In the matter of the application of the City of Durand, Michigan, for more adequate protection at the several street crossings of the tracks of the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the Ann Arbor

Application was filed on December 18, 1944, by the City of Durand, Michigan, through its City Clerk, Arthur Lamb, for additional protection at the South Oak Street crossing of the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the North Oak and West Main Street crossings of the Grand Trunk Western Railroad and the Ann Arbor Railroad in Durand.

In said application, the Commission is advised that the above named crossings have only part-time crossing tenders, and it is the desire of the City Council of Durand that protection at the crossings should be afforded the public for the full 24 hours of the day

A conference was held in the City Hall at Durand by a representative of this Commission with representatives of the City Council of Durand, the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company, the Ann Arbor Railroad Company and the Shiawassee County Road Commission in regard to said matter, at which time the following understanding was reached:

SOUTH OAK STREET

Substitute track-circuit-operated side-of-street type of flashing-light signals for the watchman, as now maintained at said crossing, the cost and expense of installing said signal system, together with its operation and maintenance, to be borne solely by the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company; and, if in the future it is found necessary to provide manual control of said flashing-light signals for 8 hours or more during the 24 hours of the day, the City of Durand would pay one-half and the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company one-half of the salary of the watch man stationed at the crossing whose duty it will be to manually control the flashing-light signals for engine and train movements.

NORTH OAK STREET

Substitute manually-controlled flashing-light signals of the side-of street type for the manually-controlled wigwag signals, as now maintained at said crossing, manually controlling said flashing-light signal system for the full 24 hours of the day, daily, from a tower to be erected between North Oak Street and West Main Street. The cost and expense of installing said flashing-light signal system and tower, together with the maintenance and operation of same, is to be borne by the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the Ann Arbor Railroad Company.

WEST MAIN STREET

Substitute manually-controlled side-of-street type of flashing-light signals, with half-roadway gate attachments, for the safety gates, as now maintained at said crossing, operating said flashing-light signal system and half-roadway gates from the tower to be erected between North Oak Street and West Main Street for the full 24 hours of the day, daily. The cost and expense of installing said flashing-light signal systems, together with the maintenance and operation, is to be borne by the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the Ann Arbor Railroad Company.

The Commission, after due consideration of said application, together with the recommendations contained in the report of the conference held in said matter, being advised that parties in interest have reached an understanding in said matter, FINDS AND HOLDS that the proposed change in protection at said crossings is in the interest of the welfare and safety of the traveling public, and therefore said application should be granted.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by the Michigan Public Service Com mission that permission shall be and authority is hereby granted to the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the Ann Arbor Railroad Company to substitute side-of-street type of flashing-light signals to warn traffic in advance of the approach of engines and trains for the protection now maintained at the North Oak Street crossing and side-of-street type of flashing-light signals, together with half-roadway gates, at the West Main Street crossing of their tracks in the city of Durand, Michigan, PROVIDED :

Said side-of-street type of flashing-light signals to be substituted for the wigwag signals at the North Oak Street crossing, and said side of-street type of flashing-light signals, together with half-roadway gates, to be substituted for the safety gates, as now maintained at the West Main Street crossing, be manually controlled and operated for the full 24 hours of the day, daily, from a tower to be erected and located be tween the North Oak and West Main Street crossings;
That the cost and expense of installing said flashing-light signals, together with their maintenance and operation, is borne by the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the Ann Arbor Railroad Company in accordance with any agreement which may now exist or shall hereafter be entered into between said railroad companies for the protection at said crossings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that permission shall be and authority is hereby granted to the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company to substitute track-circuit-operated side-of-street type of flashing light signals at the South Oak Street crossing of its tracks in the city of Durand for the watchman, as now maintained, to warn street traffic in advance of the approach of engines and trains, PROVIDED, the cost and expense of in stalling, maintaining and operating said flashing-light signal system is borne solely by the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, if in the future it is found necessary to station a watchman at said South Oak Street crossing of the tracks of the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company in Durand for 8 hours or more during the 24 hours of the day to manually control the flashing-light signals at said crossing, the City of Durand will pay to the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company one-half of the wages of said watchman as per their agreement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that said proposed side-of-street type of flashing light signals at said above named crossings shall be installed as per the requirements of Act 336 of the Public Acts of 1931 and as per the plan and specifications of the Michigan Public Service Commission hereto attached and made a part hereof by reference.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the present protection at said crossings shall be continued until such time as said flashing-light signal systems have been installed and are ready to be placed in service; then and then only shall the Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company and the Ann Arbor Rail road Company, at their joint and several crossings, discontinue and re move the present protection.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, if at any time said flashing-light signal systems at said crossings become inoperative or cease to work, the railroad maintaining said signal systems shall, as soon as possible, cause a watchman to be stationed at the crossing or crossings so affected to warn traffic in advance of the approach of engines and trains until said signal system or systems have been placed in working order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, when said flashing-light signal systems at said crossings have been installed and placed in service, an affidavit shall be filed with this Commission by an official of the railroad company installing said signal systems advising of the day and date such signal systems were placed in service at said crossings.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all previous order or orders of this Commission or its predecessors heretofore made pertaining to protection at said crossings shall be and the same are hereby canceled and made void upon the filing of the affidavit heretofore mentioned showing that the terms of this order have been complied with.

