn. Ship- | ments from Birmingham. are needed as saon as they can be obtained. Emergency shipments are received “from New. Orléans. Applicant’s. proposed service is - -_desired and would be used. . 2p og lor & Brewer Foundry Company,; iii Ga. “ shes es shipments to Birmingham, Gadsden, Montgom- ery and other Alabama points. Baggett and -Dixie- Ohio have been used. Shipments to Gadsden, Birming- ham and Montgomery move each 2 or 3 weeks, and range from 200 to 1,400 pounds. Emergency ship- ments are made two or three times a week. Ninety percent of shipments are repair parts, and transit “time: is important because of breakdowns. There is "no direct. service from Rome to Gadsden or Mont- gomery. The best service'he can obtain is from Rome to wry and complaints. have been made to carriers about this method of handling. Consistency of ce is important te witness because it tvould enable fhe witness to advise his customers when shipments could be expected. Customers have been.lost because of _ the available motor carrier service-to both M ontgomery | and Birmingham.. If applicant’ S proposed service was available, it would be Seervensent to him, and it is _ desired: : | _ *& Murray Cingahd. of Tecas, ue. Atlanta, Ga.,. has main factory at Dallas, and shipments are received from that point. T on has been used on those shipments for the past 5 o&6 months. Other carriers used are Bowman, Hoover, LdeMac and East Texas Except durjng winter months, receives from two °to ° _ four shipments out of Dallas.per week, usually weigh- ing about .2,000 pounds. Shipments are subject to damage. Transcon promises to make third morning delivery in Atlanta from. Dallas, but such service not given. Witness. sponsored exhibit 84 covering 10 rep- resentative shipments handled by Transcon and sub- . } jected to an average transit time of 5.40 days, between Kebruary and December 1960. Time -in ‘transit: is im- portant to control inventories. Complaints have been ‘ made'to Transcon about the service. During the sum- mer warehouse is open 6 days a week, and sometimes ‘Sunday. Deliveries are accepted on Saturdays. Ship- . . ments are.made outbound from Atlanta to southeast- — ern states, the witness particularly naming towns in Alabang Applicant’ S proposed service would be con ~ venient, is desired, and wofild be used. Automotive Paint & Supply Company, Montgom- ery; Ala., reveives shipments, from Shreveport, and ‘Atlanta and Tucker, Ga. One Jarge , order is received from Shreveport each month, with three or four | mon fill-in orders. Time in transit is essential on ‘shipmpents because if colors are not in stock sale is lost. Bhipments from the points named average about 2,000 pounds, with the. fill-ins smaller. Carriers used have been™Dixie, West Bros. AAA Motor Lines, Ryder, and Braswell to Jackson. Out of Atlanta, - A-NO has been the principal carrier used. Service by applicant from Shréveport to Jackson very satisfac- - tory and trouble “generally experienced hen been affer $ t : . - ee ae e Ne: 97a 7 : Oy tl | "to 6. days. Pro . lis ¢. | shipment Was. ‘ate(lined a a: J ackson; ‘especially, with - Dixie’s service. Experiences poor, delivery service, and - often has to pick up. freight at carriér’s dock to insure. _ delivery. on. time to customers. Encountefs ’ Domtnk = difficulties i in tracing shipments originating at Shreve- _ port because: of’ interchange and of éarriers’ breach © of routings, -Witness_sponsored exhibit 85, covering 8 see representative shipments. between February and: Octo- - ber 1960, and depicting average transit times of 9.75 _ service en be iBdventageons, - “convenient, is desired ® by. witness, and would be used in order to increase sales by 10 percent ($300-460, a - month), and. afford better service to eustoniers. Re- : is ceives shipments all. day, 6 days a week. . Shreveport ‘Brass. We orks, Shreveport, La., spon- F "gored: exhibit 86 covering 7 represéntative shipments» from, February to October 1960, and showing transit * times afforded by Ryder rahying from 4 to 5.60 days, Shipments are receiyed from, Birmingham, and ‘Annis- ton, Ala., averaging. three _o or four per month. Time - in transit is ‘important. Ryder system. has .beert. used -during the last 12 months but. this . Service is Hot satis- ‘factory, and shipper desires a dependable 2-day service, Prior , theréto, . ‘yarious ‘combinations uséd requiring ‘two-line haul, but not considered: ‘adequate. Shipments * are. received all day, 6 days, a week. Witness desires Tae s proposed . service... . Anderson-Dunham, I ncorpordted, Minden, La, re- - eeives “shipments from Montgomery, averaging. from | . _ 2,000’ to’ 3, 000 pounds, Smaller s ipments,, of, replace- ment pate le ‘also 2 re, asa ant Peg Shipments from” Pala, Parsi in- | “id "ah pmehts oh gto ol Moai fe Desires Proposed: ¢ 2-day delivery pat of Mo ontgomery. ‘Witness sonal exhibit 87 listing 5 neprrsentatys, einpments it ae a —— ee ee eS eee ee ee ee . SS from cntennens, from: J. yet hy Senta 108 afforded an average, transit 5 33-4 a eS " pond Tehow ‘Bottling. Coane ‘Waco, ed re- * ceives shipments fromCo bus, Ga., once a week dur--- _ing the summertime, once e 2 weeks i in the winter. Shipments haye heen.made principally, by rail. Desires” _ applicant’s service and would, sg it. Time i in, transit is important, otherv ties. up too much. operating capital,. Sponsored exhibit 89 covering 32 representa- tive “thipments. handled by. rail and. subjected to, an "average transit ‘time of 6.25 days, from September 1959 to October 1960. Witness does nat, know all pres-. _ ent: available ¢ srvice “but has, inquired , of competitors about service it: an attempt to. improve its ald , tion requirements. ; _ Royal Crown. Bottling Company, “Abilene, ‘Tex., re- -eeiyes, shipments, from. Columbus, Gay. about ‘once a. week during | the summer, slower. in the winter.. Car- ‘riers used ‘have, been, Dixie, Ryder, Braswell, Trans- con, Sunset and Merchants. bas combinations 1 thereof. ’ - areal st Ge fot ‘oe ryig's pth arias ( . cree Bi” Witness apa eatin 88° covering 20° representa tive shipments from February | to November 1960, nt \ .