95-579. Implementation of Section 4 of the Negotiated Rates Act of 1993  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 1995)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 2543-2545]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-579]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION
    
    49 CFR Parts 1002, 1011, and 1130
    
    [Ex Parte No. MC-219]
    
    
    Implementation of Section 4 of the Negotiated Rates Act of 1993
    
    AGENCY: Interstate Commerce Commission.
    
    ACTION: Adoption of final rules.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Commission is adopting final rules to implement section 4 
    of the Negotiated Rates Act of 1993. These rules provide a mechanism 
    for obtaining Commission review of motor carrier and shipper 
    resolutions of overcharge and undercharge claims resulting from 
    incorrect tariff provisions or billing errors arising from the 
    inadvertent failure to properly and timely file and maintain agreed-
    upon rates in compliance with 49 U.S.C. 10761 and 10762.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: The rules are effective February 9, 1995.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lawrence C. Herzig, (202) 927-5180. 
    [TDD for the hearing impaired: (202) 927-5721.]
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) in 
    Ex Parte No. MC-219, Implementation of Section 4 of the Negotiated 
    Rates Act (not printed), served March 4, 1994, and published at 59 FR 
    11240, March 10, 1994, we proposed rules which would implement section 
    4 of the Negotiated Rates Act of 1993 (NRA), Pub. L. No. 103-180. The 
    NPR proposed a mechanism for obtaining Commission review of motor 
    carrier and shipper resolutions of overcharge and undercharge claims. 
    These claims result from incorrect tariff provisions or billing errors 
    arising from the inadvertent failure to properly and timely file and 
    maintain agreed-upon rates in compliance with 49 U.S.C. 10761 and 
    10762.
        The NPR proposed two alternate methods of settlement. Under the 
    first method, a petition to depart from the filed rate would be filed 
    which would become equivalent to an order of the Commission after 45 
    days if it was not protested or investigated; the second method would 
    require a formal order to be issued in all instances, whether or not 
    there was a protest or investigation. The NPR also proposed standards 
    for the information required to be included in a petition to depart 
    from the filed rate, and set a filing fee of $70.
        Nine comments were received. In response to these comments, we are 
    modifying the information required to be included in a petition, and we 
    will permit either a carrier or a shipper to file a petition. We will 
    also adopt the first method of settlement and filing fees of $40 and 
    $80, depending on the amount involved in the petition.
        Consolidated Freightways Corporation of Delaware states that the 
    proposed rules are too burdensome in requiring written Commission 
    orders in all cases, prefiling of the petitions for relief, and a 
    docketing fee on insignificant amounts. Also, it is concerned that the 
    proposed rules do not clarify that multiple tariff errors may be 
    resolved by a single filing. The final rules will not require an order 
    on any uncontested petition. Also, while each petition should encompass 
    only one shipper or one consignee, it can include multiple tariff 
    errors. However, we will require payment of a fee for all petitions.
        D&J Associates, a freight transportation consulting firm, is 
    concerned that the proposed rules apply only to publishing errors and 
    not to billing errors and overcharge claims based on published and 
    timely filed rates. In this regard section 4 of the NRA is very clear; 
    it applies only to overcharge and undercharge claims resulting from 
    incorrect tariff provisions or billing errors arising from the 
    inadvertent failure to properly and timely file and maintain agreed 
    upon rates. Thus, the concerns of D & J Associates need not be 
    addressed further.
        The National Industrial Transportation League (NITL) states that 
    the proposed procedures are too complex and formalistic. First, it 
    argues that they will prevent the parties from quickly and efficiently 
    resolving paperwork errors. We agree, and will simplify the 
    requirements for information to be included in each petition. Also, 
    NITL is concerned that any private party, even though not a party to 
    the transportation at issue, could protest petitions. We do not 
    consider this to be a significant problem. The right of any interested 
    party to protest a petition has been part of the rail special docket 
    procedures for a number of years, without causing any problems.
        The Transportation Brokers Conference of America generally endorses 
    the proposed rules. However, it favors the method whereby an 
    uncontested petition automatically becomes an order of the Commission 
    after 45 days. We are adopting this method in the final rules.
        The National Motor Freight Traffic Association, which publishes the 
    National Motor Freight Classification on behalf of its member carriers, 
    generally supports the proposed rules. However, it suggests that a 
    notice should be published by the Commission when a petition concerning 
    classification matters is investigated on the Commission's own motion 
    or is protested. We consider this publication to be unnecessary. 
    Petitions will concern tariff publishing errors or the failure to 
    publish agreed-upon rates, covering primarily discounts or 
    [[Page 2544]] commodity rates and not classification matters.
        Baldor Electric Company, GAF Building Materials Corp. and W.R. 
    Grace Company filed consolidated comments. These firms assert that 
    shippers should be allowed to initiate tariff reconciliation 
    procedures. We agree, and are amending the rules to this effect. The 
    commenters also believe that the responsibility for serving the 
    petition is unclear. We have amended the regulations to show that the 
    party who files the petition has the responsibility to serve all the 
    parties. These three corporations also argue that the Commission should 
    adopt the second method of reconciliation by issuing an order, and that 
    the procedures should encompass contract carriage. We disagree. To 
    expedite dispute resolution and in light of our limited resources, we 
    will permit uncontested and uninvestigated petitions to become orders 
    of the Commission after 45 days. The contract carriage issue does not 
    lie because contract carriage does not involve filed tariffs.
        National Small Shipments Traffic Conference, Inc., considers that 
    the requirements for the information proposed to be contained in each 
    petition are too burdensome. It also favors permitting the petitions to 
    become orders of the Commission after 45 days. We agree in both 
    instances and the final rules respond to both concerns.
        The Petroleum Marketing Association of America argues that we 
    should adopt a single-page standardized form for the petitions. We do 
    not consider this necessary. The Association also argues that there 
    should be no fee, or at most a nominal fee for filing the petitions. We 
    are required to assess a fee based on actual cost for services rendered 
    to the public. The fees adopted here are based on the average cost of 
    processing similar applications.
        Roadway Services, Inc., a common carrier, is concerned, as is D & J 
    Associates, that the rules not be applied to pure billing errors. We 
    have disposed of this issue in connection with the comments of D & J 
    Associates discussed previously. Also, Roadway indicates that the 
    information required in the proposed 10-step procedures is too complex 
    and burdensome. We agree and in the final rules have significantly 
    reduced the amount of required information. Roadway also believes that 
    nominal claims ($1,000 or less) should be settled without our 
    involvement. We disagree. We do not think that the adopted rules are 
    burdensome, especially since we would permit multiple claims involving 
    one shipper or consignee to be consolidated.
        We note that, because it substantially eliminated tariff filing 
    requirements for independently determined rates, enactment of the 
    Transportation Industry Regulatory Reform Act has substantially reduced 
    the need for the remedy authorized by section 4 of the NRA and our 
    proposed regulations. In the past few months we have received fewer 
    than 15 requests for adjustments, and these requests primarily involve 
    one motor carrier. Nevertheless, we expect that, as filed tariff 
    provisions are reviewed, these requests will continue at the rate of 
    one or two per month for some time. Also, because it is possible that 
    tariff errors will be made in collectively set tariffs, we may receive 
    requests pertaining to rate bureau tariffs.
        We believe that the simplified regulations adopted here will allow 
    efficient processing of section 4 petitions by the Commission without 
    subjecting petitioners to undue burdens. Actual handling of the 
    petitions will be by our Special Docket Board. The filing fees of $40 
    for petitions involving $25,000 or less and $80 for petitions involving 
    more than $25,000 correspond to the fees currently in place for rail 
    special dockets.
    
