has trip leased trucks to applicant for movements of steel from the Chicago area to lowa points near but outside its own destination area, such as Muscatine or Ottumwa. Ultimately, Umthun will replace the agent at Chicago with salaried employees, but only after it gets more familiarity with the Dearmin operation. Umthun denies that it would ever knowingly refuse or delay pickup of any steel traffic to its own destination area that was offered to it because it has such an abundance of available trucks at Chicago. The witness also stated from hearsay that the Walkers have formed their own company, which he called Indian Oaks Transportation, which is seeking authority to Iowa, and he infers that that company may seek to divert traffic and owner-operators away from both Umthun and applicant.' Hunt Truck Lines, Inc., performs most steel transportation under No. MC-52979 (Sub-No. 2) which authorizes transportation of iron and steel articles over irregular routes from Chicago to points in Iowa on and north of U.S. Highway 20 and on and west of Iowa Highway 17, described as generally north and west of Webster City. This certificate, issued May 25, 1950, appears to be defective in that lowa Highway 17 currently does not extend north to the Iowa-Minnesota boundary. Hunt interprets this to mean that it should extend that highway due north from its terminus at junction with U.S. Highway 18 near Wesley to establish the eastern boundary of the territory. To clarify this, undersigned examined old maps of lowa in his files. The Iowa State Highway Commission map of the State for 1961 shows that at that date what is now Iowa Highway 17 was then Highway 60, and what was then Iowa Highway 17 is that now designated Iowa Highway 4, hence that the territory is properly north and west of a junction near Rockwell City. Important exclusions are Fort Dodge and Algona, both within the belt of land approximately 50 miles wide which is not within the authorized territory. Hunt is a family-owned carrier. Its witness and executive vice president, Dennis W. Hunt, was employed about the date that this certificate was issued and at least 18 years before the highways were renumbered. Rand McNally Road Atlas first shows the renumbering of its 1969 edition. It is elementary that the description of a highway in a certificate speaks as of the date of issue, and that relocation of lowa Highway 17 does not relocate the boundaries described nor in any wise increase or decrease the operating authority. See 49 CFR 1042.2(c)(3), Jackson Truck Line, Inc., Extension-Maryville, Mo., 86 M.C.C. 641, and Interpretation of Operating Authorities, 112 M.C.C. 829. Where it is not essential to determination of public convenience and necessity, one should not find that a protestant has operated unlawfully or beyond its authority. Therefore, no such finding is made. The undersigned only states that the plain meaning of the certificate as he reads it is that the eastern boundary is a road now designated Iowa Highway 4 and formerly designated Iowa Highway 17. Even though the abstract of Hunt's traffic shows some traffic to Algona one could not speculate on the lawfuiness thereof anyway since the commodity is not shown. A copy of this report will be directed to the Bureau of Enforcement for its consideration. The Commission's files show four applications filed by Indian Oaks Transportation Co., a corporation, of Chicago, of which one, No. MC-138548, has proceeded through hearing. That application showed Monty, George, and Helen Walker, and Donald J. Griffin as its officers. The initial decision of Administrative Law Judge Cross served January 25, 1974, would grant restricted authority to transport iron and steel articles from named plants at or near Bradley, II. (Kankakee County), to points in Iowa, Nebraska, et al. Applicant's exceptions contains resignations of George and Helen Walker and affidavit of George Walker that he also ceased to be affiliated with Iowa Steel Express, Inc. By decision and order dated May 2, 1974, the Commission by Review Board No. 1 adopted the order of the Administrative Law Judge. Hunt also has authority to transport general commodities, with exceptions, from Chicago over a regular route to a number of points in Iowa, both within and without the above territory, but not including Algona or Fort Dodge; to transport hardware (and a few iron and steel articles could move under such authority) from Chicago to all points in Iowa; and to transport farm machinery and implements and parts and supplies therefor, between Chicago (and other Illinois points not here involved), on the one hand, and several named Iowa points. Hunt offered an abstract of about 180 shipments which it handled in 2 months of 1973 and purportedly involving traffic which applicant could divert upon approval of this application. Most but not all are full truckloads. Hunt estimates that such traffic provides about 70 percent of all revenues out of the Chicago area. This traffic moves in its own vehicles and in trip-leased vehicles of grain haulers. The undersigned wishes to apologize for suggesting to Mr. Hunt at the hearing that the question of northbound extension of the eastern boundary beyond present lowa Highway 17 could be handled as a simple correction of a certificate. He relied upon the witness stating that in 1950 Iowa Highway 17 did not extend further than it now does. The witness should have known, quite obviously, of the renumbering which occurred during his long employment and not very many years ago. It is not a correction question, except perhaps to have the certificate reissued showing lowa Highway 4 instead of 17. The cavalier attitude of the witness to these certificates is also shown by his feeling that all iron and steel articles could be transported as hardware. In fact, a shipment was handled to Jefferson, Iowa, which could not move lawfully unless the commodity, iron filings about 1 inch long for use as a binder in concrete, may be considered as hardware. Similarly, one finds a shipment of steel sheets moved to Jefferson. See No. MC-C-2590, Albert Hardecopf-Investigation and Revocation of Certificates, not printed by the Commission but summarized at 14 Federal Carrier Cases, C. C. H., 40, 621 (para. 35,228), which discussed this specific issue. See also Houff Transfer, Inc.