The Commission reserves unto itself jurisdiction in this matter and the right to issue any further order or orders herein which, in its judgment, may be deemed necessary.

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

In the matter of the application of the Michigan State Highway Department for permission to install side-of-street type of flashing-light signals, with half-roadway gate attachments, at the crossing of the Ann Arbor Railroad with South State Street at the south limits of the city of Ann Arbor, Michigan. File No. 8030-929. May 18, 1945

Application was filed on May 11, 1945, by the Michigan State Highway Department, through its Assistant Bridge Engineer, J. H. Flynn, for permission to install side-of-street type of flashing-light signals, with half-roadway gate attachments, at the crossing of the Ann Arbor Rail road with South State Street on section line between sections 32 and 33, T2S, R6E, Ann Arbor Township, Washtenaw County, Michigan, at the south limits of the city of Ann Arbor.

Attached to said application and made a part thereof is a copy of an agreement, dated the 9th day of May, 1945, signed by Charles M. Ziegler, State Highway Commissioner of the state of Michigan; N. B. Pitcairn, President for the Ann Arbor Railroad; and approved by George Gill, Chairman, Washtenaw County Board of Railroad Commissioners for the County Road Commissioners of Washtenaw County, covering the cost and expense of installing, maintaining and operating said signal system and half-roadway gates at said crossing.

Also attached to said application and made a part thereof is Michigan State Highway Department Plan, dated April 11, 1945, marked File XI of 81-1-21, Federal Project No. FAGS 203-A-(1), showing location of said proposed side-of-street flashing-light signals and half-roadway gate attachments.

In said application, this Commission is advised that the installation is being made to protect the traveling public at this crossing which has proved hazardous by trucks carrying inflammable liquids from nearby gasoline storage plants as well as other vehicular traffic utilizing South State Street to connect with state trunk lines to Ypsilanti and Detroit.

The Commission is also advised, in the copy of the agreement as entered into on the 9th day of May, 1945, by the Michigan State Highway Department and the Ann Arbor Railroad Company, as approved by the Board of County Road Commissioners of Washtenaw County, that the cost of installation at said crossing shall be paid for from Federal appropriations for the protection of railroad crossings, and that the railroad will thereafter, at their sole expense, maintain and operate said signal system.

The Commission is now advised, in the report of inspection made by a representative of this Commission at said crossing, that, due to the heavy use of this crossing by trucks carrying inflammable liquids as well as other vehicular traffic, there is a necessity for the installation of flashing light signals and gates at said crossing to give advance warning to highway traffic of the approach of engines and trains.

The Commission, after due consideration of said application, agreement and plan, together with the recommendations contained in the report of said inspection, FINDS AND HOLDS that the safety of the traveling public on the highway reasonably demands the installation, maintenance and operation of additional protection at said crossing, and therefore said application should be granted and said agreement and plan approved.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by the Michigan Public Service Commission that permission shall be and the same is hereby granted to the Michigan State Highway Department and the Ann Arbor Railroad Company to install automatic track-circuit-operated side-of-street type flashing-light signals, with half-roadway gate attachments, at the crossing of the Ann Arbor Railroad with South State Street on section line between Sections 32 and 33, T2S, R6E, Ann Arbor Township, Washtenaw County, Michigan, at the south limits of the city of Ann Arbor, PROVIDED:

