Report of Georgia public service commission. Eighty-seventh report, 1959

S T A T E OF G E O R G I A
Ernest Vandiver, Governor

*/A5!

87th REPORT OF
GEORGIA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 244 Washington St, SW, ATLANTA 3, G*
January 1, 1959 to January 1, I960
Matt L. McWhorter, Chairman Allen Chappell, Vice Chairman
Walter R* McDonald, Commissioner Crawford L. Pilcher7^~C6mmissioner Ben T, Wiggins, Commissioner
A. 0* Randall, Secretary

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
September 1 , i960
To His Excellency S* Ernest Vandiver Governor of Georgia Dear Governor:
We have the honor to submit the 87th
Annual Report of the Georgia Public Service Commission for the calendar year January If 1959 to January
1$ i960 in mimeograph form* The report will be in
corporated with later reports in a printed volume at a future date in accordance with previous practice*
Respectfully submitted,
" Q u it .A
Matt L* McWhorter, Chairman

BOUND BY THE NATIONAL LIBRARY BINDERY CO. OF GA.

1n A' T V"

yv. X / W ^ Tj ^ ( ' \ j / !

i a r

C/ \

\

Walter R* McDonald, Commissioner

j . if.
CrawfonQf L. Pilcher, Commissioner

Ben T, Wiggins, Commissioner
LIBRARIES
P F G0RG\^

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
September 1 , i960
To His Excellency S* Ernest Vandiver Governor of Georgia Dear Governor:
We have the honor to submit the 87th
Annual Report of the Georgia Public Service Commis^ sion for the calendar year January 1, 1959 to January
1, i960 in mimeograph form* The report will be in
corporated with later reports in a printed volume at a future date in accordance with previous practice*
Respectfully submitted,
' O u i
Matt L. McWhorter, Chairman

A

/ A,

\ /V

iir, p ) / \

^ malter R* McDonald, Commissioner

Crawfon: L. Pilcher, Commissioner

87th Annual Report

Introduction

As required by law the Georgia Public Service CornCommission submits its 87th Annual Report herewith covering the regulatory activities for the year ending December 31> 1959#

The organization of the Commission remains un changed since the last report, Matt L* McWhorter having been re-elected as Chairman and Allen Chappell as Vice Chairman, effective August 27, 1959 for another two year term. The present personnel and staff of the Commission is as follows:

Matt L. McWhorter, Chairman

Allen Chappell, Vice Chairman

Walter R McDonald, Commissioner

Crawford L Pilcher, Commissioner

Ben T. Wiggins, Commissioner

A # 0* Randall, Executive Secretary and Legal Aide

Mrs Mae A* Montgomery, Reporter

Robt B. Alford, Chief Utilities Engineer

(vacancy) , Senior Utilities Engineer

Douglas N. Smith, Utilities Engineer

James L* St John, Junior Utilities Engineer

llvin J* Rowe, Senior Utilities Auditor

Prank G* Heald,Utilities Auditor

Chas* H, Hagerty, Junior Utilities Auditor

David 0 Benson, Transportation Rates Expert

J Fred Parker, Senior Transportation Rates Specialist

L Thomas Doyal, Transportation Rates Specialist

Robert N. Fellows, Certificate & Insurance Supervisor

Donald J Lawrence, Director Motor Carrier Inspection and En

forcement

(vacancy)

, Transportation Rates Assistant

Ip

1

Page 1

All other Commission employees are listed in alpha betical order as follows:
Mrs* Carolyn N* Baxley, Senior Stenographer Mrs. Luoene R. Boring, Senior Stenographer Larry Carpenter, Confidential Secretary Mrs. Mozelle Colquitt, Senior Stenographer H. E. Conley, Motor Carrier Inspector Mrs. Burniece Daniels, Senior Stenographer W. E. Doolittle, Motor Carrier Inspector Bobby Edmondson, Porter-Machine Operator A. J. Port, Motor Carrier Inspector Mrs. Doris G. Lane, Senior Stenographer Mrs. Opal Magill, Senior Stenographer Mrs. Virginia R. Mann, Senior Stenographer Mrs, Emily Martin, Senior Stenographer Mrs. Doris Mills, Principal Stenographer Mrs, Edna A. Murphy, Receptionist Mrs, Sarah B, McGonigal, Senior Stenographer Mrs. Rubye D, Otwell, Senior Stenographer Mrs. June Powell, Intermediate Typist Mrs. Hazel P, Turner, Intermediate Clerk T* S* Tyson, Motor Carrier Inspector
(vacancy), Motor Carrier Inspector (vacancy), Motor Carrier Inspector
A comparison of the foregoing list of employees with last year*s report will indicate very few changes. The position of Junior Utilities Engineer was filled by employment of Mr. James L. St. John. The position of Senior Utilities Engineer remains vacant. Also the position of Transportation Rates As sistant and two Motor Carrier Inspector positions remain vacant, largely due to insufficient appropriation of funds. In the Motor Carrier Division the Commission established the position of Director of Motor Carrier Inspection and Enforcement and Mr. Donald J. Lawrence was employed to fill this position. The Commis sion is in need of additional employees. This is well established in the report of the Senate Committee on Government Operations, which is reproduced herein below:
REPORT NO, 2 - SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERN__________MENT OPERATIONS.
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, GOVERNOR VANDIVER, LT. GOVERNOR BYRD, SPEAKER SMITH AND THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA:
This report by the Senate Committee on Government Operations has to do with the work of the Georgia Public Service Commission and the services it renders the people of our State and the public utilities that are subject to its regulations. It
Page 2

probably will be well to dwell briefly on the Public Service Commission and its duties and then we will go into the reason behind this report*
Very few departments of our State Government are as old in years of existence and in years of service to the people of Georgia as the Public Service Commission* This Commission was established in 1879, just a few years after the end of the Mar Between the States, and was originally called the Railroad Com mission of Georgia* At that time about all it had to regulate were the rates and services of the railroads in Georgia, as the railroads were for many years our only public utility as we now use the term* Many years later, after the turn of the century, as electricity, telephones and gas came into wider use, the jur isdiction of the Commission was extended over those utilities and in 1922 its name was changed to the Georgia Public Service Commission to more properly reflect its enlarged functions* In 1931, when the bus and truck operations had begun to spread over the State, the Legislature added those operations to the juris diction of the Commission* The Commission is a constitutional body, with its five governing members elected by the people for six year terms*
The work of the Public Service Commission began to increase in the early nineteen twenties, just after the first World War, as public utilities as we now know them began to grow in Georgia, and indeed, through our nation* It is this growth of public utilities that began in the twenties and has mushroomed since that time with which this report will be concerned* The amazing fact is simply this: the public utilities of our State such as telephone companies, electric power companies, truck and bus lines, gas companies, transit companies, and others-haveJin creased over twenty-five times since 1920 and all of them are subject to regulation by the Public Service Commission* Yet the Public Service Commission is actually operating its entire work as of January this year with TWO LESS staff members than it had twenty years ago. Its staff and resources are entirely inadequate to give the people of Georgia the service they are entitled to and this Committee feels that it can point out a way to improve this situation without going into the pockets of the taxpayers of Georgia*
Whether it is generally realized or not, the Georgia Public Service Commission probably has a closer contact with every family in Georgia and is at their beck and call day by day in more ways than nearly any other department of the State Govern ment. Every family in Georgia is affected every day of the year in some manner by the many fine public utilities that serve our people* Nearly every family in our State, if not all of them, are served daily by a telephone company or telephone co-op, an electric light company, a bus line or a truck line, a railroad or a gas company, a city transit line, or the Western Union tele-' graph company* All of these utilities come under the regulations,
Page 3

in one way cr another, of the Georgia Public Service Commission. The Commission tells them what rates they can charge you, how much service they must give you, how many bus or railroad sche dules the carriers must run to give adequate service to the pub lic and handles the hundreds of other miscellaneous service matters that come up in the daily operation of these services* The Public Service Commission is the umpire and the referee bethe utilities and the people. By the very nature of their busi ness, many utilities are monopolistic. That is, you have only one telephone company in your town. You probably have only one or two railroads, except in the larger centers. Most towns and counties have only one or two truck and bus lines, or one gas company that pipes in natural gas. Therefore, the people must trade with these utilities without much competition and the State Legislature has over the years charged the Public Service Commis sion with the responsibility of keeping the rates and charges and services of these utilities fair and equitable, both to the public and to the utilities.
One thing should be made clear at this point, and that^is that any citizen of the State that deals with any public utility has the right to call upon the Public Service Commission at any time, to investigate almost any matter of dispute between that citizen and the utility in question* Many people may not realize that but thousands of them do call on the Commission throughout the year and it is the duty of the Commission to look into the matter in question and make a fair ruling. Here again, the Public Service Commission is one Department that is close to the people of the State. A person does not have to go through any other governing body to ask aid from the Commission. A citi zen does not need anyone to intervene for him or his family. He has the right to go in person, write or telephone the Commission for relief and his request will be answered and handled as quick ly as possible* The members of the Commission themselves and their staff are always at the service of the people. And of course, by the same token, the public utilities of our State have the same right of appeal to the Commission.
The Public Service Commission is divided into three main divisions for orderly and efficient operation. The Transpor tation Rates and Services Division handles all matters pertaining to the intrastate rates and services of the rail, bus and truck lines; the Utilities Division handles the telephone, telegraph, electric and gas utilities and the Motor Carrier Division handles all matters pertaining to operating rights and inspections of the truck and motor bus lines that operate through and within the State. This entire work is carried on with only thirty four staff employees plus the five Commission members, and as we mentioned before, the Commission had two fewer staff members as of January 1st this year than the Commission had twenty years ago. Below we will show the tremendous increase of work in the past few yeas that causes us to believe that more help is needed to give the people the service they require and are calling for*
Unlike most departments of the State Government, the
Page 4

Public Service Commission gets practically no money from the State tax income or State treasury* In 1956 the last year that a general appropriation bill was passed by the Legislature, the Public Service Commission was granted three hundred thousand dol lars for all of its operations and it has never used more than that since then* Of this money, the utilities, such as telephone companies, electric companies, gas companies and railroads paid in regulatory fees totaling seventy thousand dollars and the truck and bus lines paid in license fees totaling two hundred and fifteen thousand dollars. Therefore, the Commission only received fifteen thousand dollars of general tax money*
Back in 1922, before the days of bus or truck com panies, the Legislature passed a law that assessed the amount of seventy thousand dollars per year against all of the utilities operating in the State of Georgia* At that time the railroads paid in most of the seventy thousand dollars. This assessment was based on the ad valorem tax valuation of each utility and divided among them on that basis. As the years passed and util ities grew, both in numbers and worth, the amount levied against each utility grew smaller each year since the total figure re mained at seventy thousand dollars. Naturally, that figure has been inadequate for proper regulatory work as the utility services to the people grew year by year and by leaps and bounds. The fees against trucks and buses were not limited as to total and that total has grown each year*
The Commission operates almost entirely on money it collects from the utilities* We mention these financial figures in order to give a clear picture of the condition and we will now give an example of why the Commission needs more money and more help to adequately serve the public.
Under the utility assessment laitf, only the two large telephone and power companies pay comparatively large fees - one paying #22,635.58 in 1959 and one paying #18,006.73.These two com panies are the source of a major portion of the service anu rate complaints made to the Utility Division of the Commission and much of the cost of the Utility Division arises from the handling of those matters* In addition each of these companies has at frequent intervals major rate, service, securities and certifi cate cases which are usually large in scope and long in hearing time, and correspondingly costly in the direct expenditure of the Commission^ time and in the many man hours necessary to analyze the great volume of evidence and statistics usually submitted. ' In spite of the comparatively large payments of those companies, there is no doubt that they fail by considerable amounts to pay in a sufficient sum for their regulation*
Insofar as concerns the railroads, none of them now pay under that law in excess of #4,500 per year and the many rate and service matters handled by the Commission involving these carriers require the expenditure of amounts considerably in excess of those payments.
Page 5

The growth of the public utilities of Georgia is an entrancing story and certainly reflects the progress and growth and the present prosperity of our State* This increasing growth of the utilities also has caused a tremendous increase in the work that must be done by the Public Service Commission* This increase in the number and volume of the public utilities of Georgia since the early nineteen twenties has been fantastic. Our Committee has studied many available records and it seems that the increase in all public utility services to the people of our State in the last forty years has been twenty fold or more# In nineteen twenty we depended almost entirely for transportation on the railroads and few, if any, bus or truck lines were in re gular operation in the State* Today we still have 32 railroads, and also we have over five hundred licensed truck and bus lines that operate within the borders of our State* The Public Service Commission must regulate the bus and truck lines# The Commission must set rates, allot routes, license the trucks and buses and check on them for safety to protect the general public.
The growth of other utilities in our State has been as fantastic and wonderful as the growth of truck and bus lines* In 1922, according to the best available records, there were about fifty thousand telephones in the State of Georgia* That was only thirty-seven years ago* Today the people of Georgia are are using over one million and fifty thousand telephones. This is an increase of over twenty times in the number of telephones
between 1922 and 1959* The tremendous expansion of the electric
power industry in our State has been as rapid and as far reaching as the expansion of other utilities* In 1922, many homes, even in towns and cities, were without electric lights and there was practically no electricity in the country areas. Now there is hardly a home in the State, rural or urban, that is not provided electric service* All other utilities in our State have been in creasing at the same rapid rate and this expansion of services naturally has opened new grounds for contention between utilities and customers. This continuing expansion calls for regulatory handling of many kinds and the people are entitled to this service by the Public Service Commission*
Over the years the Legislature has made changes from time to time in the laws that govern the Public Service Commission but in all of these changes the Legislature has always held to the theory that the revenue to operate the Commission should come from fees, set up by the Legislature, and levied on the various utilities of the State. (That same theory is applied in most of the States of our country)* The noted increase in work of the Commission and in its cost of operations has brought about the result today that no type of utility in Georgia pays in enough in fees to cover the cost of regulating that utility, with the ex ception of the truck and bus companies* The reason for this is plain and is not any fault of the utilities or of the Commission* With the growth of truck and bus lines the Legislature levied special license tag fees that go to the Public Service Commission and the total of these fees has increased through the years as the
Page 6

numbers of trucks and buses have increased. (These fees are not to be confused with the regular license tag fees which are col lected by the Revenue Department)* These fees have covered the cost of motor carrier regulation and in fact the Commission has r had to use truck and bus license fees for the past few years to carry a large part of the cost of all other regulatory operations* All other utilities, as we have shown, pay in only seventy thous and dollars per year*
The growth of utility service of all kinds in Georgia and the demand from the people for regulatory service has grown so in the last few years that the Commission must have more fi nancial help if it is to continue to give the good service to the people that it has been rendering in the past* Probably the greatest period of utility growth in Georgia has been since 19^0, the years since the beginning of the second World War, and al though the Commission*s work load has increased ten times and over, the staff of the Commission has not been increased at all during that time* In spite of this substantially increased work load budget limitations have prevented the Commission from fill ing vacancies in staff positions already authorized by the State Merit System (there are now vacancies in the Motor Carrier En forcement Section and one each in the Transportation and Utili ties Division)* Recent reorganization of the Commission^ Motor Carrier Enforcement Section - long urged by the motor carriers themselves - was designed to provide broader and more efficient enforcement of the safety, service, rate and certificate provi sions of the Motor Carrier Act, but the full benefit of that re organization cannot be realized unless additions are*, made to the staff of the Enforcement and Transportation Sections* In order to properly process the major utility cases being brought before the Commission and in order to keep as nearly current as possible on the handling of utility rate and service complaints, the Utility Division has been forced to defer needed regular field engineering inspections of utility facilities and services. A number of Georgia municipalities are now operating various utility services and because of the limited size of those operations are unable to engage qualified personnel to advise them concerning technical engineering and rate matters. The Commission has been called upon to furnish assistance to these municipalities and has done so to the extent it could with its limited utilities staff* The Commission feels it should give all assistance possible to the Georgia municipalities in this field and would be able to increase its add if its utilities staff were augmented*
In addition to directly regulating the intrastate rates and services of the various utilities subject to its juris diction, the Public Service Commission is charged by law with ap pearing before the Federal regulatory agencies to protect the interests of the people of Georgia involved in interstate proceed ings* The Commission regularly participates in rate, service and securities cases before the Interstate Commerce Commission, Federal Power Commission, Federal Communications Commission and Securities and Exchange Commission. This interstate work is very
Page ?

important since the Commission has been able to oppose in such proceedings changes in rates and service which would either directly or indirectly affect the people of Georgia. In a num ber of instances the Commission has been able to prevent or obtain modification of interstate increases in rates which would either immediately affect Georgia citizens or ultimately have to be passed along to Georgia consumers* The Public Service Com mission spearheaded the long fight through the Interstate Commerce Commission and the courts through which Georgia and the South ob-> tained freight rate equality with the North - an equality which has meant so much to the industrial growth and the economic improve ment of our State and region*
These interstate proceedings are regular and fre quent and require extensive preparation on the part of the Com mission and its staff in the hea.rings before the conferences with the Federal agencies.
The Commission is assigned by law with still another function - that of being guardian and supervisor of the Stateowned Western and Atlantic Railroad - and this duty regularly consumes considerable time of the Commission and its transporta tion staff. In addition the Chairman of the Commission is a member of the Western and Atlantic Railroad Commission (which group is charged with the handling of the properties of the Western and Atlantic Railroad which are not used for railroad purposes) and much of the technical work of this Western and Atlantic Railroad Commission is left to the Chairman of the Public Service Commission.
It is the belief of this Committee that the Public Service Commission should be given enough help to permit them to properly serve the people and do the job demanded of it and we have the following recommendation to make:
The Committee on Government Operations has met with the Public Service Commission and its staff. We have been through their records and have checked into the increased number of cases that they must handle today* It appears that since the twenties and thirties their work has increased many times and their income practically none. They are emphatic in their re quest that they want only enough money to do the job*
We believe and recommend that the law passed origi
nally in 1922 assessing utilities the seventy thousand dollars for
operation of the Public Service Commission should be amended so as to assess the utilities two hundred and fifty thousand dol lars. We believe that this law should also be amended so as..to provide that no utility pay in less than one hundred dollars. We have found that nearly one hundred utilities in Georgia pay in under the old 1922 assessment less than fifty dollars each. Many of them only pay in from one dollar to ten dollars and sev eral pay in less than one dollar* This is not enough to pay the State Revenue Department for collecting the money. The financial

reports of those utilities, eves the snail ones, show clearly that they can pay a reasonable minimum* The increased assessment
. will, other than the minimum, not more than triple the assessment
of any utility and yet their worth has increased many times since 1922
We recommend no changes at this time in the fees paid by the truck and bus companies as their fees are paying the cost of handling their current regulatory problems* Their fees can be increased when needed* This increase in other utility as sessment will allow the truck and bus assessments to be used strictly for their regulation and itfill result in better safety inspection and more comprehensive handling of all truck and bus matters. We are requesting the Attorney General to prepare a revised statute containing the amendments recommended by this Committee#
The Committee wants to say that it has kept the present financial condition of the State in mind in making these recommendations and would like to emphasize the fact that this financial aid for the Public Service Commission can be made with no extra general taxes* It follows the original theory, laid down by the Legislature many years ago and adhered to through the years, of levying enough fees against the utilities to cover., the cost of operating the Public Service Commission, but no more* We also believe that Georgia is blessed with many well-operated public utilities of every kind* They are good citizens and are willing to pay their share of government* We realize that they pay taxes to the State, cities and counties and it is not our idea to gouge them in any way* Our study of this matter makes us believe that this recommendation, if carried out by the Legis lature in January, will result in an improved service to the people of Georgia and to the utilities themselves.
Respectfully submitted,
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS Senator Robert Culpepper, Jr*,Chairman Senator W. J, Crowe, Vice-Chairman Senator John W* Greer, Secretary Senator Carl E. Sanders
Page 9

Motor Carrier Certificate and License Fees

The Commission is charged with the responsibility
of collecting and accounting for motor carrier certificate and license fees. Total certificate and license fees collected and remitted to the State Treasurer during the calendar year of
1959 are as follows:

Certificate fees at $35*00 each; and certificate
transfer fees at $7*50 each

2,807*50

Regular license fees at $25*00 each - - - - - - - -$196 375*00

Pick-up and delivery fees at $1*00 each - - - - - - - 2 ,068.00

Reciprocal Registration fees at $1*00 each - - - - - $26,717*00

T O T A L ---- $227,967#50

Public Hearings
During the year the Commission conducted 426 public hearings, an increase of 37 over the previous year* A large per centage of these hearings were on applications for motor car rier certificates, as will appear from the detailed motor carrier certificate decisions listed below* In addition to these deci
sions there were 280 certificate suspensions and 206 certificate
reinstatements which were handled by the Secretary of the Commis sion under a resolution relating to insurance coverage filings*
Motor Carrier Certificate Decisions
The following is a.n abbreviated chronological list of Commission decisions in 242 Docketed and 85 Non-docketed Motor Carrier Certificate cases, or a total of 327 decisions made during the year:
January 8, 1959 DOCKET NO. 1420-M - Approved application of Atlanta
Bonded Warehouse, Inc., Atlanta, Ga., for Class "C" Certificate*
DOCKET NO. 1421-M - Denied application of Active Van & Storage, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for a Class "C" Certificate.

Page 10

January 20, 1959 :

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Hix Trucking Company, Inc., Commerce, Georgia,for transfer of Class "B" Cer tificate No. 2331

DOCKET NO. 1419-M - Approved application of R. F. Truesdell, Inc..Ashtabula, Ohio, for extension of time in which to complete its qualifications for the issuance of Class E
Certificate.

DOCKET NO. 1A35-M - Approved application of Georgia Trucking Co., Atlanta, Georgia, for temporary authority, pending hearing on application for amendment of Class "Bn Certificate
No. 1069.

DOCKET NO. 1330-M - Approved application of C, H.

Elkins and James H* Morgan, dba El-Mo Convoy, Swainsboro, Georgia,

for extension of time to complete qualifications for the is

suance of Class "B" Certificate.

application of

m ,,L

NON-DOCKET - Approved / T. Marion Smith Transfer &

Storage Company, East Point, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B"
Certificate No* 29O*

NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of Atlantic Stages, Inc., Macon, Georgia for authority to issue securities.

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Southern Stages, Inc*, Macon, Georgia, for authority to issue securities.

