2-3001-6802-2
RRCC 709/E-92-155, Order No. 2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION REGULATION BOARD
In the Matter of the Petition of
White Glove Limousine, Inc. for FINDINGS OF FACT
Extension of Regular Route Common CONCLUSIONS AND
Carrier Certificate to Transport RECOMMENDED-ORDER
Passengers, Baggage and Packages
Between Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport and Stated
Locations over Regular Routes
The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before Bruce D. Campbell,
Administrative Law Judge from the State Office of Administrative Hearings, on
September 24 and 25, 1992, in Austin, Minnesota.
Appearances: Duane Wilson, Box 398, Rochester, Minnesota 55903,
appeared on behalf of White Glove Limousine Service, Inc.; Andrew R. Clark,
Kalina, Wills, Woods, Gisvold & Clark, Attorneys at Law, Suite 200, 941
Hillwind Road N.E., Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432-5964, appeared on behalf of
Rochester Express Limousine Service, Inc., Rochester Transportation Systems,
Inc., Lee Line Corp., Philipps Bus Service, Inc. and RSB Coaches; Brent W.
Primus, Attorney at Law, 630 Norwest Midland Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota
55401-2350, appeared on behalf of International Express Corporation; Curtis M.
Wiseman, Balyk & Wiseman, Attorneys at Law, 5 East County Road B, Suite 5,
St. Paul, Minnesota 55117, appeared on behalf of Rochester Direct
Corporation; and Paul 0. Taylor, Harris & Taylor, Attorneys at Law, 2950 Metro
Drive, Suite 301, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55425, appeared on behalf of
Jefferson Lines, Inc. No appearance was made on behalf of Rochester City
Lines or Richfield Bus Company.
The record closed on October 27, 1992, with the receipt by the
Administrative Law Judge of the final memorandum of counsel. No memorandum of
counsel was filed on behalf of either Jefferson Lines, Inc. or Rochester
Direct Corporation.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 14.61 , and the
Rules of Practice of the Transportation Regulation Board, and the Rules of the
Office of Administrative Hearings, exceptions to this Report, if any, by any
party adversely affected must be filed within 20 days of the mailing date
hereof with the Transportation Regulation Board, Minnesota Administrative
Truck Center, 254 Livestock Exchange BuiIding, 100 Stockyards Road, South St.
Paul, Minnesota 55075. Exceptions must be specific and stated and numbered
separately. Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Order should be
included, and copies thereof shall be served upon all parties. If desired, a
reply to exceptions may be filed and served within ten days after the service
of the exceptions to which reply is made. Oral argument before a majority of
the Board may be permitted to all parties adversely affected by the
Administrative Law Judge's recommendation who request such argument. Such
request must accompany the filed exceptions or reply, and an original and five
copies of each document must be filed with the Board.
The Minnesota Transportation Regulation Board will make the final
determination of the matter after the expiration of the period for filing
exceptions as set forth above, or after oral argument, if such is requested
and had in the matter.
Further notice is hereby given that the Board may, at its own discretion,
accept or reject the Administrative Law Judge's recommendation and that said
recommendation has no legal effect unless expressly adopted by the Board as
its final order.
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
The issues to be determined in this proceeding are: whether the
Petitioner, White Glove Limousine, Inc. has established the statutory
requisites for an extension of its regular route common carrier certificate
under Minn. Stat. 221.071 (1990); and, if such an extension is granted, the
appropriate scope of incidental charter rights also granted under Minn. Stat.
221.051 (1990).
Based upon all of the proceedings herein, the Administrative Law Judge
makes the following:
FINDINGS QF FACT
1. By Petition filed with the Transportation Regulation Board on
April 2, 1992, White Glove Limousine, Inc. requested an extension of regular
route common carrier authority to transport passengers, baggage and express
between the St. Paul-Minneapolis International Airport, and related passenger
and freight terminals and the Mall of America a/k/a the Mega Mall and
Rochester - Austin - Albert Lea - Owatonna - Faribault, servicing all
intermediate points. The route described in the Petition would take the
carrier from Rochester to Austin and Albert Lea and then North on I-35 to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport and return. An alternate route for operating
convenience is specified from Rochester west to Owatonna and then north to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport and return.