Said automatic side-of-street flashing-light signals are installed at said crossing in accordance with the requirements of Act 336 of the Public Acts of 1931 and as per the plans and specifications of the Michigan Public Service Commission hereto attached and made a part hereof by reference;
Said side-of-street flashing-light signals, with half-roadway attachments, are installed and located at points shown on the blueprint of the Michigan State Highway Department, marked File XI of 81-1-21, dated April 11, 1945, which blueprint is hereby approved and made a part hereof by reference;
That the cost and expense of installing said side-of-street flashing-light signals, with half-roadway gate attachments, shall be borne according to the terms as set forth in the agreement entered into on the 9th day of May, 1945, by the parties in interest, which agreement is hereby approved and made a part hereof; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, if at any time said flashing-light signals and gates become inoperative or cease to work, that the Ann Arbor Railroad shall, as soon as possible, cause a watchman to be stationed at the crossing to give advance warning to highway traffic of the approach of engines and trains until such signals and gate attachments are restored to working order; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, when said flashing-light signals and gates have been installed and placed in service, an affidavit shall be filed with this Commission by an official of the Ann Arbor Railroad advising of the day and date such signal and gate system was placed in service at said crossing.

The Commission reserves unto itself jurisdiction of this matter and the authority to issue any further order or orders herein which, in its judgment, may be deemed necessary. MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

In the matter of the application of the Pere Marquette Railway Company for approval of Pere Marquette Railway Signal Department Plan SD 540-1, dated September 28, 1915, as revised May 4, 1945, showing in red and yellow proposed track and signal changes at its crossing of the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad, located at Clare, Michigan. File No. RX-6057. May 23, 1945

Application was filed on May 14, 1945, by the Pere Marquette Rail way Company, through its Signal Engineer, H. C. Lorenzen, requesting approval of Pere Marquette Railway Signal Department Plan SD-540-1, dated September 28, 1915, as revised May 4, 1945, and approved by H. C. Lorenzen, Signal Engineer for the Pere Marquette Railway Company, and G. A. Rodger, Signal Engineer for the Ann Arbor Railroad, showing in red and yellow proposed track and signal changes at its crossing of the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad at Clare, Michigan.

The Commission, after due consideration of said application and plan, FINDS AND HOLDS that said proposed track and signal changes are in the interest of the welfare and safety of the traveling public and trainmen, and therefore said application should be granted and said plan approved.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by the Michigan Public Service Commission that permission shall be and the same is hereby granted to the Pere Marquette Railway Company to make certain track and signal changes at the crossing of its tracks and the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad at Clare, Michigan, as shown in red and yellow on Pere Marquette Railway Signal Department Plan SD-540-1, dated September 28, 1915, as revised May 4, 1945, and approved by H. C. Lorenzen, Signal Engineer for the Pere Marquette Railway Company, and G. A. Rodger, Signal Engineer for the Ann Arbor Railroad Company, which plan is hereby approved and made a part hereof by reference, and a copy of same placed in the files of the Michigan Public Service Commission as File No. HX-6057.

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Great Lakes Steel Corporation, Complainant, vs. Ann Arbor Railroad Company, et al, Defendants. D-3428. June 4, 1945.

By complaint filed September 22, 1944, the Great Lakes Steel Corporation, which is a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of semi-finished and finished iron and steel articles and the receiving of scrap iron or steel by railroad from points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan via intrastate routes consigned to its plant at Ecorse, Detroit, Michigan, alleges, among other things:

That the rates on scrap iron or steel (hereinafter referred to as scrap) from points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan to Detroit, Michigan, including the Detroit switching district, have been, are and will be, for the future, unjust and unreasonable in violation of Section 4 of Act 300 of the Public Acts of Michigan of 1909 and Acts supplementary thereto and amendatory thereof, and irregular and exorbitant in violation of Section (g) of Act 300, supra, and Acts supplementary thereto and amendatory thereof. We are asked to prescribe reasonable and lawful rates for the future and award reparation.

Complainant has proposed that defendants be required to establish and apply rates in the future to the transportation of scrap, in carloads, from points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan to the Detroit switching district on the specific and uniform alternative basis of: Class 20 or 20 per cent of the applicable first-class rates, subject to a carload minimum weight of 30,000 pounds; class 15 or 15 per cent of the applicable first class rates, subject to a carload minimum weight of 50,000 pounds; class 12% or 12% per cent of the applicable first-class rates, subject to a car load minimum weight of 75,000 pounds; and, in addition thereto, commodity rates to alternate with the class rate bases which are on the same bases by relation to the first-class rates as the commodity rates in effect from the same points of origin to Chicago, Illinois; Duluth and Steelton, Minnesota; and Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada.

Defendants filed separate answers to the complaint and, by their answers, admitted the formal parts of the complaint but denied all material allegations.