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Metropolitan
Transit System, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of Class
"A" Certificate No. 3079, for extension of the Howell Mill-
Argonne Limited Line*

January 21, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1A05-M -Approved'application S.BLastinger Trucking Company, Pearson, Georgia, for amendment of Class 11B " Certificate No* 3108.
DOCKET NO. 1411-M - Approved application of Heavy Duty Haulers, Inc., Columbia, S. C., for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 1600 from W. H. Allgood, dba Allgood & Company, Hapeville, Georgia.
DOCKET NO. 1A22-M - Approved application of Adams Cartage Company, Macon, Georgia, for amendment of Class uE n Cer
tificate No. 2929.
DOCKET NO. 1A25-M - Approved application of J* & M. Transportation Co., Inc., Americus, Georgia,a Georgia Corporation for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No* 1522 from J* & M. Transportation Company, an Alabama Corporation.
Page 11

DOCKET NO, 1A38-M - Approved application of Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc., Tampa, Florida, for transfer of the capital stock and control and management of Benton Rapid Express, Savan nah, Georgia,
DOCKET NO. 1A30-M - Approved withdrawal of applicati^ * of C. M. Jackson, dba Canton Truck Lines, Csmton, Georgia for Class Bl? Certificate .
DOCKET NO. 1A29-M - Approved applic^&irCn of T. R.
Moor or, Atlanta, Georgia, for transfer of all>^5r the capitOl stock, control and management in Cherry Transfer Storage Com pany from Mrs. Ruby G. Cherry.
DOCKET HD. 1431-M - Approved application of Hearin Tank Lines, Inc., Baton Rouge, La., for Class "B" Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Rule nisi issued against James S* Allen, Glennville, Georgia, for suspension of Class "B" Certificate No*
1982 for a period of one year*
DOCKET NO. 1420-M - Approved application of Atlanta Bonded Warehouse, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission in approving the issuance of a Class UC" Certificate.
January 29, 1959
DOCKET NO. 1A37-M - Issued Rule nisi against Edward Sapp, Quitman, Georgia, to show cause why Class "B" Certificate
No. 3166 should not be cancelled and revoked*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Columbus Trans portation Company, Columbus, Georgia, for authority to continue application of fare structure which were in effect prior to extnsion of the Columbus, Georgia. City Limits.
NON-DOCKET - Approved submission to the General As sembly for certain amendments to the Motor Carrier Laws,includ ing the conferring of arresting powers on the Motor Carrier In spectors employed by the Commission.
DOCKET NO. 1392-M -^Spcation of Petroleum Carrier
Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1393-M - Approved application of Petro
leum Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. IA07-M - Approved application of J. & M.
Transportation Godine., Americus, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No* 1522.
Page 12

DOCKET NO* 1416-M - Approved application of Crown Products, Inc., Marietta, Georgia for Class "BM Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1426-M - Approved application of Great Southern Trucking Company, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class "A11 Certificate
DOCKET NO. 1427-M - Approved application of J. G. Marbury, dba Albany Trucking Company, Albany, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 2660 from T. T. Gooch, dba T. T. Gooch Trucking Company, and for amendment of said cer tificate.
DOCKET NO. 1432-M - Approved application of Edmond D. Carroll, Monroe, Georgia, for amendment of Class "E U Certificate No. 3241.
DOCKET NO. 1433-M - Approved application of Salter Trucking Company, Columbus, Georgia, for Glass nB n Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Arnold Ser vices, Inc., Whitesburg, Georgia for transfer of Class MB U Certi
ficate No* 3125 from Mrs. Martha G. Arnold, dba The Arnold Com
pany.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Mrs. Lucille Adkins, dba State Transfer Company, Smyrna, Georgia for rein statement of the approval of the transfer of Class HB" Certifi
cate No. 2968.
NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of Robert L.Lester Athens, Georgia, for suspension of Class MA" Certificate No. 2811.
February 5 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1445-M - Assigned for hearing petition of William Harold Box, Brunswick, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No. 2958*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of A. M. Taylor Trucking Company, Moultrie, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No. 3149*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Augusta Coach Company, Augusta, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "A" Certi
ficates Nos. 1 5 1 7, 1821, 2733, 29II and 2939*
NON-DOCKET - AiDproved application of Burnham Van Service, Inc., Columbus, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B " Cer tificate No. 327 from L. R. Burnham, B. Emerita Reese, B Leroy Burnham a.nd Otis B. Burnham, dba Burnham1s Van Service.
Page 13

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Claud D. Ander son and John E. Morris for authority to acquire the capitol stock control and management in Zaban Storage & Transfer Co*
February 13, 1959*
DOCKET NO* 1431-M - Approved petition of Petroleum Carrier Corporation and Walker Hauling Co*, Inc*, for reconsid eration of the decision of the Commission in the application of Hearin Tank Lines, Inc.,for Class "B" Certificate*
DOCKET NO* 1435-M - Approved application of C. M* Wilbanks, dba Georgia Trucking Co*, Atlanta, Georgia, for amend ment of Class "B" Certificate No* 1069*
DOCKET NO* 1436-M - Approved application of W, D* Wingate, dba W. D. Wingate Trucking Company, Albany, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No* 2984*
DOCKET NO. 1437-M - Dismissed rule nisi against Edward Sapp, Quitman, Georgia to show cause why Class "B" Certi ficate No. 3166 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1438-M - Approved application of Edward
Sapp, Quitman, Georgia, for amendment of Class *'B 11 Certificate No. 3186.
DOCKET NO. 1439-M - Approved cancellation of Class nB" Certificate No. 1982 issued to James S. Allen, Glennville, Georgia, under Rule Nisi issued to show cause why said certifi cate should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1440-M - Approved application of Thomas F. Renfrow, dba Renfrow-Tucker Trucking Company, Statesboro, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1441-M - Approved application of Southern Tank Lines, Inc., Louisville, Kentucky, for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 3229 from James M. McClinton, III, dba McClinton Truck Lines, Bainbridge, Georgia.
DOCKET NO. 1442-M - Approved reopening of hearing on application of Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc., for Class "A" Cer tificate for the transportation of general commodities between Rome and Dalton, Georgia*
DOCKET NO. 1443-M - Approved application of Walker Hauling Co., Inc., for Class "B" Certificate.
NON-DQCKET - Cancelled Class ME" Certificate No*
3152 issued to M. B. Dunn,dba Dunn Truck & Tractor Co.,LaGrange, Georgia,
Page 14

DOCKET NO* 1411-M - Approved application of Heavy Duty Haulers, Inc*, Columbus, S* C. for an extension of time to complete qualifications for the issuance of transferred Class "B" Certificate No, 1600.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Grady Hendley, dba Hendley Transfer, Millen, Georgia, for correction of Class MB" Certificate No* 2222.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Tom Watkins, Elberton, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class ME" Certificate No. 2752, suspended on May 30, 1957*
NON-DOCKET Approved application of Gaines Lan caster, dba Lancaster Transfer Company, West Point, Georgia for reinstatement of Class "B " Certificate No, 2499*
February 18,. 1959:
NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of E. F. Green, dba R. F. Green House Moving, Ocilla, Georgia, for reinstatement of application for Class "B" Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Herndon Van Lines, Inc., for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No* 1913 from James B. Herndon, dba Herndon Transfer & Storage Company.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of James L* Can trell, Administrator Estate of Boyd Cantrell, deceased, for amend
ment of Class "B" Certificate No. 2658*
February 2 5, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1426-M - Approved petition of Harper Motor Lines, Inc. and Hamburger Motor Express, Inc. for recon sideration of amendment of Class "A" Certificate No. 3068 issued to Great Southern Trucking Company.
DOCKET NO. 1434-M - Denied application of J. H, B0yd dba Boyd Bros., Cuthbert, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B"
Certificate No. 3169
DOCKET NO. 1444-M - Approved application of Walter H. Rountree, dba Rountree Trucking Company, Swainsboro, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B " Certificate No* 2972.
DOCKET NO. 1446-M - Approved application of B.T.Tucker,
Page 15

DOCKET NO. 1411-M - Approved application of Heavy Duty Haulers, Inc., Columbus, S. C. for an extension of time to complete qualifications for the issuance of transferred Class "B" Certificate No. 1600.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Grady Hendley, dba Hendley Transfer, Millen, Georgia, for correction of Class
**B11 Certificate No. 2222.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Tom Watkins, Elberton, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "E" Certificate No. 2752, suspended on May 30, 1957
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Gaines Lan caster, dba Lancaster Transfer Company, West Point, Georgia for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No. 2^99,
February 18,, 1959-
NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of R. F. Green, dba R. F. Green House Moving, Ocilla, Georgia, for reinstatement of application for Class HB" Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Herndon Van Lines, Inc., for transfer of Class "Bn Certificate No. 1913 from James B. Herndon, dba Herndon Transfer & Storage Company.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of James L. Can trell, Administrator Estate of Boyd Cantrell, deceased, for amend-
ment of Class "B" Certificate No. 2658*
February 25, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1A26-M - Approved .petition of Harper
Motor Lines, Inc. and Hamburger Motor Express, Inc. for recon sideration of amendment of Cla,,ss MA H Certificate No* 3068 issued to Great Southern Trucking Company.
DOCKET NO. 1A34-M - Denied application of J. H. B0yd dba Boyd Bros., Cuthbert, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 3169*
DOCKET NO. 14A4-M - Approved application of Walter H. Rountree, dba Rountree Trucking Company, Swainsboro, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 2972.
DOCKET NO. 1AA6-M - Approved application of B.T.Tucker,
Page 15

ciba Tucker Hauling Contractor, Georgia, Georgia for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1447-M - Approved application of Langley Transfer and Storage Co., Decatur, Georgia for transfer of Cla,ss MB n Certificate No. 2433 from Alton W, Langley, dba Langley Transfer & Storage Co,
DOCKET NO. 1449-M - Approved application of B. A. Evans, Jr., dba B. A. Evans Transfer, LaGrange, Georgia, for Class nB" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1451-M - Approved application of N. F. Striplin, dba N. F. Striplin Bus Line, Roopville, Georgia, for authority to discontinue all operations between Rome and Car rollton, Georgia, and for amendment of said Class "A Certifi cate No. 3269*
March 11, 1959
DOCKET NO. 1451-M - Approved application of Sea board Air Line Railroad Company for amendment of Class "A" Cer
tificate No. 2901,
DOCKET NO. 1455-M - Approved application of Wells Fargo Armored Service Corporation,Memphis, Tennessee, for Class nB n Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company for amendment of Item 2 of Class "A" Cer tificate No. 2950.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for suspension of Class nA u Certificate No. 2002.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of W. P. Mims and Son, Ludowici, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certifi cate No. 3185*
NON-DOCKET - Cancelled Class "A" Certificate No.
2304 issued to Suburban Transit Lines, Macon, Georgia.
March 19, 1959*-
DOCKET NO. 124?~M & DOCKET NO. 1248-M - Denied ap plication of Theatres Service Company and Benton Bros. Film Ex press, Inc.,for amendment of existing operating certificates to authorize the transportation of mail and light express.

DOCKET NO. 1A42-M - Denied application of Dixie Ohio Express, Inc.,, Atlanta, Georgia, for Class "A" Certificate for the transportation of generaci commodities between Rome and Dalton, Georgia.
DOCKET NO. 1A57-N - Denied application of C. H* Smith, dba C. H. Smith Delivery Service, Austell, Georgia, for Class "C" Certificate.
NON-D<DCKET * Approved application of Francis B. Smith, dba Thomson-Augusta Coaches, Thomson, Georgia, for rein statement of Class "A " Certificate No. 3 H 0 .
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of D. L. Foss, Pulaski, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "Bu Certificate No. 3236*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of George S. Smith and Henry C* Smith, dba Arrow Van Lines, Savannah, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No. 32A.
March 30, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1A48-M m Denied application of Petroleum Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class "B11 Certi ficate.
DOCKET NO. IA58-M - Approved application of Gaines
Lancaster, dba Lancaster Transfer Company, West Point, Ga., for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 2A99*
DOCKET NO. 1462-M - Approved application of Kimbro Transfer-Storage Co.,Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for Class HCn Cer tificate*
DOCKET NO. 1A67-M - Approved application of Atlantic
Coast Line Railroad Company for Class UA U Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Earl T. Ivey,
Wrlghtsville, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B 11Certificate
No. 3071
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Max Mitchell, dba. Max Mitchell Transfer, Cartersville, Georgia-, for reinstate ment of Class "B" Certificate No. 3135*
DOCKET NO. 1A57-M - Approved application of C. H. Smith, dba C. H. Smith Delivery Service, for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission denying application for Class "C" Certificate.
Page 17

NON-DOCKET - Denied application of William V.Blair* dba Murray*s Transfer & Storage Company, Macon, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 3022 from Murray V. Blair, dba Murray*s Transfer & Storage Company.
NON-DOCKET - Cancelled Class $AM Certificate ,No. 2552 issued to Gray Line Transit System, Inc.,Atlanta, Ga.
April 7, 1959*.
DOCKET NO. 1456-M - Approved application of C. 0.
Johnson, dba C. 0. Johnson Transfer Oo., East Point, Georgia for Class "CH Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A6A-M - Approved application of Dixie
Ohio Express, Inc*, for Class f|J Certificate for the transporta tion of property between Summerville and Lyerly, Georgia.
DOCKET NO. 145A-M - Approved withdrawal of appli cation of Charles W. Davis and Winston Lamar Davis, dbs Davis Trucking Co.,Albany, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A63-M - Approved application of Walter Hue Braswell, Swainsboro, Georgia, for Class MB n Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1465-M <- Approved application of Erllne T. Ray, dba Ray Trucking Company, Sycamore, Georgia, for Class nB u Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A66-M - Approved application of Petro leum Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A68-M - Approved application of Wilson
Truck Company, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee, for amendment of Class "A B Certificate No. 1029*
DOCKET NO. IA69-M - Approved application of Walker
Hauling Co., Inc., Atlanta, Georgia for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A71-M - Approved application of D. F.
Hudson, RFD 1, Musella, Georgia, for Class 11B " Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A72-M - Aioproved application of Truck Service, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A73-M - Approved withdrawal of applica tion of Drayage, Inc., Port Wentworth, Georgia for Class "Bn Cer tificate.
Page ?18

DOCKET NO, 1A75-M - Approved application of Bag gett Transportation Company, Birmingham, Alabama, for Class "A" Certificate for the transportation of general commodities between Summerville and Lyerly, Georgia*
DOCKET NO, 1476-M - Approved application of G. P*
Register and Burts V, Register, Rentz, Georgia, for Class UA K Certificate for the transportation of employees,
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of L, C, Boyd, dba Boyd Trucking Co,, Dawson, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No, 2930*
April 8, 1959:
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Petroleum Car rier Corporation,Jacksonville, Florida, for authority to trans port one load of Clay Slurry from Dry Branch, Georgia to St, Marys Craft Corporation, at St, Marys, Georgia,
April 9S 1959:
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Mrs, J. H, Wimberly, dba Wimberly Transfer Company, Valdosta, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class UB" Certificate No, 193*
NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of K. W. Plemons, dba University Moving & Storage Company, Athens, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No, 2o23 from Ralph Wiley, dba Ralph Wiley Transfer, Athens, Georgia,
April 10j I959*
NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of McKenzie Tank Lines, Inc,, Tallahassee, Florida, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No, 3198-
April 23, 1959:
DOCKET No, 1^53~N - Cancelled Class "A" Certificate Nos. 1793 and 1699 issued to Gray Line Transit System, Inc.
Page 19 -

-- r imm r i !

DOCKET NO* 1A70-M - Approved application of Railway-
Express Agency, Inc. for Class nAu Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A 71-M - Approved application of D. F.
Hudson, Musella, Georgia for reconsideration of the Commissioni decision of April 7, 1959, in approving application for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1A59-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Joe J. Summerford, dba Summerford Truck Lines, Ashford, Alabama, to show cause why Class "BVCertificates Nos. 2091 and 3062 should not be cancelled and revoked*
DOCKET NO. 1A83-M - Approved application of J . B. Giles, dba Airport Limousine Service, Athens, Georgia, for Class nAM Certificate for the transportation of passengers, baggage, mail and light express.
DOCKET NO. 1A86-M - Approved withdrawal of application of James Wilburn Hickman, Jr., dba Safeway Mobile Homes Towing Company, Macon, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1330-M - Approved application of El-Mo
Convoy, Inc., Swainsboro, Georgia, for an extension of time in which to complete qualifications for the issuance of a Class "B" Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Metropolitan Transit System, Inc. for amendment of Class "A" Certificate No, 2936.
MAY 5 , 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1501-M - Approved application of George C. Murdock Freight Line, Incorporated, Dalton,Georgia, for temporary emergency authority.
MAY 6, 1959:
SON-DOCKET Approved application of Joseph Guy Head, dba American Van Storage Company for reinstatement of Class "B"
Certificate No. 3038. DOCKET NO. 1A8A-M - Approved withdrawal of application
of William V. Blair, dba Murray1s Transfer & Storage Co.,Macon,Ga., for transfer of Class ,lB n Certificate No. 3022, from Murray V. Blair, dba Murray*s Transfer & Storage Company.
Page 20

1
DOCKET NO* 1492-M - Dismissed rule nisi against R. H. Baker, dba Metropolitan Express Company, Atlanta, Georgia.
DOCKET NO* 1492-M - Dismissed rule nisi against Harry |L Davis, dba Davis Transfer Company, Tooooa, Georgia to show cause why Class "B" Certificate No* 3202 should not be cancelled and revoked*
DOCKET NO. 1492-M - Dismissed rule nisi against J* B. Keen, Stockbridge, Georgia, to show cause why Class "B" Certifi cate No. 2955 should not be cancelled and revoked*
May 20, 1959:
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of James A* Pittmap, dba City Delivery & Transfer, Hogansville, for amendment of Class "Bn Certificate No. 1834*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of H. W. Breffle, dba Fidelity Storage Company, Atlanta, Georgia for transfer of Class "E" Certificate No. 2468 from W.B.Fokes,Jr*,dba Fidelity Storage Company.
DOCKET NO. 1502-M - Cancelled Class "A" Certificate No. 2456 issued to Marietta Coaoh Company, Gainesville, Ga.,under rule nisi issued to show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked.
May 21, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1489-M - Denied motion of National Motor Convoy, to dismiss the application of Cheek & Forrest Mobile Home Service, Inc*, Macon, Georgia, for Class nB" Certificate*
DOCKET NO. 1492-M - Cancelled Class UE H Certificate No.
3260 issued to P. R. Smith, Winder, Georgia, to show cause why
Class "E" Certificate No. 3260 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1492-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against C. C. Baker, Coolidge, Georgia, to 'show cause why @lass "B" Cer tificate No, 31?4 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1492-M - Cancelled Class "B" Certificate No. 2146 issued to I. B. Ariail,dba L. B. Ariail Transfer,Cornelia, Georgia, under rule nisi to show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked.
Page 21

....-DOCKET NO# 1492-M - Cancelled Class "B" Certificate No# 3120 issued to Robert L# Harrell, Tifton, Georgia, under rule nisi t o .show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked#
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Metropolitan Tran sit System, Inc#, Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of Class MA U Cer tificate No# 2573*
May 22, 1959:
DOCKET NO# 1498-M - Dismissed petition of J* & M#
Transportation Co#, Inc#, Americus,Georgia for reconsideration of the dicision of the Commission in the transfer of Class HB n Certi ficate No. 2930 from W# K# Pace, Jr#,dba Pace Motor Lines, to L# C. Boyd, dba Boyd Trucking Co#, Dawson, Georgia#
May 2?, 1959:
DOCKET NO# 1457-M - Reconsidered application of C# H# Smith, dba C. H. Smith Delivery Service, Austell,Georgia, for re consideration of the decision of the Commission of March 19, 1959, in denying his application for a Class nC" Certificate#
DOCKET NO# 1494-M - Approved application of Overnite Transportation Company, Inc., for amendment of Class "A" Certifi cate No# 93*
DOCKET NO# 1495-M - Approved application of R. C# A# Truck Lines, Inc#, Rome, Georgia, for Class MA " Certificate for the transportation of general commodities, between the junction of
State Highway 3 (US 41) and State Highway 20 (US 411) and White,Ga# DOCKET NO. 1496-M - Approved application of C. J# Kin
sey, dba Atlanta Cartage Company, Atlanta, Georgia, for Class UC" Certificate.
DOCKETS NOS# 1493-M, 1499-M & 1500M - Cancelled Class "B" Certificate No. 3217 issued to Claude Graham and Claude Graham, Jr#,dba Claude Graham & Son, Dublin, Georgia, under rules nisi to show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked#
DOCKET NO# 1501-M - Approved application of George C. Murdock Freight Line, Incorporated, Dalton,Georgia, for amendment
of Class nA M Certificate No# 2790#
DOCKET NO# 1504-M - Approved application of Hugh H# Scott, dba Georgia-Carolina Cartage Co*, Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of Class "C" Certificate No# 3239#
Page 22

DOCKET NO* 1506-M - Approved application of Georgia
Highway Express, Inc*for amendment of Class "A" Certificate No#
3116.

DOCKET NO. 1485-M - Approved application of Tamiami

Trail Tours, Inc., Tampa, Florida, for Class "A" Certificate for

the transportation of passengers, baggage, mail, newspapers and

express.

DOCKET

NO.

1507-M

Approved /application

of

Echols

Transfer,Inc.,

Atlanta, Georgia, for tranfer of Class 11B u Certificate No. 2202*

DOCKET NO. 1508-M - Approved application of Huckabee
Transport Company, Columbia, S*C# for amendment of Class nA tt Certi
ficate No. 837*

June 11, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1470-M - Assigned for oral argument petitions of Harper Motor Lines and Georgia Highway Express for recons-ider ation, rehearing and oral argument on application of Hallway Express Agency, Inc. for Class "A" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1496-M - Denied application of Robert J.
Fehskens, Agent for protestant, for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission in approving the application of C. J. Kinsey, dba Atlanta Cartage Company for Class HC H Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1457-M - Denied application of Robert J. Fehskens, agent for protestant, for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission in approving the application of C. H. Smith, dba C. H. Smith Delivery Service, for Class nCH Certificate#
DOCKET NO. 1522-M - Denied application of W. T. May-
field Sons Trucking Co., for temporary authority to transport pre stress concrete.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of R. C. A. Truck Lines, Inc., Home,Georgia, for authority to detour, pending com pletion of construction work on US 27*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Dixie Ohio Ex press, Inc., for : uthority to detour, pending completion of con struction work on US 27*
DOCKET NO. 12A7-M & 1248-M - Denied petitions of Theatres Service Company and Benton Bros. Film Express, Inc.,for reconsideration and rehearing on the decision denying the appli cations for amendment of Class "A" Certificates Nos# 552,622, 648,
878, 879, 880, 958, 1320, 1558, 1564, 1794, 1795 and Class ''B"
Certificate No. 1214, and Class "A " Certificate No. 1210.

Page 23.

DOCKET NO* 1511-M - Approved application of George T,
Anglin and Julian W # Battle, dba A. & B* Trucking Company, Wadley,
Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate*
DOCKET NO* 1A87-M - Approved application of Atlanta
Motor Lines, Inc*, for Class "A" Certificate for the transporta tion of property between Clarkes ville and tlanta,Ga*,for operat ing convenience only*
DOCKET NO* 150A-M - Approved application of Hugh H.
Scott, dba Georgia-Carolina Cartage Co,, for amendment of Class PC Certificate No, 3239.
DOCKET NO* 1505-M - Approved application of Latex
Carriers, Inc*, for amendment of Class MB n Certificate No* 3112*
DOCKET NO* 1509-M - Approved application of Lawrence Lott and Lester Deberry, dba Deberry & Lott House Movers, Alapaha, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate*
DOCKET NO* 1510-M - Approved application of N . H *
Thompson, dba Thompson Trucking Company, Valdosta, Georgia., for Class MB" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1512-M - Approved application of Georgia Highway Express, Inc*, for Class "A" Certificate for the transpor tation of property between the junction of State Highway 3 (^S Al) and State Highway 61 (US All) and White, Georgia.
DOCKET NO. 15IA-M - Approved application of Atlantic
Greyhound Corporation for amendment of Class HAH Certificate No. 25, and Class "A" Certificate No, 1807, to authorize operations over alternate routes.
June 2A, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1527-M - Issued rule nisi,against Lamar
Beaty, dba Lamar Beaty Trucking Company, Moultrie, Georgia, to Show cause why Class "B* Certificate No, 30A2 should not be' cancelled and revoked.
NON-DOCKET - Cancelled Class "A Certificate No. A2 issued to Georgia Highway Transport Company to transport passengers, baggage, mail and express between Monroe and Social Circle,Ga.
DOCKET NO. 136I-M - Dismissed application of Petroleum
Carrier Corporation for Class "B" Certificate.
Page 2A

June 25, 1959i
DOCKET NO* 1516-M - Approved application of Arlington John Williams, dba A. J. Williams, New Castle, Delaware, for amend ment of Class "E" Certificate No* 3234*
DOCKET NO* 1487-M - Assigned for oral argument appli cation of Northern Freight Lines, Inc* for rehearing, reconsider ation and oral argument on the decision approving the application of Atlanta Motor Lines, Inc* for Class "A" Certificate*
DOCKET NO. 1528-M - Assigned for hearing petition of
Georgia Highway Express, Inc*.and Great Southern Trucking Company to cancel Class "G" Permit No* 1657 issued to Deal Cartage Co*,Inc*
July 6, 1959:
DOCKET NO* 15I9-M - Approved application of Wheeler
Trucking Company(a corporation), Soperton, Ga., for transfer of Class MB n Certificate No* 3086 from S* A. Wheeler, Sr*
DOCKET NO* 1520-M - Approved application of Harvell Garrett, dba Garrett Transfer Co*, Home, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B ,f Certificate No. 3167 from Leonard A. HalIsted, dba Hallsted Transfer Co., Rome, Georgia*
NON-DOCKET - Approved petition of James F* Taylor for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No*'3075 issued in the name of Paul Truck Line, Inc*, Ocilla, Georgia, to show the present corpor ate name of Lumber Transport, Inc*, Ocilla, Georgia*
July 14, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1531-M - Approved application of Metropoli tan Transit System, Inc., for Class "A" Certificate for the trans portation of passengers and light express, between Atlanta, Geor gia and Forest Park, Georgia.
July 16, 1959
DOCKET NO* 1490-M - Approved application of Mrs* H. C. Pike, Sr*, S* C. Pike and Mary Lillian Pike, dba Pike Transfer Company, Newnan, Ga., for amendment of Limited Class "A" Certifi cate No. 2233 to read as follows: Between Newnan and Semola,Ga*, via Sharpsburg and Turin, over Sta^e Highways Nos* 14 and 16*
Page 25

DOCKET NO. 1503-M - Approved application of J. N* Zellner & Son Transfer Company, East Point, Georgia, for amendment
of Class "B" Certificate No* 2?40 to authorize the transportation
of commodities named therein in less-than-truckload quantities.
Denied
DOCKET NO. 1513-M -/application of Deal Cartage Com pany, Atlanta,Georgia, for Class "C" Certificate.

DOCKET NO. I528-M - Cancelled Class "G" Permit No.
1657 issued to DealCartage Co.,Inc., on petition of Georgia High way Express, Inc. and Great Southern Trucking Company to cancel said permit*
DOCKET NO. 1518-M - Approved application of Albert L.
Gay, Dearing, Georgia for Class "B? Certificate for the transporta tion of concrete masonry and concrete pipe.
DOCKET NO. 152I-M - Application of Petroleum Carrier
Corporation, for Class nB M Certificate for the transportation of Pentaclorophenol, in bulk. Approved.
DOCKET NO. 1522-M - Approved application of W. T. May-
field Sons Trucking Co., Atlanta, Georgia, for Class nB " Certifi cate for the transportation of pre-stress concrete.

DOCKET NO. 152A-M - Approved application of Sanford
C. Pike, dba Sanford C. Pike Moving & Storage Co., Newnan, Ga.,
for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 289^#

DOCKET NO. 1526-M - Approved application of Brown
Transport Corp., Waynesboro, Georgia, for authority to serve Miller & Miller, Inc.,in DeKalb County, Georgia, as an off-route point.
DOCKET NO. 1527-M - Cancelled Class "B " Certificate No.
30^2 issued to Lamar Beaty, dba Lamar Beaty Trucking Company, Moultrie, Georgia, under rule nisi issued to show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1530-M - Approved application of J. P.
Sykes, dba Sykes Transfer Company, East Point, Ga., for amendment of Class "Bw Certificate No. 3177
DOCKET NO. 1533-M - Approved application of P. A.
Wiggins, dba Wiggins Transfer Co., Rockmart, Georgia, for transfer of Class "B " Certificate No. 553 from Prank 0. Crawford,Rockmart, Ga.

