# Motion to Affirm — United States v. City of Chicago > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385001_1464%3A06 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Motion to Affirm - **Published:** January 1, 1970 - **Citation:** 400 U.S. 8 ## Text ~ * * L&N ’nd by the Commission, whiGi was granted by - this Court on April 3, 1970, Mr. Justice — dissent- ing. These appeals followed. _ » ARGUMENT These! appeals present no issue warranting plenary con- ". sidératioh by. the Court, as the questions are manifestly © = unsubstantial. The Government ‘expressly concedes that ifs separate appeal from the “Hummingbird” portion judgment ‘may not warrant plenary review. (No. 387, J.S.; pp. 6-7)* -L&N’s claim that the order rein- stating the “Hummingbird” lacks “findings” and is a man- datory_injunction, ignores the findings of the opinion itself, . --- as well as LAN’s pledge to restore the train ‘if plaintiffs were — successful in their appeals last term. (No. 386, J.S., pp. 13- _ 15)® The carsier’s further contention that the federal judi- ’ cidry lacks power to grant injunctive’ relief in ‘fp discontinuance cases is without merit.’ e*--oreorrrr— *The Govertiment’s contention that the tinuance is justified apart from the “Georgian” (No. 387, J.S., pp. 5-6), is simply at variance with the face of the "s decision in the “Hummingbird” case, (No. 387, J:S., pp. 32-33), as well as contrary Lo the express interrelationship ndted by the agency in its “Georgian” report. (No. 386, J.S., p. 27) See also Appendix C here- . to, 336 LC.C.'at 84-86. Moreover, the Government in the court below. did not oppose plaintiffs’ request in January, 1970, for summary ). remand of the “"Hummingbird” in thé event remand was granted for _s the “Georgian.” *A party taking acjion in the face of and with knowledge of re- _ quests for injunctive aelief is subject later to. restoration of the status ~ quo. Texas & N.O. v. Northside Ry., 276 US. 475,479; Porter - _ 9» Lee, 328 US. 246, 251; Porter v, Warner Co., 328 US. 395, 399. ” Moreover although the court need not make findings in summary paatea ‘proceedings, F.R. Civ. P-52(a), it did so here. "LAN analogizes section 13a(1) with section 15(7) of the Inter- state Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. 13a(1), 45(7), citing Arrow Transp.» CG». v. Southern Ry., 372 US. 658. ° , Arrow is strictly con- fined to the peculiar legislative history behind the freight rate suspen- : sion power. It applies to no other statute. 372 US. at 666, fn. 13. Moreover, ee ne ae the entry of an agency order on the merits: Here, the C&EI and LAN orders . a C&EI's discontinuance of its portion of the “Georgian” . train, which portion originated in Chicago and operated in the States of Illinois and Indiana, is the heart of the mat- ter; for in eliminating access to and from Chicago, the basic railroad paséenger structure in the Southeast - embracing ? also the States of Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana-has virtually 1. The Government's contention that the Commission may properly allow one railroad, tran$porting a train’ in through service with another railroad, to separately invoke the provisions of section 13a(1) without giving notice to the public in the area Served by the entire run‘of thegtrain, is contrary to the statute and contrary to elementary. fairness.* The Government asserts that the statutory scheme of sec- tion 13a, by providing a railroad with the option of having the Commission, rather than the State agencies, pass upon discontinuance proposals, suggests that the Commission should replace State agencies only to the extent that they _ ' could have defeated a carrier's attempt to discontinue a - train. Accordingly, since C&EI could have proceeded uni- laterally to the Illinois and Indiana agencies, the Government urges that there should be no requirement in section 13a(1) as to notice in States which had no regulatory powet over | C&EL (No. 386, J.S., pp. 7-8) The Commission’s construction of the statute is unsettled and of recent origin. The C&EI decision constituted the first final order of the Commission on the point.” More- were both administratively final in every sensé.. There is nothing in the legislative history of Section 13a to suggest a limitation on the at judiciary. Congress was concerned with limiting the Commission's interim relief to a maximum four month period. . ' *A number of complaints were filed with the Commission by residents in the South who had ré@teived no notice of the C&EI. _ discontinuance. See Appendix to Nos. 101 & 102, Oct. Term, 1969,. at pp. 82-87. %A different three-judge panel in the Northern District of Jilinois, on June 4, 1970, set aside the Commission's piecemeal and disjointed handling of the “California Zephyr”, operated by three railroads be- > wy over, where a single railroad secks to discontinue only a portion of a passenger ‘run, the agency has ruled that all stations and Governors over the run must be given notice, even that segment of the operation not proposed for dis- contindance. Chicago,-M.; St. P. & P.R.R. Co. Discontin- tuance of Trains, 317 1.C.C. 761, 771-73. The basic premise of the Government is contradicted by the legislative purpose and statutory language, One of the principal evils to which section 13a was directed was “the prior confused and time-consuming procedure under which the States supervised the discontinuance of passenger trains.” City of Chicago v. United States. 396 U.S. at 164-05. *Piece- meal ‘discontinuances by State agencies were of primary voncem to the Congress. Senator Bricker, one of the floor icaders, stated: a “Mr. Bricker: Confusion arises when a railroad has, let-us say, four trains running between-Columbus, - Ohio, and Indianapolis, Ind. Ohio might permit the railroad to take off | train, running-at 10 a.m. and Indiana might permit the railroad to take off | train running at 2 p.m. Buf’in that event the railroad would have to continue the operation of all of them ‘in order to: meet the requirements of the local and State groups. That situation has led to interminable delay and confusion which would be relieved as a result’ of enactment of the pending bill in that then “the railroads would appeal to the Interstate Com- merce Commission.” (104 Cong: Rec. 10842) Senator Smathers stated: : a . . "+ Perens, oa “Mr, Smathers: What happens? The Public Utilities. Commission of New York will approve the discon- “~tinuance of trains numbered 1, 6 and 12. The Public Utilities Commission of Pennsylvania will approve the discontinuance of tfains numbered 2; 9, and 13. _ tween Chicago, Ill. and San Francisco, Calif. The Commission and the United States have noticed appeals to this Court. from that decision. Nos. 70 C 585 & 689, City of Chicago v, United States (Kerner, CJ., Will and Parsons, DJJ.). -® 4 | . s ee Page ’ ‘The Public Utilifies Commission of Delaware will ap- - prove the discontinuance of trains numbered 16, 19, and 8. They are never the same trains; with the result that, while the record of the, public utilities commission is pretty good with respect to the number of appli- cations they have granted, those trains are still ‘operating. Why? Because the railroad cannot get the public utilities commissions to agree on the same trains.” (104 Cong. Rec. 10851) : The Commission's construction of section 1 3a(1) would comtinue, at the federal: level, the very same segmented evaluation of passenger trains which Congress. sought to avoid by enactment of the legislation. Yet the National Transportation Policy is difected “all to the end of. de- veloping, coordinating, and preserving a national trans- portation system by water, highway, and rail .. . adequate to meet the needs‘of the commerce ot the United States, of the Postal Service, and of the national defense.” 