This matter was brought on for hearing in the city of Detroit, Michigan, on the 23rd day of January, 1945. Brief on behalf of complainant was filed March 12, 1945, and brief on behalf of defendants was filed April 18, 1945.

In 1938, complainant filed a complaint with this Commission which was assigned docket D-3135. In that case, there was brought into issue rates on scrap for movement from all points in Michigan to Detroit. Complainant requested that all evidence offered in that case pertinent to the issues in this instant case be accepted without formal reintroduction of the same testimony. There being no objection, such evidence was accepted and will be considered to be applicable to this case.

Great Lakes Steel Corporation operates three plants within the switch ing district of Detroit: an open-hearth plant (the main plant) at Ecorse, a smaller mill at Ecorse known as the Michigan Steel Division and a blast-furnace plant located at River Rouge. The main plant and the blast furnace plant are located on the Detroit River. The main plant was completed in 1930, and the first shipment of steel was made in August of that year. This was the first large steel mill in Michigan and brought to this state a new basic industry. No other steel mills of comparable size are located in the state. As originally constructed, the plant had an annual output of 600,000 tons. Its capacity has been increased to the point where it produces 2,000,000 tons of steel a year.

Scrap iron and steel are basic materials used in making steel along with iron ore, fuel, flux and air. Complainant uses between 700,000 and 1,000,000 tons of scrap annually. The amount of scrap used in producing steel since the outbreak of the war has decreased somewhat because of its scarcity.

The Commission in docket D-3135 made the following observations which, we believe, are pertinent to this case:

“Scrap is shipped in open-top railroad equipment and is not susceptible to damage. There are several kinds of scrap known to the trade, such as industrial, agricultural, prepared and unprepared. Industrial scrap, as the name implies, results from mechanical processes. Agricultural scrap consists usually of worn-out implements. Prepared scrap is that which is prepared by the producer or broker for specific use of the purchaser, while unprepared scrap is a mixture of all kinds not sorted for any particular use. Prepared scrap is generally heavy, and the average load is 50 tons or more per car, while unprepared scrap is lighter and averages only 20 tons per car. This disparity in weights prompted the complainant's proposal of two scales of rates at alternative minimum weights which would permit a free movement of scrap to all consuming points. Before prepared scrap can be shipped to the market, it must be conditioned in accordance with specifications adopted by the consumers. It is usually necessary, therefore, that it be consolidated at comparatively few points where dealers possess the necessary equipment for preparing, although whenever possible it has become the practice of conditioning it at point of production. It can be sorted to a better advantage and more economically at the consolidation point. There are several such points in this state. Complainants claim that, owing to the high freight rates, they are unable to avail themselves of Michigan scrap except that which is produced locally. The record indicates that the relationship of freight rates to the cost of scrap is a very important factor in complainant's production of iron and steel articles, and this is especially true with regard to the particular type of scrap used by the Great Lakes Steel Corporation. As the demand increases beyond the supply of the Detroit area, it becomes necessary to seek other sources. Scrap has been purchased by them from New York and shipped by water, be cause the level of freight rates on movement from scrap-producing points in Michigan is so high that the cost of this raw material is prohibitive. Complainants claim that competitors who can draw scrap from a radius of two hundred miles from their plants have complainants at a disadvantage. The closer the area from which scrap can be drawn the more beneficial it is to the industry in pre serving a balanced position in source of raw materials. The testimony also discloses the fact that all larger carriers operating in Michigan participate in the movement of scrap in adjoining states on a lower level of rates. It is our view that state lines do not divide diverse transportation conditions, as the conditions in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana and Illinois are essentially similar in character. The Interstate Commerce Commission has made numerous decisions under similar circumstances. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the rates on scrap in Michigan should not be on a level considerably higher than those prevailing in states adjoining Michigan having similar transportation conditions.”

The record shows that from the same sources of supply Chicago, Illinois; Duluth and Steelton, Minnesota; and Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, can draw scrap on a lower level than can Detroit. Rates on scrap between points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan are on a lower level than those in the Lower Peninsula even though points in the Upper Peninsula are in a higher-rated territory. The carriers have maintained for many years a general basis of rates on scrap from points in the Upper Peninsula to Chicago and other points of 12% per cent of the first-class rate, minimum weight 75,000 pounds; 15 per cent of the first-class rate, minimum weight 50,000 pounds; and 20 per cent of the first-class rate, minimum weight 30,000 pounds, and in addition have published a numer of specific commodity rates to Chicago, Illinois; Steelton and Duluth, Minnesota; and Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, on an even lower level.