DOCKET NO 153^-M - Approved application of F. A. Wiggins, dba White Transxer Company, Rockmart, Ga., for transfer of Class"E w Certificate No. 9^3 from Prank 0. Crawford, dba White Transfer Company, Rockmart, Georgia.

Nth-B'QCKET>- Approved applications of Metropoli

tan Transit System, Inc. for amendment of Class "A " Certificates
Nos. 1505 and 2^06 , for the purpose of extending service on week

days and Saturdays, during shopping hours to the Lenox Square.



Page 26

DOCKET NO, 1509-M - Approved petition of R. F. Green,
Ocilla, Ga., for reconsideration, and rehearing on the application of Lawrence Lott and Lester Deberry, dba Deberry & Lott House Movers, Alapaha, Georgia, for Class MB M Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 15IO-M - Approved application of N. H.Thomp-
son, dba Thompson Trucking Company, for an extension of time in which to complete qualifications for the issuance of Class B Cer tificate.
July 17, 19595
DOCKET NO. 1491-M - Dismissed application of Frank H, Stephenson, dba Veterans Transfer Service, Athens, Ga., for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 3044 .
DOCKET NO. 1497-M - Approved application of A. J. Vaughn, dba Southern Truck Line, LaGrange, Georgia, for Class "B " Certificate,
DOCKET NO. 1517-M - Approved application of Smoky Moun
tain Stages, Inc., for amendment of Class UA M Certificate No. 26 for authority to operate between Atlanta and Lawrenceville, Ga., .. via Northeast Expressway (State Highway 403) and State Highway No.
120,with closed doors at all intermediate points, as an alternate
route.
NON-DOCKET ,, Approved application of Bleckley Busses, Inc., Cochran,Georgia, for transfer of Class "A" Certificates Nos, 3029, 2634 and 2912 from Cochran Busses, Inc.
August 6, 19595
DOCKET NO, 1488-M - Approved withdrawal of application of Asphalt Haulers Company, Chattanooga, Tenn.,for Class HB n Cer tificate.
DOCKET NO. 1480-M - Action deferred on rule nisi issued against William James and Herbert James, dba James Brothers Trans fer, Vidalia, Georgia to show cause why Class "B" Certificate No.
2938 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1450-M - Approved in part application of J. & M. Transportation Co., Inc., Americus, Georgia, for Class nB H Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1489-M - Approved application of Cheek & Forrest Mobile Home Service, Inc., Macon, Georgia, for Class MB B Certificate,
Page 27

DOCKET NO* 1470-M -

Approved petitions of Harper

Motor Lines, Inc* and Georgia Highway Express, Inc, for reconsider

ation of the approval of the application of Railway Express Agency,
for Class 11A " Certificate for the transportation of general commodi

ties moving in express service between Valdosta and Nashville, Ga*

DOCKET NO* 1535-N - Approved application of Clinton L* Sanders, dba Perkins Freight Lines, Atlanta, Ga*, for amendment of Class "A" Certificate No* 73 for authority to serve Yatesville,Ga. as an off-route point*
DOCKET NO* 1537-M Approved application of Brackett .
Bros. Transfer Service, ino*, Hapcvil}.e, Georgia, for Class 11C" Cer tificate*

DOCKET NO. 1540-M - Approved application of I# A. Camp and H, J* Camp, dba Camp1s Transfer, Douglasville, Ga., for Class "B" Certificate*

DOCKET NO. 1541-M - Approved application of Ace Truck ing Company, East Point, Georgia, for Class ,,B M Certificate.

DOCKET NO. 1542-M - Approved application of Howard Bus Line, Inc*. Columbus, Georgia, for Class "A" Certificate for the transportation of passengers, baggage and light express, between Fort Benning Military Reservation and Muscogee County Airport.
DOCKET NO. 15A5-M - Approved application of Arlington
John Williams, dba A. J. Williams, for amendment of Class,,E" Cer tificate No. 3234.

DOCKET NO. 146-M - Application of Roy L. Jones, Inc*,
of Houston, Texas, for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 2792 from G. L* "Doc11 Fife & Son, Natchez, Mississippi.

DOCKET NO. 1487-M - Denied petition of Northern Freight Lines, 3nc., Gainesville, Georgia, for reconsideration of the de cision of the Commission in approving the application of Atlanta Motor Lines, Inc. for Class "A " Certificate for the transportation of property between Clarkesville and Atlanta, Georgia.

NON..DQCKET - Approved application of The Greyhound Corporation, Chicago, Illinois, for transfer of Class ,lAM Certifi cates Nos. 23, 24, 25, 58, 70, 112, 114, 115, 132, 521, 749, 1807, .. 2142 and 2440 from Atlantic Greyhound Corporation, Charleston, W.va.

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of W.D. Wingate, dba Douglas Trucking Company,Columbus,Ga., for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 254 from J. E. Smith, Jr., Fortson, Georgia*

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Cannon Warehouse
& Distributing Co., dba Cannon Transfer & Storage Co.,Macon, Ga*,
for transfer of Class MB tt Certificate No. 1963 from Walter 0.
Cannon, dba Cannon Transfer & Storage Co.

Page 28

August 19, 1959*
DOCKET NO* 1^7^-M - Approved application of Cherry Transfer & Storage Co# for Class CB Certificate*
NON-DOCKET Approved application of Brackett Bros. Transfer Service, Inc* For transfer of Class "B" Certificate No.
3212 from Charles A. Brackett, dba Brackett Bros. Transfer Ser
vice.
DOCKET NO. 15^0-M - Denied petition of I* A* Camp and H. J* Camp, dba C a m p ^ Transfer, Douglasvilie, GaVv for recon sideration of the decision of the Commission granting Class "B" Certificate*
DOCKET NO. 15^1-M - Denied application of Ace Truck ing Company for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission of August 6, 1959 in approving the issuance of a Class BE B Certi ficate in lieu of a Class "B " Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1489-M - Denied petition of National Trail er Convoy, Inc. and Morgan Drive Away, Inc. for rehearing, recon sideration and oral argument on the decision of the Commission on August 6th in approving the application of Cheek & Forrest Mobile Home Service, Inc.
NON-DOCKET - Approved cancellation of Class "A " Certi ficate No. 264? issued to Continental Crescent Lines, Inc., Alexandria, La. upon surrender of said certificate for cancella tion by the carrier.
NON-DOCKET - Approved cancellation of Class ttA n Certi ficate No. 2595 issued to N. F. Striplin, dba N. F. Striplin Bus Line Eoopville, Georgia, upon surrender of said certificate for cancellation by the carrier; also approved amendment of C l a s s i "
Certificates Nos. 3269 and 2600 issued to N. F. Striplin Bus
Line.
September 1 1959;
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Albert L. Gay,
Dearing, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B11 Certificate No.
13m .
September 16, 1959:
DOCKET NO. 1579-M - Approved withdrawal of application of Atlanta Motor Lines, Inc. for Class "Au Certificate for the
Page 29

transportation of property between Ellijay and Dalton, Georgia.
DOCKET NO. 1532-M - Approved application of Charles A,
Hulsey and Vaughn H. Owenby,dba Hulsey & Owenby Limestone Com pany, Whitestone, Georgia for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1525-M - Dismissed application of Preston Joiner, dba Preston Joiner Truck Line, Dublin, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No* 2512.
DOCKET NO. 1527-M - Approved petition of Lamar Beaty,
dba Lamar Beaty Trucking Company, Route 2, Moultrie. Georgia for reconsideration of the decision cancelling Class "B" Certificate
No. 30^2 .
DOCKET NO. 1529-M - Denied application of J . M.
Beasley, Metter, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B11 Certificate
No. 3036.
DOCKET NO. 1539-M - Denied application of George Pen
nington, Midville, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1544-M - Approved application of Modern Milk Hauling Co., Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for Class "B" Certifi cate.
DOCKET NO. 15A7-M - Approved withdrawal of applica
tion of Jack1s Past Freight, Inc*, Atlanta, Georgia, for amendmnt of Claes MA" Certificate No. 2310.
DOCKET NO. 156A-M - Approved application of J . N,
Zellner & Son Transfer Company, East Point, Georgia for amend ment of Class "B" Certificate No. 27^0.
DOCKET NO. 1569-M - Approved application of Joseph B.
Boone, Jr. and Howard W. Loudermilk to aoquire the capital stock, control and management in Zaban Storage & Transfer Co. from Claude D. Anderson and John E. Morris*
DOCKET NO. 1570-M - Approved application of Harper
Motor Lines, Inc.,for amendment of Class "A11 Certificate No.2522,
to service Jacksonville,Georgia; also for amendment of Class "A" Certificate No. 2785 to serve Middleton and Johnsontown; as offroute points.
DOCKET NO. I57A-M - Approved withdrawal of applica
tion of Coastal Transport & Trading Company, Savannah, Georgia, for withdrawal of its application for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 1418.
DOCKET NO. 1575-M - Approved application of Petroleum Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class "B" Certi ficate.
DOCKET NO. 1551-M - Approved cancellation of Class
"B M Certificate No. 1818 issued to Barney L. Burke? Millen,^ Ga.,
Page 30

under rule nisi issued to show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1554-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against J. Robert Davis, Centre, Alabama, to show cause why Class E Certificate No. 3163 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 156O-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Preston Joiner, dba Preston Joiner Truck Line, Dublin, Georgia to show cause why Glass BB " Certificate No. 2512 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1562-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Samuel David Collins, dba D. Collins Truck Line, Warrenton, Ga., to show cause why Class "B" Certificate No. 1549 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. I565-M - Cancelled Class "B" Certificate
No. 2403 issued to Claude McQuinn, dba Claude McQuinn Van Service, Columbus, Georgia, under rule nisi issued to show cause why said certificate should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1567-M - Cancelled Class *B Certificate
No. 3038 issued to Joseph Guy Head, dba American Van Storage Co., Atlanta., Georgia, under rule nisi to show cause why said certifi cate should not be cancelled and revoked.
September 24, 1959
DOCKET NO. 1576-M - Approved application of Petroleum
Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class nB n Certi ficate.
DOCKET NO. 158O-M - Approved application of Walker
Hauling Co., Inc., Atlanta, Georgia for Class "B" Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1558-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Jordan Ray Hattaway, Dublin, Georgia, to show cause why Class "B" Certificate No. 3160 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1556-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against W. P. Mims and fervi1 L. Mims, dba W. P. Mims & Son, Ludowici, Ga.,
to show cause why Class "B" Certificate No. 3185 should not be can celled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1568-M - Denied application of Gus J.Evans,
Jr., Cochran, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No. 3127.
DOCKET NO. 157I-M - Approved application of Crum*s
Trucking Company, Inc., Tifton, Ga., for amendment of Class B* Certificate No. 3039*
Page 31

DOCKET NO* 1572-M - Approved application of Joe Comer

dba Joe Comer Transfer Company, Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of

Item 2 of Class

Certificate No# 291

DOCKET NO# 1578-M - Dismissed application of P * C#
Sweat, Tifton, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate#

DOCKET NO# 1583-M - Denied application of Ervin G* Kuykendall, dba Kuykendall Trucking, Acworth, Georgia, for Class BB" Certificate#
DOCKET NO# 158A-M - Denied application of James E#
Tolleson, Locust Grove, Georgia, for Class "Bn Certificate#

NON-DOCKET Approved cancellation of Class *B" Cer tificate No# 3289 Issued to D* P. Hudson, Museila, Georgia, upon surrender of said certificate by the carrier*
DOCKET NO# 1567-M - Approved application of Joseph
Guy Head, dba American Van Storage Co#, Atlanta, Georgia, for reconsideration of the decision cancelling Class nB" Certificate No. 38 and reinstatement thereof#

NON-DOCKET - Approved application P.&S.Moving & Stge# Co#, Inc#, Marietta, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "BM Certificate No# 12A#

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Great Southern Trucking Company reissuance of all certificates in the new corpor ate name, to-wit: Ryder Truck Lines, Inc*

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of The Greyhound
Corporation to adopt all registrations of equipment made with the Commission for the year 1959 by Atlantic Greyhound Corporation; also approved application of The Greyhound Corporation for amend
ment of the self-insurance order in Docket No# 8907-A to permit
self-insurance in its own name in addition to the specified oper
ating divisions#

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of John C# Wilson Company, Millen, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 813.

NON-DOCKST - Approved application of J# C* Barnett,
Washington, Georgia, for amendment of Class MB " Certificate No* 276A*

NON-DOCKET Approved application of Otis Dixon, dba Otis Dixon Transfer, Athens, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No# 2295

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Cecil L. Ingram, dba Ingram Trucking Company, Ball Ground, Georgia, for amendment of Class UB ,! Certificate No# 2777*

Page 32

NON-DOCKET Approved application of James L# Cantrell, Administrator of the Estate of Boyd Cantrell, dba Cantrell Trans-.,
fer,..Cornelia, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B *1 Certificate No#
2658.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of B, Tanner, States boro, Georgia, for amendment of Class UB Certificate No# 2122#
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of T. J# Tucker,.. Statesboro, Georgia, for amendment of Class ,,B H Certificate No# 2400#
September 30, 1959
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of James W# Massey, to re-write Class "B" Certificate No# 2993*
NON-DOCKET - Approved explication of A# B# Parker, dba A* B# Parker Transfer, Vidalia, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No# 2818#
DOCKET NO# 1539-M - Denied application of George
Pennington, Midville, Georgia for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission denying his application for Class "B" Certifi cate#
DOCKET NO. 1551~M - Denied application of Barney L# Burke, Millen, Georgia, for reconsideration of the Commission^ order in cancelling Class ,,B" Certificate No# 1818#
DOCKET NO# 1584-M - Assigned for hearing application of James E# Tolleson, Locust Grove, Georgia, for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission in denying his application for a Class HB H Certificate#
October 1959*
DOCKET NO# 1577-M - Denied application of Dance Freight Lines, Inc*,Lexington, Kentucky, for Class RA M Certifi cate#
DOCKET NO# 1586-M - Approved application of Sweat
Transfer & Storage Company, Inc#, Waycross, Ga#,for transfer of Class nB" Certificate No* 202 from Alex J# Sweat, dba Sweat Trans fer Company, Waycross, Georgia#
DOCKET NO* 1588-M - Application of Coastal Transport
Page 33

^I|p

><$b


b O'

1 *



V





i I



* >
J

'
BBio

i
' i BZ ' iO

!


and Trading Company, Savannah, Georgia, for amendment of Class BB n Certificate No* 1418* Approved.
DOCKET NO. 1589-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Max Mitchell, dba Max Mitchell Transfer, Cartersvllle, Ga., to show cause why Class "B" Certificate No. 3135 should not be cancell ed and revoked*
DOCKET NO. 1594-M - Approved application of Milwood Eubanks, Camilla, Georgia, for amendment of Class nB " Certifi cate No. 3151.
DOCKET NO. 1595-M - Approved application of Petroleum Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Pia., for transfer of Class nB M Certificate No. 3229 from Southern Tank Lines, Inc., of Louisville, Kentucky.
DOCKET NO. 1597-M - Approved application of Petroleum
Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class uB n Certi ficate
DOCKET NO. 1596-M - Approved application of R. W.
Bryce, dba Colonial Cartage Co., Atlanta, Georgia, for Class "Cn Certificate.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Guy Word Trans fer & Storage Company, Thomasville, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class "B" Certificate No. 248.
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Norman Langley Wingate, dba N. L. Wingate Trucking Company, Albany, Georgia, for amendment of Class ttE n Certificate No. 3139*
NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Shelnutt Truck ing Company, a corporation, Atlanta, Georgia, for transfer of Class ME n Certificate No* 1231 from #| R. Shelnutt, dba Shelnutt Transfer.
October 20, 1959
DOCKET NO. 1549-M - Dismissed rule nisi against Smith Transfer Company, East Point,Georgia, to show cause why Class "B 1* Certificate No. 292 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1601-M - Dismissed rule nisi against Francis B. Smith, dba Thomson-Augusta Coaches, Thomson, Ga. to show cause why Class nA n Certificate No* 3110 should not be can celled and revoked.
Page 3^

October 22, 1959*

.DOCKET NO 1548-M - Denied application of Pennington
Trucking Co*, Inc*, Milledgeville, Ga*, for amondment of Class "B H
Certificate No* 1363*

DOCKET NO* 1585-M - Approved application of Badlo Cab Co.,Inc*, Columbus, Georgia, for Class "A" Certificate in lieu of Class "B " Certificate as applied for*

DOCKET NO. 1590-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against House, Inc*, Atlanta, Georgia, to show cause why Class "B" Certi ficate No* 285 should not be cancelled and revoked.

DOCKET NO* 1538-M - Approved application of Jordan
Ray Hattaway, Dublin, Georgia, for amendment of Class "Btt Certi ficate No* 3160.
DOCKET NO* I58I-M - Approved application of A. H*
Davis, dba Chamblee Veterans Transfer Co., Chamblee, Georgia, for amendment of Class "C" Certificate No. 3226.

DOCKET NO. 1582-M - Dismissed application of D. L* Foss, Pulaski, Georgia, for amendment of Class nB tt Certificate No. 3236.

DOCKET NO. 1587-M -^application of Echols Transfer,
Inc., for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 2202.

DOCKET NO. 1593-M - Approved application of Bay Randall, dba Dixie Mobile Home Transporters, Albany, Georgia, for Class "B n Certificate.

DOCKET NO* 1603-M - Approved application of Coastal Transport and Trading Company, Savannah, Georgia, for amendment of Class *B* Certificate No* 1418*

DOCKET NO. 158A-M -

Approved application of James

E, Tolleson, Locust*Grove, Georgia, for reconsideration of the

decision of the Commission on September 24, 1959j denying his

application for Class nB M Certificate, and approved said appli

cation for Class

Certificate*

NON-DOCKET -Approved application of Albert J* Joyner for approval of the transfer of the capital stock, control and management in Butler Truck Lines, Inc. from H. W* Butler.

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Boss Trucking Co.,Inc., Augusta, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class WB W Certi ficate No. 2290.

Page 35

I'M
, ,
.

*0
>0, t :;/dawIoO t *orxl %*oD
9

IQ,

#QH TEHw

)0 .:\U ,*0

m&oMoyort jbrxo ^ q s o c p o o d or X tfb rfa ;Jfts ..*ofe

o il

. OdiC *oH e d o il

tsc * -- wt m*mm w *
s ;... *

$$ &m &gp#*&&

,

,

V

.

BF.g

.

November 2, 1959*

NON-DOCKET -, Approved appiioation of Metropolitan
Transit System, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of Class ttA"
Certificate No. 6l6.

DOCKET NO. 1596-M -

Approved application of R. W.

Bryce, dba Colonial Cartage Co., Atlanta, Georgia, for reconsid

eration of the decision of the Commission in granting his appli

cation for a Class !,CU Certificate.

DOCKET NO. 1598-M - Denied petition of National Trail
er Convoy, Inc* and Morgan Drive Away, Inc. for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission in granting the application of Ray Randall, dba Dixie Mobile Home Transporters, of Albany, Geor
gia, for Class MB H Certificate.

DOCKET NO* 1577-M - Denied petition of Dance Freight Lines, Inc. for reconsideration of the decision of the Commission in denying its application for Class "A" Certificate to operate between Athens and Madison, Georgia.

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Harry Bennett, dba Harry Bennett Construction Company, Alma, Georgia, for rein statement of Class "E" Certificate No. 3046.

NON-DOCKET Approved application of Grady Hendley, dba Hendley Transfer, Millen, Georgia, for reinstatement of Class nB n Certificate No. 2222* November 1959:
" 1 DOCKET NO* 155O-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Paul Edenfield, Portal, Georgia, to show cause why Class "B" Cer
tificate No. 2590 should not be cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1509-M - Approved rehearing on application
of Lawrence Lott and Lester Deberry, dba Deberry & Lott House Movers, Alapaha, Georgia, for Class "B ,f Certificate.
DOCKET NO. 1573-M - Approved application of Nash
Transfer Co.,Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of Class nB M
Certificate No. 2606.

DOCKET NO. 1604-M - Approved application of Petroleum Carrier Corporation, Jacksonville, Florida, for Class "B" Certifi cate.
DOCKET NO. I606-M - Cancelled Class MB" Certificate No.
1736 issued to C. F* Singley, dba C. F. Singley Trucking Line, Jackson, Georgia, under rule nisi to show cause why said certifi cate should not be cancelled end revoked.
DOCKET NO. I607-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Harry S # Bell, Elberton, Georgia, to show cause why Class "B M Cer tificate No. 142 should not be cancelled and revoked.

Page 36

DOCKET NO* 1612-M - Approved application of J. Henry
Payne, Tallapoosa, Georgia, for Class "B" Certificate*
DOCKET NO* 1613-M - Approved application of George Bennett, Macon, Georgia, for Class "E" Certificate*
DOCKET NO* 161^-M - Approved application of Johnson Freight Lines Company, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee, for transfer of Class "A 1* Certificate No. 1^0 from Johnson Freight Lines, Inc*
DOCKET NO* l6l5-M - Approved application of Southern Truck Lines, Inc*, LaGrange, Georgia for transfer of Class "B"
Certificate No. 3369 from A* J* Vaughn, dba Southern Truck Lines,
LaGrange, Ga*
DOCKET N0.1616-M - Approved application of Gaines Lancaster, dba Gaines Lancaster Transfer Company, West Point, . Georgia, for amendment of Item (3) of Class "B" Certificate No. 2499.
DOCKET NO* 1618-M - Approved application of Wendell C* Phillips, dba Phillips Moving & Storage Co., Albany, Georgia, for Class ttB n Certificate.

November 13, 1959:

NON-DOCKET - Cancelled Class "BM Certificate No.3312 issued to I* A* Camp and H* J. Camp, dba Camprs Transfer, Douglasville* Georgia, on surrender of said certificate by the car rier.

NON-DOCKET - Cancelled Class "B" Certificate No, 3178 issued to W. M* Lovett, Sylvania, Georgia, on surrender of said certificate by the carrier*

NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of Walter H, Roun tree, dba Rountree Trucking Company, Swainsboro, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B " Certificate No. 2972#

DOCKET NO* 1585--M --

Approved application of

Badio Cab Co.,Inc*, Columbus, Georgia, for reconsideration of the

decision of the Commission in approving the granting of a Class

"A" Certificate.

DOCKET NO. 1613-M - Approved application of George Bennett, Macon, Georgia, for authority to use the trade name "Geo. Bennett Truck Line".

Page 37

November 25 1959
DOCKET NO. 1600-M - Dismissed rule risi against M* L*
Holloway, dba Holloway Supply, Bowdon Georgia, to show cause why-
Class MB" Certificate No* 0O6 should not be cancelled and revoked*
DOCKET NO. I605-M - Dismissed rule nisi against Paul
Hoffman, dba Robinson Transfer & Storage Company, Griffin, Geor
gia, to iow cause why Class HB" Certificate No* 5O0 should not be
cancelled and revoked.
DOCKET NO. 1610-M - Approved application of J. L*
Lawhon for amendment of Class "B n Certificate No* 21020 DOCKET NO, 16II-M - Approved application of J * C#
Barnett, Washington, Georgia, for transfer of Class "A" Certificate
No. 2638 from W. C. Callaway, Washington, Ga* DOCKET NO. 1621-M - Approved application of C. M*
Wilbanks, dba Teorgia Trucking Company, Atlanta, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No* 1069*
December 3, 1959
DOCKET NO* IAO8- M - Dismissed application of W, L.
Carter, Locust Grove, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certi ficate No* 3196*
DOCKET NO* 1622-M - Dismissed application of William James and Herbert James, dba James Brothers, Vidalia, Georgia, for amendment of Class nB H Certificate No* 2938*
DOCKET NO. 1624-M - Dismissed application of Erline T. Ray, dba Ray Trucking Company, Sycamore, Georgia, for amend ment of Class "B" Certificate No* 3281*
DOCKET NO, 1627-M - Approved application of B.H* Deal Jr., dba D. & L. Transfer Co.,Atlanta, Georgia, for transfer of Class nCn Certificate No* 3265 from Daniel M. Clower & B* L. Clabom, dba D. & L. Transfer Company, Atlanta, Ga.
DOCKET NO. 1606-M - Approved application of C.'F*
Singley, dba C. F. Singley Trucking Line, Jackson, Georgia, to rescind the Commission's order of November 5, 1959 cancelling his Class "B" Certificate No* 1736

December 17, 1959

DOCKET NO* 1591-M -

Buie nisi issued against

J* E* DeVane and M* E* DeVane, dba Dogane Trucking, Ellaville,

Georgia, to show cause why Class MB H Certificate No# 3103 snould

not be cancelled and revoked# Cancelled certificate#

DOCKET NO* 1563-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Brooks A. Bird, dba Bird Transport Company, Metter, Georgia, to show cause why Class "BH Certificate No# 3033 should not be can
celled and revoked#

DOCKET NO* 1553-M - Dismissed rule nisi issued against
Frank Lanier, Metter, Georgia, to show cause why Class MB " Certi ficate No# 1533 should not be cancelled and revoked#

DOCKET NO# 1628-M - Approved application of Otis Dixon dba Otis Dixon Transfer, Athens, Georgia, for amendment of Class wB ,r Certificate No# 2295.