2. On April 3, 1992, the Board issued an ex parte order granting White
Glove temporary authority to transport passengers and their baggage between
the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and Rochester - Austin - Albert
Lea - Owatonna - Faribault, with stated restrictions.
3. The Board published notice of the Petition in its weekly calendar,
commencing on April 10, 1992, and fixed May 1, 1992, as the final date for
filing protests to the Petition. Timely protests were filed by International
Express Corporation, Rochester Express Limousine Service, Richfield Bus
Company and Rochester City Lines, Jefferson Lines, Inc., Rochester Direct
Corporation, Lee Line Corp., RSB Coaches and Philipps Bus Service.
4. By oral request, the Petitioner amended the request for authority to
include service to and from the Rochester Airport. The Administrative Law
Judge determined that only Rochester Transportation Systems, Inc. held
-2-
conflicting authority to the amendment and it was not represented in the
proceeding. By letter dated August 25, 1992, Rochester Transportation
Systems, Inc. was informed of the proposed amendment. Rochester
Transportation Systems, Inc. filed a timely protest and was made a party to
the proceeding.
5. The contested Petition was referred to the Office of Administrative
Hearings for a contested case proceeding and notice of the hearing was
published in the Board's weekly bulletin, commencing on July 24, 1992, up to
and through the rescheduled hearing dates of September 24 and 25, 1992. At
the request of the Petitioner, the hearing location was moved to Austin,
Minnesota for the convenience of potential witnesses.
6. By letter dated September 2, 1992, International Express Corporation
withdrew its Protest, conditioned on a grant of authority in this proceeding
not being expanded as a result of the hearing, except for the additional point
of the Rochester Airport. International Express Corporation did not,
therefore, participate in the hearing.
7. At the hearing herein, all of the remaining Protestants were made
party intervenors in the proceeding, except Richfield Bus Company and
Rochester City Lines. Richfield Bus Company and Rochester City Lines did not
appear at the hearing. Their protests were, therefore, disallowed.
B. White Glove Limousine, Inc., is a Minnesota corporation
headquartered in Rochester, wholly owned by Duane Wilson, its President. The
Petitioner holds charter carrier authority to provide luxury limousine service
from a number of counties in southern and central Minnesota to all points in
Minnesota. The corporation also has regular route authority to provide
service between Winona, Minnesota and Rochester, in vehicles with a seating
capacity of 12 passengers or less.
9. On or about April 1, 1992, the Department suspended the authority of
Northern Eagle Express Shuttle, Inc. to provide service between the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and Rochester, Austin, Albert Lea,
Owatonna and Faribault for failure to maintain the requisite certificate of
insurance. Apparently, Northern Eagle Express Shuttle, Inc. ceased providing
service because it found the route to be unprofitable with the level of
service it provided. White Glove Limousine, Inc. applied for and received,
ex parte, temporary regular route authority to transport passengers and their
baggage between the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and Rochester -
Austin - Albert Lea - Owatonna and Faribault. EX parte Order, RRCC 709/TE-92,
Order No. 2, April 3, 1992. The ex parte order issued by the Board also
included other restrictions on the service to be provided.
10. White Glove will use the following equipment in providing the
regular route service requested: a 1982 and 1985 Lincoln Town Car; a 1984 and
1988 stretch limousine; and a 1986 Ford 15-passenger van. A statement of
assets and liabilities of the company, as of March 1, 1992, shows a positive
net worth of $225,500.00, largely represented by luxury vehicle equipment.
Pet. Ex. 3. The type of equipment in which White Glove proposes to provide
service is depicted in Pet. Exs. 1 and 2. For 1991, the company had a net
profit of about $60,000.00 from all its operations.
-3-
11, Although White Glove had experienced some financial problems as a
result of failing to withhold for federal tax liability, its delinquent
accounts with the Internal Revenue Service have been entirely paid.
12. There is no evidence in the record of violations of transportation
statutes or rules for which the company has been cited since it began
providing service in 1985.
13. The Petitioner's vehicles are regularly maintained and kept in good
condition and repair.
14. Under the temporary authority granted to White Glove to serve the
routes in question, the company has advertised two trips per day in each
direction. However, not all of the trips have been undertaken. The schedule
published by White Glove requires a 24-hour advance reservation for any trip.