Complainant in docket D-3135 brought into issue rates from points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. However, as the record did not disclose any volume of movement, it was our view that the interested carriers should voluntarily adjust their rates on scrap from Upper Peninsula origin points to Detroit comparable to rates on scrap to other points, distance considered, without the issuance of a specific order by this Commission.

Defendants did not comply with this provision, although complainant -upon several occasions requested them to establish rates as recommended by the Commission.

We have, upon different occasions and in the preceding case herein referred to, stated that it was our opinion that the rates on scrap in Michigan should not be on a level considerably higher than those prevailing in other states adjoining Michigan.

In 1941, and prior thereto, the principal source of scrap used by complainant was the Detroit switching district, but, after the outbreak of the war in 1941, scrap became very scarce, and complainant could not obtain sufficient scrap from the sources available in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Most of the scrap purchased by the complainant prior to the war was from automobile plants. However, when these plants changed over to the production of war materials, they did not produce as much scrap, so in 1942 complainant was compelled to look further afield for new sources of supply and began to purchase scrap from available sources in the Upper Peninsula of this state.

Exhibits were introduced showing that the Office of Price Administration had placed ceiling prices on scrap and had also issued certain regulations in connection with its purchase. The selling prices set by these regulations were delivered prices at Detroit, and the prices included the freight rate. The price fixed at Detroit was seventeen dollars eighty-five cents ($17.85) per gross ton (2,240 pounds). At Duluth the price was fixed at eighteen dollars ($18.00) per gross ton. In arriving at the cost of scrap at any producing point in the Upper Peninsula, the selling price at Duluth is used because Duluth is the nearest basing point. The freight rate is then deducted from the producing point to Duluth. Thus, in complainant's exhibit, an invoice showed the purchase of scrap by the Great Lakes Steel Corporation at Lake Linden; the price paid was fifteen dollars fifty-four cents ($15.54) per gross ton f.o.b. Lake Linden. This price was arrived at by taking the selling price at Duluth, eighteen dollars ($18.00) per gross ton, and deducting the freight rate from Lake Linden to Duluth, two dollars forty-six cents ($2.46) per gross ton. To this price of fifteen dollars fifty-four cents ($15.54) was added the freight rate to Detroit, five dollars seventy-six cents ($5.76) per gross ton, making the total cost to complainant twenty-one dollars thirty cents ($21.30) per gross ton, or three dollars forty-five cents ($3.45) per gross ton over the ceiling price at Detroit.

The regulations of the Office of Price Administration permit payment of two dollars ($2.00) per gross ton over the ceiling price on shipments originating outside of Detroit. In order to purchase this particular shipment, it was necessary to secure an allocation from the War Production Board. Thus, the lower rail rates in effect from the Upper Peninsula to Duluth and Steelton, Minnesota; Chicago, Illinois; and Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, placed the competitors of complainant at a substantial advantage in the cost of scrap to them as well as enabling them to buy scrap from points in the Upper Peninsula without the necessity of securing specific allocation orders from the War Production Board.

Other exhibits were offered purporting to show comparisons of rates on scrap now in effect and the percentage relationship of commodity rates on scrap to the first-class rates from points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan to Chicago, Illinois; Duluth and Steelton, Minnesota; Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario; and Detroit, Michigan. The percentages of commodity rates to the first-class rate to Chicago range from 15 per cent to 11.4 per cent to Duluth and Steelton, from 14.5 per cent to 7.6 per cent; to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, from 12% per cent to 4.38 per cent; and to Detroit from 22.69 per cent to 13.19 per cent. The lowest rates to Duluth and Steelton were established to meet truck competition, and the lowest rates to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, to meet water as well as motor truck competition. With respect to motor truck competition, the Commission is well aware that such competition comprises privately-owned trucks which are not under our jurisdiction. Competition from such modes of transportation does not as yet appear to have affected the rates on scrap to Detroit.

The exhibit showing the percentage relationship of commodity rates to the first-class rates to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, also shows that there are no through joint class rates from Upper Peninsula points to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario; that the through first-class rate to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, is computed by adding to the applicable first-class rate from point of origin to Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, the first-class rate of 18 cents applicable from Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, to Sault Ste Marie, Ontario. Thus, the first-class rate from Calumet and Lake Linden to Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, is 113 cents and adding to that rate the Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, first-class rate of 18 cents results in a through first-class rate of 131 cents from Calumet and Lake Linden, Michigan, to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. Due to the fact that the class rates to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, are made up of a combination of class rates to and from Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, the through first-class rate is considerably greater than is the first-class rate in the Western Trunk Line class rate scale for the total distance from point of origin to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, and therefore the commodity rates on scrap from Upper Peninsula points to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, reflect a lower percentage of the proportional higher combination of first class rates from the same origin points to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.