49 U.S.C. preceding section |. Accordingly, the Contmission is mandated to examine the overall national interest in coordinated service.” It cannot close ‘its eyes to the com- plete train service, and serve as a mere substitute for an * individual State agency. This court has emphasized that a federaJ standard applies to interstate train discontin- p ‘uances. City of Chicago v. United States, 396 U.S..at 165. The language of section 13a(1) is consistent with the legislative purpose of having the Commission examine the overall public public interest in passenger service, which overall view must embrace notice to, and the testimony of the affected public. A three-judge court recently struck down the Commission’s interpretation of the _ Statutory language of Section 13a(1) on this point: “The Interstate Commerce Commission and the de- fendants interpret Section 13a(1) as only requiring each individual railroad to notify the Governors of _ the states in which it operates and each railroad may. . proceed under Section 1|3a(1) independently of the ‘ Other railroads which together make up an entire train. Southern Pacific Co. Discontinuance of Trains- Y hae ‘Ogden, Utah, and Oakland, California, 333 1.C.C. 525 (1968). The Commission’s interpretation is based on the concept that “train’’ as used in Section | 3a(1) ‘means. one that is operated by one railroad between two or more states. It is our gpinion that such interpretation is in direct Conflict with the literal language of the stat- ute. . “The statute begins “A carrier or carriers . . . (whose) _ ++» Fights with respect to the discontinuance .. . of the Operation . . . of any (interstate) train . . . are sub- ject (© any provision of the constjtution or statutes of any State... may... file with the Commission and © . mail to the Governor of each State in which such train is operated .. .”” The logical reading of this stat- ute is that more than one carrier can be a Part of a single “train”’, otherwise the plural “carriers” would. ~ have no meaning. The Commission claims that such interpretation negates the policies behind the Trans-" - ‘portation Act of 1958 in enacting Section 13a(1). Sec- tion | 3a(1) was enacted in order that railroads would no longer have to obtain separate permission from each state regulatory agency in seeking to discontinue passen- ger trains and thereby avoid both the lack of uniformity and the long delay involved in such a procedure. The, * purpose of Section | 3a(1) was to shift the venue from the state regulatory agencies to the Interstate Commerce > - Commission and at the same time permit the statesin- . ~~ volved to present their objections to the Commission. See New Jersey v. New York, Susquehanna & Western Railroad Co.. 372 U.S. 1 (1963).” City of Chicago vy. United States (No. 70 C 585 & 689, N.D. IIL-E »:, 6/4/70). We agree with the Gansta that section 13a(1) is an optional statute. Section 13a(1) does not directly pre-empt State jurisdiction. A railroad’ has the option of proceeding to the States rather than to the Commissidn. But the mere fact that section 13a(1) is an optional statute does not mean that the federal agency is simply to act in the stead of the State authority. A railroad electing the greatly expedited federal procedure must comply with federal standards and. with federal criteria. If C&EI wishes to enjoy the rapid and expedited federal procedures, then notice must be given to the public and to all Governors in the areas served by the train. '° | » The court below correctlysheld that the notice given did’ not comply with the statutory requirements. 2. The district court took note of the action of, the ~ Commission in awarding C&EI’s Chicago-Evansville line to ‘L&N, rather than to Illinois Central Railroad Company, one of the important considerations in the Commission’s deter- mination being the anticipated maintenance afd improve- ment of through passenger service between Chicago. and the South via the C&EI and L&N routes. (No. 386, J.S., p. 14) - That decision, sustained by the Supreme Court, provides an ’ indépendent basjs for affirming the judgment below. See: Missouri Pac. R. Co. -Control-Chicago & E.R. Co., 327 L.C.C.. 279 at 298, 301, 332, 338, 361-62; Illinois Central Railroad Company v. United States, 263 F.Supp. 421, aff'd 385 U.S. 457 (1967); and 336 LC.C. 81 at 84-86, attached he-eto as Appendix C, at pp. 4-6. L&N, having acquired C&EI’s Evansville line, is respon- sible for the passenger service findings relied upon by the Commission in awarding the line to it. Yet after securing approval in January; 1967, the carrier in June, 1967 commenced Commission proceedihgs aimed at ter- mination of the “Georgina-Hummingbird”™ service. 336 © LCC 81 at 84-86 (App. C, pp. 4-6). MOCREI, Gictn its jurisdictional statement, assails the decision below for failure to specify the line or lines of route over which no- tices should be posted in the remanded proceedings. The contention is without merit since by consolidating the proceedings, the complete ~ “Georgian” and “Hummingbird” routes would be before’ the Commis- ‘sion. Moreover, L&N’s acquisition of the C&EI properties in June, 1969, renders unnecessary any separate C&EI notice. As noted, fn. 1, supra, we today fai to understand any C&El. interest in these proceedings. . a . : SERS ® Vo eer lt —e a ye, ; 12 ‘ ‘CONCLUSION. ba For the reasons stated, we submit that the halieeak: of the district court should be affirmed. | Respectfully ‘submitted,, _* RICHARD L. CURRY ; ° BERNARD RANE P ® MA GOLDSTEIN 511 City Hall Building Chicago, i. 60602 Z ? EUGENE W. WARD e Cordell Hull Building . Nashville, Tenn. 37219 * Of Counsel: _. . © CHARLES E. GRIFFITH I ROBERT E. KENDRICK 204 Metropolitan Court- -house Building “Nashvilje, Tenn. 37201 EDWARD J. HICKEY, Jr. MATHIAS M. MATTERN 511 City Hall Building , Chicago, il. 60602 J. KENNETH @TKING Cordeit Hull Building 5 Nashville, Tenn. 37219 gry thes aimee 3 WENODELL w. a tal Washington, 0.C. 20005 MARION E. WRIGHT, RTH 106 N. Vermilion Street waaucet as Seah. de Danville, I. 61832 JOHN W. HINCHEY KEITH E. ROBERTS : 132 State Judicial Building ‘ 120 S. LaSalle Street Atlanta, Ga. 30334 : - Chicago, WI. 60603 “" WELDON A. COUSINS 5 ANTHONY HASWELL “ 737 National Bank of Commerce Bids. s \ 2517 N. Burling New Orleans, La. 70112 _ Chicago, 1. 