Without an advance reservation, a particular trip might not be run. There is
no evidence in the record of the number of trips that have not been run as
scheduled under the Petitioner's temporary authority because no reservations
were made. The Petitioner's president, Mr. Duane Wilson, has also, in the
past, operated his regular route service between Rochester and Winona, on a
reservation basis. Mr. Wilson believes that requiring an advance reservation
and not providing service unless at least one reservation is made meets the
definition of regular route service contained in Minn. Stat. 221.011,
subd. 9 (1990). White Glove Limousine Service, Inc. will, however, operate
the proposed regular route service without an advance registration and make
each trip scheduled irrespective of the absence of passengers, if the Board
states that it must do so to provide a regular route service.
15. There is no evidence in the record of the number of passengers
carried by White Glove on the routes in question since it began providing
temporary service on April 3, 1992.
16. Austin Community College is a two-year institution of higher
learning located in Austin, Minnesota. The college sometimes conducts
national searches for its faculty and administrative officers. It is
anticipated that in the next 12-month period, approximately 16-25 people may
travel to Austin, primarily from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport for such recruitment purposes. It is also possible that some faculty
candidates may travel to Austin from the Rochester Airport. The college
believes it would be appropriate for such candidates for employment to be
transported in limousine service, rather than by private car or public bus.
The college believes that the prospective employees should be met and picked
up at the airport soon after arrival and be taken to Austin by a relatively
direct route. Such prospective employees of the college would also need a
return trip from Austin to the airport. There is no evidence in the record as
to whether prospective employees of the college interviewed while White Glove
has been providing interim service have used the White Glove limousines
between Austin and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport or the
Rochester Airport. There is no evidence in the record that students of Austin
Community College would use the White Glove Limousine equipment in regular
route service between Austin and the Rochester Airport or the Minneapolis-St.
Paul International Airport.
17. Ms. Diane Amacher of Salt Lake City, Utah, travels from Salt Lake
City to Austin, Minnesota from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport,
-4-
about six -- eight times per year. Ms. Amacher has used the service of White
Glove on several occasions between the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport and Austin. She appreciates the service provided by White Glove
because its luxury equipment can pull up to the front of the main terminal, on
both the ticketing and baggage levels. The driver of the limousine has offered
to assist her with her luggage. The public bus, operated by Jefferson Lines,
when it arrives at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, must park
to the side of the lower level and discharge its passengers there, even though
their ultimate destination is the second floor ticketing level of the airport.
The Jefferson drivers do not assist the public with their luggage. Ms.
Amacher has found the time schedule of White Glove more suited to her arrival
and departure times than the schedule of Jefferson. She also believes that
White Glove has fewer stops between the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport and Austin than does Jefferson. The somewhat higher rate charged by
White Glove over Jefferson is not a disincentive for Ms. Amacher to use
Petitioner's service. Her convenience in entering and exiting the airport was
much more important to her than the relatively small amount of extra cost
involved in using White Glove luxury equipment over the Jefferson coach. Ms.
Amacher might use transportation other than White Glove between Austin and the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. She does, however, like to have
the availability of White Glove's equipment at the airport as an option in the
event that its arrival and departure times would be Consistent with her
flights. White Glove will also wait a limited pericd of time when a person
making a reservation has a delayed flight.
18. Gertrude Morin of Albert Lea is an elderly person who is unable to
drive a vehicle. On several occasions, Ms. Morin has taken a White Glove
limousine from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport to Albert Lea.
Ms. Morin was completely satisfied with the White Glove service. The
chauffeur was on time and helped her with her luggage. Because the equipment
was able to discharge passengers at the main level of the terminal, Ms. Morin
was not required to walk a long distance or carry her luggage, as she would
have had to do if she had taken the Jefferson bus. Ms. Morin used the White
Glove service because it fit in better with her flight schedule than did the
Jefferson bus. Ms. Morin, in the future, would use either the White Glove
Service or the Jefferson coach, based upon which conveyance could provide more
timely or convenient service. Ms. Morin had no real complaints about the
Jefferson coach service.