Complainant, in comparing rates from Hancock and Houghton, Michigan, to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, versus Detroit, Michigan, shows that the distance (254 miles) to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, is less than one half the distance (526 miles) to Detroit, Michigan. The first-class rate to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, is 127 cents and, to Detroit, 157 cents. The first-class rate to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, is proportionately higher than the first-class rate to Detroit. This is so not only because the class rate scale within the Upper Peninsula is relatively higher than the class rate scale from Upper Peninsula points to Detroit but also because there are no through class rates from Upper Peninsula points to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. The first-class rate from Houghton and Hancock, Michigan, to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, is made up of the combination of 109 cents, the local first-class rate to Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, plus 18 cents, the local first-class rate from Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, to Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, making a total first-class rate of 127 cents. Applying the water-competitive commodity rate against the combination first-class rate necessarily produces a lesser percentage than would be the case if the first-class rate to Sault Ste. Marie. Ontario, was on relatively the same level as the first-class rate to Detroit and, also, a lesser percentage than would be the case if the commodity rate was not constructed to meet water competition. It has never been the view of this Commission, in prescribing a general basis of rates, that such rates should be based upon the lowest rates that may be in effect from or to certain specific points, as we are well aware of the fact that commodity rates that are established lower than the basic level are caused by a large volume of traffic. Consideration must also be given to the shorter distances, when comparing commodity rates with percentages of class rates for the reason that class rate scales are relatively higher per mile for shorter distances than for longer distances.

Defendants state that, in view of the emphasis placed by complainant on the alleged fact that no effort was made by the interested carriers to lower the rates on scrap between Upper Peninsula points and Detroit in accordance with the suggestion of this Commission in docket D-3135, there was no reason at that time why the carriers should make an effort to lower the rates because there was no movement of scrap from the Upper Peninsula points to Detroit. Further, that it will be noted by reference to the Commission's suggestion in the prior case that this absence of volume movement of scrap by rail from the Upper Peninsula points to Detroit is the very reason why the Commission did not consider the rate structure between those points.

While the complainant does not now show a large volume of movement from the Upper Peninsula points to Detroit, it is pointed out that complainant could have purchased more scrap if the freight rates had been such as to permit the purchase of scrap without violating regulations of the Office of Price Administration or the necessity of having to secure specific allocation orders from the War Production Board. It is our view that, if the carriers had complied with our suggestion in the prior case, a considerable movement of traffic would have been furnished the interested carriers.

After due consideration of all the evidence, exhibits, briefs and records in t this case, THE COMMISSION FINDS that the rates assailed are, and for the future will be, unreasonable to the extent that such rates exceed the rates hereinafter ordered.

With reference to the matter of reparation, Section 11026, Subdivision (g) of the 1929 Compiled Laws provides, among other things, that any person may complain to the Commission that the charge exacted for the transportation of freight is irregular and exorbitant, and that, if upon hearing the Commission shall decide that the rate or charge is irregular or exorbitant, it shall find what, in its judgment, would have been a reasonable rate or charge for the service complained of, in which case, if the rate or charge so found shall be less than the charge exacted and the Commission shall determine that the party complained of is entitled to an award of damages under the provisions of said Act, the Commission shall make an order directing the payment thereof.

The statute contemplates that rates be maintained at a reasonable level and authorizes the Commission to fix such rates and charges as are just and reasonable (Sec. 11038, C. L. 1929). From the foregoing provisions of the statute, it will be seen that the test to be applied in determining whether or not a rate should be altered is entirely different from the one to be applied in determining whether or not reparation should be awarded.

It must not be understood that, whenever this Commission reduces a rate, it necessarily follows that it will award reparation upon the basis of the rate established for two years preceding the filing of the petition. There is no conclusive presumption that a rate reasonable today was reasonable a year before, since reasonable rates vary from time to time, and some point of division must be found. Where, therefore, rates have been established and maintained by the carriers in good faith, especially where they have been long in effect and acquiesced in by shippers without protest, this Commission will not award reparation even though the rate is reduced, unless it clearly appears that the rates paid in the past have been exorbitant and not merely unreasonable. The record shows that very few shipments moved in 1942 and 1943, and that no shipments were made in 1944 or, so far, in 1945. The record does not conclusively show that the rates in question were irregular or exorbitant. Therefore, it is not incumbent upon the Commission to find what, in its judgment, would have been a reasonable rate or charge for the service complained of.