60614 CHESTER L. RIGSBY WILLIAM E. NELSON State Office Buliding Dyer Buliding Frankfort, Ky. 40601 Hoopeston, ill. 60942 LEON M. DESPRES GEORGE 8. TOFAUTE | 77 W. Washington : ae 17 Harding Avenue Chicago, Il. 60602 Terre Haute, Ird. 47801 GORDON P, MacDOUGALL , ROBERT P. DOOLITTLE, Jr.- F 705 Ring Building 801 Busseron Street . Washington, 0.C. 20036 Vincennes, ind. 47591 * a : ' HENRY C. NEEL y Farm Credit Buliding Attorneys fe or Ap, pe lees Henderson, Ky. WILLIAM F. BLACK : CARL lL. EVANS ; ; ‘ ° State Office Building 4 Mofritgomery, Ala. 36102 CARL E. VanDORN 807 State Office Building indianapolis, ind. 46204 BENNETT E. SMITH ; _ State Office Bidg. - Rm. 1105 : . ne Jackson, Miss. 39201 ’ » SHELDON A. TAFT a, % , GERALD P. WADKOWSKI +. 111 N. High Street re , - Columbus, Ohio 43215 August 1970. aes APPENDIX A SERVICE DATE : . | MAY 15; 1968 - ORDER At a Sestion of the INTERSTATE COMMERCE COM- MISSION, Division 3, acting as an Appellate Division, held at its office in is ccna D. C., on the 8th day +e May, 1968. ’ Finance Docket No. 24725 CHICAGO & EASTERN ILLINOIS RAILROAD Co. DISCONTINUANCE OF TRAINS NOS. 93 AND $4 BE- TWEEN CHICAGO, I&L., AND EVANSVILLE, IND. Upon consideration of the record in the above-titled proceedings, including the petition filed by the Cities of Chicago, Danville, Hoopeston, Terre Hau@e, Vincennes, and Watseka and the Village of Milford, on March 1, 1968, for’ reconsideration of the order of the Commission, Division 3, dated January 25, 1968, authorizing the above- titled discon- ’ tinuance; applicant’ s reply thereto; petitioners’ motion to strike certain matter appearing in the reply; and — s reply to the’ motion; and ee . It appearing, That the matters appearing in the reply to the petition objected fo in the motion to strike are not of record in this proceeding and therefore not properly before this Commission as evidence and that no objection is made to the motion to strike; It further appearing, That in order to invoke the jurisdic- _ tion of this Commission under section 13a(1) of the Inter-. state Commerce Act a.carrier must comply with: certain requirements, including the posting of notice “in each, station, depot, or other facility involved” (49 CFR 43. 5(j)), which notice must contain a “complete description of the present service of the train . . involved and of the discon- tinuance or change of operation or service proposed” (49 CFR 43.5(c)); and that the purpose of requiring such notice is to give the travelling public affected the opportunity to protest the proposed discontinuance; and A. 2 It further appearing, That applicant in the above-titled. proceeding failed to give .the proper notice required, as - described above, in that“ffio notice was posted in those faci- lities along the through route of trains Nos. 93 and-54 south of Evansville, Ind., and the notice as posted contained no mention of the through-route nature of ‘the trains south of Evansville; and that applicant therefore tras not effectively invoked the jurisdiction of this c ommission in the above- titled proceeding: . - It is ordered, That the motion to strike certain matters appearing in applicant's, reply. to the petition for reconsider- "ation be, and it is hereby, granted: ae It is further ordered, That the petition, insofar as it seeks dismissal of the above-titled proceeding for, failure to iNvoke this Commission's jurisdiction under section | 3a(1), be, and | it is here by. granted, and in all other respects is denieds or By the € ‘ommission, tides 3, acting as an Appellate Division. . : + it NEIL GARSON, Secretary (SEAL) ee a SERVICE DATE ; . MAY 15, 196% APPENDIX B- on dee 2 At a Session ‘of the INTERSTATE. COMMERCE COM- MISSION, Division 3, acting as an Appellate Division, held at its office in waeneon, D.C, on the %th day of May, 1968. velet Finance Docket No. 24725. - CHICAGO & EASTERN ILLINOIS RAILROAD CO. - DISCONTINUANCE OF TRAINS NOS. 93 AND 54 BE- TWEEN CHICAGO, ILL., AND EVANSVILLE, IND: Upon consideration of the record in the above-titled proceedings, including the petition filed by the Cities of. Chicago, Danville, Hoopeston, Terre Haute, Vincennes, and Watseka andthe Village of Milford, on March 1, 196%, for reconsideration’ of the order of the Commission, Division 3. dated January 25, 196%, authorizing the above-titled discon- | tinuance; applicant’s reply thereto; petitioners’ motion to strike certain matter appearing Fin the re reply; and sonceaecs S reply to thé motion, ‘and : Ht appearing, That the arder of the Conimission, Division 3, acting as an Appellate: Division, dated May %, 1968, and ‘served earlier on May 15, 1968, erroneously indicated that the Commission had granted - the _petition insofar as it sought dismissal of the above-titled ‘proceeding for failure. to properly invoke this patauameaces. S jurisdiction under section™ - 13a(1);, Tea ee It farther appearing, , That the matters appearing in the reply to the petition objected to in the motion to strike are not of record in this proceeding and therefore not: properly ‘ ‘before this Commission as evidence and that no objection | is made to the motion to strike; - a: further appearing, That in order to invoke the jurisdic- . tion Of this Commission under section 13a(1) of the Inter- - state Commerce Act a carrier must comply. with certain’ PAN INES) TRON Ae oT, iy B2 | fi Tequirements, including the posting of notice “in pg station, depot, or other facility involved” (49 CFR 43. oe which notice must contain a “complete description of the . "present service of the train . ... involved and ofthe discon- . ™, ; tinuance or change of operation. or service proposed” (49 ~ "Se ' CFR 43. 5(c)); and. that the purpose of requiring such. notice is to give the travelling: public affected the = to : protest the proposed discontinuance. anaes Tit further appearing, ‘That applitant in the above: titled proceeding gave the proper notice required, as described. ». above;, and | ren Vata soe ean It further appearing. That’ no other new issues are raised or I Surer a of substance offered to support the request for reconsideration, and good cause has not been shown for - granting the relief requested: It is ordered, That the motion to strike certain matters ‘appearing in applicant’s feply to the petition for reconsider- ation be, and it is hereby, granted; e, Itis further ordered, That the petition for reconsideration - be, and it is hereby, denied in all respects. By the Commission, Division 3; — as ap Appellate Division. *H. NEIL poe ~ Secretary (SEAL), 5 RO AES i SORES, de . Served December 12, 1969 «* dureene eaten: se tones : INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION | a FINANCE DOCKET No. 25765. LOUISVILLE. AND: NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY DISCON- | _, TINUANCE OF. TRAINS: NOS. '3.AND 4 BETWEEN ATLANTA, GA., AND EVANSVILLE, IND.,-AND’ TRAINS NOS. 5 AND 10 BETWEEN FVANSVILLE AND ST. LOUIS, MO. ‘ » Decided December 3.1969 — } . ? ‘ ; e ° on, Upapinvestigation, found that continuance of operation by the Louisville * and Nashville Railroad Company of service by its passenger trains Cg Nos. and 4 between Atlanta, Ga., and Evansville, Ind., and its pas- Senger ‘trains ‘Nos. 5 and 10 between Evansville, Ind., and St. Louis, Mo., is required by the public convenience and necessity and con- tinued operation will not unduly burden interstate commerce, Opera- tion ordered. for a period of 6 months from the. date heregf, Investiga- ‘tion discontinued. : : _ ‘F. Wesley Bowers; Clifford T. Coomes, Tyree B. Harris, Joseph L.Lenthan, W. Rhett Tanner, and Ralph D. Walker for LouisviNe - - and Nashville Railroad Company. . a2 Koad me _d. Fred Parker for Georgia Public Service Conimission, Carl F. Van Dorn for State of Indiana, and Eugene W. Ward for Tennessee Public Service Commission, protestants? — Soe. SS Vint David L. Stanley for city of Carmi, Ill.,\ Bernard Rane, Raymond F. Simon and Mathias M. Mqttern for city of Chicago, IIl., Demetri -- Hassakis for city of Mt. Vernon, Ill., Robert S. Matthews for city of Evansville, Ind., and- Albert W. McCallister for village of En- field and county of White, Ill., protestants. ste ; Gordon. P: MacDougall for passenger association, protestant. hla W. E. Cobble, Gordon E.. Coz, ‘S. G. Davenport, B. L. Dresbach, Thomas J.Duggan, L. G. Freeman, Joe Hester, Richard H. Kraus. haar, George B. Lee, Tom McNeal, Maurice F. Radriz2i, Robert Fr’ Reynolds, Mack P, Rice, Henry Risner, Keith. Roberts, D..M. . ‘Schmitt, W. R« Selby, George P. Sheahan, A. L. Shepherd, Harry. T. Smith, J. He Smith, W.C. Spencer and G. |. Winn, Jr., for rail- ~ way labor organizations, protestants. a Rie. 336 I.C.C, Roe Peay pad dar & a} "0. ‘ * ; ° * os s a ed o- . of 7 * “ ’ ; ¢ ‘ . . . £ . , ‘ ; 1s % ; * ¢ P , - . ° , ad - . , P a, . ad » ¢ . * 7 ‘ . ’ Te e2 sp INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REPORTS . ‘ dl 2 ‘| REPORT OF TH® COMMISSION * -~ * Divigion 3, COMMISSIONER'S TUGGLE, DEASON, AND-HARDIN — ns . HARDIN, Commissioner: ! ‘On July 9,. 1969, Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company. (L&N), a common Carrier by railroad sub ject to the provisions of part I of the Interstate Commerce Act, filed two separate notices and a single supporting statement pursuant. to the provisions ie section -13a(k) of the “act proposing to discontinue operati August 13, 1969, of its (1) passenger trains Nos. 3 and 4 be een Atlanta, Ga., and Evansville, Ind., a distance of 444 miles, and, (2) passengers traips Nos. 5 and 10 between Evansville and St. Louis, Mo., a distance of 165 miles, or a total distawce of 609 miles. © Upon, consideration thereof and of a petition filed July 25, 1969, by the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP), re-. questing the carrier’s notice be re jected for lack of jurisdiction,’ and protests filed by the association, various tommunities, thdivi- uals, labor organizations and State regulatory agencies, the’Com- mission, division 3, by order entered July 30, 1969, instituted an _ investigation of the proposal embracing the issues "raised by the petitioh, and ordered continued operation of the train¥tor a period not to exceed 4 months beyond the date when the. proposed discon- ‘tinuance would. otherwise become effective. Because of the statu- tory limitation upon the time available for investigation and deci-- sion, the order provided that hearings would be held, for the omis- sion of a report and recommended order by the hearing examiner, and for certification of the record t6 us for inftial decision. Pur- - guant to a later order, duly posted in stations served by the trains, . public hearings were held at St. Louis, Carmi, Ill., Evansville, | Hopkinsville, Ky., Nashville and “Chattanooga, Tenti., and Dalton, and Atlanta, Ga., between September 24 and October ve 1969, inclusive. Briefs.have been filed. 7 As previously indi ted, NARP in its petition requests rejection . of the notices filed by L&N on the grounds that the carrier failed effectively to invoke the Commission’s jurisdiction pursuant to : section 13a(1) of the act in that the wording of the certificate of posting does’not indicate whether both notices, i.e., the notice con- cerfing trains Nos, 3 and 4,‘and the notice concerning trains Nos. 5 and 10, were in fact posted at all stations served by the trains ‘ between St.- Louis*and Atidnta, that neither notice sets forth the ’ = 336 LCL. = 2 7 - Atlanta at 10:55°a.m. (e.s.t.). Sad - . “+3 The normal consist of trains Nos. 4-10 is one diesel locomotive, -one Atlanta-Nashville storage mail car, Yc aga ia Louis storage ‘mail car, one Atlanta-St. Louis ggage and mail car, and one Atlanta-St. Louis. reclining seat coach. During: June, July, and August an additional coach is added on weekends. One deadhead. Atlanta-Nashville storage mail car-is also carried on each of S days of the week. No sleeping or dining cars are now . carried on the trairis. The normal'consist of trains Nos. 3-5 is. i one_ single-unit diesel locomotive, one St. Louis-Atlanta storage: Y mail car, one St. Louis-Atlanta baggage and mail car, and one Sts . Louis- Atlanta coach with an additional coach on weekends during June; July, and August. Qn 5 days‘a week two additional Nashville- Atlanta storage mdil cars are carried on trairi No. 3, One dead- fe head storage. mail car is also. carried between ’St. Louis and Nashville. No sleeping or dining cars are carried on the trains & nor is any food service available for the convenience of passengers on. any of the: trains during the 609-mile trip between St. lis - and Atlanta, such services having been discontinued: in 1 on ‘the St. Louis-Evansville trains when the trains were designated 7h ery trains Nos. 53 and 92, and in ie eel 1968, on the Evansville- : 4 336 I.C.C.. 3 \e | \* - Prem (88. INTERSTATE COMMERCE ‘COMMISSION een eda tt tint RO er se oe , io ee ‘Atlanta train. That circumstance is frequently referred: to by protestants as contfibuting to declining patronage, but defended © * by the railroad as an ‘economy measire. . While there is no food " . gervice available or provided on the trains, the cafrier represents . that southbound passengers on train No. 5 have a 70-minute. layover at Evansville before proceeding on (fain No. 3 to.Atlanta, and have available a restaurant across the street from the L&N railroad station, and” passemgers ‘on train No, 3 are given time (10 minutes)~at- Chattanooga to obtain’ breakfast. Northbound — passengers on train No. “4 arrive Chattanooga at 8:30°p.m. and -- depart at 8:45 p.m., and may obtain evening meal service at that, , point. No other convenient point is provided on train No. 10 which departs. Evansville at 4: :15 a.m. arriving St. Louis at.8: :55,pems Each train. handles passengers, some U, S. mail, and baggage. No: -exptess, except for a single movement on train No. 3 from _ ‘Nashville to Atlanta, has been handled on. trains Nos. 3 or 4 ‘since April 1, 1968. No express has been handled on trains Nos. 5 or 10 since April 1, 1968. Some expréss previously handled on these trains now moves trailer-on-flatcar (TOFC). 