DOCKET NO# 1629-M - Approved application of Winford F# Riddle, dba Montezuma Bus Line, Montezuma, Georgia, for amend ment of Class "A" Certificate No# 3170#

DOCKET NO. 1631-M - Approved application of Harry Bennett, dba Harry Bennett Construction Company, Alma, Georgia, for transfer of Class nE H Certificate No# 3213 from J# Sim Alex ander, Lyons, Georgia#

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Barnes Freight Line, Inc*, Carrollton, Georgia, for amendment of Class MAn Certi
ficate No# 1030#

NON-DOCKET - Approved application of Transfer Service, Inc*, Atlanta, Georgia, for transfer of Class wE n Certificate Certificate No. 2A68 from H# W# Breffle, dba Fidelity Storage
Company#

December 22, 1959
DOCKET NO. 1585-M - Approved amended application of Radio Cab Co#, Inc., Columbus, Georgia, for Class "C" Certificate#
DOCKET NO# 1621-M - Reconsidered application for re consideration of amended Class "B" Certificate No# 1069 issued to C. M* Wilbanks, dba Georgia Trucking Co#
DOCKET NO. 1630-M - Assigned for:further hearing application of Shippers Express, Inc#, for amendment of Class MB tt Certificate No# lOoO#

Page 39

DOCKET NO. 156I-M - Dismissed rule nisi against C. L.
Dodd, Plainville, Georgia, to show cause why Class "E" Certificate No. 1781 should not be cancelled and revoked.
NON-DOCKET Approved application of R. A. Willis, dba R. A. Willis Transfer, Augusta, Georgia, for amendment of Class "B" Certificate No. 2154.
NON-DOCKET _ Approved application of A. J. Joyner for amendment of Class "B" Certificates Nos. 349 &nd 3080 to show the correct corporate name, to--wit! Joyner Truck Lines, Inc. in lieu of Butler Truck Lines, Inc*
NON-DOCKET . Approved application of J* L. Lewis Cor poration, Cordele, Georgia, for waiver of notice and hearing and for transfer of Class "B" Certificate No. 3074 from J* D. Lewis, Arabi, Georgia.
NON-DOCKET Approved application of Boat Transport, Inc., for waiver of notice and hearing and for transfer of Class
UB H Certificate No. 2945 from Hubert Cotton, dba Boat Transport.
NON-DOCKET 1 Cancelled Class HE H Certificate No. 3123 issued to Hugh Bannister, dba Bannister Stock Yard, Coolidge, Geor gia, upon surrender of said certificate by the carrier.
December 29, 1959:
NON-DOCKET - Approved application for amendment of Class UB H Certificate No. 2844 to show the correct corporate name k as changed from Chancey Truck Line, Inc. to Tiger Truck Lines, Inc.
DOCKET NO. 1627-M - Approved application of D. & L. Transfer Co., Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, for transfer of Class "C" Certificate No. 3265 from Daniel M. Clower and B. L. Clabom, dba D. & L. Transfer Co.
Page 40

Motor Carrier Enforcement
On March 1, 1959, the Commission employed Don Lawrence to re-organize and direct the activities of the Motor Carrier Inspection and Enforcement Department At that time there were five Inspectors employed by the Commission During the period from March 1st until July 1st certain changes were made in the department and new inspection and reporting procedures were ini tiated to enable the Commission to maintain a closer watch on the activities of certificated carriers domiciled within the state and to make certain that all carriers domiciled outside of the state subject to compliance with Georgia laws while engaged in "for hire" transportation within the state boundaries are properly registered with the Commission During this period two Inspectors were physically incapacitated, and one of them, W* M Lee, resign ed. The information shown herein below covers the six month period from July 1, 1959, through December 31, 1959, W reflects the activities of these three Inspectors.
During this time six hundred and six heavy duty tractor-trailers, trucks and buses were inspected for mechnaical condition and violations of safety rules and regulations. When such unsafe conditions were found to exist, the management of these carriers were so advised and were required to make repairs necessary and to so advise this Commission in the form of an af fidavit.
Also, Inspectors made eight hundred and two personal contacts with carriers, shippers, receivers and other interested parties while conducting routine and special investigations. Routine calls on carriers included the checking of rates, vehicle condition, authority, GPSC Tags and for compliance with all Com mission regulations governing the operation of their business which have been promulgated to protect the general shipping pub lic, and develop a healthy motor carrier industry.
Special investigations in general involved the check ing of those performing unauthorized or illegal transportation, the apprehension and prosecution of such illegal operators and warning those shippers who aid and abet such operators by using their unlawful services. Although no arrests were made during this period many illegal truck operators were warned and one
hundred and thirty-five (1 35 ) shippers were given letters of warn
ing, with copies of the Georgia law which prescribes that the shipper who aids and abets a violator is also subject to prose cution as a misdemeanor.
Routine investigations of carriers holding authority from this Commission have resulted in thirty-nine Rules Nisi being issued against carriers to show cause why their certificates

should not bo suspended and/or cancelled for failing to comply with Commission Rules and Regulations pertaining to rates, author ity or safety violations* In addition, as a result of these routine investigations, during this six-month period over fifty Motor Carriers have been processed through this office and advised of the necessary steps to place them in compliance with Commis sion tariff and other regulations In this respect the Inspection and Enforcement Department is grateful for the time, efforts,advioft and assistance of the Transportation rates division*
Further, the three Inspectors were directly responsible for the collection of $7,034*00 in motor carrier fees for licenses and indirectly responsible for the collection of several thousand dollars more remitted by mail* It is felt that with a limited force in action the Inspection and Enforcement Department has done a reasonably good job* This record can be increased with the ad dition of more competent personnel*
42*

:

: " -- .c '''K ^ ::

. ;I

'
ri-i 1 ... te n
*:: - Xt V- ; P V ' C('
noaiyl .-;:.vr not : icqe sorT or; ...

a'oiooqanl o o i ette tad<ss%

' ; ' ' . ?t>ln ri o i c i < ni a i 00***0 tS , 1c /. o i I < o ...... ,. '

'OS lo acid o oI I qo ri1*iol ..oiriJt.saoq^o'i yXioo^iJ&fti; Jbar

m it M m ai i l

\ d oM toe o? e io rj S k l o ft

IOO`

ofi . .. X0`

o Torti d coso Encoca siriT cfot

TRANSPORTATION

General
Pressure for adjustment in rates and charges of the regulated carriers - caused both by the continuing inflationary spiral of increase in cost of operations and the necessity for meeting the competition of other regulated modes of transportation and private carriage - kept the work load of the Transportation Rates Division at a high level in 1959 the volume of transportation cases concluded during this year increasing appreciably over that of 1958* As usual, service complaints continue to regularly consume a substantial part of our staff's time and the stepped* up motor carrier enforcement program instituted by the Commission has resulted in a great increase in tariff compilations, freight bill audit ing and rate education conferences with the smaller carriers. In spite of this substantially increased demand on the Commission's small trans
portation rates staff, we officially disposed of, in addition to the 83
formal proceedings listed below (almost all of which were made the sub ject of written opinions), 425 transportation rate and service matters, many of which required lengthy studies and investigations in the field.

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959

Docket No* Date

Subject

Disposition

Non-Docket 1-7*59

Application of Louisville &

Approved

Nashville Railroad Company for

authority to discontinue agency

service at Holly Springs

384-R

1-8-59

Application of the Central of Approved Georgia Railway Company for permission and approval to institute condemnation proceed ings for the purpose of acquir ing certain properties located in Fulton and Clayton Counties

317-R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Lake Park

Approved

336-R

1-21-59

Application of Georgia Railroad Approved for authority to discontinue agency service at Devereux

337-R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Devereux contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point.

Approved

Page 43.

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket No Date

Subject

Disposition

371- R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Clinchfield

Denied

372- R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc, for authority to close the express office at Pinehurst

Denied

373- R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc, for authority to close the express office at Sycamore

Denied

388-r

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Lenox

Denied

3B9-R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Sparks

Denied

390- R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Unadilla

Denied

391- R

1-21-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Colbert

Approved

369-R

1-29-59

Application of Atlantic Coast Approved subject

Line Railroad Company for

to conditions

authority to discontinue agency

service at Naylor

Supt. 369-R

2-24-59

Oral argument on petition for reconsideration of the Com mission* s order of January 29 in this file and docket

Order amended to reguire part time service at Naylor to be performed by the agent at Stockton with one agent to serve both stations

379-R

2-25-59

Application of the Central of Approved Georgia Railway Company for authority to revise the services of its agency stations of Hamil ton and Cataula by establishment of dual agency operation under a single agent
Page 44,

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket No Date

Subject

Disposition

let Supt. 384-R

2-25-59

Oral argument on petition of Petition for recon protestant for rehearing and sideration denied reconsideration of the Commis and order clarified
sion^ order of January 8
granting authority to the Central of Georgia Railway Company to institute condemna
tion proceedings for the purpose of acquiring certain properties
located in Fulton and Clayton Counties

395-R

2-25-59

Application of Railway Express Denied with Agency, Inc*, for authority to authority granted

close the express office at

to reduce hours

Cataula contingent upon the con of service at

solidation of the railroad

both Cataula and

agency at that point with that Hamilton express

at Hamilton

offices to coin

cide with the

hours the rail

road agent is

on duty at those

stations

Non-Docket 2-25-59

386-R

3-6-59

Application of Atlantic Coast Approved Line Railroad Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Gay
Application of Atlantic Coast Withdrawn Line Railroad Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Ludowici

392-R

3-6-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Ludowici contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

Dismissed

Non-Docket 3-11-59

Application of Louisville &

Approved condi

Nashville Railroad Company for tionally, subject

authority to discontinue agency to complaint and

service at Smyrna

further order

1st Supt 3*K>-R

3-19-59

Application of Georgia Railroad Approved after

for authority to discontinue review of opera

agency service at Deaxing

tions for addi

tional test period

Page **5

Docket No* 377-R
387-R
1247- M 1248- M
1st Supt. 1281-M
lk77-M

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Date

Subject

Disposition

3-19-59

Application of the Central of Denied Georgia Railway Company for authority to revise the services of its agency stations of Andersonville and Oglethorpe by establishment of dual agency operation -under a single agent

3-19-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc*, for authority to close the egress office at Andersonville contingent upon the consolidation of the rail road agency at that point with that at Oglethorpe

Dismissed

3-19-59

Application of Theatres Service Denied, subject Company and Benton Bros* Him to review after Express, Inc., for amendment of further investi their existing operating certi gation ficates to authorize the trans portation of mail and light
express

3-19-59

Investigation into reasonable- Investigation

ness of charges applied by

instituted and

Class ''A" Motor Carriers of

assigned for

Property on shipments weighing hearing
100 pounds or less, moving

between points within the State

of Georgia and the effect on

the carriers* revenues of any

adjustment in such charges or

of the diversion of such traffic

3-19-59

Investigation into reasonable Investigation

ness of charges applied by

instituted and

Class "An Motor Carriers of

hearing assigned

Passengers for the transporta

tion via bus express of ship
ments weighing 100 pounds or

less moving between points

within the State of Georgia,

and into the reasonableness of

the services performed by such

carriers in connection with such

shipments

Page 46

FORMAI CASES TOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket No Date

Subject

Disposition

407~R

3-30-59

Application of Seaboard Air

Denied

Line Railroad Company for

authority to discontinue agency

service at Colbert; to discon

tinue handling less-than-carload

freight at that point; to elimi

nate Colbert as flag stops for

Seaboard Air Line Railroad

Passenger Trains Ros* 3 and 4;

to dismantle the depot facili

ties at Colbert and to make

Colbert a prepay station

i452-M

3-30-59

Application of Gray Line Transit Schedule reduction

System, Inc., for increase in granted but fare

fares and reduction in scheduled increase withheld

operations

pending carrier* s

improvement of

equipment

408- R

4-10-59

Application of Seaboard Air Line Withdrawn for sixRailroad Company for authority month test period to discontinue agency service at Jeffersonville

409- R

4-10-59

Application of Railway Express
Agency, Inc., for authority to
close the express office at Jeffersonville contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

Dismissed

Ron-Docket 4-22-59

Application of Louisville & In view of com

Nashville Railroad Company for plaints, condi

authority to discontinue agency tional approval

service at Smyrna

granted on March 11

rescinded and

application set

for formal hearing

378-R

4-23-59

Application of the Central of Approved Georgia Railway Company for authority to revise the ser vices of its agency stations of Greenville and Luthersville by establishment of dual agency operation under a single agent

410-R

4-23-59

Application of Railway Express
Agency, Inc., for authority to
close the express office at Luthersville contingent upon the consolidation of the rail road agency at that point with that at Greenville
Page 47.

Approved

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket Ho Date

Subject

Disposition

413-R

5-6-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc*, for authority to close the express office at Cohutta

Approved

4l6-R

5-27-59

Application of the Central of Georgia Railway Company for authority to revise the ser vices of its agency stations of Bartow and Davisboro by establishment of dual agency operation under a single agent

Approved

Non-Docket 5-27-59

Application of Southern Railway Approved Company for authority to dis continue agency service at Gaillard

395-R

5-27-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc*, for authority to close the express office at Cataula

Approved upon reconsideration

393-R

6-11-59

Application of railroads for Approved with

authority to increase intra exceptions as to

state freight rates and charges rates on marble,

to the same extent as authorized anhydrous ammonia,

by-the Interstate Commerce Com insecticides, scrap

mission in Ex Parte 212

iron, waste wooden

cores and clay or

shale

405-R

6-11-59

Application of Railway Express Approved Agency, Inc*, for authority to increase intrastate rates and charges to the same extent as authorized by the Interstate Commerce Commission in Ex Parte 210

417-R

6-11-59

Application of Seaboard Air Line Approved Railroad Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Bogart; to discontinue handling less-than-carload freight at that point; to dismantle the station building and to make Bogart a prepay station

4l8-R

6-11-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Bogart contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

Approved

Page 48.

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket No* Date

Subject

Disposition

Non-Docket 6-11-59

361-R 362-R

6-24-59 6-24-59

Application of Savannah &

Approved following

Atlanta Railway Company for

showing of arrange

authority to discontinue passen ments for handling

ger service on its mixed trains of railway express

Nos* 21 and 212 between Savannah

and Waynesboro

Application of Southern Railway Approved Company for authority to dis continue agency service at Lula

Application of Railway Express Approved Agency, Inc*, for authority to close the express office at Lula contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

1st Supt. 393-R

6-24-59

Application of railroads for

Order clarified

authority to increase intra

as to rates on

state freight rates and charges marble

to the same extent as authorized

by the Interstate Commerce Com

mission in Ex Parte 212

1515-M
394-r

6-24-59
8-6-59

Application of Suburban Transit Approved Lines, Inc., to increase fares by five cents per ride.

Application of Georgia and Florida Railroad for authority to discontinue agency service at Uvalda

Approved

4o 6-r

8-6-59

Application of the Central of Georgia Railway Company for authority to discontinue opera tion of its Passenger Trains Nos. IT and 18 (The Flamingo) between Atlanta and Albany

Denied

4ii-r

8-6-59

Application of Southern Railway Denied Company and Georgia Southern and Florida Railway Company for authority to discontinue opera tion of their Passenger Trains Nos. 1 and 2 (The Ponce de Leon) between Atlanta and the GeorgiaFlorida State Line (en route to Jacksonville, Florida)

Page 49.

>3X0 O
'I

Docket Ho. Date

4l2-R

8-6-59

420- R

8-6-59

421- R

8-6-59

te2-R

8-6-59

423-R

8-6-59

1478-M

8-6-59

1479-M

8-6-59

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Subject

Disposition

Application of Seaboard Air

Denied

Line Railroad Company for

authority to discontinue agency

service at Dallas; to discontinue

handling less-carload freight at

that point; to dismantle the sta

tion building at Dallas and to

make Dallas a prepay station.

Application of the Central of Georgia Railway Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Guyton

Approved

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Guyton contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

Approved

Application of Seaboard Air Line Railroad Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Dacula; to discon tinue handling less-carload freight at that point; to dis mantle the station building at Dacula; to discontinue Dacula as a flag stop for Seaboard Air Line Railroad Passenger Trains Hos. 3 and 4 and to make Dacula a prepay station

Approved

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc#, for authority to close the express office at Dacula contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

Approved

Application of principal bus
carriers for authority to
increase one-way fares to a
maximum of 2.8875 cents per
mile with a minimum one-way
fare of 30 cents

Denied

Application of Smoky Mountain Denied
Stages, Inc#, for authority to
increase to 3 cents per mile all
one-way fares between points on
its line lower than 3 cents per mile

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAH 1959 (Continued)

Docket Ho Date

Subject

Disposition

I536-M

8-6-59

Application of Fort Gordon Bus Company to increase by 5 cents per ride all one-way fares between points on its line

Approved

Supt, 412-R

9-16-59

Motion for rehearing, reconsideration and oral argument on
the Commission's order of
August 6, 1959 denying applica
tion of Seaboard Air Line Rail road Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Dallas and to make other changes in service provisions at that point*

Oral argument assigned

424-R

9-16-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to
increase less-carload rates and charges with certain exceptions
by 25 cents per 100 pounds with a minimum increase of 25 cents
per shipment (corresponding to
the increase granted by the Interstate Commerce Commission
effective September 1, 1959)

Approved

I566-M

9-16-59

Application of Class "A" Motor Approved Carriers of Property for authority to establish increased rating of Column 400 on any quantity shipments of boats or boat parts

Non-Docket 9-16-59

Petition of Class "B" Motor Carriers of Property for inter pretation of the "household goods" description in Commodity Group No# 1 of Motor Carrier
Rule 8

Commodity group description amended to authorize the transportation of new store fixtures from the manufac turer to the store in which such facilities are to be installed and used

425-R

9-24-59

Application of Georgia Railroad Denied for authority to close its agency station at Crawfordville
on Saturday

Page 51

Docket No*
430-K
431-R
432-R
43U-R 435-R
437-R Supt. 9508-A 9509-A
1st Supt* 412-R

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAH 1959 (Continued)

Date

Subject

Disposition

10-9-59

Application of Southern Railway Approved Company for authority to discon tinue agency station at Alto; to discontinue handling less-carload freight at that point; to dis mantle the station building at Alto and to make Alto a prepay station

10-9-59
IO-9-59

Application of Railway Express Approved Agency, Inc*, for authority to close the express office at Alto contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point
Application of Southern Railway Approved Company for permission and approval to institute condemna tion proceedings for the purpose of acquiring certain property located in Fulton County.

10-9-59

Application of the Central of Georgia Railway Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Byron

Denied with provi
sion for review
after 12-month
test period

IO-9-59

Application of Railway Express Dismissed Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Byron contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point.

10-9-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Coolidge

Approved

10-22-59

Petition of petroleum shipper Revision approved for revision of prescribed rates to Uvalda and on petroleum products in bulk denied to Hazlehurst
from Savannah to Uvalda and
Hazlehurst

11-5-59

Oral argument on motion of Sea Reconsideration board Air Line Railroad Company denied for reconsideration of the Com mission's denial of that rail road's application for authority to discontinue agency service at Dallas and to make other changes in service provisions at that point.

Page 52.

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket No. Date

Subject

Disposition

Supt. 9508-A 9509- A
lH*l-R
433-R

11-13-59

Application of Walker Hauling Company, Inc., for establish ment of specific point-to-point rates on liquid petroleum pro ducts in bulk from Doraville to the Atlanta Airport, East Point, College Park and Hapeville the same as to Atlanta

Approved

11-13-59

Application of Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Smyrna and to remove the station building at that
point.

Approved

11-13-59 Application of the Central of Approved Georgia Railway Company for authority to discontinue agency
service at Junction City

Supt# 9508-A 9509- A

11-20-59

Rates on liquid petroleum pro ducts in bulk from Doraville to the Atlanta Airport, College Park, East Point and Hapeville

Rail rates per mitted to remain as in effect prior to motor carrier adjustment

^38-R
427-R

11-25-59 Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at
Roberta

Approved

12-22-59

Application of Augusta and

Temporary removal

Summerville Railroad Company of switch and dis

for authority to remove the

continuance of

switch at the intersection of service authorized

Kollock and Fenwick Streets in subject to replace

Augusta (connecting a spur track ment and rehabilita

of that railroad with the main tion should suffi

line of the Georgia Railroad) cient need develop

and to discontinue service on therefor

that spur track

436-R

12-22-59

Application of the Central of Georgia Railway Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Senoia

Denied with provi
sion for review
after 12-month test period

1&0-R

12-22-59

Application of the Central of Approved Georgia Railway Company for authority to revise the services of its agency stations of Butler and Reynolds by establishment of dual agency operation under a
single agent
Page 53.

FORMAL CASES FOR YEAR 1959 (Continued)

Docket No* Date

Subject

Disposition

iOH-R

12-25-59 Application of the Central of Approved Georgia Railway Company for authority to discontinue agency service at Leesburg

-R

12-22-59

Application of Georgia Southern Approved insofar and Florida Railway Company for as concerns disauthority to discontinue agency continuance of service at Pinehurst; to discon- agency service tinue handling less-carload ship- and establishment ments at that point; to dismantle of prepay requirethe station building at Pinehurst ments but denied and to make Pinehurst a prepay in all other respect
station

1&3-R

12-22-59

Application of Railway Express Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Pinehurst contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency
at that point

Approved

A-R

12-22-59

Application of Railway Express
Agency, Inc., for authority to close the express office at Leesburg contingent upon the closing of the railroad agency at that point

Approved

BUS FARES AND SERVICES
By application dated January 9, and amended on January 28 and March 9, the principal bus carriers operating within the State sought authority to increase one-way bus fares from the existing 2.625 cents per mile to 2.8875 cents per mile and to increase the minimum one-way fare from 25 cents to 30 cents. Following public hearing on the application, the Commission found that the bettering of economic conditions generally had resulted in the operations of all the applicants showing an improve ment in the first half of 1959 as compared with the same period in 1958, with three of the principal applicant carriers operating during the first half of 1959 at a ratio below 88 in spite of the increased costs incurred. The Commission held that no reason had been shown why a greater return should be allowed this type of carrier than the other classes of motor carriers and further found that the overall return to these bus carriers under the present fares appeared to be adequate and for those reasons denied the application.
Unfortunately, however, the operations of some of the smaller bus lines had not improved to the same extent as had those of the larger carriers,and it was necessary during the year to authorize increased fares for three lines and a substantial reduction of service on one of those lines. In addition, regular schedule filings evidenced a continuing decline in the number of passengers using the facilities of the State*s bus lines -
Page 54.

In a number of instances such proposed reductions in service were so adverse in the effect on the riding public as to he against the public interest, and in those instances such proposed reductions in service were denied.
During the year following public hearings in each case, increased fares were authorized for Gray Line Transit System, Inc., (operating between Atlanta a**d Atlanta General Depot via Lakewood Heights, Blair Village and Forest Park); Suburban Transit Lines, Inc.(operating between Macon and surrounding suburban areas); and Fort Gordon Bus Company (operating between Augusta and Fort Gordon). In addition, Gray Line Transit System, Inc., was permitted to substantially reduce the number of schedules operated by it upon a showing of financial losses on and little riding of the sched ules sought to be discontinued.
As the result of a decision in related proceedings, which will be discussed elsewhere in this report, the Commission on March 19 insti tuted an investigation into bus express rates and services for the specific purpose of determining the reasonableness of charges for the transportation via bus of shipments weighing 100 pounds or less moving between points within the State of Georgia, and the reasonableness of the services per formed by such carriers in connection with such shipments. For that pur pose, each bus line certificated to transport express was required to furnish to the Commission a complete record of all bus express shipments moving during seven consecutive days between points on its line in Georgia showing for each shipment the origin, destination, commodity, weight, rate and total charges.
Public hearing was held in this investigation on July 30, at which time the required statistics were submitted together with cost study relating to the transportation of bus express, the bus lines* contention being that at the present rates there was little profit in handling bus express traffic and that, under the circumstances, they considered the existing rates to be fair and reasonable and did not propose any adjust ment in those rates#
Decision as to the results of this investigation was withheld by the Commission pending further action in the related cases.
TRUCK BATES
As was the case with the motor carriers of passengers, the Commission*s decision in related proceedings brought about the initiation on March 19 of an investigation into the level of charges applied by the Class "A" Motor Carriers of Property on shipments weighing 100 pounds or less moving between points within the State of Georgia. That investiga tion was incorporated into the pending Docket 1281-M concerning motor carrier application for increase in freight rates and charges and the decision in that phase of the docket was deferred pending the completion of such investigation. The Docket 1281-M proceeding was broadened to specificly include consideration of the reasonableness of the existing charges for shipments of 100 pounds or less, and the effect on the carriers* revenues of any adjustment in such charges and the effect upon the carriers* revenues of the diversion of such traffic. The investiga tion phase of the proceeding was assigned for hearing on April 21, but due to the complexity of the required traffic study, was subsequently twice postponed and at the end of the year the matter had not yet been formally heard.
Page 55.

t&gj'

u

'V.u ...- :ut .

.dAtaagecue ;.t siit to! ^xaiio to aaii#J-..rr^c*iJC3`x aifc-

to eat

fT '

.:iar'.-.

