Bloomer Shippers Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Commission

679 F.2d 668
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedMay 6, 1982
DocketNo. 81-1233
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 679 F.2d 668 (Bloomer Shippers Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bloomer Shippers Ass'n v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 679 F.2d 668 (7th Cir. 1982).

Opinion

ROBERT D. MORGAN, Chief District Judge.

This petition was filed for review of a decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) dismissing a complaint filed by Bloomers Shippers Association (BSA), which alleged that Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company (ICG) had violated the Interstate Commerce Act by its failure to provide adequate service upon a branch line, commonly known as the Bloomer Line, by practicing undue preference to the prejudice of BSA and its members, and by granting a petition by ICG to abandon a 63-mile segment of that line. Illinois Central Gulf R. Co. — Abandonment, 363 I.C.C. 690 (1980). ICG intervened as a further respondent upon this petition for review.

Historical Background

For many years ICG and its predecessors operated the Bloomer Line, which extends for a distance of 69 miles through an agricultural area in east central Illinois. The principal commodity transported over the line in relevant recent times is grain. The movement of grain economically and efficiently by rail requires the use of 100-ton hopper cars, each of which has a loaded gross weight of 263,000 pounds. The line, constructed between 1913 and 1925, was built of secondhand 75-pound and 85-pound [670]*670rail.1 Many years would pass before the advent of the 100-ton cars. The 75-pound rail is inadequate to handle 100-ton shipments. The 85-ton rail is marginally adequate for such service, but only if train speed is limited to 10 miles per hour.

In 1974, in response to shipper requests for 100-ton car service, ICG inaugurated a “gathering train” service over the line.2 ICG moved about ten of such trains over the line from 1974 through early 1977. Because of accelerated deterioration of the line, ICG lowered the weight limit over most of the line from 263,000 to 210,000 pounds per car on March 2,1977, precluding the further use of the 100-ton cars.

In April 1977, pursuant to the requirements of Section la(5) of the Act, 49 U.S.C. § 10904(e),3 and regulations promulgated thereunder,4 ICG filed a system diagram with the ICC which designated a 63-mile segment of the line as a segment for which abandonment would be sought. 49 C.F.R. § 1121.20(bXl). The Act fixes a four-month minimum period of previous notice, by the filing of a system diagram before a petition for abandonment can be filed. 49 C.F.R. § 1121.23(d).

On July 20, 1977, and before the four-month notice requirement was satisfied, BSA filed a complaint with ICC alleging that ICG had violated the Act by its discontinuance of 100-ton car service on the line. 49 U.S.C. §§ 10702, 10741, 11101, 11121. On October 28, 1977, ICG filed its application to abandon 63 miles of the line. Following an investigation, ICC consolidated the abandonment and complaint proceedings and assigned the matter for oral hearings.

The ICC Proceedings

On January 5, 1979, following a series of hearings, the administrative law judge, to whom the matter was assigned, denied the abandonment application and found that ICG had violated §§ 11101 and 10741 by its failure to provide 100-ton car service over the line. His order required ICG to upgrade the line to accommodate trains of 100-ton cars at a speed of 10 miles per hour on an as-needed basis, and to cease and desist from practicing undue prejudice to shippers on the line and undue preference of service to other shippers within its system which were denied to BSA shippers. He further found that BSA had failed to prove any actual loss. He awarded no damages.

Both parties filed administrative appeals. On October 12, 1979, the ICC division,5 to which the appeals were taken, reversed the law judge’s decision. It approved the abandonment application and found that there had been no violation of the Act by ICG.6

The ICC granted petitions to review the matter. Among other procedural steps taken, it reopened the record to receive cost and revenue evidence related to operation of the line in 1975 and 1976. On December 19, 1980, it filed its decision, finding that ICG had not committed the violations charged in BSA’s complaint, and that public convenience and necessity permitted abandonment of the 63-mile segment of the line.

[671]*671The ICC first stated that the proper test to be applied when it is alleged that adequate service had been denied to shippers, was the balancing of the public need for service at the level sought by shippers against the burden imposed upon the carrier involved and upon interstate commerce by the providing of service at that level. That inquiry involves a case-by-case approach.7

In its consideration of the contention that ICG had not provided adequate service on the line when it discontinued the use of 100-ton cars, ICC found that the line was not designed or constructed to accommodate the gross weight imposed by the use of 100-ton cars; that substantial deterioration of the line had resulted from the limited use of the 100-ton cars; that, although ICG had provided only minimal maintenance of the line, there was no downgrading of the line, because the physical structure would necessarily require that weight limits be imposed which would preclude 100-ton car service; that rehabilitation and maintenance of the line to accommodate 100-ton car service would require that the line be largely reconstructed, using heavier rails and reinforced grading, entailing substantial rehabilitation costs and annual maintenance costs;8 and that the line could not be profitably operated with 100-ton car service restored without a substantial increase in traffic over and above that generated during the brief period when ICG sought to render that service; that there was no evidence of any possible increase in available traffic which could both offset the substantial rehabilitation and maintenance costs and produce a reasonable prospect of profit; that, although the nonavailability of 100-ton car rail service would impose some economic burden upon the public in the involved area, there was available alternative transportation for the traffic which previously moved over the line; and that the evidence would not justify an order which would require ICG to provide noncompensatory service by reinstating 100-ton car service. It concluded that ICG had not failed to provide adequate service over the line and that it had not violated Section 11101.

Related to the allegations of undue discrimination against the Bloomer group, the ICC said that the question depends on a case-by-case determination. It said that the line lacked the physical capability to handle 100-ton cars, and thus it differed from other ICG branch lines which possessed that capability, unless it was shown that the lack of capability resulted from the carrier’s deliberately downgrading the line. It found that there had been no downgrading of the line, and that the line’s physical incapacity to provide the level of service demanded, was a condition which justified ICG’s discontinuance of 100-ton service.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
679 F.2d 668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bloomer-shippers-assn-v-interstate-commerce-commission-ca7-1982.