4 Storage mail now movgs in these: trains. However, the Post - etoM Office Department has notilied L&N that the last day for handling ‘bulk mail at L&N’s Nashville station will be.November 28, 1969, and that effective November 29, 1969, substantial changes with - /Yespect to transportation pf storage mail will be instituted. -In _ that regard, , effective April 18, 1969; the Nashville to Kansas City, Mo., storage mail was’ diverted to TOFC service by order- of the Post Office Department. Allother storage mail now. moving: _” in these traits will be diverted to star routes by highway éarriers. ‘: Thereafter, only a.small amount of preferential mail would be © expected to be’ handled on these trains. ts Se The passénger coaches utilized by these ard pmeipaol ‘by the carrier as. modern and ‘well mainta » Of steel and aluminum. construction, purchased new in 1946, and have seating capacity. of 60 persons in each coach. The coaches are equipped _ with revérsible reclining seats, are air conditioned, have modern lighting, washroom and toilet facilities. . + Financial data.— The. carrier’s balance. sheet gtatement as of June 30,.1969, shows assets of $1, 049.3 million, including current age ‘assets $95 million, special funds $4.7 million, investments $39.2 - million, total properties less reserve for depreciation and.amofti-— 4° =” gation, $900.4 million, and. other assets and deferred charges $9.8 een - million. ae gino were: .Current liabilities $60.5 ‘million, song- ‘term debt dué within. 1 year ‘$29 million, long-term, debt due after. - bate year $423.9 million, reserves $5.7. million, other liabilities and deferred credits $19.2’ million, capital stock $123. ‘9 million, capital surplus $22.1 million and retained income ‘unappropriated $364.6 ~ ‘million. L&N “ihcome statements for 1967, 1968, and first 6 months — _ of 1969 show, respectively, railway operating revenues of $285.3 . "million, $301. 7 million, and $161.7 million; net railway operating . é income’ of $31.4 million, $35.0° million and $19.3 million; and . °° + ordinary net income after fixed charges-and other dedisctions Ae ~ | $19.9 million, $22.9 million, and ‘$13.1 million. | ° : Financial results.— L&N subfhitted financial results of the trains’ operation for 1967, 1968, and first 7 ‘months of 1 ‘Revenues during .1967 and 1968 include pass nger, mail, exp om) baggage, ~ dining and passenger car rental. During the 1969 partial-year _ period revenues include passenger, mail, express and baggage . °... only. Passenger counts are. for the 19 months’ period ended . July 31, 1969. Excluding maintenance-o f-way and-structurés ~ expense, L&N’ data show in 1967 trains Nos. 3 and 5 revenues of $1,064,861, and out-of-pocket expenses of $1,519;674, for an i out-of-pocket loss .of $453,813. During the. same -period for trains Nos. 4 and 10 revenues were: ‘$1,134,769 and out-of- & pocket expenses $1,439,380, for an eo a loss of $304,611. In 1968, the L&N data show trains Nos. 3 and 5\as having revenues | of $477,264, and out-of-pocket expértses of $822,718, for an out- of-pocket loss of $345,454. During the same period. trains Nos, 4. and 10 revenues were $570,751, and out-of-pocket expenses — $815,338, for an out-of-pocket: logs of $244,587. During the first 7 months of 1969, the data show trains Nos. 3°and/5 as having revenues of $227, 723, and out-of-pocket expenses of $457,844, for an out-of-pocket loss of $230,121. During the same period trains ' Nos. 4 and 1G revenues were’$194,013, and out-of-pocket: expenses of $426, 243, for an out-of-pocket —_ of aa cited Operation of the 836 1.0.0. wae : . a Sent Ane INTERSTATE pane covalent REPORTS . °s = * oo ei sent ies h ic) rt nt 1969 . (projecting | ata’ from the: first 7 months), are expected to prodtice net out-of-pocket. (savable) losses, before Federal jncome , . tax effect, of. $784,130, and projecting such data for the period - .° December 1, 1969 through November 30, 1970, would’ approxi- mate net. pre-tax out-of-pocket (savable)* loss. of $942,364, ‘The , _ latter figure ‘is . submitted to show effect of loss of mail on i November 29, 1969.. L&N argues that discontinuance of the trains in 1967 or 1968-would have been’ warranted considéring the losses it shows in those periods, and that ¢gntinued operation in the ‘light. of the projected 1969..loss of $784, ,000 reflecting feeder gain based on current operations, and ‘in the light of the annual loss, of _ $942,364 reflecting loss of Us S.mail effective November 29 1969, after deducting gain from that mail which would move in TOFG, - and which may be expected asa minimum: loss for futuré years, ‘cannot be justéfied. L&N ‘further argues. that such lofses) =. be justly absorbed by it because such losses are an ane nomic drain on. its working ‘capital. ; ‘combined, trains; for the periods indicated shows, respectively, . + revenues of $2,199, 630, $1 048,015, and $421, 736, ; out-of-pocket ex- penses ‘of $2,958, 054, $1, 638,056, and $884, 087. The net out-of-poc- * 4 . ket losses, after excluding maintenace.of way and structures \and: ‘giving effect to feeder value, but before Federal income tax effect, are, respectively, $566,397; $564, 618, and $461, 282, Operations for 2 pias . L&N’s financial results of the operation of ‘both sets of sratile . | for thé first 7 months of 1969 and as projected for all of 1969 based on “present ‘operation are shown: in appendix B. L&N _ expects beriefits from a net annual savings thfough discontinuance. excluding. maintenance of ‘way and structures, but including feeder © traffic gain,—of $784,130 before provision for taxes:(26. 4 percent © rate) and $577,119, after such .provision. Projected for a l12- ‘month period December 1, 1969 through ‘November 30, ‘1970, L&N. expects to realize a net gnnual savings.t through discontin- uance, excluding expense for maintenance of way and structures, “and: including” gain from U; S, mail diversion, of $942,364 before provision for taxes (estimated at 24.6-peycent rate) and $710,544 ° _’ after such-provision. Passenger revenues were determined by _ applying. system average revenue per passenger-mile to the actual -number, of revénue passenger-miles developed: on these trains and reflect the 10-percent incr&ase effective July 1, 1968. Passenger-miles. attributable to the subject trains were obtained from.an analysis of tickét collections and daily reports submitted . ‘by conductors on these runs. Mail revenues were based on actual | ) ; se 338 1,C.C. ; (a ah Basket eran > e - - i Ee ees a ee eae LOUISVILLE & N. R.. 9% DISCONTINUANCE OF "TRAINS 2 a . pilings. Express teverues (carload) are “actual; leas enka ; ‘load‘are based on calculations: using car foot-miles. applicable to . - the-traing-as against the system totals. . Baggage revenies are -- ics ‘ actual.: Wages of train. -and- enginecréws are actual—amounts . paid, tp which. has been added. allowance for appropriate payroll taxes, vacation, holiday, health and) welfare, paid by- L&N for: . .account of the crews. Locomotive repairs, fuel, lubricants, other. locomotive ‘supplies, and enginehouse experises are based ona: - system average Cost (excluding overhead) per. diesel unit-mile applied to the diesel, unit-miles operated by ‘the ‘subject trains. Locomotive: and car depreciation - costs and costs of deadhéading ~ cars, and’ the wages, and fringe benefits of- station employees at - ‘Nashville,.are. excluded from out- -of-pocket expenses: of the subject - - trains. $uch losses are thus claimed. to be understated for the .. 