-Revocation of Certificates, 78 M.C.C. 275, but compare Farm to Market Carriers, Inc., v. Elliott, 67 M.C.C. 358. The undersigned will again, for reasons stated, make no finding as to the lawfulness of such movements, but he is not satisfied that they were proper. Hunt has only six flat-bed trailers, most of its equipment being vans, and, therefore, many of these movements must have been in trip-leased equipment. Decker Truck Line, Inc., holds regular-route authority to transport general commodities, with exceptions, from Chicago to Spencer and LeMars, Iowa, serving all intermediate points including Fort Dodge and Waterloo, and to transport same over irregular routes from Chicago to an area of northwest Iowa which includes portions of Algona from Chicago, but all of Algona and its commercial zone points in the Chicago commercial zone other than Chicago. In general terms, this area is a square bounded by Sanborn and Algona on or near U.S. Highway 18 at the north and by Harcourt and Ida Grove on Iowa Highway 175 (somewhat south of Fort Dodge and U.S. Highway 20), at the south. It has 38 tractors and 62 trailers, including 30 flat beds. About half is leased and half is owned, more or less. Decker also has authority to transport gypsum products and building materials from Fort Dodge to points in Illinois and Wisconsin which provides an eastbound traffic flow for which iron and steel traffic is desired to balance the operation. Most of this eastbound traffic now is gypsum board moved on flat beds. Decker has solicited 16 to 20 steel shippers in the Chicago area but only 7 or 8 of them have used Decker. In November and December 1973, Decker terminated 297 of its own trucks with gypsum and building materials in an area of Illinois or Wisconsin convenient for picking up westbound traffic at Chicago. In those same months, Decker only obtained 37 return loads of steel. During the first 3 months of 1974, possibly because of increased solicitation efforts, Decker got 115 steel loads westbound, about half of them to Algona. Principal destinations for such traffic have been Algona, Sac City, Webster City, and Fort Dodge. While it does get some other authorized westbound traffic besides steel, Decker still has to trip lease its trucks westbound to others in order not to suffer serious financial problems from empty movements. Decker needs to obtain traffic from more shippers in the Chicago area. To illustrate this, 83 of the 115 moved in 1974 were for two shippers. Only three of the 115 were for a supporting shipper herein, to wit U.S.S. Just like Dearmin, Pape, and Hunt, part of Decker's problem in obtaining traffic is that its authorized destination territory is small and shippers must have difficulty keeping track of whether a given destination is or is not served by carriers with such limited authority. Nonetheless, Decker does appear to have a surplus of suitable equipment available daily at Chicago and to serve a destination area to which some shipper witnesses claimed difficulty in finding available equipment. Thus Decker should be able to improve its steel traffic picture by vigorous sales efforts, as no shippers showed its service to be unsatisfactory when and if tried. Most never tried Decker at all. Cedar Rapids Steel Transportation, Inc., operates under its own authority and that of several other carriers under its temporary control or lease. It operates in three divisions, one of which specializes in steel hauling. This unit has 221 grain and flatbed trailers, mostly leased, and performs about 1,700 steel movements monthly for roughly 40 percent of its $19 million annual revenue. As pertinent. it holds authority (stated generally) to transport the considered commodities from Chicago and Portage to Dubuque and Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and from the latter to points within 100 miles of Cedar Rapids; from the Bethlehem plant to all of Iowa; and (pending issuance of certificate) from the Midwest Steel plantsite to all of Iowa (and other States). These are under its own rights. Then, under authority of Bos Lines, Inc. (leased pending proposed acquisition in No. MC-F-10199), it may transport general commodities, with exceptions, between Chicago and Kearney, Nebr., and between Des Moines and Hastings, Nebr., serving all intermediate points including Des Moines and Omaha, and transport iron and steel articles between Omaha and designated Nebraska points, including Fremont, all over regular routes. It also has numerous subsidiary routes in Iowa, Nebraska, and in the Chicago area, such as allowing it to serve Atlantic and Marshalltown, Iowa. Under irregular-route rights leased in that proceeding, it may transport iron and steel articles (with exceptions) from the Bethlehem plantsite to lowa and Nebraska. The headquarters of the Steel Division is in East Chicago, Ind. CRST transports both grain and general commodities on return movements, which provides for a viable operation. It engages, for example, in transportation of things like gypsum board out of Fort Dodge which uses flat-bed trailers. Additionally, it trip leases equipment westbound for some traffic, mostly to Nebraska. CRST produced an abstract showing 63 shipments of iron and steel moved in March 1974 from the Chicago area to points in Nebraska, mostly Omaha, although 32 included on the same trailer items made of other metals such as brass, aluminum, or copper (note that the movements were generally under general-commodities rights so no unlawfulness is suggested). It also produced computer printouts of traffic handled in 1973 and 1974 for supporting shippers, and others which supported applicant but failed to appear, including as pertinent, U.S.S., Union, Youngstown, Howard, Republic, Midwest, and Bethlehem. These printouts do not show the destinations, although they do show names of consignees, and destinations are not limited to lowa and Nebraska. The undersigned recognizes certain named consignees as primarily operating plants in Iowa and Nebraska, but others are companies which do or may have plants in other States too. He declined to permit oral testimony as to locations of these consignees on the ground that it would not be probative. Besides, supporting shippers do not contend that CRST refuses to serve them, but only that it does not have adequate equipment available and willing to take loads to Iowa and Nebraska. Surely the evidence by shippers does show that they use CRST. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Applicant is seriously short of capital and its management lacks significant experience. It lacks facilities except of a rudimentary nature at Mead and an agency at Chicago. With many of its vehicles now operating solely between Chicago area and lowa because of geographic preferences of their owners and licensing requirements, it is likely that many vehicles in the applicant's service have never been seen at Mead. It survives on owner-operators and trip lessors. The record shows that such vehicle owners will sign up with one carrier or another from time to time, depending on what traffic each carrier can offer and what sort of deal it is willing to make on paying the owner-operator. The proposal of applicant to buy some equipment is unbelievable. Such equipment is not readily available, even if funds to buy it were, and applicant lacks adequate funds. Approval does not portend any increase in the total number of trucks available to steel shippers, but only a realignment of the allegiance of vehicle owners. It can be argued that applicant does not propose to be a real motor common carrier but only a broker of transportation. Large-scale use of trip leasing from exempt truckers, use of an agent at Chicago which also serves other carriers, and lack of tangible carrier operating property of any kind certainly supports such a conclusion as to applicant's present service. Future ideas that it will buy trucks, hire employee drivers, and obtain a Chicago terminal staffed by employees are no more than hopes or plans of doubtful fruition. Approval of the proposed operation would largely result only in wooing owner-operators away from other carriers now serving the steel industry. Applicant rather blithely forecasts that it can find enough exempt eastbound traffic to make a viable two-way operation. There is no evidence of how much such traffic exists or that its transportation would be so compensatory as to make an economical service. While we are told of origins of eastbound grain movements, we do not know either the volume or destinations of same, including whether it moves to points actually in the northern or southern Illinois steel origin areas, or both. We cannot estimate the deadhead mileage incident to the proposed operations. Will Mr. Eckley even wish to stay in such a business? Note that in 1973 he and his wife obtained a salary of only $6,000, far less than the drivers working for applicant probably earned. Their joint salary, which is allegedly for full-time work, is also less than the agent in Chicago got. Surely things would have to get much better to work out satisfactorily for them. The bank, taking 5 percent off the top of revenues, has a much better deal, and the high interest rates charged mean long period of slow payment of principal on the borrowings, even if no equipment debt were added on to the burden on applicant. The application cannot be called a major Federal administrative action, but it may substantially injure the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 unless a two-way operation with adequate return loads from places at or near destinations of steel to points at or near the steel origins can actually be obtained. This would be from wasteful use of fuel, highways, and other resources. There appears little doubt that shippers, faced with capacity sales and growth of steel consumption in Iowa and Nebraska, have a problem getting transportation and that the protestants and others are only partially meeting the needs of steel shippers at present. That alone does not mean that every application purporting to remedy that problem should be granted. Fortunately for the shippers, there are numerous other applicants for similar authority which they are supporting. Hopefully those other applicants are better qualified, better financed, and able to obtain backhauls on a more certain and compensatory basis. This applicant does not show a capability to meet those needs. in whole or in part. Finally, the proposed operation is not consistent with the national transportation policy set out in the act. It would not aid economical or efficient service, and would adversely affect sound economic conditions in transportation and among motor carriers. ULTIMATE FINDINGS AND ORDER Upon consideration of all evidence of record, the Administrative Law Judge finds that public convenience and necessity do not require the operation by Economy Movers, Inc., for which authority is sought, that applicant failed to show that it is fit, willing, and able to perform the proposed operation, that approval would adversely affect the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 but that this is not such a major Federal administrative action as to require issuance of an environmental impact statement pursuant to that act, and that the application should be denied. WHEREFORE, it is the ORDER of the Administrative Law Judge that: In the absence of a stay or postponement thereof by the Commission or of the timely filing of exceptions, this order shall be effective as the order of the Commission 30 days from the date it is served. 125 M.C.C. |