The Commission does not find that the record will sustain an award of damages on account of past shipments made by complainant.

Now, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

That the defendants in this proceeding, as they participate in the traffic, be and they are hereby notified and required to cease and desist on and after August 20, 1945, and thereafter abstain from publishing, demanding or collecting rates for the transportation of scrap iron and/or steel in carloads between points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and Detroit, Michigan, including points in the Detroit switching district taking the Detroit basis of rates which will exceed the rates resulting from the following percentages of the lowest first-class rate applicable between such points, subject to the minimum weights shown in connection there with :

12% per cent of the first-class rate, minimum weight 75,000 pounds;
15 per cent of the first-class rate, minimum weight 50,000 pounds;
20 per cent of the first-class rate, minimum weight 30,000 pounds.

That the term “scrap iron and/or steel,” referred to in the next preceding paragraph, shall be considered as the following:

Axles, railway car or locomotive, old, having value for remelting or re-rolling purposes only

Borings

Filings

Rails, railway track, old, having value for remelting or re-rolling purposes only

Scrap (applies only on pieces, separate or combined, having value for remelting purposes only)

Turnings

Wheels, railway car, old, loose or attached to axles, having value for remelting or re-rolling purposes only.

That, when the charge based on the higher rating and actual weight (but not less than the minimum weight specified for the higher rating) exceeds the charge based on the lower rating and actual weight (but not less than the minimum weight specified for the lower rating), the latter charge will apply
That the lowest applicable first-class rate shall be determined by applying, via all intrastate routes, the lowest first-class rate arrived at under the different sections of the tariffs naming class rates applicable, via either interstate or intrastate routes, between points in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and Detroit, Michigan, including points in the Detroit district taking the Detroit basis of rates
That the minimum charges provided in the class rate tariffs herein referred to shall not be applied to the rates herein prescribed on scrap iron or steel as defined in paragraph 2
That, in compiling said rates, fractions of less than one-half or .50 of a cent shall be omitted. Fractions of one-half or .50 of a cent, or greater, shall be increased to the next whole figure.
That the tariffs or supplements issued pursuant to this order shall be filed upon not less than thirty days’ notice to this Commission and the general public in the manner prescribed by law
That the Commission reserves unto itself full jurisdiction of this matter and the right to make any other or further order or orders herein as it shall hereafter deem just, fitting and proper. - MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

In the matter of the application of the Michigan State Highway Depart ment for permission and authority to substitute automatic track-circuit operated flashing-light signals of the side-of-street type, with half-road way gate attachments, for the existing Evans Auto-Stop at the crossing of State Trunk Line Highway M-50 (Monroe Street) and the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad Company in Dundee, Michigan. File No. 7077 331. August 2, 1945.

Application was filed on July 9, 1945, by the Michigan State Highway Department, through its Assistant Bridge Engineer, J. H. Flynn, for permission to substitute automatic flashing-light signals of the side-of street type, with half-roadway gate attachments, for the existing Evans Auto-Stop at the crossing of State Trunk Line Highway M-50 (Monroe Street) and the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad Company in Dundee, Michigan.

In said application, the Commission is advised that the State Highway Department has agreed to bear the entire cost of the change in protection.

Attached to said application is a copy of a letter, dated July 2, 1945, addressed to the Michigan State Highway Department and signed by J. C. Bousfield, Chief Engineer for the Ann Arbor Railroad Company, wherein the Commission is advised that the railroad company is agreeable to the substitution of automatic flashing-light signals, with half roadway gate attachments, for the Evans Auto-Stop barrier as now maintained at the crossing of State Trunk Line Highway M-50 (Monroe Street) and their tracks in Dundee, Michigan, it being understood that the State Highway Department will bear the entire cost of the change in protection, and that the Ann Arbor Railroad Company will, at their expense, bear all future maintenance costs.

An inspection of the premises in question having been made by a representative of this Commission, the Commission is now advised, in a report of said inspection, that the State Highway Department claims that, since the cost of maintaining the Auto-Stop is so excessive, they are willing to install, at their own expense, automatic flashing-light signals of the side-of-street type, equipped with half-roadway gates, at said crossing, which proposed change in protection is recommended by the Commission’s representative.