1969 projection:by $80,199. .— * ‘Passenger car repairs and train supplies and expenses were computed by . applying systemiaverage cost (excluding overhead) per’ passenger car-mile tothe car-miles operated by the. subject: trains Nos. 3, 5, 4, and 10. Rent for passenger train gars was computed by multiplying appropriate mileage rate by the mileage . ' accrued ‘on the. L&N (in the subject trains) for foreign line pas- ‘ ‘ senger ears operating ‘betw@en Atlanta and St..Louis. Pérsonal ,injury ‘and property damage expenses were computed on \basig-of: average. annual cost per passenger train-mile using expénses’ . _charged to. passeriger service and. passenger train-miles for the system. Terminal ‘ented coveréd expenses at St. Louis, Evansville, ' and Atlanta, as well.as cost of ‘operation of joint-line facilities. ' These were calculated on.an avoidable cost basis approved by this ’ Commission’ in Chicago, R. Il. & P.-R. Co. Discontinuance OF . Trains, 328 1.C.C, 278 Discontinuance of trains Nos. 5 and 10 - use of main-line tracks and East St. Louis, Ill., relay passenger ‘gtation, Expenses at Evansville include cost of operating the - subject traing through the joint terminal, apportioned to L&N Ly and C&EI on number of cars into and out of terminal. However, . | @ffective: February 3, 1968, that terminal ceased to be a joint. _operation and no’ expenses“are shown after that date for the sub~ \ would . eliminate ‘all these expenses since they are the last L&N : — trains to utilize the terminals. Those expenses included. - re costs of operating the trains through various zones of the. ~ “terminal plus bridge transfer’ charges and trackage. charge for ject. trains. ‘Expenbes at — include cost of operating the 336 1.€.C. : Pr a eee . : 4 C. 12 *92 - INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION a ‘ sub ject traing into and out of joint terminal, apportioned to L&N, . Seaboard Co4st Line, and Georgia Railroads on number of cars into and out, of terminal. However, effective January 26, 1969, terminal cease to be jointly operated and no expenses are shown after that date for operating subject trains into and,gut of terminal. Statign employees expense and station supplies expense as shown are actual. Discontinuance of the trains would eliminate the positions of the former and there would be no need for the latter. Passenger revenues projected ‘for 1969 were determined: by using the passenger revenues earned during the first 7 months of 1969, and adjusting to 12 months assuming heavier travel during vacation months and special holidays. No adjustment was “ .made to tfeflect the downward trend in rail passenger utilization. The mail revenues projection was estimated on basis of notice received from the Post Office Department that all storage mail cs would be discontinued on the subject trains effective November 29, 1969, and upon advice of post office officials that limited preferential mail would continue on the subject trains, Projected expenses were applied as previously described for current opera- tions using consist of one locomotive, ore coach and one head- . end car on each of the subject trains, and assumed no additional equipment during heavy travel. periods. Feeder revenue and expenses were predicated on analysis from samples of passenger and mail traffic feeding to and from the subject trains. While protestants express some dissatisfaction with a number of areas. of L&N’s financial data their arguments ‘are not persuasive. a of the train service.—L&N’s evidence shows that there has been & decrease in passenger-miles for trains Nos. 4-10 and 5-3 between Atlanta and St. Louis in recent years. Passenger- miles for trains Nos, 4-10 for 1967, 1968 and first 7 months of 1969 were 16,779,931, 6,000,831, and 1,288,508, respectively. Passenger-miles for trains Nos. 5-3 were 17,017,116, 4,082,958, and 918,233'for the same periods, respectively. For the separate segments trains Nos. 3 and 4 between Atlanta and Evaneville passenger-miles for 1966, 1967, and 1968 were 36,167,888, 30,271,327, and 7,66),396, respectively. As to trains Nos. 5 and 10 passenger-miles for the same periods were 4,998, o44, 3,525,- 720, amd 2,422,393, respectively. L&N’s passenger count data covers a period of 18 months . beginning February 1, 1968 and ending July 31, 1969, during which the subject trains carried 33,829 passengers (18,480 0n trains Nos. 4-10 and 15,349 on trains Nos. 5-3). During that period, 8,211 336 1.C.C. * . CAP tee LOUISVILLE & N. RJ CO, DISCONTINUANCE OF RAINS , 93 passengers boarded. train No. 4 at Atlanta, of which 1,918 came ‘s ‘from othef connections, 3,552 at Nashville, afyhich 1,835. came from other connections, 1,975 at Chattanooga, Of’which 208 came “from other connections, 330 at Hopkinsvillé, 322 ar Marietta, Ga., ° 264 at Tullahoma,-Tenn., 152 at Dalton, 108 at Madisonville; Ky., 79 at Cartersville, Ga., 7Qcat Henderson, Ky., and 4 at Guthrie, - Ky. The same train on departing Pvansville.as No. 10, recéived + on board 1,566 passengers, 683 at Carmi, 418 at McLeansboro, 297 at Mount Vernon, IIf., 271.at Mount Vernon, Ind., 122 at Nash-. ° ville, I1l., 28 at Enfield, Il)., 27 at Rellevifle, Il., and lat St. Louis. Of those passengers detraining fram train No. 4,'4,017 detrained at Nashville, Tenn., of which 2,573 went to othér connections, .' 768 at Evansville, 774 at Chattanooga, of- which 14 went to con- ~ necting trains, 263 at Tullahoma, 223 art Hopkinsville, 100 at Madisonville, 74 at Henderson, 12 at Dalton, 9 at Marietta, and _ 5 at Guthfie. On.the same train departing Evansville as No. 10, _~ 11,065 detrained at St..Louis, of which 4,972. went to connecting DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Here, as in most proceedings ‘under section 13a(1) of the act, we are faced with a proposal to discontinue 4 rail passenger service (here the last sets of trains between the termini) that has been conducted at a loss. The removal of Railway Post Office cars by . ‘ the Post Office Department in recg¢nt years and subsequent action Ys it in ne or ai aa et nae ftof storage mail to TOFC 336 1.C.C. a aad . fs . g -C.19 ae 3 LOUISVILLE.& N.