[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 160 (Friday, August 16, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42677-42678]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20916]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board 1

[STB No. MC-F-19190 (Sub-No. 1)]


Adirondack Transit Lines, Inc., Pine Hill-Kingston Bus Corp. and 
Passenger Bus Corporation--Pooling--Greyhound Lines, Inc., and Vermont 
Transit Company, Inc.

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board, DOT.

    \1\ The ICC Termination Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat. 
803, which was enacted on December 29, 1995, and took effect on 
January 1, 1996, abolished the Interstate Commerce Commission and 
transferred certain functions and proceedings to the Surface 
Transportation Board (Board). This notice relates to functions that 
are subject to Board jurisdiction pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 14302.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACTION: Notice of proposed service pooling application.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: By application filed June 7, 1996, the Adirondack Group 
[Adirondack Transit Lines, Inc. (Adirondack), and its corporate 
affiliates, Pine Hill-Kingston Bus Corp. (Pine Hill) and Passenger Bus 
Corporation (PBC), all of Kingston, NY] and the Greyhound System 
[Greyhound Lines, Inc. (Greyhound), of Dallas, TX, and its corporate 
affiliate, Vermont Transit Co., Inc. (Vermont), of Burlington, VT] 
jointly request approval of a service pooling agreement under 49 U.S.C. 
14302 with respect to motor passenger transportation services between 
various points in New York, including services extending between New 
York City, NY, and Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

DATES: Comments must be filed by September 16, 1996, and applicants' 
rebuttal must be filed by October 7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send an original and 10 copies of comments referring to STB

[[Page 42678]]