* Showing transit times ranging from 5:33 to 8.24 raha Company does ‘not. have capital ta tie up!in stock; __ therefore, time in transit is: important. Practically _ every combination 6f ‘carriers utilized to obtain 3 day service on .Columbus-originating shipments without success, the most recent being Dixie, Transcop, and Sunset. Receiver needs third morning delivery, : as ised 4 day: delivery but always fail to provide such service, resulting -in witness having to borrow mer- chandise from nearby ' bottlers entailing eee Will « tse proposed service if authorized: » > here proposed, to coordinate ‘inventory: supply with | : customer demands. The protestants used have prom- ~" Poulan, Saw Company, Inc., Shreveport, La., makes ee. shipments into Atlanta and other Georgia points, and . through the Atlarita gateway to the Carolinas, Vir-. - ginias, and further points north and east. Carriers. used have been Ryder, Southwestern, Braswell, Couch, ‘Herrin, Strickland; and T&P Railroad. Interline of shipments always involves loss of time. Present serv- ice «rtilized-is-a-3-line haul, Desires-applicant’s ' “pro- posed. 2-day service to Atlanta and would use it. Time area.. service are important in order to satisfy customers _and to ‘maintain inventory control. The destination: carrier utilized out of Atlanta to Claxton is Benton. . «There is no other carrier that can handle the ship- ments. Witness sponsored exhibit: 90 covering 13 ‘representative shipments moving betwetn January and October 1960, and or an vine transit 4 _ Clazton Saw Company, Claxton, Ga., receives ship- - ments from Shreveport through the Atlanta gateway, =~ » possibly one a week. Transit time and consistency of ‘jn transit important to meet ves as ta situation a “time of 6.25 days afforded on ‘shipnients final Shreve- port. Shipments are received 7 days a week, including: _ Sundays and holidays. Service’ presently received is: . | unsatisfactory because too slow. Desires’a service from - Shreveport ‘of not over 4 days. Applicant’s proposed “service would be convenient and is-desired. Witness ~ ‘ has: agreed. with consignor that’ routing now used is best available, considering all: available carriers. Smith Venetian Blind Company, West Monroe, La., receives shipments from Birmingham. In 1959 ship- ments averaged one a week, but off some. in. 1960; average 1,000 to 1,500: pounds. Loss of one day in transit could mearf Joss of a job. Shipments have been © routed by Ryder because it is a single-line service. Witness sponsored ‘exhibit. 92 covering 22 representa- - . tive shipments from Birmingham to West Monroe in _ . 1959 and-nine during 1960, all’handled by Ryder, and ‘showing an average transit time of-5.04 days. Time in . transit is important®Applicant’s proposed service is desired and would be used. If’ it was available, ship-. ments from Birmingham would be increased. Appli- céint has been used om traffic from Dallas, and such "_- service characterized as reliable and dependable. Texas Refinery Corporation, Fort Worth, Tex. " “> makes shipment to Birmingham and to various points - along applicant’s proposed routes in Georgia and beyond daily. Shipments range from: 600 to 700 pounds to full truckloads. Warehouses are maintained at Birmingham and Greensboro, N.C. Shipments are made direet to.customers as well as to warehouses. - Carriers used_inelude. Central Freight, Campbelt-66, + Braswell, Bowman, Delta, Couch, Dixie, East Texas, and just about all of 1 the involved protestants without ' specifically naming theni. Most of available carriers have been used, either as delivering carrier or in com- bination from Forth Worth. Applicant’s service has . . ee 102 ane "been, used to other BoH § and Tonisiasa and is very : isfactory.. ‘Company -has s competitors, which com--. - ; petition. (local, distributors). Inust be met with a fest “delivery: Bervice,: - On, . Strickland, and Herrin » have.no terminals j in Fort Worth. Their pick-up and — = delivery: service iz not depe pedo Complaints. have _ been made. by letter to, Transco pis pick-up service’ : witha rene They. have been Pus numerous to. TF mart, ei. oat a a ship: tion reeate would: ably: discon “PFESE i tge ofits wn. ‘trucks. and: use motor, carrier service. ‘Has “specifically . re- quested, appligant on, numerous |, occasions: to\ file sack ap past ation. : ’ R, Pir, Gola Betting Company, Siro La. - » sponsored exhib it 93 covering 11 representative pie eG : between May und. November. 1964 and. showi ine . shi ay . ae eae ne Colu ri us. i b. Bie e trar : ansit: time. affor wan 644, ; - “days, and. on. two, ‘handled by Ryder from. Columbus, . the average way, 5 5Q days... Shipments. Ate received trom: Columbus Us. Once: a. week, and , sometimes tye. or toe per ,week, expépt. in, the, renter, months. Service as, not, been, satisfactory, Applicant's ‘Proposed: serv: i desired, and. would be is Feat fe big diien | that shipments do not come in wh henrthey are up- | ‘ ida. @- bibaba to.* Time “in transit too ‘dlow and i [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385001_1018%3A2. Public record. Not legal advice.