-R. CO. DISCONTINUANCE OF TRAINS 99 ‘ on freight trains as well as the present proposal to shift the trans- _ portation of mail to star routes by a ee has" not im- proved the situation. Among the factors generally considered in proceedings under section 13a(1) of the ‘act to ascertain whether operation or sarv- ice of passenger trains is required by the public convenience 4nd - necessity and will not unduly burden interstate commerce, ate the population served, the effect upon the communities, the extent o the use by the public of the service sought to be discontinued, other available or alternate transportation service in the area, the cost incurred ahd financial logs sustained by the carrier in providing ‘the service under consideration,.and the carrier’s financial con- ¢ dition. Also warranting our consideration in determining the public . convenience and necessity is whether or not we, in administering section 13a(1) of the act, are preserving 4 national transportation. system by rail for passengers, insofar as is needed, to meet the. changing needs of commerce, among others. We must evaluate the puljjic convenience and necessity requiring the-continuance of the. ‘service, on the one hand, wi th, on the other, the degree of burden — ‘imposed on interstate commerce due to the carrier’s financial loss resulting from continuance of the trains. No factor alone is . conclusive or controlling. The-weight afforded éachis determined ; by the circumstances presented’in.each case. Concerning the public convenience and necessity, L&N here has‘ endeavored to show that in measuring the publictheed for the trains there has been a decrease in passenger traffic in recent years and that the decreased patronage has been marked. The evidence of — record aisa clearly shows, however, that decrease in patronage | ‘was undoubtedly due in no small measure to a marked deteriora- tion in the service provided by these trains, a matter wholly within © the province and control of the railroad. Most of the complaints voiced regarding service deficiencies are, inour opinion, justified on the basis -of the record. No dining cars or other food service facilities are provided on, the trains for any segment of-the 609- | mile run, not even food or beverage vending machines. As pre~_ viously noted, dining car service was discontinued onthe Atlanta- Evansville segment in’ February 1968, a few days after discon- '.tinuance of the C&EI Chicago-Evansville segment of the: ‘‘Geor-' - gian.’”’ To obtain any sustenance, other than carrying. thetr-own food aboard, passengers must leave the train during | the 70-minute layover at Evansville and cross the street to an all-night restau- rant to obtain refreshments. While train No. 5-3 on the south- © 336°1.C.C. . _ ie : - “- . q a . 2 ee ds.4 feet q iin aieeeerie | | SP oe ae 100 © INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REPORTS bound trip from St. Louis to Atlanta arrives and departs Evansville at 8:30 p.m. and 9:40 p.m., sespectively, train No. 4-10 on the northbound trip arrives at Evansville at theearly morning hour of eae. :40 a.m., departing at 4:15 a.m. The only other time food. is / . . obtainable is during a. 10-. or 15-minute stop (depending on the — of.travel)at Chattanooga. As to providing food and bever-" ag’ vending: machine service on these trains, the record shows ‘ that L&N had studied vending machines previously, but not for these particular trains. While several witnesses complained of the lack of sleeping car service, most of the complaints’ regarding the ab- sence of sleeping car and eating facilities centered on the Jack of - food service. / - : : With respéct to eS of poor, iusto performance; the ad record shoWs that out of 28 trips during January 1969, train No. - 5-3 a from St. Louis arrived late at Atlanta on 16 occa- _ sions was on time on‘onfy 12, On seven of these trips the train was over 1 hour late, from 30 minutes to 1 hour late on three, — from 15 to 30 minutes late on five,. and less than 15 minutes. tate . - on one occasion. During the same period, out of a total of 27 trips, train No. 4-10 northbound from Atlanta arrived late in St. Louis » on 22 occasions, and arrived en time on only 5. The train was % over-1 hour late on 12 occasions, from 30 minutes to 1 hour late on 7, and. frém 15 to 30 minutes late on 3. During the months of ae June, July, and August 1969, out of a total of 92 trips, train No. 5-3 was late in arriving in Atlanta on 52 occasions and arrived on time on 40. It was over | hour late on 5 trips, from 30 minutes ‘to 1 hour late on 10, from 15 to 30 minutes late on 17, and less than 15. minutes late on ‘20, During the same months train No. 4-10, out of a total of 91 trips, arrived late in St. Loujs on 56: - occasions and was on.time on 35. On 10 trips it Was over 1 hour late, from 30 minutes to 1 hour late on 14, from 15 to 30 minutes _ ‘Tate on 21, and less than 15 minutes late on 11. While we recognize Q that trains are delayed at times for reasons beyond the carrier’s -¢ontrol, we find-little such explanation of record in this proceeding. =e e on-time’ performance of these trains leaves much to be desired | not conducive to retention of or increase in patronage. Ina similar vein, and as previously noted, numerous complaints were made with respect.to the reduction of the maximum speed of these _trains from 70. to ‘60, and more recently, to 50:miles per hour. Those complaints are, inour view, justified, but, as also previously - noted, the record indicates that the carrier is taking steps te rectify this situation. We would ee L&N to’continue its efforts = . 5 + 336 1.C.¢0. °°) 4 es ass Be ety | faa | oe ° — | . " LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. DISCONTINUANCE OF TRAINS~ 101 in’ this direction.~ Weare also.of the view that L&N should explore _ the possibility of reducing thé lengthy layover time-at Evansville. _We do not agree that the carrier was precluded by any prior order of the Commissign from taking such. steps as may “be necessary to. effect such change, including an:appropriate petition to the Com- :. mission. Other reasons for the decrease in patronage are the elimination of porters, slower scliedules, dirty cars, and poorly _ equipped facilities, such as washrooms, et cetera, all of which are ‘significant in the eyes of the users of the service. It may be -added that had L&N continued to exercise diligence toward its passenger service, after removing sleeping cars and: food.service facilities, as it had prior thereto, “instead of removing services ~~ not only attractive to the rail passenger hut vital to the latter’s © support of rail trapsportation service, it would have, in our opinion, enjoyed revenue from its passengers more in keeping with-the- -amount of revenue received in the recent period of record and . would. have incurred considerably Jess loss in the operations of - ‘the trains in those recent periods of record here. With respect to promotional efforts on the. carrier’s part, the record shows that the last large advertising of its: passenger service took place . in about 1963, Also in this connection, however, we-are aware of - the need for the public to demonstrate, by its ‘patronage of these _ trains, the extent to which itconsiders such service to be required by the public convenience and necessity. “i ‘As previously indicated, L&N anticipates