19. All Continents Travel of Albert Lea has arranged service between
Albert Lea and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport for clients. On
some occasions it has provided persons with the White Glove number. The
company has not received complaints about the White Glove service and, in
fact, has received positive responsive comments on the performance of the
White Glove chauffeurs. There is no evidence in the record of the number of
persons booked through All Continents Travel that have used the White Glove
service to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The company
believes that the availability of the White Glove service is important because
the chauffeurs can help the elderly and handicapped with their baggage.
Moreover, limousines are given access to the airport that buses do not enjoy.
Chauffeurs can assist passengers in checking luggage and provide wheelchair
assistance for the handicapped and elderly. Finally, the White Glove service
is somewhat more direct than the Jefferson service from Albert Lea to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The travel agency also believes
that the limousines used by White Glove are more comfortable, quiet and
uncrowded than the Jefferson coach. This, they believe, is important to
business travelers, the elderly and handicapped. All Continents Travel
confirmed that White Glove currently requires a 24-hour advance reservation if
service is to be provided.
20. The Owatonna Chamber of Commerce supports the White Glove
application. Owatonna has over 40 industries operating on a national and
international basis. Many flights annually arrive at the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport carrying high level business executives destined for
Owatonna and return. The Chamber believes that the luxury equipment provided
by White Glove would fill a need if there were only one stop between Owatonna
and the Airport. The Chamber is not aware of the current transportation
service offered by Protestants between Owatonna and the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport. It is aware, in a general way, of service provided by
Jefferson. The Chamber has not requested Jefferson to expand its service or
change its current service to Owatonna in any way.
21. Travel Headquarters, located in Owatonna, believes that the service
provided by White Glove with luxury equipment fulfills a need. The travel
agency books approximately two trips a month for White Glove to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. That number of trips may increase
during the winter and spring months, as the weather becomes more inclement.
The travel agency believes the White Glove service is necessary because
Jefferson Lines does not assist passengers with their baggage and cannot
discharge passengers at the ticketing level of the airport. Moreover, the
agency does not believe that Jefferson's two or three scheduled trips to the
airport per day from Owatonna are sufficient to service all Owatonna's needs.
The company believes that an early pickup in Owatonna would be required for
persons who have early flights. Jefferson does, however, make a 4:00 a.m.
pickup in Owatonna with an arrival at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport of 5:35 a.m. for early flights. Travel Headquarters testified that
White Glove requires a reservation, and, in the absence of reservations,
service might not be provided. Travel Headquarters also uses the charter
limousine service of White Glove on a regular basis.
22. The Albert Lea Chamber of Commerce believes that a luxury shuttle
from Albert Lea to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport provides a
needed service. There is no evidence in the record of the number of passengers
that use White Glove service from Albert Lea to the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport. The Chamber of Commerce believes that the business
community would prefer a luxury shuttle over a public bus service because a
more direct trip to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport would save
business persons valuable time. The Chamber also believes that usage of the
shuttle service would increase if permanent authority were granted and more
people became aware of the service. The Chamber could not provide an accurate
estimate of future usage of the White Glove service from Albert Lea to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.
23. Rochester Transportation Systems, Inc. holds regular route authority
to transport passengers and parcels between Rochester Municipal Airport and
hotels and motels in Rochester, Minnesota. A statement of its authority,
represented by RRCC 581, is contained in Prot. Ex. 4. A schedule of its trips
to the Rochester Airport from Rochester is contained in Prot. Ex. 5. The
schedule is published in the local Rochester newspapers and distributed in the
vicinity of the Rochester Airport. Rochester Transportation System, Inc.
-6-
operates a 1969 MCI 47 passenger coach, a 1971 MCI 39 passenger coach and a
1988 Ford 15 passenger van. All vehicles are clearly marked Rochester
Transportation, Inc. The company also maintains a desk and employee at the
Rochester Airport. Since 1989, traffic from the Rochester Airport to
Rochester for Rochester Transportation System, Inc. has declined 4% 9% per
year. The company operates on a minimally profitable basis and 10 20% of
its revenues are derived from the shuttle service. If there is a significant
interruption in these revenues, Rochester Transportation Systems, Inc. would
consider dropping its service to the airport. It believes that a grant of
additional authority to serve the Rochester Airport would decrease the
profitability of its airport operation and, perhaps, result in it ceasing to
provide that service. It has dropped limousine service between Rochester and
the Rochester Airport because of a lack of usage.
