CHAPTER X INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION PART 1051 - INFORMATION REQUIRED ON RECEIPTS AND BILLS No. 36314 PETITION TO INSTITUTE PROCEEDING TO AMEND NOTICE OF RULE CHANGE AGENCY: Interstate Commerce Commission. ACTION: Final Rule. SUMMARY: Modifies the existing rules governing information to be shown on freight bills by requiring the issuer to show either a remittance address or the address of its own principal place of business. This was sought by a shipper in aid of claim filing; it has the approval of the parties and is said to represent the current practice of 90 percent of the carriers. The new requirement will aid in filing claims and in the timely remittance of transportation charges. EFFECTIVE DATE: 60 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janice M. Rosenak, Deputy Director, or Harvey Gobetz, Assistant Deputy Director, Washington, D.C. 20423 (202-275-7693) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION The Interstate Commerce Commission, in the above-entitled proceeding, has amended 49 CFR $1051.1(b) to require that the issuer of a freight or expense bill furnish either a remittance address, generally that of a local or regional terminal, or the address of its own principal place of business, at the issuer's choice. This action was taken as a result of a petition filed by Emmett Allred, seeking this addition to the requirements of 49 CFR $1051.1(b). Notice of the proposed rulemaking proceeding was published in the Federal Register on May 11, 1976, and representations were filed by interested persons. The Commission adopted the requirement described in this notice in order to facilitate the filing of claims by shippers or consignees; the requirement is said to reflect current business practices of 90 percent of the carriers. This regulation is issued under authority of 49 U.S.C. 301, 302, 304, 316, 317, 318, and 319, 5 U.S.C. 552, 553, and 559. 49 CFR 1051.1(b) was modified as follows: By adding as the words, between the words "shipment moved;" and "and a record". the following: "either the address where remittance must be made or the address of the principal place of business of the issuer of the freight or expense bill, or both, at the issuer's option;". SECTION 5a APPLICATION No. 66 WESTERN TANK TRUCK CARRIERS—AGREEMENT Decided July 28, 1977 Proposed amended ratemaking agreement found not to comply with the essential standards of section 5a of the Interstate Commerce Act. Proceeding held open for a designated period to afford applicants an opportunity to present an agreement in conformity with the conclusions reached. Arthur R. Hauver, Alvin J. Meiklejohn, Jr., and J. R. Smith for applicants. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 2, Commissioners Hardin. MURPHY. AND CLAPP BY THE DIVISION: In the prior report, 306 I.C.C. 511 (1959), the Commission, Division 2, withheld approval for further amendment of an agreement, under section Sa of the Interstate Commerce Act, between and among motor common carrier members of the Western Truck Carriers' Conference, Inc. (conference), relating to the joint consideration, initiation, or establishment of rates, charges, rules, and regulations applicable to the transportation of commodities in bulk, in tank vehicles, between points in specified western and midwestern States.' Upon substantial compliance with the terms and conditions of the report, an order was entered on October 12, 1959, approving the revised agreement. By application filed April 29, 1976, as amended May 21 and 25, 1976, under the provisions of section 5a of the act, the conference, for and on behalf of itself and seven member carriers seek approval of amendments to the agreements to conform with the standards promulgated by the Commission in Rate Bureau Investigation, 351 I.C.C. 437, and to make other substantive and incidental changes. 'Arizona. Colorado, Idaho. Kansas. Montana. Nebraska. New Mexico. North Dakota. Oklahoma. South Dakota. Texas. Utah, and Wyoming. The application is unopposed. No oral hearing was requested and none was held. The agreement consists of articles of agreement, articles of incorporation, bylaws, and rules of procedure. The amendments to the agreement are to provide: (1) elimination of the term "in tank vehicles" from the commodity description of "commodities in bulk" and the substitution of "in bulk" for "in tank vehicles" in the description of carriers eligible for membership in the conference; (2) broadening of the territorial scope to include the States of Iowa, Nevada, and Minnesota; (3) a reduction of the quorum for rate committee action from five to three members; (4) that carrier membership shall be of right upon payment of dues and a showing that applicant qualifies for membership; (5) a prohibition against carriers affiliated in any way with a shipper from serving on the board of directors, rate committee, or any other committee which has an effect upon the rate making function of the conference without prior Commission approval; (6) a requirement that formal minutes be kept of all meetings of the conference, including the rate committee; (7) a revised method for dues assessment; (8) a prohibition against the investment by the conference in any outside commercial business; (9) the prohibition against protests by the conference to any rate filings or proposals of member carriers; (10) the prohibiting of any agreement or contractual arrangement between the conference and any other rate bureau without approval of the Commission; (11) that notice of final disposition of proposals will contain reasons for the action taken; (12) establishment of 120 days as the maximum period for the processing of docketed proposals to final disposition; and (13) other incidental changes. As proposed, the presently approved agreement would be substantially changed so as to necessitate review of the entire