Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

548

FEDERAL REGISTER,
Wednesday, February 8, 1939

of date November 1, 1938, a n d aforesaid districts without taking into copies of said order were mailed to each consideration those additional factors of the code members within M inimum and standards which are set forth in Price Areas 2, 3, 4 and 5; to the Office Section 4, Part n , subsection b of the of Consumers Counsel, Washington, Act. The minimum prices so proposed, as D. C.; and to each of the Secretaries of hereafter approved or modified, will the District Boards within Minimum serve as a basis fo r coordination as pro Price Areas 2, 3, 4 and 5. A copy of vided in Section 4 n b of the Act.
said order was published in two con Such proposals of minimum prices do not secutive issues of The Louisville Times, take into account differences in trans Louisville, Kentucky; the Illinois State portation methods and charges and their Register, Springfield, Illinois; The Des effect upon a reasonable opportunity to Moines Register, Des Moines, Iowa; The compete on a fair basis, or competitive Terre Haute Tribune, Terre Haute, Indi relationships between coal and other ana; The Arkansas Democrat, Little forms of fuel and energy as such matters Rock, Arkansas; The Birmingham News, constitute a part of the coordination of Birmingham, Alabama; and The Kansas minimum prices and are properly a sub City Star, Kansas City, Missouri.
ject of consideration under Section 4 n Due and reasonable notice of the b of the Act.
The Commission, after hearing the separate hearing upon the proposalsof minimum prices and marketing rules evidence adduced with respect to the and regulations as submitted to the minimum prices and marketing rules Commission by the District Boards and regulations proposed by the District within Minimum Price Areas 2, 4 and 5, Boards for Districts Nos. 9, 11 and 12, as postponed, having been given all upon due consideration thereof, and be interested parties, said cause came on ing fully advised in the premises, makes for hearing before the Commission on Findings of Fact and Conclusions as fo l the 14th day of November 1938, at the lows:
hour and place as specified in the order of the Commission dated October 29, M i n i m u m P r ic e A rea No. 2 D is t r ic t 1938, to wit, at 10 a. m., in the Hear No. 9
ing Room of the Commission at the PROPOSED M I N I M U M PRICES
Morrison Hotel, Chicago, Illinois; and, after said hearing had been duly and Soon after the issuance o f Order No.
formally opened and all interested 249 of this Commission and conformably parties desiring to appear had entered to its directions, Bituminous Coal Pro their appearances in said cause, the ducers Board for District No. 9, herein Commission proceeded to receive evi after referred to as District Board, held dence relative to the proposals of mini a meeting at which it appointed a classi mum prices and marketing rules and fication committee of seven members to regulations as proposed to the Commis review all facts and data on the coal pro sion by the District Boards for Districts duced in District No. 9 by each code 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, and 15, said hearing member and to report to the District being duly concluded on the 6th day of Board its recommendation of proper December 1938.
classifications and proposed prices of A t said hearing all interested parties such coal. Each member of this com were afforded full opportunity to be mittee had not less than twenty years heard on the proposals of minimum experience in the production and mar prices and marketing rules and regula keting of coal.
tions which had been submitted by each This classification committee held its of the District Boards within Minimum first meeting on August 25, 1938, and Price Areas 2, 4 and 5. Each of the Dis subsequently a number of other meetings trict Boards within said Minimum Price at various places within the Distrct, and Areas adduced evidence relating to such submtted to the District Board a report proposals and placed into the record as in the form of a proposed schedule which exhibits all of the data which such Dis contained the following: 1 The price trict Boards had used as a basis for such instructions and exceptions; 2 the size proposals and each of the District Boards classifications of coal describing twentythrough competent witnesses testified as one size groups; 3 a list of all code to the factors which the District Boards members and of their mines in District had considered in determining the price No. 9 showing the seams and the quality relationships and the marketing rules classification by size groups for all uses;
and regulations which had been proposed 4 a list of proposed prices in cents per by the District Boards in their respective net ton of 2,000 pounds for each kind, schedules.
quality and size of coal so classified for Each of the schedules o f proposed shipment into all market areas; and 5
minimum prices offered in evidence by a description of eighteen market areas the District Boards contained the above by states.
clause previously quoted from Order 249
The District Board then adopted the which clearly indicated that the Dis report of the classification committee trict Boards were proposing minimum and, at a meeting held September 30, prices free on board transportation 1938, it sent a copy of this proposed facilities at the mines for kinds, qualities schedule to each code member in Dis and sizes of coal produced in each of the trict No. 9 with a memorandum to the R e g is t e r
effect that the District Board would en tertain protests that might be filed by any dissatisfied code member. The Districa Board received objections from seven code members operating truck mines in the District with respect to the classifications proposed for them in the schedule of proposed minimum prices transmitted to code members in Dis trict No. 9 in compliance with Order No. 249 but none from the code members operating rail mines. Accordingly, the District Board made some modifications in the schedule which were satisfactory to all operators of truck mines.
The schedule of proposed minimum prices, as revised after the disposition of the said objections, hereinafter re ferred to as the schedule, was unani mously adopted by the District Board after a thorough discussion of all angles and a requisite number of copies there of were filed by such Board with the Commission in compliance with Order No. 249, and a requisite number of copies thereof were also transmitted by such Board to all code members in the Dis trict and to each of the other District Boards. There were no complaints made to the District Board upon this schedule by any code member. This schedule was received in evidence as Exhibit No. 690.
Testimony in support of m inim um prices proposed by the District Board was adduced at the hearing before the Commission by two expert witnesses, one of whom is a member of the District Board, and both thoroughly familiar with the marketing and distribution of coals in District No. 9. Their knowledge of District No. 9 was based upon years of experience in the District. It appears that the members of the District Board, seventeen in number, who took an active part in the preparation of the schedule, represent all the various seams and pro ducing subdistricts within District No. 9, and are men who, by reason of the inti mate knowledge of their own coals and their general familiarity with their com petitors coals, are fully capable of judg ing the price differentials and relation ships between the kinds, qualities, and sizes of coal produced within the District.
In the schedule of minimum prices proposed by the District Board, the seam in which each code members mine is located appears following the name of the mine. These seams are No. 9, No. 11, No. 6, No. 12, No. 14, and various stray seams which may be one of the seams herein named and which are all truck mine operations. The mines having coal seams Number 9 and Number 11, have the largest production in District No. 9.
Those having coal seams No. 6 and No.
14 have come into production in recent years, and those having coal seams No.
12, the Empire and various stray seams have very small production.
W e find that the District Board, among other things, considered the phys ical characteristics and the uses of the