The Commission, after due consideration of said application, together with the recommendation contained in the report of said inspection, and being advised that an understanding has been reached by the parties in interest, FINDS AND Holds that the proposed change in protection is in the interest of public safety, and therefore said application should be granted.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by the Michigan Public Service Commision that permission shall be, and the same is, hereby granted to the Michigan State Highway Department to substitute automatic flashing light signals of the side-of-street type, equipped with half-roadway gate attachments, for the Evans Auto-Stop as now maintained at the crossing of State Trunk Line Highway M-50 (Monroe Street) and the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad Company in Dundee, Michigan, Provided said flashing-light signals are installed in accordance with Michigan State Highway Plan No. X2 of 58.4-2, dated July 30, 1945, and the plan and specifications of the Michigan Public Service Commission hereto attached and made a part hereof by reference; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the cost and expense of installing said automatic flashing-light signals, with half-roadway gate attachments, shall be borne solely by the Michigan State Highway Department; where. as, the Ann Arbor Railroad Company shall, at their expense, bear all future maintenance of said flashing-light signals and gates; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, if at any time said flashing-light signals and gates at said crossing become inoperative, the Ann Arbor Railroad Company shall, as soon as possible, cause a watchman to be stationed at the crossing to warn highway traffic of the approach of engines and trains until said signals and gates have been restored to working order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, after said flashing-light signal and gate system have been installed and placed in service, an affidavit shall be filed with this Commission by an official of the Ann Arbor Railroad Company advising the day and date such signal system was placed in service at said crossing.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any and all orders of this Commission, or its predecessors, which may have been issued relating to the protection at said crossing, shall be vacated, canceled and made void upon the filing of the affidavit heretofore mentioned showing that the terms of this order have been complied with ; and any and all protection existing at said crossing, whether or not provided for in said orders, shall be and the same is hereby abolished, changed or modified, as the case may be, and as hereinbefore provided.

The Commission reserves unto itself jurisdiction in this matter and the right to issue any further order or orders herein which, in its judgment, may be deemed necessary.

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.

In the matter of the application of the Michigan State Highway Department for permission to relocate the flashing-light signals with cantilever arms, as now maintained at the Wood Street (U.S. Highway No. 131) crossing of the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad in the city of Cadillac, Michigan. File No. RX-1737. November 21, 1945.

Application was filed on May 22, 1945, and an amended application on November 19, 1945, by the Michigan State Highway Department, through its Assistant Bridge Engineer, J. H. Flynn, and its Bridge Engineer, G. M. Foster, for permission to relocate the flashing-light signals equipped with cantilever arm signals, as now maintained at the Wood Street (U.S. Highway No. 131) crossing of the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad in the city of Cadillac, Michigan.

In said application and amended application, the Commission is advised that the purpose of the relocation of the signals is to remove the signals from the center of the existing sidewalk.

An inspection of the premises in question having been made by a representative of this department, the Commission is now advised, in the report of said inspection, that at the time the signals were first installed it was proposed to widen the street and install sidewalks which would run on the outside of the flashing-light signal mast. However, after the signals were installed, the proposed street widening was abandoned, and, as a result, the signals are located in the sidewalk and are a menace to pedestrian traffic and therefore should be relocated as shown on Michigan State Highway Department Blueprint Plan X1 of 83.5.1, dated May 8, 1941, as revised June 14, 1945, attached to said application and made a part thereof.

The Commission, after due consideration of said applications and plan, together with the recommendations contained in the report of said inspection, FINDS AND HOLDS that the relocation of the flashing-light signals and cantilever arm signals is necessary and in the interest of public safety, and therefore said application should be granted and said plan approved.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by the Michigan Public Service Commission that permission shall be, and the same is, hereby granted to the Michigan State Highway Department to relocate the flashing-light signals equipped with cantilever arm signals, as now maintained at the Wood Street (U.S. Highway No. 131) crossing of the tracks of the Ann Arbor Railroad in the city of Cadillac, Michigan, PROVIDED said signals are relocated as per Michigan State Highway Department Blueprint Plan XI of 83-5-1, dated May 8, 1941, as revised June 14, 1945, which plan is hereby approved and made a part hereof by reference; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in all other respects, the order of the Commission, dated the 4th day of September, 1941, File No. RX-1737, requiring the installation of flashing-light signals at said crossing, shall remain in full force and effect.

The Commission reserves unto itself jurisdiction of this matter and the right to issue any further order or orders herein which, in its judgment, may be deemed necessary.

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.