24. Rochester Express Limousine Service, Inc. holds authority to provide
regular route service as stated in Prot. Ex. 10. That authority allows the
company to transport passengers, baggage, U.S. mail and small packages between
the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport on the one hand and the City of
Rochester on the other hand, serving no intermediate points. The authority is
restricted to using "maxi-van" vehicles which seat 12 persons or less.
Rochester Express Limousine Service provides six round trips per day between
Rochester and Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. It takes
approximately 95 minutes to provide service between Rochester and the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The company operates two Ford
maxi-vans and has another van which could be made serviceable on short
notice. The company has a lease at the airport for a desk on the lower level
of the baggage area. Rochester Express Limousine Service makes its scheduled
trips to the airport whether it has passengers or not. Its current charge to
provide service to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport is $22.00,
as compared to a White Glove charge of $32.00. Rochester Express Limousine
Service, Inc. believes that any diminution in its traffic volumes would
jeopardize its ability to continue providing service. The company believes
that White Glove Limousine has not been operating as a regular route carrier
on either its Winona or Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport trips
because the Petitioner requires an advance reservation and may not make a trip
if no reservations are received. The company does not consider "on-call"
service to be a regular route service. Rochester Express also believes that
the route requested by the Petitioner cannot be operated profitably making
four trips per day in the size equipment the Petitioner intends to use.
25. The continued ownership of the Rochester Express authority reflected
in RRCC File 681, RRCC Order No. 2049-1, dated April 7, 1981, is open to some
question. As a result of civil litigation and a transfer proceeding before
the Board, the authority currently held by Rochester Express Limousine
Service, Inc. may be transferred to Protestant Rochester Direct Corporation.
Rochester Direct Corporation's interest is stated in its Protest, dated May 1
1992. Rochester Direct Corporation did not provide additional evidence in the
proceeding. If the transfer is ordered by the Board, Rochester Direct
Corporation will provide the same service as is being provided by Rochester
Express Limousine Service, Inc.
26. Jefferson Lines is an interstate and intrastate regular route common
carrier of passengers, baggage and express. Jefferson Lines is currently
experiencing some financial difficulty and reorganization. Its authority is
currently owned by Jefferson Partners. Jefferson Lines operates coach
-7-
equipment over the routes at issue in this proceeding, except for service
between Rochester and Owatonna. Jefferson has 70 pieces of coach equipment
nationwide. It would require four - six coaches to provide service over the
routes in question. Jefferson has approximately 40 employees in Minnesota.
It operates between the cities to be served under the Petition and the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in accordance with the system time
table contained in Prot. Ex. 13 and Prot. Ex. 14. The time-table was
established after the company made a study of ridership to set its schedules
for the most appropriate pick up times. Jefferson has not been asked by any
passengers or civic groups in the cities to be served under the Petition to
increase its service to individual locations or to vary the times of the
service provided. Jefferson operates, as noted, according to a regular
schedule and no advance reservation is required. Its coach equipment
traverses its routes irrespective of ridership. On a system-wide basis,
Jefferson is operating at a break-even position. Its revenues are
approximately $1.25 per mile and its costs range from $1.25 - $1.50 per mile.
Jefferson maintains a desk at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
which is serviced by a company employee between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and
8:00 p.m. Jefferson does not provide service to Rochester Airport.
27. Over the years Jefferson has experienced a reduction in the number
of trips and towns served in southern Minnesota. Over the past 20 years, its
bus ridership, particularly intrastate ridership, has deteriorated. In the
past 3.5 years both increased competition on its routes and the deteriorating
economy have accelerated its decline in ridership. Jefferson notes that both
Greyhound and Trailways stopped providing service to southern Minnesota
because of a lack of ridership. Several companies, in the past, have provided
service down Highway 35 from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
and have, temporarily, eroded the business of Jefferson to towns along
Highway 35. Jefferson opposes the White Glove application because it believes
White Glove would erode its current essentially break-even position in
Minnesota intrastate traffic.
28. Lee Line Corp. holds charter carrier permit authority to transport
passengers under charter from Red Wing and points located within a 50-mile
radius of Red Wing to all points in Minnesota. Lee Line Corp.'s interest in
this proceeding relates to incidental charter rights that the Petitioner might
receive as a result of Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990). Lee Line Corp. did not
provide any testimony in this proceeding. Prot. Ex. 12 contains a statement
of the Lee Line Corp. authority.