Docket No. MC-F-19190 (Sub-No. 1) to: Surface Transportation Board, 
Office of the Secretary, Case Control Branch, 1201 Constitution Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20423. In addition, send one copy of comments to 
each of applicants' representatives: (1) Lawrence E. Lindeman, Suite 
311, 218 N. Lee Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-2531; (2) Mark E. 
Southerst, General Counsel, Greyhound Lines, Inc., P.O. Box 660362, 
Dallas, TX 75266-0362; and (3) Fritz R. Kahn, Suite 750 West, 1100 New 
York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20005-3934.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Llewellyn Brown, (202) 927-5252, 
or Beryl Gordon, (202) 927-5660. [TDD for the hearing impaired: (202) 
927-5721.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Adirondack Lines, Inc., and Pine Hill-
Kingston Bus Corp.--Pooling--Greyhound Lines, Inc., No. MC-F-19190 (ICC 
served Feb. 8, 1989), a service pooling agreement was approved between 
Adirondack and Pine Hill, on the one hand, and Greyhound, on the other, 
over their routes between Albany, NY, and New York City.
    Applicants now seek to extend the scope of their coordinated 
operations 2 over the following additional routes: (1) Between 
Buffalo, NY, and New York City; (2) between Albany and Buffalo; (3) 
between Albany and points on Long Island, NY; and (4) between New York 
City and Montreal.3 These routes also serve such intermediate 
points as Syracuse and Rochester, NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The application indicates that applicants intend only to 
pool their services over these routes, and not to pool revenues or 
share expenses (except, perhaps, to the extent that use of common 
terminal facilities would result in sharing certain overhead 
expenses). Additionally, the application states that package express 
traffic is expected to be the subject of a later agreement. The 
appended agreement, however, purports to cover all ``bus 
operations'' and explicitly contemplates both passenger and package 
express traffic. Applicants should clarify this matter by the date 
comments are due.
    \3\ These routes are all operated in interstate or foreign 
commerce. The New York City-Buffalo route traverses New Jersey and 
serves Ridgeview, NJ. The Albany-Buffalo route is part of through 
services between such points as Boston, MA, and Toronto, Ontario, 
Canada. The Albany-Long Island route provides advertised connections 
to and from points in Connecticut and Massachusetts, and it connects 
with the New York City-Montreal route.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Adirondack Group operates 6 eastbound and 7 westbound trips 
daily between Albany and either Buffalo or Syracuse. Greyhound operates 
6 daily round trips between Buffalo and either Albany or Syracuse. 
Between Buffalo and New York City, the Adirondack Group operates 4 
southbound trips and 3 northbound trips, and Greyhound operates 11 
round trips. Between Albany and points on Long Island, the Adirondack 
Group operates 3 daily round trips and an additional weekend round trip 
on specified dates,4 and the Greyhound System operates 1 daily 
round trip. Between New York City and Montreal, the Adirondack Group 
operates 4 daily round trips,5 and Greyhound operates 5 daily 
round trips and 1 additional round trip on weekends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The application states there are 5 daily round trips. 
However, footnotes in the bus schedules appended to the application 
indicate that two of these round trips operate only on specified 
dates and one of the two operates only between Kingston, NY, and 
Long Island.
    \5\ The Adirondack Group proposed to begin operations to and 
from Montreal in June 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because their competing services, in many instances, operate at 
nearly the same times of day with buses that are only partially loaded, 
applicants assert that their operations are inefficient, costly, and, 
as a consequence, unable to compete effectively with Amtrak, airline 
service, and private automobiles.
    The Adirondack Group operates over 1,500 miles of intercity bus 
routes, predominantly in New York, under the following operating 
authorities: No. MC-28356 (Adirondack); No. MC-2060 (Pine Hill); and 
No. MC-276393 (PBC).6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The appendices or exhibits attached to the application 
appear to indicate that PBC operates under the trade name New York 
Trailways, but the record is not clear on this point. Applicants 
should either confirm or correct this point, as well, by the date 
comments are due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Greyhound System operates over 90,000 miles of intercity bus 
routes throughout the nation. Greyhound holds operating authority under 
No. MC-1515, and Vermont holds operating authority under No. MC-45626.
    Applicants contend that there is substantial intermodal competition 
between points on the affected routes. They assert that Amtrak operates 
daily passenger train service between New York City and Buffalo, New 
York City and Montreal, and New York City and Albany. Additionally, 
they identify numerous air flights \7\ and contend that the region's 
highway network makes private automobile travel relatively quick and 
inexpensive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Applicants state that there are at least 75 daily flights in 
each direction between New York City and Buffalo or intermediate 
points, via American Airlines, Continental Airlines, Delta Airlines, 
U.S. Air, and United Airlines; 9 daily flights in each direction 
between Albany and Buffalo or intermediate points, via U.S. Air; 27 
daily flights in each direction between New York City and Montreal, 
via American Airlines, Air Canada, Continental Airlines, and Delta 
Airlines; and 6 daily flights in each direction between Albany and 
points on Long Island, via U.S. Air.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed pooling of services, according to applicants, will 
enable them to increase their passenger load per bus. This, in turn, 
will reduce their unit costs and make their services more competitive. 
Additionally, they emphasize that the proposed pooling of service will 
permit them to spread their schedules out more evenly throughout the 
day, affording the traveling public a greater choice of departure times 
and enhancing the convenience of bus travel.
    Applicants already operate from common terminals in Schenectady and 
White Plains, NY. They assert that these joint terminal operations have 
reduced their unit costs and improved their competitive posture. Joint 
terminals, they note, are more convenient for passengers as well. With 
joint terminals, passengers may board the next bus to their destination 
without regard to which carrier operates the particular schedule. 
Connections are enhanced as well because passengers can transfer 
between buses of the different carriers without changing terminals.
    Applicants assert that they are not domiciled in Mexico and are not 
owned or controlled by persons of that country. In addition, they 
assert that approval of the service pooling agreement will not 
significantly affect either the quality of the human environment or the 
conservation of energy resources. Although it does not appear that 
significant environmental or energy conservation effects will result 
from approval of this application, comments are also invited on this 
issue.
    Copies of the pooling application may be obtained free of charge by 
contacting applicants' representatives. In the alternative, the pooling 
application may be inspected at the offices of the Surface 
Transportation Board, Room 1221, during normal business hours. 
[Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through TDD service 
on (202) 927-5721.]
    A copy of this notice will be served on the Department of Justice, 
Antitrust Division, 10th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, DC 20530.

    Decided: August 7, 1996.

    By the Board, Chairman Morgan, Vice Chairman Simmons, and 
Commissioner Owen.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-20916 Filed 8-15-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P