- . %: , 'V; ' ':.' .. . i? j t ' , . n

od sBilssper a m saoxqxo frMqez&xd o$ h&ifr.a&it.

a^ d a aaoicqx car-1 ;i.a to ;

: m e ' .: , /-aajtaoCv @dd ed ilaiff

i3*xoo0 a l &nJtI edi so edLfc<| aaesrdecf arpa& svJtfvo&aaoo flrea sc.t*m& go

dai tev:d.jv ^^ibociur.o:> t.aoj:daaJ:4'iie

E*x

* add aasr A ;\5 c : - 'cC d&yff'.-i9Q am

. dooC

.0 - . / , . y : .

-'

-5 ; d : lit

e d e * i d d ;. i & > .'/

ifoi'i'I-<pK>o-.Oder 9aJtJbaq arst& M f $$9016 k H to

.v.afii :cfa/-


dadd ax noJtstoi
.td^-'.

.

agidsovoi; .''

. /d &ttamI `
'1 1

a &2SC slay

The decision -which precipitated both the investigation into bus express rates and charges and truck rates and charges on the small shipments -was that involving the application of Theatres Service Company and Benton Bros* Film Express* Inc** for amendment of their existing operating certificates to authorize the transportation of mail and light express*
These two applications were filed late in 1957 with hearings being held during that year and during last year. Briefs and reply briefs were submitted by the parties and decision was not rendered until March 19 of this year*
The Commission on that date rendered a tentative decision* finding that the institution of the proposed service, particularly at the contemplated rates* would be an added convenience to many shippers and receivers of freight and that the applicants were fit to perform such service. The Commission further found* however, that under the provisions of the governing statutes* before the certificates sought could be granted it would be necessary to determine whether the existing and anticipated volume of traffic was sufficient to support the proposed operation as well as the existing carriers, and whether the effect of the proposed operation on existing transportation revenues and services of all kinds would or might seriously impair essential existing public service.
The record was contradictory in the contentions of the various parties as to the impact of the proposed operations on the existing carriers* It was for that reason that investigations were ordered into the fields of both bus express and truck shipments of the size and weight involved in these applications. Final decisions on the applications were deferred pending completion of such investigations and the determination by the Commission whether there existed a service deficiency of the existing carriers from the rate standpoint.
During the year it was necessary to make two adjustments in
the Commission1s proposed rates on petroleum and petroleum products via
motor carriers. The prescribed rates on petroleum products via both
motor carrier and rail for distances of 200 miles and less are based on
distances contained in the Commission* s Highway Distance Table Ho. 1 those mileages reflecting distances via short line paved State highways as of the date of computation of that distance table. The paving of
State Highway Ho. 56* between Reidsville and Uvalda* significantly
reduced the paved distance from Savannah to Uvalda* and in consideration of that change, the Commission authorized adjustment in the rail and motor carrier petroleum rates to the basis of the revised distance.
Since the original order of the Commission prescribing these petroleum rates* the city limits of Atlanta have been extended to the point where many locations within those city limits are further from the pipeline outlet at Doraville than are many parts of the surrounding munici palities of College Bark, East Point and Hapeville. Under the circumstances* the Commission found Justified the proposal of one of the motor carrier transporters of petroleum products to establish from Doraville to College Park* East Point and Hapeville the same rate as that applicable to loca tions within the city limits of Atlanta. In addition, it was found reason able to permit the application of the same rate to receivers at the Atlanta Municipal Airport which* while not within the city limits of Atlanta* is closer to Doraville than a number of locations within those city limits.
Page 56.

The Commission during the year received a number of inquiries from Class "B" Motor Carriers of Property as to whether or not the "household goods" description in Commodity Group No* 1 of the Commissions Motor Carrier Buie 8 authorized the transportation of new store fixtures from the manu facturer to the store in which such fixtures were to he installed and used*
It was pointed out hy the interested carriers that the existing household goods commodity description authorized the transportation of new furniture from the manufacturer or retail store to the home in which such furniture is to he used through the phrase "personal effects and property used or to he used in a dwelling", hut that the wording of the existing description did not contain such provision in connection with furniture, fixtures, equipment and the property of offices, stores, museums, institu tions, hospitals, or other similar establishments*
The intent of the household goods commodity group description was to authorize the movement in specialized service of the type rendered hy the household goods carriers not only of the basic home furnishings hut also of similar furnishings of stores, offices and other such establish ments. The transportation of the articles here in question, while usually moving from a manufacturer to a purchaser and in new condition instead of used, is still basically a movement of furnishings to the place of final use and obviously should he accorded the same treatment as the movement of new furnishings to he used in a dwelling*
In order to definitely provide that such transportation was included within the "household goods" description the Commission on September l6 amended the description in Commodity Group No. 1 of its Motor Carrier Rule 8 to read as follows:
"1* HOUSEHOLD, KITCHEN, OFFICE FURNITURE AND STORE FIXTURES.
Any personal effects and property used or to he used in a dwelling when a part of the equipment or supplies of such dwelling; furniture, fixtures, equipment and the property of offices, stores, museums, institutions, hospitals, or other establishments when used or to he used as a part of the stock, equipment or supplies of such offices, stores, museums, institutions, hospitals or other establishments, and articles including objects of art, displays, exhibits, which, because of their unusual nature, or value, require specialized handling and equipment usually employed in moving household goods."
RAILWAY EXPRESS
Increasing costs of operations forced the Railway Express Agency to seek during this year two general increases in rates and charges.
The first application sought increase in Georgia intrastate express rates and charges to the same extent as authorized by the Interstate Commerce Commission in October last year in Ex Parte 210. At the public hearing, it was shown that even with the increase the Agency would earn on Georgia intrastate traffic a net total of only $38,7%*39 per year with which to compensate the railroads for the line-haul transportation of express traffic. It was also developed that the increase sought, while appreciable percentagewise, would still be almost half absorbed in the payment of additional wages to operating personnel, and in view of the
Page 57.

fact that the future of the Railway Express Agency was then in considerable doubt, the increase was authorized to help prevent further worsening of the Agency's financial position.
After long negotiations between the Railway Express Agency and its railroad owners there was reached this year an agreement whereby the Express Agency would in the future operate on an independent basis and would purchase its transportation as required, either from the rail roads or from other modes of transportation as its best interests dictated. In order to accomplish the aims of this proposed new agreement it was stated to be necessary for the Express Agency to have the financial stability to operate on its own and to that end it had instituted an extensive program to reduce its operating expenses, but in addition to that savings would require substantial additional revenues from its traffic to make its opera tions financially possible on an independent basis* The second proposed
increase corresponded to the increase of 25 cents per 100 pounds with a
nri-nirmim of 25 cents per shipment granted by the Interstate Commerce Commis sion on September 1 and in view of the total lack of opposition at the hearing this Commission likewise approved a similar Increase in order that Georgia intrastate traffic might contribute its part to the continued opera tion of the Railway Express Agency.
The Railway Express Agency continued during this year its pro gram of discontinuing local offices at the smaller stations. As in the past, many such applications were filed because the railroads had filed applications to discontinue agency stations at the same points - the railroad agencies also operating the express offices - with the Express Company* s applications being contingent upon approval being given to the railroad applications. In addition, however, there were a number of pro posals to close express offices which were based solely on alleged inade quacy of the financial returns from express traffic handled by those offices.
Of the contingent applications filed during the year, the Express Agency was permitted to close its offices at Alto, Bogart, Cataula, Dacula, Devereux, Guyton, Leesburg, Lula and Pinehurst, but the need shown for railroad agency operations at Andersonville, Byron, Jeffersonville and Ludowici resulted in the contingent Express applications involving those points being denied.
Six applications (involving the proposed discontinuance of the express offices at Clinchfield, Pinehurst, Sycamore, Lenox, Sparks and Unadilla) were based on the "excessive cost of providing messenger service" on the freight trains transporting the railway express shipments to and from those stations* The record showed that the freight trains on which the express shipments to and from these offices are transported were formerly mixed freight and passenger trains operating on a fixed schedule and handling passengers, mail and railway express in addition to railroad
freight. By application dated July 6, 195^> the Georgia Southern and
Florida Railway Company sought authority to discontinue the passenger service on these mixed trains (Eos. 26 and 2?) operating between Macon and Valdosta and stated in that application that express which was being handled on those two trains would be continued on the freight trains or shifted to other available trains. The Commission on August 12, 195^> authorized the proposed elimination of passenger service on these trains with the understanding that the commitments made in the application con cerning railway express would be met.
Page 58.

At no time during the processing of that application was there any protest from the Railway Express Agency as to any added cost that might be incurred by the Agency due to the discontinuance of passenger service on these mixed trains- There was no indication to the Commission or to the public along the route of these trains that the continuance of railway express service along this route would in any way be dependent upon the Express Agency* s cost of providing the messengers on the freight trains.
In consideration of the protests to these proposed discon tinuances, the Commission held that the proper recourse of the Express Agency was further negotiations with the Georgia Southern and Florida Railway instead of discontinuing service needed by the public and denied the applications.
As was mentioned above in connection with discussion of express rate increases, the future of the Railway Express Agency appears considerably better than was the prospect last year. The new agreement between the railroads and the Agency provide for its continuation on an independent status, purchasing its transportation requirements from such carriers as it deems best suited for its own purposes and paying all such carriers, including the railroads, a contracted rate for such services. There has been extensive overhauling of the agency* s operation personnel and services, and the new policies of its new management evidence a bright hope for its future.
RAIL PASSENGER SERVICE
By application received February 18, the Central of Georgia Railway Company sought authority to discontinue operation of its passenger
trains Nos. IT and l8 (The Flamingo) between Atlanta and Albany. There
was substantial opposition to this proposal to discontinue these last passenger trains operated by the Central of Georgia Railway between Macon and Albany. The statistics introduced by the applicant at the hearing showed that the southbound "Flamingo" transported an average of 39*8 passengers per trip and the northbound "Flamingo" transported an average of 50.1 passengers per trip. Out-of-pocket losses claimed amounted to $49,461.45 for the 12-month period ending November 30, 1958 - those losses
including a cost of $139,229.62 for terminal and Joint facilities at
Atlanta, Macon and Albany. The Commission found that the indicated loss
of approximately $50,000 per year did not appear to be sufficient to
Justify the total elimination of railroad passenger services over an important segment of the Central of Georgia Railway and the removal of the last passenger service to a number of local stations. The Commission also questioned whether or not the full extent of such losses would be saved if the trains were discontinued and pointed out that the Interstate Commerce Commission (to which Jurisdiction over passenger train services was given last year by Congress as a result of extensive and vigorous urging by the railroads as a group) had refused to recognize any appre ciable portion of terminal, expenses as savable costs. In addition, it was found that there were other manners in which appreciable savings could be effected in the operating cost of these trains and, under the circumstances, including the fact that the financial condition of the Central of Georgia Railway had shown considerable improvement over last
year, the Commission on August 6 declined to authorize at that time the
proposed discontinuance of these trains.
Page 59*

By application dated March 10, the Southern Railway Company

and the Georgia Southern and Florida Railway Company sought authority to

discontinue operation of their passenger trains Nos. 1 and 2 (The Ponce de

Leon) between Atlanta and the Georgia-Florida State Line (en route to

Jacksonville, Florida) The Ponce de Leon trains are through Midwest--

Florida trains operating between the terminal points of Cincinnati, Ohio

and Jacksonville, Florida - the portions sought to be discontinued in this
proceeding being 309 miles of the total 8iK)-mile operation of trains* The

discontinuance of these trains would eliminate all rail passenger service

to the towns of Juliette, Howell, Mayday, Thelma and Council and would eliminate southbound service to or from Lenox, Sparks and Hahira. Statis

tics introduced at the hearing showed that the southbound Ponce de Leon

trains handled an average of

passengers per trip and the northbound

trains transported an average of

passengers per trip* While other

rail and bus service is available to a number of the affected points, no

through parallel bus service is maintained and passengers north of Atlanta

riding the segment of the Ponce de Leon trains proposed to remain in opera

tion would have to wait a minimum of 7 hours for connections to Macon and over 10 hours for connecting trains to points in Georgia on the applicants

lines south of Macon* Financial statistics submitted at the hearing indi

cated that during 1956 these segments of the Ponce de Leon trains operated
at an indicated loss of $112,727 - including a cost of $126,002 for terminal

expenses. The statistics as submitted by the applicants showed results of

operation of the trains between Atlanta and Jacksonville, Florida, including

the cost of the Jacksonville terminal. Proration of these costs based on

the miles operated in Georgia and Florida produced in Georgia losses of

$23,585 for the year 1958. As in the Central of Georgia case above dis cussed, the Commission pointed out in this proceeding that the Interstate Commerce Commission, to which jurisdiction was given over the passenger

train services under the Transportation Act of 1956 - which Act, inciden

tally, was strongly supported by these two railroads - had rendered deci sions on passenger train discontinuance applications filed with it con taining findings that it was "highly doubtful" that terminal expenses in

proceedings similar to that here involved would be reduced to any appre

ciable extent by the discontinuance of the trains and that Commission haa

consistently reduced the savings estimated to be obtainable by substantially

the full amount of terminal expenses claimed* This Commission found it

reasonable, since a portion of an interstate train was here involved, to

apply that finding of the Interstate Commerce Commission to

"

when the terminal expenses were thus disregarded it was concluded that the

applicants in this proceeding would be effecting no savings at all through

the discontinuance of the Ponce de Leon trains and that this Commission

was not going to authorize the discontinuance of the Georgia portion of

an interstate operation when there was indication that the Interstate Com

merce Commission would not, under the same set of facts, authorize the
discontinuance of the entire operation. Accordingly, on August 6 the

application was denied.

By application dated May 25, the Savannah & Atlanta Railway Company sought authority to discontinue passenger service on its mixed trains Nos. 21 and 212 between Savannah and Waynesboro. In view of the negligible use of this passenger service, and subject to the understanding that provisions be made for continuation of handling of railway service, the Commission on June 11 authorized the discontinuance of this
service.

Page 60.

RAIL FREIGHT
In December of last year, the railroads filed application for authority to increase their freight rates and charges on Georgia intrastate traffic to the same extent as they had increased their interstate freight rates and charges under authority granted by the Interstate Commerce Com mission in its orders of February 11, 1958 end September 9> 1958 in Ex Parte 212* At the public hearing held on this application, the railroads clarified and amended their petition to definitely provide that the same exceptions were sought on Georgia intrastate traffic as had been prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission and voluntarily made by the railroads on interstate traffic* In addition the applicants indicated that while a permissive increase was sought in the intrastate rates on fuel oil and related products, that increase would not be made effective unless the competitive truckers made similar increase in their intrastate rates on those commodities* Further specific amendment was made to the application concerning increase on carload shipments of marble from Tate to Kelson -
such amendment seeking a 10$ increase in the charges per car in lieu of
the 2 cents per 100 pounds increase originally sought. Hearing was held in June, at which extensive evidence was submitted both by the carriers and by a number of shippers. This proceeding is the first rail general Increase case in Georgia in which the railroads have sought increased revenues through a selective increase in rates on certain defined commo dities rather than an across-the-board increase on all commodities* The volume of shipper protest was considerably less than usual at such pro ceedings due to the fact that there m s not sought in this proceeding increase on many commodities important to the economy of the State of Georgia, such as fertilizer, grain, feed, cotton, textiles, pulpwood or sand and gravel. The proposal thus indicated recognition by the railroads of their potent motor carrier competition and the inability of many indus tries to stand further increase in transportation costs* The record was clear that the continuing upward spiral of labor and materials costs had substantially increased the operating expenses of the railroads and that the comparatively small amount of additional revenue sought in this pro ceeding was needed to offset those increased operating costs* Under the circumstances, the Commission approved the additional Increases with some further exceptions found justifiable on Georgia intrastate traffic - those exceptions including rates on anhydrous ammonia - a product now being used in Georgia not only as a fertilizer ingredient but also for direct applica tion to the soil as a fertilizing agent - insecticides, scrap iron and waste wooden cores and certain gathering rates on clay or shale. Ho increase was authorized in rates on marble from Tate to Kelson and the
increase on other movements of marble was limited to 3$ in lieu of the 2 cents per 100 pounds increase sought*
Subsequent to the Commissions decision in the above-detailed increased rate proceeding it was developed that the Commission's order needed clarification insofar as concerned the exception ordered in rates on marble* Accordingly, a supplemental order was issued specifically
limiting the increase on marble to 2 cents per 100 pounds where that measure of increase would be less than the 3$ increase generally authorized*
By application dated July 2, the Augusta and Summerville Bailroad Company sought authority to remove the switch at the intersection of Kollock and Fenwick Streets in Augusta (connecting a spur track of that railroad with the main line of the Georgia Railroad at that point) and to discontinue service on that spur track* The application contended that the street crossing and the railroad track at this point were in bad
page 6l.

condition and that the City of Augusta was insisting that repairs be made

to the crossing. Cost of needed renovation was estimated to amount to an

additional $6,900 if the switch could not be removed. It was further estimated that the cost of rehabilitating the spur track (including repair

of the trestle over the Augusta factory tailrace between 12th and 13th

Streets and street repairs and repaving to standards required by the City

of Augusta) would amount to an additional $3^,600. This spur track serves
only two industries with one of those industries having shipped or received
nothing over the track since 195^ end the other having received only eight

cars for its account during the past four years - the railroad contending

that such limited use of the spur did not justify its continued maintenance,

much less the expensive rehabilitation necessary to continue its operation.

While the application was protested by the two industries served, there

was no indication that any appreciable volume of rail traffic was contem

plated to be shipped or received by such industries in the foreseeable

future. Under the circumstances, the Commission concluded that there was

not now sufficient use of or need for the spur track to justify the added

cost of installation of a new switch and renovation of the track and accord

ingly permitted the railroad to remove the switch as requested and to tem

porarily discontinue service on the track. The Commission recognized,

however, that total abandonment of the track at this time would result in

unwarranted depreciation in the value of the properties of the protestants

and would handicap their efforts to locate railroad-using industries on

those sites. The railroad also recognized the inpact of total abandon

ment and agreed to cooperate in such industrialization efforts by leaving

the spur track in place in its existing condition and by not covering the

track or filling in the flange depressions, and committed itself to reha

bilitation of the track and replacement of the switch upon reasonable

request therefor should sufficient rail traffic result from industriali

zation or other usage of these properties - and that only if such develop ment did not materialize would it return to the Commission to seek authority

for total abandonment of the track. These commitments were made specific

conditions of the authority granted and the Commission specifically retained

jurisdiction in the proceeding in order to insure compliance with such con

ditions.

X,

BAIL AOEHCY SERVICE

In keeping with the trend of recent years, the Commission during 1959 received an increasing number of applications from the railroads seek ing discontinuance of agency service at the smaller stations. This year the Commission processed applications involving 32 stations, and as has been the case in the past most of these applications were based on the conten tion that the type and volume of traffic handled at the involved stations was such as to no longer justify the continuing increase in cost of main taining agency service. As in the past the Commission adhered to its policy in deciding such applications on the need for and use of the service rather than solely on the statistical showing of revenues versus cost. Of the 2T applications processed during 1959> Commission found that the public convenience and necessity of the affected areas would not be ade quately served without agency service in 4 instances and accordingly denied authority to discontinue agency service at Byron, Colbert, Dallas and Senoia (in addition, applications to discontinue the agencies at Ludowici on^ Jeffersonville were voluntarily withdrawn by the proponents). Authority was granted to discontinue agency service at Alto, Bogart, Dacula, Dearing, Devereux, Gaillard, Gay, Guyton, Holly Springs, Junction City, Leesburg,
Lula, Pinehurst, Smyrna and Uvalda. Page 62.

Additional applications were filed "by the railroads during this year seeking authority to operate two adjacent agency stations with one agent by providing part-time service at each station* Recognizing that such arrangement was the most practical means yet found of providing service to the smaller towns at a cost more commensurate with the value of the work performed, the Commission during the year approved such appli cations to dualize the agency stations of Hamilton and Cataula, Greenville and LuthersviHe, Bartow and Davisboro, and Butler and Reynolds. In one instance - the application of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad to discon tinue agency service at Naylor - the Commission authorized part-time service at that point with such part-time service to be provided by the agent at the adjacent station of Stockton (the hours of service at that station being reduced to permit such an arrangement). One dualization application - that involving the Central of Georgia Railway stations of Andersonville and Oglethorpe - was denied after finding by the Commission that the volume and type of traffic handled through those two stations was such that adequate service could not be rendered through the parttime arrangement proposed.
CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS
Luring the year there were submitted to the Commission by the railroads two applications for authority to institute condemnation proceedings - the Georgia law requiring that before such a proceeding can be instituted in the Courts, this Commission must find that the pro perty sought is needed for public purposes.
One such proceeding - that involving the application of the Central of Georgia Railway Company for permission to institute condemna tion proceedings for the purpose of acquiring certain properties located in Fulton and Clayton Counties to be used in the construction of a spur track to a large tank farm (for the storage of aviation fuels) to be located on the property of the Atlanta Municipal Airport - -was filed late last year and was briefly reviewed in last year*s report. As indicated in that report, the Commission held public hearings for three separate days, during which there was extensive opposition expressed both by the City of Hapeville and by individual property owners in the area.
Following the full public hearings and extensive review of the record, the Commission concluded that the public interest involved in the maintenance of the Atlanta Municipal Airport demanded that rail service be provided to transport fuel which would permit conversion of that airport to jet operations, and further concluded that the proposed track would permit opening up of an area of Clayton County containing ideal locations for industrial development to the benefit of that portion of Clayton County and the adjoining City of Hapeville. The Commission further found that the movement of switch engines and cars over the pro posed track could be so timed as to reduce to a minimum any traffic hazard at grade crossings and that the proposed route was the most feasible and practical route available to reach the necessary location on the airport property. Under the circumstances, the Commission held that the land sought was necessary and essential for the proposed construction by the Central of Georgia Railway of a spur track to reach the proposed fuel tank farm and that such track construction was required for the safe and efficient conduct of the petitioner^ business as a public carrier and for public purposes and therefore approved the taking for such public use of the property involved in this application.
Page 63.

By petition received on January 19, filed on behalf of the protestant property owner who had provided the most opposition to the con demnation proposal, there was sought rehearing, reconsideration and oral argument on the issues involved* Oral argument was held on this petition and following re-examination of the record and testimony in the proceeding, including the various documents filed by the applicant and this protestant before, during and after such oral argument, the Commission concluded that its basic finding in this proceeding was correct but did modify the order in the proceeding by correcting a minor factual error in the report, and by broadening the order to permit the institution of condemnation proceed ings against unknown parties who might have an interest in some of the involved property where the title was not entirely clear*
The second such condemnation case handled during the year involved the application of the Southern Railway Company for permission to institute condemnation proceedings for the purpose of acquiring certain property located in Fulton County to be used for the construction of and to provide sufficient clearance for main tracks of the Southern Railway Company on the south side of that railroad* s new Inman Yard in Atlanta* Public hearing was held following proper publication of notice by the carrier, and there was no opposition expressed to the application* Upon showing of need for the property in order to construct new freight and passenger main tracks in the expansion of the applicant* s yard facilities being Tna-de to more efficiently handle the large volume of traffic moving via the Southern Railway through its Atlanta terminals, and on further showing that the applicant had made effort to purchase the tracts of land involved and had obtained option from one of the parties of interest, but due to ambiguity and uncertainty in the chain of title to such property had been unable to secure valid warranty deeds, the Commission approved the application*
WESTERN & ATLANTIC RAILROAD
On February 6, members of the Commission and the Commission* s
staff accompanied members of the General Assembly on the annual inspection of the Western & Atlantic Railroad properties. The property of the rail road was found to be maintained in excellent condition, with the track and roadbed in excellent shape and comparable to that of the best Class I Railroads.
In March, the lessee sought permission to dismantle and remove a three-story brick building, property of the Western & Atlantic Railroad, located at 1115-1119 Market Street in Chattanooga. The purpose of this removal was to provide access from Market Street to a parking facility which occupies much of the remainder of the city block in which this building is located* From, an on-the-ground investigation it was developed that the building was not used or useful in the operation of the Western & Atlantic Railroad and that the proposal was not disadvantageous in that respect to the State of Georgia. The building was found to be very old and in extremely bad condition. The ground floor had been vacant for over three years and would not be attractive to any prospective tenant of any value without extensive renovation which would necessarily be practically equivalent to rebuilding. The upper floors were once used as a cheap hotel but were found to be in such run-down condition that they were no longer fit for human occupancy. In view of the fact that two leading realtors in the City of Chattanooga recommended the proposal as an improvement in the earning potential of this State property, and in
Page 6k

further consideration of the fact that the Mayor of the City of Chatta nooga hftd urged approval of the proposal as an improvement of that area of that city, recommendation was made that no objection he expressed by the State to dismantling and removal of the building, subject to the pro vision that necessary measures be taken to properly assure that such dis mantling and removal did not injure adjoining buildings, which are also Western & Atlantic Railroad property*
In July, the lessee, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company, filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission application Jointly with the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company for necessary authority to permit it and the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company to enter into a Joint facility agreement for Joint operation of the lessee*s Hills Park Yard in Atlanta. This Commission carefully reviewed the application and concluded that from an operational and service standpoint there could be no reasonable objection to the proposed agreement insofar as concerned the Western & Atlantic Railroad property. There was question raised as to whether or not agreement would be equivalent to a sub--lease requiring the prior approval of the Governor, but the Commission was advised by the Attorney General's office that the agreement was such as not to require that approval. The proposed Joint operation was approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission in October and was Initiated on December 1*
The ftirmw] report of the lessee of the Western & Atlantic Railroad for the calendar year 1959 shows for the net expenditures charged to the accounting classification "Additions and Betterments" by classes of railroad property, the following amounts:
Improved track materials......*$64,852.71
Bridges, trestles and culverts... 37,610.13
Yard tracks and sidings.. l4,593*96
Elimination of grade crossings... 86,603-64
Communication facilities......... 11-35
Signals and interlockers... . 2,244*54
Station and office buildings..... 563*02
The above net additions reported are after deduction for value of property replaced during the year and total $117,047.10. The net capital expenditures made by the lessee for additions and improve ments to the Western & Atlantic Railroad from the beginning of the lease in 1919 through December 31, 1959, amount to $7,938,756.
Rage 65.