29. RSB Coaches holds charter carrier permit 19031. Its authority is
statewide, Prot. Ex. 11. RSB Coaches did not provide any testimony in the
proceeding. Its interest is limited to incidental charter rights which might
be granted to the Petitioner under Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990).
30. Protestant Philipps Bus Service, Inc. holds statewide grandfathered
charter carrier permit authority represented by Charter Permit 38877.
Philipps did not provide testimony in this proceeding. Its interest is
limited to the incidental charter rights that might be granted to the
Petitioner under Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990).
31. There is no evidence in the record of a need for White Glove to
provide service to Faribault or the Mall of America, a/k/a the Mega Mall.
-8-
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge
makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Transportation Regulation Board has jurisdiction over the
subject matter of the hearing.
2. Proper notice of the hearing was timely given, and all relevant
substantive and procedural requirements of law or rule have been fulfilled
and, therefore, the matter is properly before the Administrative Law Judge.
3. From Petitioner's experience, knowledge of the rules and financial
condition, it is fit and able within the meaning of Minn. Rule 7800.0100,
subp. 4 (1989).
4. Petitioner's vehicles, being regularly maintained and free from
defects, are within the safety requirements prescribed by the Department.
5. The service to be offered by the Petitioner is a regular route
service, even if an advance reservation is required to provide service.
6. The Petitioner has not established a need to provide additional
service to or from the City of Rochester, the Rochester Airport, Faribault or
the Mall of America, a/k/a the Mega Mall.
7. The existing carriers that serve the city of Rochester and the
Rochester Airport, including Rochester Express Limousine Service, Inc. and
Rochester Transportation Systems, Inc. provide a level of service to the city
of Rochester that is appropriate. Further, the Petitioner has not established
any service advantage that it could offer over the service offered by the two
Protestants previously enumerated who service Rochester. Protestant Jefferson
Lines also provides service at the city of Rochester for passengers to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.
8. The service Petitioner would offer over the Highway 35 corridor
between Austin, Albert Lea, Owatonna, and the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport in luxury sedan or limousine equipment and small vans
provides a service benefit over that provided by Protestant Jefferson Lines.
The White Glove luxury sedan equipment and van would have direct access to
both the ticketing and baggage levels of the main airport terminal.
Passengers would not be required to transport luggage from the bus parking
area. Moreover, with the limited number of passengers transported, the
chauffeur would be able to provide assistance to passengers in checking or
transporting their luggage, as necessary. This service is especially
important to the handicapped and elderly. Some business travelers also would
prefer more direct service in luxury equipment.
9. Jefferson Lines, the only active Protestant providing regular route
service between locations stated in Conclusion 8, supra, and the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport cannot provide the service benefits
stated in the previous Conclusion.
10. Given the difference in charges between the Petitioner and
Jefferson, the two companies are not essentially competing for the same
traffic.
-9-
II. A grant of extended regular route common carrier authority to the
Petitioner to provide service from Austin to the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport and return may decrease, to some extent, the ridership
available to Jefferson Lines. It will not, however, significantly jeopardize
their financial viability so as to affect the availability of necessary
transportation service to the public.
12. A grant of regular route common carrier authority to provide service
between Austin and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport will not
have an adverse effect on transportation service furnished by any railroad.
13. It is appropriate to limit any grant of regular route authority to
provide service between Austin and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport to the use of luxury sedan equipment, limousines and vans carrying not
more than 12 passengers.
14. As a result of Conclusions 3 - 13, supra, the Petitioner has
established that the public convenience and necessity requires a grant of
additional regular route authority between Austin and the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport over I-90 and I-35 with the limitations stated in
Conclusion 13, supra.
15. It is appropriate under Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990) to grant to the
Petitioner incidental charter authority from the counties of Freeborn, Mower,
Steele, Rice, Dakota, Scott and Hennepin to all points in Minnesota and
return. It is also appropriate, however, to limit that incidental charter
authority to providing service in luxury sedans, limousines and vans carrying
not more than 12 passengers.
16. Any Conclusion more properly termed a Findings of Fact, and any
Finding of Fact more properly determined a Conclusion are hereby expressly
adopted as such.
