OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN



## ZtellroQQ c8~eaion at TQxtlS Auaala , Texfu

ettsntioa .to that pert of pqrrgqpq~(di,, seotloa 5a or 33.

00 there

that rb am herring a oontraat end ah0 operator of a oomaoa r~xafl line should taetlry that ho e aorvic~ ao raeot

tho raquixwmntm of tha budnea8 oonobrn ahi& require8 the senlosn of the aoatmot omler ap?lioant,biut that, by the addition Of tl-U&E ol ad'ledUb6 Or tl'kin '3QUiJ%W!It, 5~ioi-1 oomn oarrler IQ oapable of rsnllcrlng the propoecQ servioe, the authmitg to psrfom whloh the oontrsot carrier applioant 18 fieekln&ia suoh testimny about the addition of ttu@ke or 6ohedule8orRailroad Ocmmia5ionoi Tex.es, pagO 2

traiil equiplssnt

admlsalbleor ia sach oommon oerrier oontincrd

to the aontcntionthat his existiug truok8,soheduleeend equipmentare oapable of rendering the senloe involved in the contraatoarrier applioatlon? "2. 3oes the Coraalsslon have aotual or gotortlalpower to grant e contraatWo8rrler ap plioatlon .where

it oonolusirely

epgears that the ,exlnting

truok8, facll.itloa imd train equlpmnt are not,

adequate to perfom the .oervlces ?ropossd sy P oontraot osrrier applicant,Sut :pimre it ooxOlUSiVely QFF%FLTS

that 8UCh OOJ31oIl

OtllTi%rS

P.Tb

_ ready, able and nllllhg to increasetheir eahedules, truciu, faoll$tla8or equlpaentto th% point shere they areoapebleof ITmd6rl;lg the mrvlce proposed by the oontraot carrier nppllcant? "3. ?lease advise us on whoa the burden oi pleadingsand aroof lie In tho ytter ofsetabllshingwhether or not exist& oarrlersare randsring adequate aervioe for the cornmoditles ouqht to be transported

by the contrsot~.carrlerapplioma. *li has further been auggeate3 to UB that the Fortion of paragraph: ~*llkanisa,

the Cotieslon shall hare ao authorityto gant any oontraotcarrier a;jplloation

for tcie

trahsporteticm



## 0r any oomoditiss in any territoryor bet7feen any pointswhere the existingoarrlsrs tirs r6r;&dnq, Gr ere oapable,ofrendering, a rea%oheblJadequate service in the trmsi>ortatlon

of s.~ch

cmmilties.~ refers only to spedltlimd zotor aaziers by the reicr6nce to existlzt~

oarriors.
"!+. 33az.e ;IdVl.56 33s

If fhe tern 'axistin carriers'Railroad CormnBaslon of Taxas, Qage 3

mane only specialized riotor carriers or doee it mean all oarriers under the auporvisionof this Cora!Aleslon." Cur answer to your firs& question is that evidenoe tending to show that the exiatlnguarrlef is ready,able and willing to.

obtain additionalequipsentto improve hle servioe would be admissible. The dlfrerenoebetween ownerehlpof a truok and the ownership of mcneg with which a truok -might be pumhasod, in suoh a oase, the avidence. would go only to the weight of

Uiihm! the quoted language of' the jot, the aontraat aarrier permitmentioned ln your aeeond question should be denied. It is exgresely provided that the contract terrier applioetlonahall not be granted, cot 3rJy shere existirK oarriers are renderinga reaeoaablyadequate mmrIce, ‘sut also wnere they are OaFable of 80 doing. iienoe, we think tkrt where the exiatlnq oarricruakes timely otter to inprove ita aervioe, oonvinoesthe Commissionand obtains fikdlngs that he is flnanola3J.y

and phyaioallyable to ryike suoh lmprovenentand will promptly da so, It 1s oontemplatsdChfit such erietin& ocrrier or carriers shall be given the opprtunity to remedy the deftate in existing services so OS to .BEXKB the acme adequate.

**- ‘**  **ife** are not to be understood, however, +a Raying that the mere deolarationof intention on the part of ,thaexisticgcarrier that he wlLl acquire additionalequipmentand remeby the dez"eats In his serviaemust necessarilybe taken aa oonoluslve. Such a deolaxatlonor promisemight be acceptedby the Couuni~ aion or it ml&t be rejeated, depending upon the lndlvldual ease. Referring to your third question, the burden Is upon the ap;rliaant o show in the pleading8and by su??orting proof that he should be granted the pernIt, iaoludlngthe showing that exlstlw services are inadequate.

irur anewer to your f’ourth qusstlon is that the term Wexletlng oarriers,m aa used in paragraph (dj or -7ection 5a, d. ii.

351, has referenceto all typea of carriers servinS the territory. There simply is nothing in the stat'lte lvhlah seems to mqgeet to ue that ttle meaning or the term should be reatrlcted to speaislized rotor oarriers.