PARTICIPATION IH INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION CASES
As has been detailed in the last three reports of the Commis sion, the Commission has supported the application of the St* Louis-San Francisco Railway Company for authority to acquire control through stock ownership of the Central of Georgia Railway Company* As reported last year the Interstate Commerce Commission in December of 1958 issued an order denying the application and recommending penalties to be applied against the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company for its technical violation of the Interstate Commerce Act in inadvertently acquiring stock control of the Central of Georgia Railway Company without prior authority* This Commission strongly disagreed with this finding of the Interstate Commerce Commission and in January filed petition for rehearing, reargu ment reconsideration, pointing out that the Interstate Commerce Com
mission had reached an erroneous conclusion by (1) failing to consider
tile evidence of the Georgia Public Service Commission dealing with the public-interest aspects of the case armi (2) in finding that the Georgia trustee was affiliated with the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway within the Mftarrtng of Section 5(6) of the Interstate Commerce Act and that trans fer of the Central of Georgia Railway stock to him did not operate to terminate control of the Central of Georgia Railway by the St. LouisSan Francisco Railway. In spite of our efforts, however, the unfavorable order of the Interstate Commerce Commission was affirmed and our petition
denied.
The Commission expected the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway to contest in the Courts the order so obviously based on erroneous con clusion. However, not only did that railroad not contest the order but it failed to contest a criminal proceeding brought in connection with the alleged control violation and paid a fine imposed as result of that failure to resist.
The St. Louis-San Francisco Railway has concluded to comply with the conditions of the order of Interstate Commerce Commission and is now preparing necessary arrangements to transfer the trusteeship of its stock from the Georgia trustee to the Hanover Bank in New York. Public hearing will be necessary for Interstate Commerce Commission ap proval of any new trust arrangement and this Commission intends to oppose the trusteeing of the stock in an out-of-State trustee.
As briefly reviewed in the last report the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company last year filed application with the Interstate Commerce Commission for authority to abandon ^9*09 miles of its Thomasville Branch extending from a point near Kingwood, Georgia, northwardly to Fitzgerald, Georgia. In consideration of protests received from interested parties in the area this Commission intervened in the proceed ing with request that public hearing be held at a point located on the line proposed to be discontinued. Later last year, and before any public hearing was held, the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad requested that its appli cation be held in abeyance pending adjustment of a rate feature affected by the application, and such delay was permitted. This year the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad reactivated its application and public hearing was held before an Examiner of the Interstate Commerce Commission at Albany, Georgia on June 18. Prior to the hearing the principal protestant (a fertilizer manufacturer located at Omega) withdrew his objection and Just prior to
Page 66.

the hearing similar withdrawal was made by the Chamber of Commerce of Fitzgerald. This left still actively protesting against the abandonment only the City of Norman Park. The Commission's representative assisted the City of Norman Park in making its presentation at the hearing and acted, in effect, as attorney for that city. The Interstate Commerce
Commission by order dated August 28 held that the public convenience and
necessity did not require continuation of service on this line and author ized the abandonment sought.
In September the Commission received a copy of application filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission by the Central of Georgia Railway Company and the Savannah & Atlanta Railway Company seeking author ity to abandon certain tracks in Chatham, Effingham, Burke and Screven Comities. In consideration of a number of protests received from interested parties in the affected area, this Commission intervened in the proceeding in opposition to the application on behalf of the citizens of Georgia who would be adversely affected by the proposed abandonment. Public hearing was requested at Augusta, Georgia. At the end of the year no hearing date had as yet been set by the Interstate Commerce Commission.
On October 22 Seatrain Lines, Inc., (a coastwise water carrier transporting freight on ships in railroad box cars) gave written notice to the Georgia Ports Authority (whose facilities Seatrain Lines utilizes at Savannah) that it was cancelling its lease for those facilities and terminating its service to and from Savannah effective October $U
As reason for this abrupt withdrawal of service Seatrain Lines cited the fact that its railroad competitors had just recently reduced the all-rail rates on pulpboard from St. Marys and Port Wentworth to des tinations in the East without making corresponding reductions in the port rates applicable on joint rail-Seatrain-rail movements of the same commo dity between the same origins and destinations. The pulpboard traffic constituted a large portion of Seatrain*s traffic through the Port of Savannah and that line contended that the loss of the revenues from that traffic would make its Savannah operations so unprofitable as to preclude continuation of that service.
This Commission was bombarded with protests from interested parties in Savannah, from Georgia shippers and receivers of freight utilizing the service of Seatrain and from the Georgia Ports Authority which stood to lose the $70,000 per year rental paid by Seatrain for use of the Port Authority* s dock facilities at Savannah. After determining that informal negotiations with the railroads would prove fruitless this Commission joined with the Georgia Ports Authority, the Savannah District Authority, the City of Savannah and the Savannah Chamber of Commerce in filing formal complaint with the Interstate Commerce Commission seeking adjustment of the situation and in filing petition for expedited handling of the complaint so that decision could be rendered promptly enough to prevent interruption in this only coastwise service available to the Port of Savannah. A representative of this Commission joined the Governor of the State and representatives of the other complainants in personally requesting from the Interstate Commerce Commission such expedited handling. That request for expedited handling was granted and initial hearings were held in Washington, D. C. beginning on December 15 at which time this Commission led the presentation of the complainants. Further hearing for the defendants* evidence and testimony is scheduled for early next year at Savannah.
Page 67.

This Commission joined with the National Association of Rail road and Utilities Commissioners in filing in January exceptions to the report proposed by an Interstate Commerce Commission Examiner in that Com mission* s investigation into the railroad passenger train deficit*
This proposed report in an investigation designed to find ways and means of alleviating the railroad passenger deficit was extremely pessimistic and, in effect, forecast the not distant demise of railroad passenger train service* Foremost among the many defects found in the report we criticized the failure of the Examiner to make any recommenda tion as to affirmative steps to be taken either by the Commission, the railroads, the States, or any other validly interested parties, to pre serve for the Nation* s needs the railroad passenger train services* We pointed out in this connection that the Transportation Act of 1958 hadtransferred to the Interstate Commerce Commission responsibility for the Nation* s Railroad Passenger Train Services and that the Interstate Com merce Commission would fail in its duty, if it did not fortrightly make specific recommendations, for improvements in the field to the end that the proper parties - most of whom are on the national level - could implement those recommendations and take the affirmative steps necessary to accomplish what the record showed to be acceptable means of reducing the railroad passenger train deficit. We further pointed out that the States while they had jurisdiction over these services did not hesitate to make through the Passenger Deficit Committee of the NARUC such recom mendations that the principal reason those recommendations were not effectuated was that most of the avenues for improvement are at the federal level and those at that level gave little recognition to recommendations and suggestions from the mere States but might possibly pay more attention to the recommendations of one of their own agencies* On May 18 of this year final report in this proceeding was issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission which recognized most of the exceptions we had taken to the Examiner's proposed report. With the exception of reduction of criticism of the activities of those federal agencies utilizing railroad passenger train services - specifically the Post Office Department and the Defense Department - the final report of the Interstate Commerce Commission in this investigation closely paralleled the reports made by the National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners* Passenger Deficit Committee as result of its independent studies into this problem. Most of that Committee's findings were substantiated in this final order and the specific recommendations made by the Interstate Commerce Commission so closely followed those of the State Commissions* Committee that the State Commissions could find little fault therewith. It will be interest ing to note whether or not the Federal Government recognizes and acts upon these recommendations of one of its own agencies.
In 1956 the Interstate Commerce Commission established divi sions on interterritorial rail traffic moving between Southern and Offi cial Territories based on equal factors which gave the railroads in the North and in the South an equal share of divisions on this traffic where the hauls in each territory were of the same length. The Official Terri tory railroads, not satisfied with this equal factor basis, filed petition during this year to reopen the proceeding with the request that the Inter state Commerce Commission allow the Official Territory lines additional divisions on this traffic which would result in the diversion of between $25 and $30 million dollars per year from the railroads in the South.
Page 68.

Recognizing that approval of such an application would so affect the Southern railroads as to reduce the quantity and quality of services rendered by those carriers or require further increase in rates cnri charges, this Commission joined with the other State Commissions in the South and with the Southern Governors1 Conference in objecting to the proposed reopening of this proceeding by the filing on May 29 of a formal protest* In spite of this action the Interstate Commerce Commis sion permitted the reopening of the case and set the matter down for further bearing under special procedures* It is the Intent of this Com mission to join with other interested protestants in the South in fight ing this further freight rate burden sought to be imposed upon the South with the resultant subsidy by the Southern shipper of his Northern competi tor.
There was introduced in Congress this year a measure seeking to strike from the Interstate Commerce Act the provision which permits motor carriers operating wholly within one State under an intrastate certificate of public convenience and necessity issued by that State to transport interstate commerce within the limits of its intrastate certi ficate - that provision being identified as the second proviso of Section 206 (a) (l) of the Interstate Commerce Act* Representative of this Com mission appeared before the Surface Transportation Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce in opposition to
S.2U17, the measure seeking to cancel this provision. It was pointed
out that there have been no abuses of this provision with the State of Georgia - that there were no details submitted to the Congressional Committee concerning alleged abuses and that the Interstate Commerce Commission had never advised the States of any difficulty it was experi encing in this field. We vigorously opposed the enactment of this measure and initiated appointment of a committee within the framework of the NAKUC to oppose this threatened further invasion of States* Rights. At the close of the year the measure was still pending before the Senate.
Page 69.

>c "

s re ta ' < X l" B JB
.9 V O v

tS j& 'i/Q

a ta ?

. .

`i b A i

h im

.

-,

: V . 3 a h . :. .

*: .

. r i ? a i t L f 'i a i r i #

,3 ' i ;

. . s X . .

.. ; f c t f f c ! . v

:&al 4 ra 0 ?

W & *X:

stfjbe;

aol: oqsii
lOttSH- .

-,)2 8 X V v . _ B'Xu

o 1 f
'

;'ices
'



)&M0

.

1

.

'rj,xa

;.

:.

U J

7-V

8J

3 glOS 0

tini ,-

a

i&Xttt*o0

&*/ . .

|J v..

&u5 3.s .

'

t - 1

'.V ^ C i '

UTILITY REGULATION
GENERAL

Because of the continuing growth in Georgia due to the changing economy and the attendant increased operations of Utilities, we find that the demand upon the efforts of the Commission and Technical Staff has continued to a degree that more personnel and operating funds are a vital necessity.

During the latter part of 1959. the Senate Committee on Government Operations prepared a most comprehensive report on the many regulatory problems confronting the Commission and certain recommendations were contained therein for appropriate action by the i960 General Assembly. This aforesaid report is cited hereinabove.
As of December 31, 1959 the Commission had the following number of Utilities under its jurisdiction:

Telephone

65

Electric

k

*Natural Gas

6

Telegraph

1

Transit

6

*The Commission regulates 21 municipalities who own natural gas distribution systems and serve beyond the county in which the munici pality is located.

The Commission is constantly continuing its efforts to bring about improved and expanded service of the numerous Utilities under its jurisdiction. With the additional technical staff as planned, much more and faster service can be provided the citizens of Georgia. Also, formal cases being processed can be handled more expeditiously, thus reducing the so-called regulatory time lag.

During the year the Commission held 127 formal hearings on public utility matters alone. Decisions were rendered involving rate increase applica tions, security issues and certificates of public convenience and necessity. The increase in number of utility customers resulted in a larger number of complaints received by the Commission concerning the character of service being furnished as well as high bills. All complaints were carefully investigated by the staff to insure each utility customer a fair application of utility company rules, regulations and rate tariffs. All the technical data used in analyzing the com plaints are compiled from various electric, gas and telephone precision instru ments which are the property of the state. These instruments are sent to the United States Bureau of Standards in Washington, D. C. periodically for accuracy
certification.

The chart on page 71 indicates the number of complaints processed by the Commission in recent years classified by the particular type utility. The chart on page 72 shows the increase in average number of complaints processed during the years 1952 through 1959-

Page 70.



*XCBI

\&&.
>9T[ / IO
,ate

NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS PROCESSED

N U M B E R O F C O M P L A I N T S P R O C E S S E D IN RECENT YEARS CLASSIFIED B Y M A J O R UTILITY TYPE


\cv.
oO

2100

NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS PROCESSED

2000

1900

1800

1700

1600

1500

*51

'52

'53

*54

*55

'56

5 7

'58

YEAR

TOTAL OF ALL UTILITY COMPLAINTS PROCESSED

TRAINING
The Technical Staff continued working on various National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners committees. It was reported last year that the Committee on "Procurement and Training of Commission Staff Personnel" sponsored by the National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners received its directive to proceed with the first two weeks short course training program. This short course was held at the Georgia Institute of Technology during the period July 13-25, 1959. Enrollees numbering 29 from Regulatory Commissions were registered and comfortably housed in private rooms in one of the School dormitories. Among the enrollees were Commissioners, Engineers, Accountants,
Lawyers and Staff Technicians from 16 Regulatory Agencies, including the Federal
Communications Commission and the Federal Power Commission.
The Short Course was presented in three phases:
1. Basic administrative and organisational functions. 2. Public Utility regulation. 3. Preparation and conduct of a utility rate case.
The class was divided into five groups so arranged that each group inso far as practicable was made up of a variety of talent, such as Engineers, Account ants and Lawyers. Each group selected a leader for the purpose of making up a team in order to solve the various problems given the class within the allotted time. The instructional method used in the morning sessions was through lectures with appropriate training aids* Prior to the presentation of each subject the instructor distributed a mimeographed outline for convenience in making up notes as desirable. Reading assignments were given out prior to the subject presenta tion in order that each student would be somewhat familiar with the general topic being discussed.
The highlights of the course as seen by the students were the "Public Utility Regulation" and "Preparation and Conduct of a Rate Case." Phases of this latter course were handled in an expert manner by Mr. H. L. Gerrish, former Chief Engineer of the Maine Commission, being assisted by Mr. H. J. O 'Leary, Chief of Rates and Research of the Wisconsin Commission.
In order to obtain an estimate of success and Short Course effectiveness, forms were distributed in order that constructive criticisms might be obtained and a general evaluation of the Short Course determined by school officials. At the conclusion of the course, these data were analyzed and all concerned were of the opinion that the Course was a tremendous success. However, with the general com
ments by those in attendance, a number of changes were suggested for the i960
course.
After the Commissioners Committee reported to the Philadelphia Conven
tion, it was concluded that another such Short Course should be offered in i960.
The Commissioners and the Staff Committees have been busily engaged since January in designing another Short Course which we feel will be even better and attended by a larger number of students than in 1959* The general plan and conduct of the
i960 Course will be briefly as follows:
Page 73*

The purpose of the Regulatory Commission Development Short Course is to help the working staff member obtain a more complete knowledge of the techniques and practices of Regulatory Commission duties. An intensive study of the economic background of regulation, the fundamentals of accounting, and the accounting problems peculiar to public utility rates and rate structures will receive con siderable-attention as will the effect of rising costs upon public utilities. The second week will be devoted almost entirely to the preparation and conduct of a rate case. One day will be devoted to transportation subjects which appear to have considerable interest at this time. The faculty will be made up of men with many years experience in their respective fields of endeavor and all faculty members have graduate degrees with many years of teaching experience.
TELEPHONE
There were twenty decisions issued by the Commission during 1959 regard
ing rate applications filed by certain Independent Telephone Companies and Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company. One such application requested increased rates which would have had the effect of providing some $3^,000 of annual local service revenues to the Company. Said revenues were contended by the Company to be necessary due to further REA. financing which it proposed in a contemporary loan application. Because the Commission concluded that the Company's loan re quest was not in the public interest, it was denied. Therefore, the Company's rate application was also denied. Of the other nineteen applications, seven involved requests for authority to establish increased rates for telephone ser vice due to the improvement and expansion of the telephone system of each appli cant with funds obtained from REA., Annual local service revenues from the rates
proposed in these applications amounted to a total of $315 >150 while annual local
service revenues from the rates authorized by the Commission amounted to $263,101. Each of the other twelve applications involved a request for increased rates in order that revenues would be adequate to meet known increases in the cost of rendering telephone service to subscribers. Rates requested in these applications would have provided some $2,^2,000 of increased gross revenues to the applicants. The Commission concluded that some $2,152,000 of increased gross revenues were required and rates were prescribed to produce this amount of additional gross revenues.
One of the foregoing total number of applications involved a request for increased rates by General Telephone Company of the Southeast while another involved a request for increased rates for certain of the telephone services rendered by Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company.
At the close of 1953, hearings were in progress on the application of General Telephone Company of the Southeast for authority to increase its rates for telephone service rendered to subscribers in the State of Georgia. This
matter had been designated as Docket No. 1395-U by the Commission. Hearings were reconvened in this proceeding on March 3 1959? and concluded on March 12, 1959 In its application Company requested a gross revenue increase in the amount of $423,8l6~per annum. By its order issued May 20, 1959, the Commission granted the Company a gross revenue increase in the amount of $153?868, of which amount $68,101 was deferred until certain improvements in service specified by the Com mission had been instituted. During the Course of the proceeding, extensive testimony was given by public protestants indicating deficiencies in service,
Rage

primarily in six exchanges operated by the Company. As a result thereof, the Commission deferred the authorized increase in these exchanges until such time as service had been brought up to the standard deemed reasonable by the Commission.
With respect to the evidence presented by the Company, the Commission took exception to the following primary points: (l) The test period adopted by the Company for its presentation; (2) Rate case expenses; (3) Rate base; (4) Rate of return. In its presentation the Company submitted a pro forma test period of operations being the estimated results of operations one year hence, or for the twelve months ended December 31, 1959- Under the conditions here in evidence, the Commission concluded that it would not be proper to indulge in forecasting operat ing conditions twelve months in advance for the purpose of reaching a decision as to proper and reasonable rates. It was further the opinion of the Commission that inclusion of rate case expenses in the instant proceeding were unnecessary in that the Company presentation was based primarily upon the record prepared by the Com pany in the ordinary course of business. With respect to the rate base proposed by the Company, the Commission found it more proper to consider the average net plant in service for the actual year ended December 31 1958 rather than indulge in the use of estimated future investments. With respect to rate of return, substantial evidence and testimony was presented on this subject and, after care ful consideration of the very detailed and expert testimony presented, the Com
mission determined that a rate of return of between 6.25 and 6.60$ would be fair,
reasonable and liberal under the circumstances in lieu of the 7 # rate of return requested by the Company.
On April 21, 1959, Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company filed
an application with the Commission to revise certain exchange tariffs to reflect the growth in these communities subsequent to this Commission's last general rate order for the Company in 1951, and to e:cpand the base service charge areas in certain exchanges to bring into said base area new, highly developed, surburban areas and thereby eliminate mileage charges theretofore in effect in said areas. It has been the practice of this Commission in recent rate determinations for the Company to set rates based on overall groupings of similar sized exchanges. In the interim period since the last rate order of the Commission, many of these exchanges have grown and the overall rate structures are no longer comparable between similar sized exchanges. In addition, the surburban areas of many ex changes have now become densely populated areas, physically not distinguishable from the urban area around which they have grown. The Company, therefore, pro posed to adjust these discrepancies in such manner that the net revenue effect on the Company was estimated to provide only a net increase in revenues of some
$1,200 per annum. By its order issued June 25 1959 the Commission approved the
application of the Company providing for the reclassification of fifty-six (56) exchanges and the expansion of base rate areas in thirty-nine (39) exchanges of the Company to encompass the built-in surburban areas.
The application of the Company also contemplated the establishment of additional groupings which, though not required at the present time, the Company felt would be needed in the future. The Commission denied this request as they do not feel it proper to provide rate structures for which no use would be made.
In a companion application filed the same date, the Company requested authority to increase its intrastate toll tariffs and to revise its exchange
Page 75.

rasr.i

isbxO rfc*

t

SI

.' . < w ,

ri

pi d:

KF

C

l

C

;

S'

m<

ti

v< bi
.
'fizqzs su 3-i o.vri inon, r t\, et t<

i&'ssjoo ^ i s a i t n o or

P<

*rr ;r lotftec 8QI tL id<830d r r r r * sj&gr 1&&& rd r 'to l lin S $1 dual

OX :;

S"
o;

.. '

o:

,.rj;*r.iy'i ; rirr. r :rsi> &r.ibz'e fJMaXir.

d<
o:

c



ajaxs
'Cti: sncr .2d$

<12 ItsqA aO
sifrcD di "r,.'.'i' ad:

f:
a;

hs ..X; .-I ii ;sot) :ni yr .

a: a
A

M

: -H`> . ., 'y '

w t w

Mai.'i niXInia f-c. m agjs

t B Ci

P

:

i
e

. ' - \s.ti-

.'iXr'

.-9K9 naqsio!

j u n :

tariff to establish a Metropolitan Area Rate Plan for the City of Atlanta and many surrounding communities. The Company stated in support of its requested increased rates for intrastate toll charges that recent developments in the art of tele phony now made it possible for toll operators to dial directly the call number in distant cities. This practice is now followed in a majority of the toll telephone calls placed in the state today. Other developments now in the process of instal lation also make it feasible for the subscriber himself to dial directly the called number in many cities throughout the United States. In view of the sub stantial increases in toll usages and the resultant increase in operator require ments, the institution of customer dialing will result in substantial savings to the Company and speedier service for the subscriber. However, a substantial volume of the toll traffic now placed is on a person-to-person basis. It was the belief, therefore, of the Company that in order to fully develop and realize the economies of subscriber dialing, it was necessary to revise the toll rate structure to encourage the placement of station-to-station calls and discourage the use of person-to-person calls.
In its order issued June 25, 1959, the requested revisions in the intra state toll tariffs of the Company were denied. The Commission stated that in its opinion, the Company had based its estimates of the effect of the rate revisions on inadequate experiences and judgment factors and that there was substantial doubt as to the actual affect the proposed revisions would have on the revenues of the Company. Furthermore, the evidence submitted failed to present the factual data required to undertake major revisions in the rate structure of the Company.
The proposed Atlanta Metropolitan Area Plan envisioned the increased free-call area of the Atlanta exchange from its present square mile area to approximately 1800 square miles. This would be the largest flat rate, free-calling area in the United States, larger in fact than the State of Rhode Island and nearly as large as the State of Delaware. This proposal would permit the Cities of Austell, Douglasville, Duluth, Fairbum, Fayetteville, Jonesboro, Lithonia, Marietta, Norcross, Roswell, Stockbridge, and Stone Mountain to obtain free twoway calling to the present Atlanta Area, which area now includes Chamblee, Clarkston and Smyrna. It would also provide for lateral calling between those cities where traffic study analyses indicate that such service is desirable. According
to the testimony this program would require new facilities costing some $6,800,000,
By its order issued June 25, 1959 the Commission approved the application of the
Company effective on or about October 2, i960, and provided for increased rates to
produce some $1,980,000 of additional gross revenues which revenues the Company, in its presentation of evidence showed m s required in order to make the said plan economically feasible.
During 1959, there were eighteen decisions issued by the Commission following public hearings of applications filed by Independent Telephone Companies in which applications, authority m s requested to obtain loans and issue securi ties. One such application involving a request to borrow $406,000 from the Rural Electrification Administration, also authority to issue capital stock of the value
of $^,750 m s denied since the evidence in the matter set forth that the making of
the loan and the issuance of capital stock would not be in the public interest. The remaining applicants were authorized to obtain loans and issue securities in the total amount of $10,^10,100 in order to provide capital funds to be used for the expansion and construction of telephone facilities, also for other corporate
purposes deemed proper by the Commission. Of the total amount, $2,370,000 m s

" : ' . .
OQ

authorized to he borrowed from the Rural Electrification Administration in order that residents in certain of the rural areas of Georgia would have modern dial telephone service available following the construction of facilities required to serve them. The balance authorized $8,040,100, comprised construction loans of $5t335?000 to be obtained from private sources and capital stock securities of the value of $2 ,705,100 for issuance because of various required corporate purposes.
The Staff representative of the Commission on the Special Telephone Committee of the National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners devoted considerable time to the work of this committee during the year. As stated in the report for 1958, this committee has been authorized to make a detailed study of the operating practices and pricing procedures of the Western Electric Company. While this work was anticipated to commence in 1959> the Com mittee has experienced great difficulty in obtaining personnel qualified to under take this investigation and in arranging for adequate financial resources to pro vide the type of study desired. Aside from its normal duties during the year, this committee appointed a Special Staff Subcommittee, of which the representative from this Commission was a member, to -undertake an initial review of the procedures of Western Electric Company for the purpose of preparing a broad outline of the scope of the proposed investigation and making recommendations as to personnel and financial requirements necessary to complete the study. This investigation was made at the offices of Western Electric Company in New York City and the re port of the committee rendered. At the close of the year the Special Telephone Committee was in the process of drafting final plans for the investigation. It is anticipated that this study will not be actively under way until the latter part of i960 or early 1961 due to the difficulty being experienced in obtaining qualified personnel and the necessity of making final financial arrangements. As it is envisioned that the cost of this investigation may well run to $500,000, complete financial arrangements are absolutely necessary prior to initiating work on the project.
During 1959 the Special Telephone Committee of the Southeastern Associa tion of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners completed its study of the depreci ation rates currently in use by Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company. Lengthy discussions were held with representatives of the Federal Communications Commission to effect the revision of the depreciation practices of the Company. While complete accord was not reached between the states and the Federal agency, we feel that some progress has been made. Additional studies are being undertaken, particularly in the fields of central office equipment and station accounting, and it is anticipated that upon completion of this work that reductions in the depreciation charges of the Company in these areas will be effectuated.
As a matter of Interest, the number of telephone companies operating in Georgia is shown with the respective growth in stations for each one in 1959 as compared to 1958 The remarkable station growth indicated has been the result of availability of capital funds required for modernization and expansion as well as the improved economic additions in the state during the period involved. By the end of i960, it is expected that practically all of the independent companies will have converted the few remaining manual exchanges to automatic dial operation, thus making for the maximum in telephone communication efficiency.
Page 77*

PROGRESS OF TELEPHONE COMPANIES IN GEORGIA

INDEPENDENT COMPANIES
Alma Telephone Co., Inc.
Atlas Utilities Company Blue Ridge Telephone Co. Brantley Telephone Co., Inc. Broomtown Telephone Co. Broxton Telephone Co. Bulloch Co. Rural Tel. Co-op., Inc. Byron Telephone Company, Inc. Cairo Telephone Co. Camden Tel. & Tel. Co., Inc. Canton Telephone Co. Chatsworth Telephone Co. Cherokee Telephone Co., Inc. Chickamauga Telephone Corp. Citizens Telephone Co., Inc. Coastal Telephone Co.
Coastal Utilities, Inc. Comer Telephone Co. Commerce Telephone Co. Consolidated Telephone Co., Inc. Dalton Telephone Co. Darien Telephone Co., Inc. Dixie Telephone Co. Douglas Telephone Co. Ellijay Telephone Co. Fairmount Telephone Co., Inc. General Tel. Co. of the Southeast Georgia Telephone Corp. Glenwood Telephone Co., Inc. Gold Leaf Telephone Co. Gray-Haddock Tel. Co., Inc. Hart County Telephone Co. Hawkinsvilie Telephone Co. Homerville Telephone Co., Inc. Interstate Telephone Co. Jeffersonville Telephone Co. Loco Telephone Co. Milledgeville Telephone Co.
Mutual Telephone Co., Inc. Nelson-Ball Ground Tel. Co., Inc. Pembroke Telephone Co., Inc. Pinehurst Telephone Co.
Pineland Telephone Co-op., Inc. Plant Tel. & Power Co., Inc.