THIS REPORT IS NOT AN ORDER AND NO AUTHORITY IS GRANTED HEREIN. THE
TRANSPORTATION REGULATION BOARD WILL ISSUE THE ORDER OF AUTHORITY WHICH MAY
ADOPT OR DIFFER FROM THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS.
Based on the foregoing Conclusions, the Administrative Law Judge
recommends to the Transportation Regulation Board that it issue the following:
QRDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitioner's current regular route common
carrier authority be extended to authorize the transportation of passengers
and baggage and express between the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
and Austin - Albert Lea - Owatonna over the following route:
Over I-90 from Austin to Albert Lea and there north on
I-35 to Owatonna there to Faribault and continuing on
either I-35W or I-35E to the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport and returning over the same route.
-lo-
Alternate route for operation convenience only:
Beginning at Austin, Minnesota, and extending over Minn.
Highway 218 to Intersection of U.S. Highway 14, and then
Highway 14 to I-35 and return over the same route.
Restrictions:
1. Restricted to the use of luxury sedan vehicles,
limousines and vans with a maximum seating capacity of
12 passengers or less; and
2. Restricted against service between on-route or off-route
points including the Minneapolis-St. Paul International
Airport lying north of Owatonna, Minnesota.
Incidental charter authority is also granted from the counties of
Freeborn, Mower, Steele, Rice, Dakota, Scott and Hennepin to all points in
Minnesota and return; restricted to providing service in luxury sedans,
limousines and vans with a seating capacity of not more than 12 passengers.
Dated this day of November, 1992.
BRUCE D. CAMPBELL
Administrative Law Judge
NOTICE
Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 14.62, subd. 1, the agency is required to serve
its final decision upon each party and the Administrative Law Judge by first
class mail.
Reported: Audio Magnetic Recording; No Transcript Prepared.
MEMORANDUM
White Glove Limousine Service, Inc. has requested an extension of its
regular route authority to transport passengers baggage and express between
Rochester, Austin, Albert Lea, Owatonna, Faribault, Mall of America and the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport over a specified route. The
Petition does not limit the type of equipment to be used. Moreover, in the
Petition, White Glove requests a full grant of incidental charter rights,
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990), with no restriction on the type of
charter equipment to be used.
Under Minn. Stat. 221.071, subd. 1 (1990), White Glove must first
establish that it is fit and able within the meaning of Minn. Rule 7800.0100,
subp. 4 (1989). Although some of the Protestants questioned portions of the
balance sheet presented by the Petitioner and raised some concerns about its
financial stability, White Glove has the necessary resources to provide the
service proposed in the Petition. Irrespective of the exact value of the
transportation equipment White Glove operates, the company has a significant
net worth and last year made a significant profit. let Finding 10, supra. It
is true that White Glove, in the past, did have some federal tax liabilities.
It has, however, liquidated all of its past tax indebtedness. There is no
evidence in the record of past transportation violations or citations against
White Glove. Its equipment is regularly maintained and kept in appropriate
working order. The Administrative Law Judge therefore concludes that the
Petitioner is fit and able to provide the proposed extended regular route
service stated in the Petition.
Minn. Stat. 221.071, subd. 1 (1990) requires that the Petitioner
establish that the public convenience and necessity require granting all or a
portion of the Petition. The analysis to be used under Minn. Stat. 221.071,
subd. 1. (1990), was summarized by the predecessor to the Transportation
Regulation Board in GWNCO, PC 113/A-81-1107, Order No. 1, October 26, 1982.
tee Petitton-of-American Freight-systems, inc., 380 N.W.2d 192, 197 (Minn.
App. 1986); Hyman Freightways Inc,, 488 N.W.2d 503 (Minn. App. 1992). See
also, New Ulm Freightlines inc., IRCC 649/A-75-24, April 24, 1979.
There is no argument that existing service along the route from Rochester
through Austin, Albert Lea, Owatonna, Faribault and the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport is inadequate. Quinn Distributing Co__v. Quast
TrAnsfer- Inc., 288 Minn. 442, 181 N.W.2d 696 (1970); Monson Dray Line v-
Murphy Motor Freightlines, 259 Minn. 382, 107 N.W.2d 850 (1961).