    Environmental Statement
    
        This action will not significantly affect either the quality of the 
    human environment or the conservation of energy resources.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Certification
    
        Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), we conclude that adoption of these 
    rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
    number of small entities. The economic impact will be minimal because 
    the rules merely provide a simple, voluntary method to resolve certain 
    billing problems that are likely to arise in only a small proportion of 
    the shipments transported by the motor carrier industry. Thus, the 
    economic impact is unlikely to be significant within the meaning of the 
    Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    
    List of Subjects
    
    49 CFR Part 1002
    
        Administrative practice and procedure, Common carriers, Freedom of 
    information, User fees.
    
    49 CFR Part 1011
    
        Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations 
    (Government agencies), Organization and functions (Government 
    agencies).
    
    49 CFR Part 1130
    
        Administrative practice and procedure.
    
        Decided: December 21, 1994.
    
        By the Commission, Chairman McDonald, Vice Chairman Morgan, 
    Commissioners Simmons and Owen.
    Vernon A. Williams
    Secretary.
    
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, title 49, chapter X, 
    parts 1002, 1011 and 1130 are amended as set forth below.
    
    PART 1002--FEES
    
        1. The authority citation for part 1002 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A), 5 U.S.C. 553, 31 U.S.C. 9701 
    and 49 U.S.C. 10321.
    
        2. In Sec. 1002.2(f), in the table, a new No. 81 is added to read 
    as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 1002.2  Filing fees.
    
    * * * * *
        (f) * * *
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Type of proceeding                          Fee  
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (81) Tariff reconciliation petitions from motor common                  
     carriers:                                                              
      (i) Petitions involving $25,000 or less......................      $40
      (ii) Petitions involving over $25,000........................       80
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    * * * * *
    
    PART 1011--COMMISSION ORGANIZATION; DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY
    
        3. The authority citation for part 1011 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 49 U.S.C. 10301, 10302, 
    10304, 10305, 10321, 10762.
    