No. Tel.

1958

1959

Ili

IOT

32

33

648

644

503

551

56

56

191

19*1-

922

1009

it86

508

2I5I

2305

119^

1363

3^

37^2

622

6*1-0

653

709

1273

1568

466

666

173

(part of

Coastal Utilities)

1191

1492

1678

2077

3593
7283

4o6l
6051

7105 589
1417

8153
644
1631

28*1-5
919
321

2931 1182 332

28,902
1*1-96

35,337 l6*i-0

199

211

--

1918

909

1037

15^9

1781

1326

1503

795

891

5221

5781

471

536

49

49

359^ (Part of General

Tel. System)

2252

2356

956

922

385

4o6

119 (Part of Plant

Tel. & Power Co.)

2680

3006

1830

2142

Page ?3.

Planters Rural Tel. Co-op., Inc. Progressive Rural Tel. Co-op., Inc. Public Service Telephone Co. Quincy Telephone Company Ringgold Telephone Co. Seminole Telephone Co., Inc. Sikes Telephone Co., Inc. South Georgia Tel. Co., Inc. Standard Telephone Co. Statesboro Telephone Co. Summerville*Telephone Co. Thomaston Telephone Co., Inc. Trenton Telephone Co. Trion Telephone Co. Union Point Telephone Co., Inc. United Tel. & Tel. Co. The Utelwico, Inc. Vienna Telephone Co., Inc. Walker County Telephone Co. Waverly Hall Telephone Co. Wayne Telephone Co., Inc. Western Carolina Tel. Co. Wilkes Tel. & Electric Co. Wilkinson County Tel, Co., Inc.
Total Independent Companies No. Magneto Exchanges No. Common Battery Exchanges No. Dial Exchanges
Total No. Exchanges
No. Magneto Telephones No. Common Battery Telephones No. Dial Telephones
Total Telephones
Per Cent Dial Telephones 1959 Per Cent Gain in 1959
Telephone Plant in Service

No. Tel.

1958

1959

106

W

738

91b

1671 159

1792
166

915

1077

879

1010

820

1208

2205

2467

5101

5686

3183

3498

2008

2207

5176

428

772

911

658

670

8l6

922

2

2

482 706
2108
199 507 915
2600

490
675
2299
209
541
1038
2784

854

894

62

60

4

+H

14

10

192

204

210

214

1122
14224
112736

7081
134056

128082

141137

88.02
10.19

$36,336,382 $42,097,491

Page 79

....

XpfM

.
0 ;t

'

'

.

COT


OS

'dtp.

r^m

Xd1 " rzu
.

*IJ30*2S
o X X l^ t )7 y X

-


.I 3

qJ5
.oO

:T' a J

\ r-

der

m

oD

laSTH/S
tsqfrt

'.

, I 9 T . A II* T ; : i f i il CK wX tU 9f

>0. suotqaXT. sunoXV-

P ^Jm/oO *i )iiXW

Listi

If

>5? MTU

'v:,` .;

: '-.! ? A .1T 391XXW

Xa \;\,: cEfoO uouXj&XtW

r.:. :\6J\,
7-r"S9$.S.

oS
Xjsfft .

SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY

col
1

1?59

No. Common Battery Exchanges No. Dial Exchanges

15

12

H8

129

Total Exchanges
No. Common Battery Telephones No. Dial Telephones
Total Telephones

133
^2,190
865,008
907,198

ikx
34,129
966,620
1 ,000,749

Per Cent Gain 1959 Per Cent Dial Telephone 1959

10.3 96.6

Telephone Plant in Service

$31^,799,738 $336,585,280

TOTAL TELEPHONES IN GEORGIA AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1959

Independent Companies Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

lto.,137 1,000,7^9

TOTAL

1,1*1-1,386

Page 80.


4 ..
# f tOG
;i

X ssH/M 'wmoO .oH ' rxomiro' -
(?<QI nJ:O tsO -xp*!-

TELEPHONE CERTIFICATES ISSUED IN 1939
EXCHANGE CERTIFICATES TYPE OF ORDER

Name of Utility

Date of Docket AmendOrder Number ment

Dixie Tel. Co.
it it

Jan. 7 1404-0 X
Jan. 7 1403-0
Jan. 7 i4oi-U X

Jan. 7 1400-U X

Jan. 7 1399-0

Jan. 7 1398-0

Cherokee Tel. Co.Inc. Jan. 7 1314-0

"

" "

" "

"
11

Jan. Jan.

77 11331123--0U

X

" " * Jan. 7 1311-0 X

* M " Jan. 7 1310-0

Sou.Bell Tel & Tel Co.Jan. l4 1415-0 X

Hawkinsville Tel. Co. Jan. 21 1412-0 X

Pinehurst Tel. Co. Jan. 29 1416-0

X

11 1422-0

11 1423-0 X

Vienna Tel. Co.,Inc. Mar. 19 1425-0 Sou.Bell Tel & Tel Co.Apr. 8 1436-O X
22 1437-0 X

Quincy Tel. Co. Dixie Tel. Co.
ii

23 1427-0
May 5 1435-0 X May 5 1434-0 X May 5 1433-0 X May 5 1U3I-U

May 5 1*62-~U

Georgia Tel.Corp. May 5 11&0-U

May 5 lUt-U

5 ittuu

So11u.Beitll 11 it

Te11l


&

Tel tt tt

Co.May 13 May 27
July l6

1445-0 1448-0 1454-0

X X X

Trenton Tel. Co.

July 16 1449-0 X

Sou.Bell Tel & Tel Co.July 16 1453-U X ti ti tt t* Sept 15 1476-0 X

Il II H tt Sept 15 1473-0 X

Il II tt II Sept 15 1472-0 X

Il II tt tt Sept 15 1471-0 X

Nelson-Ball Ground

11

Tel. Co.

11 11 11

Sept 15 1461-0 Sept 15 1462-0 Sept 15 1466-0

X

Walker Cty. Tel. Co. Sept 15 14T5-U X

Standard Tel. Co. Sept 15 1470-0 X

u



Oct. 9 1486-0 X

Acquisition
X
X X
X X
X
X
X X X X X

New Exchange.
X

Page 8l

TOLL CERTIFICATES
X X
X

EXCHANGE CERTIFICATES TYPE OF ORDER

Name of Utility

Date of Docket Amend* Acqui New ExOrder Number ment sition change

Sou*Bell Tel & Tel Co*Oct 22 11*88*11 X

Darien Tel Co.,Inc. Nov 13 It3-U X

tl

It

tt

t!

Nov 13 lUit-u X

Nov 13 1485-U

Plant Tel & Power Co. Nov 2k lltgU- Standard Tel* Co* Nov 2k 1322- X

Nov 25 3A98-U X Nov 25 IU99-U X Nov 25 1500-U X

Dixie Tel* Co*

Nov 25 1^93-U X

Gen.Tel.Co* of the SE Nov 25 X206-U X

It

It

tt

n Nov 25 1209*U X

tt

tt

It

tt

Nov 25 1210-U X

tl

tt

tt

tt

Nov 25 I2I3--U X

tt

tl

tt

tt

tt

tt

tt

tt

tt

tt
it u

Nov 25 1212-U Nov 25 12llf-U Nov 25 I2I5-U

X X X

tt

II

11

tt

Nov 25 I216-U X

tt

tt

tt

tt

Nov 25 I217-U X

tt

it

tl

tt

Nov 25 1218-U X

tt

tt

tt

tt

Nov 25 I226-U X

tl

It

tt

tt

Nov 25 I229-U X

tt

It

tl

it

Nov 25 123^U X

Quincy Tel* Co.

Dec 17 ll*27-U X

Dixie Tel* Co.

tt

it

tt

Dec 17 1401-U X
Dec 17 ll*00-U X

TOLL CERTIFICATES
X

BiTAOll'.: '

OTADItlT^O X X) fr.



.i;,-" ;

PP ; *4**-

Xa11 a.

. P ` * V "

r t i :

FI . .

.X s ^ . / : '


-, V . X :
M

TEIEGRAHi
There was no major rate case application filed in 1959 'by the only tele graph utility regulated by the Commission in Georgia. Only minor tariff revisions pertaining to rules and regulations were filed and these were accepted subject to complaint and further order.
As a matter of interest, Western Union during the past year, continued to emphasize research and development, engineering and merchandising activities to promote improved service and sound expansion* The present network of transmission
facilities, modernized and highly mechanized, is built around 15 strategically-
located message centers. Each center serves an area of from one to six states and messages flash through these centers to destination in minutes without manual retransmission at any point. This high speed system has substituted electronic for manual transmission of telegrams, thus doubling its message capacity and greatly increasing its efficiency. Prior to mechanization, messages were trans mitted through a succession of relay centers. Telegrams were handled formerly by several employees at each relay point. Not less than five people, and as many as
15, once were involved in the transmission process from origin to destination.
Now through mechanization, these time-consuming and costly methods have been eliminated. Presently, only three persons are involved in the transmission proces sing from origin to destination: One to type the message in tape form for auto matic transmission; one at message center, simply to push button; one at destina tion to receive the message.
The following are typical examples of progress made in the telegraph utility field during the past five years:
20, COO Desk-Fax machines in service and an additional 23,000 business offices equipped with Western Union
teleprinter machines making a total of ^3,000 direct
connections with telegraph centers. The 20,000 DeskFax machines installed since 19^8 compared with less
than 5 >000 teleprinters installed for the same pur
pose in the preceding six-year period.
First nationwide private wire system, designed exclusively for automatic transmission of control data, installed for Sylvania Electric Products, Inc.
Capacity of microwave beam system doubled through development of improved equipment by Western Union research engineers.
Revenues of $252,502,758 pass quarter-billion mark first time in Western Union history.
World's fastest private wire system installed.
First private wire system designed for data proces sing in trucking industry placed in service.
Longest Intrafax circuit inaugurated for U. S. Strategic Air Command.
Page 83.

More than 3,000,000 miles of ''carrier" circuits in operation. Installation begun on 12,000-mile nationwide fac simile weather map network for U. S. Air Force, to he largest network of its kind In world. 55,500 direct tieline connections now serving tele graph users. This includes 36>000 Desk-Fax machines and 19,500 teleprinters.
Orders received from U. S. Air Force to install new, automatic, high-speed communication centers at five overseas bases.
Candygram service inaugurated.
Nationwide Strategic Facsimile Network for U. S. Air Force, largest high-speed facsimile ever installed by Western Union, placed in service in May. The system links 57 weather stations at Air Force bases coast to coast.
Page Qb,



`t o f . l l - a O Q G ^ O : X \ r . :::,.r s r i o M

- ;::/ r*3qo

TOl-'liSit 6.1,J: V'1 10 i.i~'y:> <3 Jtoi
.hM'y-t al ix:'> Osti Ix. : tgt&T eo

oro'ixov,< ; oo,o.v.-l'! oo M 00=<?c : ' bu lo i : . ':a ;.yjXo , OC* \ ban

J'3l'lX Ot 9M01

,*"f*J

'f - i-tJEOBEtOO .

Viooot ste^tO '1 7 y . sat sro

J V .... c)

..... '>*x&&

.. . :.
iaX 1 ' fca armi :,v-
. ;.-s

ELECTRIC
In its order issued December 3, 1956 the Commission granted Georgia Power Company authority to purchase all of the assets* properties, and business of Georgia Power and Light Company. Georgia Power and Light Company, the wholly owned subsidiary of Florida Power Corporation, was rendering service in some twenty-two (22) counties in South Georgia, generally located across the entire width of the south portion of the state. Purchase of these properties was con summated effective March 1, 1957* The primary consideration in pemitting this purchase was to effect substantial economies in operation and thereby permit re ductions in the rates charged for electric service throughout this area. This order of the Commission specified that Georgia Power Company would be permitted three years in which to effect the economies contemplated at the end of which period the Company was to file for application in this area its Uniform Rate Schedules effective throughout the rest of the state. In order to properly pre pare the customers in the area for this rate reduction, on November 23, 1959* Georgia Power Company filed an application with the Commission requesting authority to file the rate reductions as required by the Commission's order of December 3* 1956. It is estimated that the revised rates will amount to an overall reduction
of approximately $2,000,000 per annum, or slightly more than 20$ from the rates
now in effect. By its order issued November 2^, 1959* the Commission approved the
application of the Company to become effective on March 1, i960. It also specified
that on said date the Uniform Rate Schedules and General Rules and Regulations for Electric Service of Georgia Power Company presently in effect throughout the re mainder of the State would thereafter become effective in this area.
This action will culminate a twenty-year effort on the part of this Commission to obtain reasonable rates for electric service in this area. The rates in effect in the past have been a substantial deterrent to industrial development in South Georgia, and it is hoped that these substantial rate reductions will be a major inducement to the future economic growth throughout South Georgia.
The following 12 months tabulations indicate the resultant savings of typical residential, general service and industrial customers when the Georgia
Power Company irates become applicable on March 1, 196O;
Page 85.

. "'' tr,.



' 3W*

teisfctunco

sriT .n*;I -, 1



&Sl

cftttSSXS 'ff; I grzad

^0 terit' SfcTts-

Brf' .

: sdt.aJrii Ob

Ihme

' >' *I

f'-Sf .

; 1

ta g

'

s i saotaxis .s rit . m m

f: Xvte: i qq# m BeSl"! scvqmoD xenroH slgoosD

`l d M 2 0 3 *O 7 9 & 0 B 1JO C B B ImoO Sjdfc
ciOxJ-tijho's X-jLartavo ixticxs lib*? egtf,rx b b/st on\l tedri Jat&inJtta narici sicaa v lrig jlB lo flBIiBI',:-isq \

f is ic i sa-3 5n 'S tri

,0c^ ',1 rions?-! no vritorrirl mosti ot ^aajraD) arit.'l'c s s jjH I b i 9090 Isos a s rrimarioB sriR griffi. it! sii:).'a

teoM cps abalas

#OA

Sri

Affi

Xs rtol estarr sldsroaasr iatcfo .: nolasxs tfacws a oastf svari taaq orft al toSTts a. . . Xti*8 a
-'. :X r .'rie?' oS ta:- ' ;' iXv -'

m is

foui* .

Oi ,1 ricrcaM no aids ollqq: ei$sri astai \ncqraoO'swof

TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER SHOWING COMPARISON OF PRESENT AND PROPOSED RATES

KWH
228 186
166
190
166
210
19k 186
23k
178 31*0
272
Total 2,550

PRESENT NET BILL RATE D-l
$ 7.68
6.82
6.A1 6.90 6A 1
7.31 6.98
6.82
7.81 6.65
9.50
B.kB
$8 7.77

Average Cost per KWH

3 .1^

Average Monthly Consumption

Per Cent Reduction

PROPOSED NET BILL RATE A-10
$ 6.13 5.5^ 5.12
5.62
5.12 5.93 5.71 5.5^ 6.19 5.37 7.31
6.59
$70.17
2.75(5
212 KWH
20

REDUCTION
$ x.55
1 .2 8
1.29
1 .2 8
1.29 1.38 1.27
1 .2 8
1.62 1.28 2.19 1.89
$17.60

Note: jfo Sales Tax included - Fuel Adjustment of 30^ per 1000 KWH Included on Rate A-10. Rate A-10 effective March 1, i960.

Page 86.

TYPICAL WATER HEATING CUSTOMER SHOWING COMPARISON OP PRESENT AND PROPOSED RATES

KWH
132
96
106 100 80 106
6k
112 98
68 96 128
Total 1,186

PRESENT NET BILL RATE H-l
$ 2.58 2.58 2.58 2.58 2.58
2.58 2.58
2.58
2.58 2.58
2.58
2.58
$ 30.96

Average Cost per KWH

2.610

Average Monthly Consumption

Per Cent Reduction

PROPOSED NET BILL RATE WH-3
$ 1.71
1*33 1.43 1*37
1.15
1.43 1.05 19 1*35 1.05 1*33 1.67
$16.36
1.3S4
99 KWH
47.2

REDUCTION
$ 0.87 1.25 1.15
1.21
Hk3
1*15 1*53
1.09 1.23
1*53
1.25
.91
$ i 4. 6o

Note: jfo Sales Tax included - Fuel Adjustment
of 300 per 1000 KWH on Rate WH-3.
Rate WH-3 effective on March 1, i960 for "Unrestrictive Service". Minimum Charge: $1.03 per month * - Minimum Charge of $2.58 per month - 200 KWH per month <!$1.250 per KWH costs $2.50 for "Off Peak" Water Heating Service. Rate WH-3 effective March 1, i960.

Page 8 7 .

, .

TYPICAL SMALL GENERAL SERVICE CUSTOMER SHOWING COMPARISON OF PRESENT AND PROPOSED RATES

KWH
1216
1100 1010
954 966 978 1106
llkO
1160 1128 1160 1118
Total 13,036

PRESENT NET BILL RATE C-l
$ 59.62
55.67 52.61
i}.9.90 50.52 51* Ik 55.88 57.03 57.71
56.62
57.71
56.28
$660.69

PROPOSED NET BILL RATE B-10
$ 37-87 36.65 35.69 34.03 34.14 3k. 8k
36.71
37.07 37.29
36.95
37.29 36.84
$435.37

Average Cost per KWH 5.068^

Average Monthly Consumption 1086 KWH

Per Cent Reduction

3k. 1

3.34^

REDUCTION
$ 21.75 19.02 16.92
1 5 .8 7 16.38 16.30
19.17
19.96
20. k2 19.67 20. k2 19.44
$225.32

Note: 3$ Sales Tax included - Fuel Adjustment of 30$ per 1000 KWH included on Rate B-10 and maximum demand of 5 KW assumed. Rate B-10 effective March 1, i960

Page 88.

ir g
.

disi;

COMPARISON OP PRESENT AND PROPOSED RATES FOR INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER

KVA Demand
3,900 3,900 4,080 4,020 4,020 4,020
3,960
4,0^) 4,l4o
3,960
3,900 3,81(0
Total 47,820

KW Demand
3,5^1 3,k79 3,M9
3,602
3,5k2 3,602 3,600 3,721 3,51(0
3,600
3,5kl 3,k87
42,674

P.F .$
90.8 89.2 8 3 .8
89.6 88.1
89.6 90.9 91.2 85.5
90.O
90.8
90.6

KWH Consumption
1,914,000 2,046,000 1,932,000 1 ,716,000 1,614,000 1,782,000 1 ,860,000 1,782,000 1,632,000 1,524,000
846,000 1,596,000
20,244,000

Present Net Bill Excluding Sales Tax
$22,781.40 24,038.60 22,862.00 20,870.00 19,812.20 21,523.40 22,294.00 2 1 ,6 18 .6 0 19,988.80 18,967*60 1 2 ,208.20 19,590.00
$246,554.80

Proposed Net Bill Excluding Sales Tax
$1 5 ,559.00 16,351.00 15,829.00 14,479.00 13,850.86 14,857.18 15,289.00 14,929.00 14,083.00 1 3 ,257.76 9,134.08 1 3 ,533.16
$171,152.04

Total bills less Fuel Adjustment

$167,603.20 $167,305.68

Total Fuel Adjustment Charges on Georgia Power Co. Rate $3,846.36

Total Fuel Adjustment Charges on Ga. Power 8sLight Co. Rate

$78,951.60

Georgia Power and Light Company charges - 44.05$ higher than Georgia Power Co.

Hours Use of Demand - 423

Average Cost/KWH

Georgia Power Co.
.845^

Georgia Power 8s Light Co. 1.217$$

Page 89.

L`
oo*


' 'MDi'



A

On January 7, 1959, Georgia Power Company was authorized to issue and sell $18,000,000 principal amount of its First Mortgage Bonds, Series due 1989 also 75,000 shares of its Common Stock. Said bonds were ordered to be sold to responsible purchasers at competitive bidding at not less than 99$ their principal amount plus accrued interest to date of delivery, and to bear interest at such rate as will result in the lowest annual cost of money to Georgia Power Company. It was further ordered that the said Common Stock be sold to the Southern Company for a cash consideration of $7,500,000. Proceeds from the sale of the above securities were ordered to be used for the construction and completion of power plants, the completion of extensions and improvements to the Company's elec tric facilities, or to reimburse the Company's treasury for expenditures for such purposes.
On December 3, 1959 Georgia Power Company was authorized to issue and
sell $12,000,000 principal amount of its First Mortgage Bonds, Series due 1990, also 100,000 shares of its Common Stock. Said bonds were ordered to be sold to responsible purchasers at competitive bidding at not less than 99$ of the princi
pal amount thereof, plus accrued interest to date of delivery, and to bear interest at such rate as will result in the lowest annual cost of money to Georgia Power Company. It was further ordered that the said Common Stock be sold to the Southern
Company for a cash consideration of $10,000,000. Proceeds from the sale of the
above securities were ordered to be used for the construction and completion of power plants, the completion, extension, and improvement of the Company's electric facilities, for the improvement or maintenance of its service, for the purchase of
up to $8,000,000 securities of Southern Electric Generating Company or to reimburse
the Company's treasury for expenditures for such purposes.
TRANSIT
Transit companies in certain of the major cities of Georgia experienced a further decline in the number of passengers carried during 1959, also experienced were increased wage rates. As a result, applications for fare increases were filed by three such companies.
On April 23, 1959, the Atlanta Transit System, Inc. and Metropolitan Transit System, Inc. were authorized to institute a token fare at the rate of four tokens for $.70 and six tokens for $1.05 including the 3$ Georgia Sales Tax, or any multiple thereof. The increased fare applicable to both Systems was ordered made effective with the first operating schedule on April 2k, 1959
On December 1, 1959, Columbus Transportation Company was authorized to
establish a cash fare of 15^, a token fare of four for $.50, also a school token
fare of 10 for $1.00. Said fares were ordered made effective at 12:01 A. M. on December 5, 1959*
On June 2k, 1959, Atlanta Transit System, Inc. was authorized to issue a note payable for the acquisition of 21 General Motors Diesel buses. Said note to
be in the principal amount of $398,800 bearing interest at the rate of 5$ per annum
on the unpaid balance thereof, with both interest and principal payable on the last day of March, June, September and December of each year beginning September 30, 1959*
Page 90.

i

h s ocf b s ra fn tc !