agreement for compliance with current section 5a standards. The proposed amendments satisfy the requirements of Ex Parte No. 297. However, some of the proposed amendments as well as the present provisions of the agreement fail to comply fully with the current standards established under section 5a. Article II of the proposed bylaws provides among other things, for the expansion of the territorial scope of the agreement to include the States of Iowa, Minnesota, and Nevada. Before the Commission may approve such an amendment, it must be clear that approval is necessary and would be in furtherance of the national transportation policy. The conference presently consists of 'seven member carriers, many of whom were not signatories at the time the agreement approval was granted. There is no showing that expansion of the conference's territory to include an additional 3 States, or that the present territorial scope, is necessary for carrier collective rate making purposes in furtherance of the national transportation policy, or even that any of the member carriers has operating authority in the new territorial areas. Under such circumstances approval of the territorial amendment must be denied, and we will require applicants to justify the present 13-State scope for continued. agreement approval. See Steel Carriers' Tariff Assn., Inc.-Agreement, 335 I.C.C. 655, 658-59 (1968). Similarly the expansion of the member carrier collective activity to include bulk commodities, other than in tank vehicles is broader than the present scope and requires justification. There is no showing that the members are engaged in other than tank vehicle traffic or that broadening of the commodity scope is necessary or warranted. Moreover, applicants should clearly define the term "bulk commodities" as used in the proposed agreement. If the definition of "bulk commodities" as proposed, includes commodities which move in open-top equipment, or flat-bed vehicles in addition to tank vehicles, it may be necessary for applicants to establish separate rate making committees and to revise that section of the bylaws governing the establishment of rate committees. It is also noted that applicants propose to amend article II of the bylaws to define carrier as used in the proposed agreement as an entity authorized to transport "property." The term property" is too broad and should be defined to reflect the commodity scope of the agreement. It is further proposed to reduce the quorum for rate committee action from five to three members. No provision is made for change in the quorum requirements for increased membership. The quorum for rate committees should not be less than a majority. Article XIX relating to amendments to the bylaws without a meeting is vague and indefinite as to how such amendments are initiated. More definite procedures should be established which set forth with definiteness the steps involved in processing to amend the bylaws without a meeting of the membership. We have no objection to the remainder of the proposed amendments. However, pursuant to paragraph (7) of section 5a, a reexamination of the amended agreement has been undertaken to determine whether it conforms to the standards of section 5a. The essential elements for approval or continued approval of section 5a agreements require, among other things, that the agreement set forth the procedures governing carrier collective rate making activity in an orderly manner with reasonable definiteness and provide adequate public notice of every proposed new or changed rate or rule. Review of the considered revised agreement discloses that the agreement does not meet these standards in several respects. Section 7 of article V of the bylaws indicates that special meetings of the membership may be called by the chairman, whenever the board of directors deem such a meeting necessary. No requirement of notice for the special meetings is stated, however. The aforesaid section of the bylaws is deficient also in that it permits the annual meeting of the membership to be held at Denver on the second Friday of January at 10 a. m., or at such other time and location as may be decided by the board of directors. Such alternative provision is not sufficiently definite to meet the standards of section 5a. Section 3 of article VI of the proposed bylaws provides that the board may consist of not less than 3 nor more than 13 members. The number of directors of the conference should be definite and certain. Other rules of procedure that fail for lack of definiteness include rules 1, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 17, and 18. Rule 1 should be amended to show the complete mailing address of the conference for filing of rate proposals. The effect of rule 5 of the rules of procedure is to permit the conference to engage in the rate making function by conferring with carriers and shippers concerning the merits of docketed proposals. Such activity by the conference is beyond the scope of the agreement procedures relating to the collective consideration of rates and related matters by the member carriers, and should be striken therefrom. Rule 8 provides for special handling of proposals in an emergency. The procedures outlined therein are deficient, however, in that they fail to provide public notice to shippers and other interested persons, and the opportunity for them to present their views prior to collective action by the carriers. Moreover, the meaning of "affected carrier" as used in rule 8 is not clear. Who determines which carriers would be "affected" by an emergency proposal for the purpose of receiving notice or of what standards govern this determination is not explained. Furthermore, the conditions under which an emergency shall be deemed to exist for the purposes of an expedited docket procedure need clarification. Condition (A) should be limited to rates which |