dicated that it is not their duty to search the entire record and to make a decision based upon conflicting data. See, for example, Colorado-Wyoming Co. v. Comm'n., 324 U.S. 626, 634:

But we must first know what the 'finding' is before we can give it that conclusive weight. We have repeatedly emphasized the need for clarity and completeness in the basic or essential findings on which administrative orders rest.

In like vein, this Commission should not be faced with an equivocal and confusing request for relief. Complainant has an obligation to indicate with clarity and completeness exactly what it wants this Commission to find. Moreover, Rule 32 of the General Rules of Practice, 49 CFR 1100.32(a) specifies that a formal complaint in which relief for the future is sought should contain a detailed statement of the relief desired.

In light of these factors, I am unable to agree with the majority's conclusion that origins in southern Illinois should also be included in the findings of unlawfulness with regard to rates to the port of Chicago.

COMMISSIONER O'NEAL did not participate.

It is ordered, That the defendants named in the complaint, to the extent that they participate in the transportation, be, and they are hereby, notified and required to cease and desist, on or before February 15, 1974, and thereafter to abstain from practicing the undue prejudice and preference found to exist.

It is further ordered, That said defendants, according as they participate in the transportation, be, and they are hereby, notified and required to establish, on or before February 15, 1974, upon not less than 30 days' notice to this Commission and to the general public by filing and posting in the manner prescribed under section 6 of the Interstate Commerce Act, and thereafter to maintain and apply rates which will prevent and avoid the undue prejudice and preference found to exist.

And it is further ordered, That this order shall continue in force until the further order of the Commission.

By the Commission.

(SEAL)

ROBERT L. OSWALD,

Secretary.

APPENDIX B

Comparison of representative soybean rates of the C&EI from central and southern Illinois origins to Chicago and New Orleans and their relation to docket No. 28300 first-class rates.

APPENDIX C

Comparison of representative single-line soybean rates of the GM&O from central and southern Illinois origins to Chicago and New Orleans and their relation to docket No. 28300 first-class rates.

APPENDIX D

Comparison of representative single-line soybean rates of the IC from central and southern Illinois origins to Chicago and New Orleans and their relation to docket No. 28300 first-class rates.