. t? ***. lio. ' . 'UJl

j
ttfisosG :

)tj li

&o ' [ b ss ' dins

: -*<is

The following orders were issued by the Commission during 1959 regarding major matters affecting Telephone, Electric, Gas and Transit Utilities in Georgia:

RATE MATTERS

TELEPHONE
Name of Utility
Ringgold Telephone Company Dixie Telephone Company Cherokee Telephone Company, Inc. Cherokee Telephone Company, Inc. Fairmount Telephone Company, Inc. Dixie Telephone Company Georgia Telephone Corporation General Telephone Company of the Southeast Wilkinson County Telephone Co., Inc. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co. General Telephone Company of the Southeast Trenton Telephone Company Ellijay Telephone Company Ellijay Telephone Company General Telephone Company of the Southeast Nelson-Ball Ground Telephone Company General Telephone Company of the Southeast Darien Telephone Company, Inc. Plant Telephone and Power Company, Inc.

Date of
Order
1/7/59 1/7/59 1/7/59 1/7/59 3/11/59 5/5/59 5/5/59 5/20/59
6 /2k/59
6/25/59 6/25/59 7/6/59 7/16/59 7/16/59 9/15/59 9/15/59 10/9/59 10/22/59 11/10/59 11/2^/59

Docket Number
I385-U lto 6-u 1U08-U 1371-u 1S18-U
1J-29-U llM-U
1395-U llj-52-U 1&7-U 11j46-U
1395-u 1^51-u ll+50-u 1^50-u 1395-u li^lf-U 1395-u ll+82-u
1^97-U

Georgia Power Company Georgia Power Company

ELECTRIC

11/2^/59 12/22/59

IO89-U IO89-U

GAS
Atlanta Gas Light Company Chattanooga Gas Company Gas Light Company of Columbus United Cities Gas Company Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company Gas Light Company of Columbus

11/2/59 11/10/59 11/13/59 12/3/59 12/17/59 12/22/59

1^8o- u/1501- u None
lil-78-U
I525-U
1^77-U Ik78-U

TRANSIT

Atlanta Transit System, Inc. Metropolitan Transit System, Inc. Columbus Transportation Company

U/23/59
k2^/59
12/1/59

1^39-U 6-70 1502-U

Page 91



- '

...

8
.
j|||

LOAN AND SECURITY MATTERS

Name of Utility

TELEPHONE

Date of `Order

Dixie Telephone Company Cherokee Telephone Company, Inc. Gray-Haddock Telephone Company, Inc. General Telephone Company of the Southeast Fairmount Telephone Company, Inc. Vienna Telephone Company, Inc. Dixie Telephone Company Georgia Telephone Corporation Western Carolina Telephone Company Consolidated Telephone Company, Inc. Dalton Telephone Company Summerville Telephone Company Chatsworth Telephone Company Douglas Telephone Company Walker County Telephone Company Nelson-Ball Ground Telephone Company Darien Telephone Company Cairo Telephone Company

1/7/59 1/7/59 1/21/59 2/20/59 3/11/59 3/19/59 5/5/59 5/5/59 5/20/59 3/6/59 8/6/59 8/6/59 8/6/59 8/6/59 8/27/59 10/9/59 11/10/59 12/29/59

ELECTRIC

Georgia Power Company Georgia Power Company Georgia Power Company

1/7/59 11/2^/59 12/3/59

GAS

South Atlantic Gas Company United Cities Gas Company Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company United Cities Gas Company

8/6/59 11/10/59 12/17/59 12/22/59

TRANSIT

Atlanta Transit System, Inc.

6/2^/59

OTHER MATTERS

Consolidated Telephone Company, Inc.

-

9/30/59

Rule Nisi:

Inadequate telephone service rendered to Hawthorne School of Aeronautics.

Page 92-

Docket Number
1*07-U Ito2-U
None
20-U 19-U
IteMJ
28-U
1&3-U None
1^56-U 57-U 58-U 1U59-XJ 60-u 69-U 63-U 81-U
None
17*11
1089-u
iJpUu
5 5 -u 8 9 -u 115^-u 90-u
None
9 2 -

GAS
As set forth in our report covering the year 1958, as a part of the settlement agreement of the rate increase of Southern Natural Gas Company con cluded in April of that year, Southern Natural had agreed to increase its system capacity by approximately one-third bringing its overall jurisdictional capacity up to a designed deliverability of 1,365,000 MCF per day of which amount approxi mately 60$ is deliverable in the State of Georgia. An integral condition in the settlement proceedings was the agreement of the distributors to permit Southern Natural to file an additional increase in rates of sufficient amount to meet the carrying charges associated with the expanded system. On April 15, 1959> Southern Natural Gas Company filed said rate increase to become effective as of June 1, 1959*
The overall increase was in the amount of $10,135,^35 of which $5,895,W>, or 58*2$,
was directly applicable to the State of Georgia. In addition, the increase appli cable to South Georgia Natural Gas Company, which pipeline company delivers most of its gas to the State of Georgia, was $291,721, bringing the total increase to Georgia to something over $6,000,000, or approximately 60$. This increase was designated Docket No. G-18512 by the Federal Power Commission. This Commission intervened in said proceeding and requested that these increased rates and charges be suspended, as provided by law, for the full statutory five-month period. By order issued May 15, 1959, the Federal Power Commission suspended the increased rates requested by Southern until November 1, 1959 at which time the increase went into effect as filed upon petition by Southern, subject to refund upon final de termination of the just and lawful rate by the Federal Power Commission.
As a direct result of this increased rate filing by Southern Natural, South Georgia Natural Gas Company filed for increased rates to its jurisdictional
customers in the amount of $187,683. This filing was made under date of April 23, 1959, to become effective June 1, 1959, and was designated Docket No. G-I8626 by
the Federal Power Commission. This Commission intervened in said proceeding and requested that the increased rates be suspended in a manner commensurate with that of Southern Natural Gas Company. By order issued May 27, 1959, the Federal Power Commission suspended the effective date of said rate increase to November 1, 1959, at which time the increased rates became effective, subject to refund upon final determination by the Federal Power Commission.
Before these rate increases could be assigned for hearing, on November 25, 1959, Southern Natural Gas Company filed for a further increase in its rates to
become effective January 1, i960. This matter was designated as Docket No. G-20509
by the Federal Power Commission, and proposed systemwide increased revenues of $7,756,563* This Commission also intervened in this proceeding and requested that the increased rates be suspended for the full statutory period. On December 2b, 1959
the Federal Power Commission suspended said rate increase until June 1, i960 and scheduled hearings to commence in said proceeding on January 26, i960.
Under date of December 1, 1959, South Georgia Natural Gas Company again filed increased rates in the amount of $109,3^0 by reason of the action of Southern Natural Gas Company. This matter was designated Docket No. G-20512 by the Federal Power Commission. This Commission intervened in said proceeding and by order issued December 31, 1959, the Federal Power Commission likewise suspended the effective
date of said increase until June 1, i960. While this is the third increase filed
by South Georgia Natural Gas Company and placed in effect under bond subject to refund, the Federal Power Commission had not scheduled hearings in any of said pro ceedings at the close of the year.
Page 93*

$ajs$ al ;'Q.g}/f.'V- -f
00/'' 90

cvo 9$; ''gii^al'x j

j o - ,;` ad* l o d o se , - , : ' -o-v asrrl&SOiGr Ysis&^a

3&Y

v * 65

SK'JB'Y

&jfcC

"MM# O.:'

$$&d

.
j
"1*X

-i:.u ;-
O' .k fk !bJs'ios dd'uoC 'j ni
/n-- i'C.Tatypst

38B

ar '

.

.


HOJ JbjuJSS ) 0

rI :;:1M 'UB M SWIS 'I$aMlIfMBP0**t0& -

(JX

j&flCX taf

v'.'ViS flj &jXT8,d ..c

5 . , bifid XfifiilBB ^0 *IWO^

On May 18, 1959* Trancontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation filed for increased rates in the amount of $15,133*700,, to become effective June 18, 1959 Of this amount $508,173 was applicable to the State of Georgia. This matter was
designated Docket No. G-I8783 by the Federal Power Commission. This Commission
also intervened in this proceeding and requested that the increased rates be sus pended for the full statutory period. By order issued June 17* 1959* the Federal Power Commission suspended the effective date of said rate increase to November 18*
1959* at which time said rates went into effect subject to refund upon final de
termination of the reasonableness thereof by the Federal Power Commission. Thus, at the close of 1959 there were six active pipeline rate increases
filed before the Federal Power Commission increasing the rates of natural gas to the customers of Georgia in the overall amount of $10,978,966 per annum. The overall effect of these increases is summarized on the following page:
Page 9k.

;aoO *3

Private Companies
Atlanta Gas Light CompanyGas Light Company of Columbus South Atlantic Gas Company Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company United Cities Gas Company
Total Private Companies

ANNUAL INCREASE TO STATE OF GEORGIA OF NATURAL GAS

PIPE LINE RATE INCREASES IN EFFECT SUBJECT TO

_________ REFUND AT DECEMBER 31 1959__________

Transcontinental Gas

Southern Natural Gas Co South Ga. Natural Gas Co. Pipe Line Corp.

Docket No.

Docket No.

Docket No.

G.18512

G-20509 G-13550 G-18626 G-20512

G-18783

$4,768,963 325,237 247,137
13,93*

$3,216,476
212,3^ 1*18,022
9,188

$17,371 $24,931

$11,832

$371,283
19,780 28,965

$5,355,271 $3,856,030 $17,371 $24,931 $11,832

$1*20,028

Municipal Systems Nest Point, Ga. Austell, Ga. Cartersville, Ga. Dalton, Ga. Dublin, Ga. Grantville, Ga. Jointly Owned Nat.Gas Trans. Line Board LaFayette, Ga. LaGrange, Ga. Summerville, Ga. Trion, Ga. Bovdon, Ga. Dallas, Ga. Eatonton, Ga. Fort Valley, Ga. Eogansville, Ga. Jackson, Ga. Louisville, Ga.

$ 9,3!+6 47,773 41,799
69,674 33,065
5,5*1-1 115,197 16,733
6i,l4i
24,575 14,454
5,452
5.879 6,855 11,425
5,31* 3,773
6,165

$ 7,30l* 29,682
18,386
51,1*01
19,507 J*,81*0 88,520 9,320
25,189
9,010 21,803 1*,028
i*,56o
5,655
8,892
3,900
3,315 5,031
Page 95*

Municipal Systems
Manchester, Ga. Millen, Ga. Monticello, Ga. Sparta, Ga. Statesboro, Ga. Sylvania, Ga. Talbotton, Ga. Tallapoosa, Ga. Thomson, Ga. Villa Rica, Ga. Warrenton, Ga. Waynesboro, Ga. Woodland, Ga. Wrens, Ga* Albany, Ga. Americus, Ga. Bainbridge, Ga. Cairo, Ga. Camilla, Ga. Cordele, Ga. Dawson, Ga. Moultrie, Ga. Pelham, Ga. Richland, Ga. Thomasville, Ga. Bouman, Ga. Buford, Ga. Commerce, Ga. Covington, Ga. Elberton, Ga.

ANNUAL INCREASE TO STATE OF GEORGIA ON NATURAL GAS

PIPE LINE RATE INCREASES IN EFFECT SUBJECT TO

_________ REFUND AT DECEMBER 31, 1939__________

Transcontinental Gas

Southern Natural Gas Co. South Ga. Natural Gas Co. Pipe Line Corp.____

Docket No.

Docket No.

Docket No.

G-18512

G-2O5O9 G-13550 G-13626 G-20512

G-1873

$ 8,503 $ 6,435

3,507

3,003

-0-

2,964

2,923
9,831 2,976

2,4l8 8,463 2,379

2,020 5,719
9,087

1,599
4,103 7,878

7,537
2,657 6,165

5,700
2,612 4,563

479

390

3,986

3,o4i

$ 2,136
7,208
5,154
9,351 3,213 4,359 3,582 14,252 1,718 1,052
26,003

$50,566 12,016
11,271
3,838 5,396 8,387
4,644
12,792
2,820
1,575 17,019

$31,112
5,122
4,895
5,249
2,351 3,778
1,887
9,091 1,129
650
9,300

Page 96

$ 431
6,217 4,084
8,267
5,099

.
C--' "H fc~PO . S*

S 4*

{'`

. .

...
K* e .co- .1

Municipal Systems
Hartwell, Ga. Jefferson, Ga. Lawrenceville, Ga. Monroe, Ga. Royston, Ga. Sugar Hill, Ga. Toccoa, Ga. Winder, Ga.
Total Municipal Systems
Total Increase

ANNUAL INCREASE TO STATE OP GEORGIA ON NATURAL GAS

PIPE LINE RATE INCREASES IN EFFECT SUBJECT TO

_________ REFUND AT DECEMBER 31. 1959__________ -

Southern Natural Gas Co. South Ga. Natural Gas Co.

Docket No.

G-I8512

G-2O5O9

Docket No.
G-13550 g-jS S S T G-20512

Transcontinental Gas
Pipe Line Corp. Docket No
G-I783

$ 6,792
2,424
5,234 7,678
3,423
988 28,700 5,8o8

$ 549,551 $ 375,891 $78,028 $130,324 $74,564

$ 85,145

$5,904,822 $4,231,921 $95,399 $155,255 $86,396

$505,173

Total Private Companies Total Municipal Systems
Grand Total

$ 9,685,463 1.293.503
$10,978,966

Page 97

sy
'i
g- 3 S

Also during the year, Southern Natural Gas Company made application to the Federal Power Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to serve certain industrial customers in the Savannah area. These customers are within the area certificated "by this Commission to South Atlantic Gas Company. During our review of the rates of South Atlantic Gas Company (discussed below), it has become apparent that South Atlantic is in dire need of additional industrial customers to improve its load factor and thereby maintain its rates to the general public at reasonable levels. The Commission is therefore seriously considering intervening in this filing by Southern Natural Gas Company, designated as Docket
No. G-I9632, in opposition to Southern to prevent them from invading the territory
of the local distributing company and siphoning off revenues from industrial sales which rightly belong to South Atlantic, and which revenues would be used by this Commission to keep residential rates at reasonable levels. As the original filing by Southern in this proceeding did not meet the requirements of the Federal Power Commission, said filing is currently in the process of being amended and final de termination of our action in this proceeding has been deferred until receipt of the
amended application.

As a direct result of the tremendous increases filed by Southern Natural Gas Company in Docket No. G-18512, South Georgia Natural Gas Company in Docket
No. G-I8626, and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation in Docket No. G-I8783,
all of the natural gas distribution systems of Georgia have made application to this Commission to pass on to their customers the increased costs of gas which they will sustain when said increases become effective. In addition, most of said com panies have requested increased earnings over and above their increased costs of operation, allegedly to bring the earnings of said distributing companies up to a fair and reasonable level as permitted by law. The following table summarizes said
applications :

COMPANY
Atlanta Gas Light Company Gas Light Company of Columbus South Atlantic Gas Company Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company United Cities Gas Company

INCREASE IN COST OF GAS
$5,200,651 333*967 300*791 29*781 27*755
$5,927925

INCREASED EARNINGS
$3,390,551 185,6l5
167,858
100,000
- 0 -
$3,853,013

TOTAL
$8,591*182 518,581
568,659 129,781
27*755 $9*735*937

The application of Atlanta Gas Light Company was filed on August 25, 1959 requesting the increases specified above. This matter was designated Docket No. 1580-U and was assigned for hearing on October 7* 1959* at which time the direct presentation of the Company was heard. After receipt in the record of the direct presentation of the Company, hearings were recessed until October 25* 1959 bo afford the protestants and the Commission Staff sufficient time to prepare for crossexamination of Company witnesses. Cross-examination of Company witnesses continued
through October 30, 1959* at which time hearing was recessed until January 5* i960
to permit the preparation of rebuttal testimony by the Staff and the protestants.
On October 29* 1959* cross-examination still being in progress, and recog nizing that it could not be concluded in time to permit final determination of this matter by the Commission prior to the effective date of the pipeline increases, the Company filed an additional application asking approval of temporary or interim
Page 98.

rates sufficient to cover the increase in cost of gas only, pending the Commission's decision on the overall increase sought hy the Company. The direct testimony of the Company was quite adequate to prove that the Company was not able to sustain the full amount of the increase in cost of gas without some rate relief. Therefore, on November 2, 1959, the Commission entered its order in Docket No. 1501-U author izing the Company to institute temporary rates, subject to refund, pending final determination of this matter.
Hearings in this matter were still in progress at the close of the year and final determination therein does not appear possible prior to late February,
I960.
On August 17, 1959, Gas Light Company of Columbus filed its application for increased rates as set forth above. Public hearing in this proceeding, Docket
No. 1^78-U, commenced on October 21, 1959, at which time the direct presentation
of the applicant was presented and cross-examination thereon completed. At the con clusion of this hearing, the matter was reassigned for further hearing on November 6, 1959 to permit presentation of evidence by the protestants and by the Commission Staff. Hearings were concluded and the record closed on that date. By its order issued November 13, 1959, the Commission granted Gas Light Company of Columbus
increased revenues not to exceed $^36,107 in lieu of the $518,581 requested by the
Company. The two principal exceptions taken by the Commission to the presentation of the Company were the elimination of adjustments allegedly for the purpose of ''normalizing" the weather conditions experienced in the test year and a reduction in the overall rate of return requested by the Company. On December 21, 1959, the Secretary of the Army through his duly authorized counsel, The Judge Advocate General, and, on behalf of the Department of Defense and other Executive agencies of the United States, filed a petition for reopening, rehearing, and reconsideration of the Commission's order in this matter. Petitioner averred that the order of the Commission was '`arbitrary, fails properly to appraise the evidence of record, and is grounded, in substantial respects, upon matters not of record in this case". By its order of December 22, 1959, the Commission denied the petition of the Secretary of the Army and in its opinion stated that many of the exceptions taken by petitioner related to matters which were the subject of prior orders of the Com mission, were amply discussed therein, and were not under consideration in the instant proceeding; and further, that such exceptions as relate to the instant pro ceeding were adequately considered and discussed in its order entered November 13,
1959*
On September 23, 1959, South Atlantic Gas Company filed an application requesting authority to adjust its rates in the manner set forth hereinabove. This matter was designated Docket No. 1^91-U and was assigned for public hearing on October 28, 1959, at which time the Company's direct presentation was heard. The matter was reassigned for cross-examination of Company witnesses on November 12,
1959 and upon completion thereof, and upon receipt of certain additional data re
quested by the Staff, the record was closed and taken under advisement. At yearend the Commission was still considering the record in this proceeding and had not as yet issued its opinion therein.
On August 11, 1959, Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company filed its application for increased rates as specified above. This matter was designated Docket No. 1^77-U and was assigned for public hearing on October 28, 1959, at which time the direct presentation of the Company was heard. Cross-examination of Company witnesses was scheduled for November 25, 1959, and concluded on said date. The record was closed
Page 99.

and the matter taken under advisement upon receipt of the additional evidence re quested by the Staff during cross-examination. By its order issued December 17* 1959* the Commission authorized Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company increased rates tq provide not in excess of $8l,l6o additional revenues per annum* in lieu of the $129*781 requested. The two principal exceptions taken by the Commission to the presentation of the Company related to the capitalization of the Company and the rate of return requested by the Company. The Commission declined to consider sub ordinate debentures owned by the principal stockholder of the Company as equity
capital and found that a rate of return of 6.9$ was adequate in lieu of the 8$ re
quested by the Company.
On November 16, 1959* United Cities Gas Company filed its application
for increased rates as set forth in the schedule above. Public hearings in this matter* Docket No. 1525-U, were held and concluded on December 2, 1959* United Cities operates gas distribution properties in several states and serves Gainesville * Georgia under the trade name, "Georgia Gas Company". United Cities sought only to pass on to its customers its actual increase in cost of gas sustained by reason of the increased rates filed by Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation. It was shown that Company experienced a rate of return of some 6.1$ during the test year and that the increases proposed failed by some $2,U00 to actually cover the increased cost of gas. By its order issued December 3, 1959* the Commission granted the re lief applied for by the Company.
By far, one of the largest problems faced by the Commission during the year was the adequacy of earnings of the gas distribution systems under its juris diction and the related and complex problem of rate increases filed by the natural gas pipeline companies and place into effect, subject to refund* by the Federal Power Commission without any determination by that Commission as to the reasonable ness or lawfulness of said rates. As is set forth above, there is currently being collected from the ratepayers of Georgia millions of dollars every year in rates solely for the benefit of the pipeline companies supplying the state without any determination of the justness of said charges. It should be emphasized that the major portion of the increased rates requested by the private distribution companies of the state do not benefit these distribution companies, but is simply passed on to the pipeline companies. As a result, this Commission has spearheaded an investi gation by the National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners of the adequacy of the Natural Gas Act and the administration thereof by the Federal Power Commission, to fulfill the congressional intent of providing adequate regulation of the interstate pipeline companies. As a result, at the 1959 Annual Convention the National Association of Railroad and Utilities Commissioners appointed a Special Committee to Study Natural Gas Rate Problems and appointed Commissioner Crawford L. Pilcher of this Commission as Chairman thereof. It is the purpose of this committee to review current Federal regulatory procedures with respect to the natural gas industry and to make recommendations to the National Association for the purpose of providing more complete administration of the Natural Gas Act and speedier and more comprehensive rate determinations by the Federal Power Commission to alleviate the evil of having millions of dollars of rate increases being collected from the public without any determination as to the reasonableness of said rates. Georgia Public Service Commission and its Staff have been and will devote every effort possible to assist this committee in its investigations and look forward to effectuating sub stantial reductions in' charges to the public for natural gas service as a result of these studies.
Page 100.

On August 6, 1959 South Atlantic Gas Company was granted authority to issue and sell privately, $1,500,000 principal amount of its First Mortgage Bonds, Series F, hearing interest at the rate of 5*3/8$ per annum. Said bonds were author ized to he issued and sold at a price of not less than 100$ of their principal amount plus accrued interest to date of delivery. Proceeds from the sale of the bonds were shown to he required for the construction of new facilities.
On December IT, 1959 Mid-Georgia Natural Gas Company was authorised to issue and sell ''Nunc Pro Tunc'' 2,000 shares of its $0.50 par value per share Common Stock for the cash consideration of $1,000 effective December 31* 1957*
Prior to 1957 United Cities Utilities Company, a holding company control ling several small gas distribution subsidiaries throughout the United States, owned and operated the Georgia Gas Company located at Gainesville, Georgia. By our order issued June 12, 1957 in Docket No. 112-U approval was granted to merge all of said companies into a surviving company known as United Cities Gas Company. In the pro cess of said merger all of the structure securities of the individual company became obligations of the surviving company. Upon completion of the merger this Commission informed the company that in our opinion steps should be taken to simplify the capi tal structure of the company in order to provide better marketability of the se curities at more favorable costs. As a result of the criticism of this Commission, during the year United Cities in two applications designated as Dockets No. 1489-U and No. 1490-U proposed a program to the Commission to effect the recapitalization of the company for the purpose of obtaining a capital structure commensurate with that normally deemed appropriate for public utilities. In our orders issued December 10, 1959 and December 22, 1959* respectively, approved was granted to the company for the issuance of $ 3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 principal amount of First Mortgage Bonds, 46,780 shares of 6$ Cumulative Preferred Stock and 31*187 shares of Common Stock. As a result of this action the company has been able to recapitalize on a basis consistent with that deemed appropriate for public utilities and which should per mit the company to more readily effect future financing at reasonable costs.
As stated in our report for 1958, it was anticipated that Georgia Coastal Natural Gas Company would have completed its pipeline and commenced service to southeast Georgia during 1958* However, due to the increases in gas cost occasioned by the rate increases filed by Southern Natural Gas Company discussed above, which Company was to be the sole supplier of Georgia Coastal, serious question has been raised as to the economic feasibility of the line. These increased gas costs have made it necessary for Georgia Coastal to attempt renegotiation of its contracts for direct pipeline industrial sales. By reason of competitive fuel costs in the area, it is extremely doubtful that these negotiations will result in new contracts and without these large volume industrial sales, it will not be possible for Georgia Coastal to attain the high load factors which will be required to maintain rates to the general public at competitive levels. It therefore appears (at the close of the year) that the completion of this project is extremely doubtful, and the Com mission is currently making other inquiries which it is hopeful will lead to sup plying natural gas to southeast Georgia from other sources.

was also made available to certain areas in Gwinnett County not heretofore receiv ing such service and by summer of 1959* the Cities of Norcross, Duluth, Suwanee, Lilbum and Snellville were enjoying the conveniences of natural gas as a clean and economical fuel.

The South Atlantic Gas Company filed an application for a certificate on March 9* 1959 in order to provide the citizens in the Cities of Guyton, Springfield and Rincon of Effingham County with natural gas service. All of these extensions will result in new industries locating in said cities and this contributes to the improvement of the overall economy.

GAS CERTIFICATES ISSUED ______ IN 1959______

Name of Utility

Date of Order

Docket

Distribution System

Number Certificates and Supplements

Georgia Coastal Natural Gas Corp. Atlanta Gas Light Company
South Atlantic Gas Company

Jan. 1^ Feb. 19
Apr. 6

1080-U

X

1397-U and

1062-U

Ifc30-U

X

X No. 1

Page 102.

...



.

<W*

!

tjEoO 3BD cl'i& L