loss effective Novem- ' , ber 29,:1969, of a substantial portion of mail traffic currently han- dled on the subject trains. L&N filed the notice propofing to dis- _ continue these trains on July 9, 1969, almost 5 months before the mail traffic was expected to be diverted. The claimed burden on _interstate,commerce from continued operation of the subject trains, is predicated on pro forma financial data “‘giving effect’’ to opera+ tions without mail revenues which have not yet been lost.. While L&N has attempted in that pro forma presentation to show revenue. cost data which it anticipates may be applicable to the operation of trains under new consists and operating arrangements the car-° ° rier chose not to afford any time to determine what the actual operating results might be and to assume that operating losses necessarily would flow from elimination from the trains’ earnings of the revenues whith theretofore had accrued from the mail traf- fic. In the absence of evidence. showing. L&N’s actual experience ° . in the operation of these last trains under the anticipated new arrangement the record does not provide a basis for reaching a- conclusion as to the resulting operating situation. 336 +1.C.C. , & 92. 102: INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REPORTS -_ ‘ - e . ° s . ‘Q se .¢ .. The degree of burden on ‘interstate commerce’ as a result of loss financially incurred by L&N in continuing to operate the sub- ject trains depends for all practical purposes on how seriqusly such ‘financial loss will affect its-:other passenger and freight. .*” operations. It is obvious on this record that L&N is incurring ' losses in operating the subject trains. ‘However, we do not believe © the losses’ sustained will place an undue burden on or seriously affect its other passenger and freight operations durjng the period --we will require the.continued_operation of these tra ns. In‘ view of the fact that there remains a significant number of so-calted “‘hard-core’’ passengers using the trains, the likelihood that patronage would increase with more attractive service, that — future revenues and expenses do not reflect the experience of the carrier under circumstances it only anticipates would result, and . considering. the carrier’ s financial position, a continuation of the x 4 ‘subject trains for a reasonable period to determine whether its revenue and: expense expectations will be berne out, allowing it which it has long failed to do, is warranted. Following ‘actual experience under the. changed circumstances, a new judgment can‘ “be made as to financial results-of the operations and how these relate to the public need fof continuance in whole or in part. * Contentions of the parties as to fact or law not specifically dis- . cussed herein have been given consideration and found to be a out material significance or not justified. — ; | We find that operation by Louisville afid Nashville Railroad Com- fi pany of passenger service on: its trains Nos. 3 and’4 between Atlanta, Ga., and Evansville, Ind., and trains Nos. 5 and 10 be- |. tween Evansville and St. Louis, Mo., is required by the public cori-, ' '* venience and necessity and will not unduly. burden interstate com- merce. ° An appropriate order will be Sapprons » CoMMISSIONER TUGGLE: concurs 8 in the seu: s co SR LOS ae : - . i é ‘ 5 : e . ; ae a 7. a * / =. . ‘ ye j , : F . : S “e96T *o96T/* ahrng ne) “Buy 20yeH ” SPT3¥ TR} \iemmoD ATIONOM “pury = eounos - --' ° : z ° Ki , * puokag @TTraqsen 40 eTT pasuesg y yy O23 40 wOuzZ suaBuassed enue @yP2 UO aaPey 03 sdors - 4 : a + { ~ “PUOAag PUR aFTIAYSEN acs ayea o3, pu® ; Hama fps ipe te so mime. Regn. , 2 a? PUdAeg PUB SING] 35 wou saMeessel enuaaaa Uresiep oj i Z ’ ‘ssaBuessed Aed ayes. 4, aaray 23 sdepuhsy uo atuney de : “"sjuyod wou SupBusssed 4 @arvet 02 sdoys - f ; Sn Scoas-OsTe ¢ [ON Ure4y 4 PaeAay ZO fstnoT &s “atta a *puoheq pur ary IAQS@H OO UO BouZ - ae ong ‘at be AAO OE esi ain ohe ing sen----8Ty “otuey +41 N ‘i. $079 147, GosP$t., | ~racvercoeenet-T Ghats team ae sar - = 9 35 °°M1 ben: = eesaimbea ta RL }. uaStyed “41 * Z. Ono | 147) ts6*e - FLU HN terete hs. “ oe 6S°9. © 747 62 cndrrtoprsocespneseremTEL| Hare bys . & aT:c- ‘aT | gst'9 ee eee - : 924 L *aT! e9¢ WEG 2k SBN BEF =. gp han ; e 1 Ome | roe"9 or dmondtecmdeoebose vouus } os) (252) ce's tv ON a 8 Mi *erTrasueag “ay at 4 ea ; a ; f'°M wim re | i ee P9382) re'd,onis fen |i QO0°SAT, weet eneteente-- ~enn “oturseupan) _ we - ° ; ‘ed zotor x tat QOO*TZ §) : fare cece oH can HOE | || {I Samenih saccceesteseen---89 *wo3Teg “47 ard zig ‘. ‘andl: 4 "wee TES ow 1Aq! pod* oz ween -s-ne--- -~+--@9 ‘@TTTaszeqse) ‘aT “wd ¢z:9 wnat Ms vie ys *S-O OT OT H tAT goe*.c SRE ARTE 4 TEA *eyerszeW “AT swrd 1§:5 “~~ 5: (iS3) ‘s°e ss-et, i4v . J00°ST oor ee repo cotarteoascoetD *P2UPT Ie 47 (isa) “ad st:s eae . 2 3 Ow iD” ee 5 theft » oN UID — oat ae pity - «dn. peasy Y aAG | * (Sm0p prez) a. MeL ATTeD S-¢ . 896 Te , ‘ juosaers ATI®P OT-n , “, ‘Son Suteay uorzerndos “Soy suTeal Pts ‘ ae ia ; 3 A . A ~ ‘ A . A iy deena f 7. - : ahs ° . ‘ — , cinta : 5 a oO ' “ " @ . C.C. 336 I . oe ep eeete . ; P A - Saf 622 /5//22/iaeeie te Bek fA s* gi4 80 3 (58 Sofie g2 62 G2 +4 > PEE Hf Md all . iy S38 $8852 (44) 1997|8 28 88+ 4 2 3 i $48 “S2387 197; i Seeig- gt 9° Ft t t ; -o = = ; a ts 445 weats| zai igual ds i/i tee iF ess ““s22 2: :2°"l¢ 85 ¢ a a st . 6 + j ee°c8268 (8) aiid Fa 44) 2G is /ee8 “ieds |S ofatig ae gl ads by gat stead! aaistagla i #4) 4 3 Hi fF . ges “étar lS tig @ g- gaff oe | o Sw »' iii: “it : e-ee-stT tt “ jee ‘nf ff reel Sit lees if fit -¢ fas ns] He if i si i ill ie hui 8 C. 24 ° . INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION. REPORTS a at | uly ei i a ll —- C. 25 eae : ORDER “4” At @ Seasion of the INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, Division 3, held at its office in Washington, D. C., on the 3d day of December 1969, © " , Finance Docket No. 25765 LOUISVILLE AND NASHVILLE RAILROAD COMPANY DISCON- ‘a. TINUANCE OF. TRAINS 10S, 3 AND 4 BETWEEN ATLANTA,- . ree GA., AND EVANSVILLE, IND., AND TRAINS NOS, 5 AND 10 BETWEEN EVANSVILLE AND ST, LOUIS, MO, pa Investigation of the matters and things involved in this proceed- having been made pursuant to the order of said division dated July 30, 1969, a hearing having been held and said division, on the — date hereof, having made and filed a report containing ite findings of fact and conclusions thereon, which report is reaps referred a ee it ° ‘It is red, That the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Com- es ay — and it is hereby, required to continue the operations of its trains Nos. 3 and 4 between Atlanta, Ga., and Evansville, Ind., and trains Nos. 5 and 10 between Evansville and St. Louis, Mo., +. for a period of 6 months from the date hereof; And it 1s further ordered, ccm L6es uaa eee this order. By the Commission, division 3. , * H; NEIL-GARSON, : (SEAL) ¥ , Secretary. --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385001_1464%3A06. Public record. Not legal advice.