        4. Section 1011.6(e) is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 1011.6  Employee boards.
    
    * * * * *
        (e) Special Docket Board. Disposition of special docket and tariff 
    reconciliation proceedings under 49 CFR 1130.2(e), (f) and (g).
    * * * * *
    
    PART 1130--INFORMAL COMPLAINTS
    
        5. The authority citation for part 1130 is revised to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553 and 559; 49 U.S.C. 10321, 10707 and 
    11712.
    
        6. In Sec. 1130.2, paragraph (f) is amended by adding the words 
    ``or tariff reconciliation petition'' after the word ``petition'' in 
    the parenthetical phrase in the first sentence and by adding the 
    [[Page 2545]] words ``or tariff reconciliation'' after the words 
    ``Special Docket'' in the second sentence, and by adding a new 
    paragraph (g) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 1130.2  When damages sought.
    
    * * * * *
        (g) Tariff reconciliation proceedings for motor common carriers--
    (1) Petitions to waive collection or permit payment.
        Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 11712, subject to Commission review and 
    approval, motor common carriers (other than household goods carriers) 
    and shippers may resolve, by mutual consent, overcharge and undercharge 
    claims resulting from incorrect tariff provisions or billing errors 
    arising from the inadvertent failure to properly and timely file and 
    maintain agreed-upon rates, rules or classifications in compliance with 
    49 U.S.C. 10761 and 10762. Under section 11712, the Commission may 
    approve any departure from the filed rate when the shipper and carrier 
    agree, and the departure is needed for the reason(s) stated in section 
    11712. Petitions for appropriate authority may be filed by either the 
    carrier, shipper or consignee on the Commission's tariff reconciliation 
    docket by submitting a letter of intent to depart from the filed rate. 
    The petitions will be deemed the equivalent of an informal complaint 
    and answer admitting the matters stated in the petition. Petitions 
    shall be sent to the Special Docket Board, Interstate Commerce 
    Commission, Washington, DC 20423. The petitions shall contain, at a 
    minimum, the following information:
        (i) The name(s) and address(es) of the payer(s) of the freight 
    charges;
        (ii) The name(s) of the carrier(s) involved in the traffic;
        (iii) An estimate of the amount(s) involved;
        (iv) The time period when the shipment(s) involved were delivered 
    or tendered for delivery;
        (v) A general description of the point(s) of origin and destination 
    of the shipment(s);
        (vi) A general description of the commodity(ies) transported;
        (vii) A statement certifying that the carrier(s) and shipper(s) 
    participating in the shipment(s) or the payer(s) of the freight charges 
    concur(s) with the intent to depart from the filed rate; and
        (viii) A brief explanation of the incorrect tariff provision(s) or 
    billing error(s) causing the request to depart from the filed rate.
        (2) Public notice and protest. Tariff reconciliation petitions 
    (letters of intent) shall be served on all parties named in the 
    petition by the party who files the petition and will be made available 
    by the Commission for public inspection in the Special Docket Board 
    Public File, Interstate Commerce Commission, Washington, DC 20423. Any 
    interested person may protest the granting of a petition by filing a 
    letter of objection with the Special Docket Board within 30 days of 
    Commission receipt of the petition. Letters of objection shall identify 
    the tariff reconciliation proceeding, shall clearly state the reasons 
    for the objection, and shall certify that a copy of the letter of 
    objection has been served on all parties named in the petition. The 
    Commission may initiate an investigation of the petition on its own 
    motion.
        (3) Uncontested petitions. If a petition is not contested, and if 
    the Commission does not initiate an investigation of the petition on 
    its own motion, approval is deemed granted without further action by 
    the Commission, effective 45 days after Commission receipt of the 
    petition.
        (4) Contested petitions. If a petition is contested or the 
    Commission initiates an investigation of the petition on its own 
    motion, 15 days will be allowed for reply. The 15-day period will 
    commence on the date of service of the objections or, if the Commission 
    initiates an investigation on its own motion, on the date of service of 
    the decision initiating the investigation. After the period for reply 
    has expired, the Commission will issue a decision approving or 
    disapproving the petition, or requesting further submissions from the 
    parties, and then will issue a decision based on the further 
    submissions.
    
    [FR Doc. 95-579 Filed 1-9-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7035-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
2/9/1995
Published:
01/10/1995
Department:
Interstate Commerce Commission
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Adoption of final rules.
Document Number:
95-579
Dates:
The rules are effective February 9, 1995.
Pages:
2543-2545 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Ex Parte No. MC-219
PDF File:
95-579.pdf
CFR: (3)
49 CFR 1002.2
49 CFR 1011.6
49 CFR 1130.2