The thrust of the "need" testimony of the Petitioner was that his service
to be provided in smaller luxury equipment would more particularly meet the
needs of business travelers, the elderly and the handicapped. Business
travelers and high level potential employees of businesses and public
institutions may require transportation between the cities in question and the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in more commodious equipment than
is afforded by a public coach service. Moreover, the smaller luxury equipment
and vans have access to the airport that is not shared by larger coach
equipment. Coaches must park to one side of the airport terminal at the lower
level. There is no evidence in the record that either skycaps or bus drivers
assist passengers with bringing their luggage from the bus parking area to the
upper level ticketing area of the airport. Likewise, there is no evidence in
the record that assistance is available to bring the luggage from the baggage
claim area to the buses for departures from the airport. This extra
assistance and shorter waking distance is most important for the elderly and
the handicapped. The Administrative Law Judge finds that the additional
service that White Glove proposes to offer by using smaller, luxury equipment
is a substantial benefit to the public, currently not available from competing
carriers. American_Freight Systems, Inc, 380 N.W.2d 192 (Minn. App. 1986);
Quinn Distributing Co. v. Quast Transfer- Inc.., supra.
The Administrative Law Judge has found that the Petitioner has not shown
a need for such additional service at the Rochester Airport or for the city of
Rochester. There is no evidence in the record that passengers at the
Rochester Airport have difficulties similar to those experienced by passengers
at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The difference in size of
the airports makes that unlikely. Moreover, Protestant, Rochester
Transportation Systems, Inc. currently provides appropriate service from the
airport to the city of Rochester. As regards travel between Rochester and the
-12-
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, service is currently provided by
Protestant Rochester Express Limousine Service. That is a direct service from
the city of Rochester to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
terminal, with no intermediate stops. A more direct service to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport could not be imagined. Rochester
Express Limousine Service also is limited to using smaller equipment, so that
its passengers could receive the same access to airport facilities and driver
assistance that White Glove indicates it will offer. The Administrative Law
Judge does not believe, therefore, that the Petitioner has shown a need for
additional service at the Rochester Airport or from Rochester to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. The existing Protestants
adequately satisfy and requirements for service demanded by the public
convenience and necessity.
The Administrative Law Judge also finds that the Petitioner has not
established a need for such additional service at either Faribault or the Mall
of America, a/k/a the Mega Mall. No witness testified either directly or
indirectly about the existence of any such need.
The Protestants argue that the testimony supporting the existence of need
is both general and limited in amount. The Administrative Law Judge believes
it would be practically impossible to cause large numbers of prospective
airport passengers to provide testimony. In this respect, the situation is
like that encountered when establishing a need for additional household goods
moving authority. In Five Star-Trucking v, Minnesota_TransportAtion
Regulation Board, 370 N.W.2d 666, 670-71 (Minn. App. 1985), the Court
recognized that such need may be sporadic and intermittent. In such
circumstances testimony regarding need from persons other than actual
customers may be crucial. Five StAr, 370 N.W.2d at 671.
Regarding service along the Highways I-90 and I-35 corridor, the
Administrative Law Judge finds that the service benefits previously described
would be a significant improvement over existing service offered. The only
Protestant providing a service from Austin, Albert Lea and Owatonna to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and return is Protestant Jefferson
Lines. Given the differences in the types of equipment used and differences
in fares charged, the Administrative Law Judge does not find that Jefferson
Lines and White Glove are competing for the same customers. It could be
argued, however, that any loss of ridership between the towns mentioned and
the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport must of necessity come at the
expense of Jefferson. If White Glove were not providing temporary service or
if it did not obtain regular route authority, one could conclude that
Jefferson Lines would carry those passengers. At the hearing, however,
witnesses testified that they used private automobiles to transport persons to
the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport rather than use the public bus
in many situations, particular those involving dignitaries, and high level
business executives.
The Administrative Law Judge does not believe that the White Glove
service wi I I have a substanti a 1 negative impact on Jeffer son . It is true that
Jefferson is in poor financial condition in the state of Minnesota. This is
not, however, the result of competition on the lines in question. It is a
result of the general overall economy and fewer persons using public bus
transport. The witness from Jefferson lines merely stated in a general way
the alarming financial condition of the company. He did not provide ridership
-13-
figures on the routes in question or their profitability. The Administrative
Law Judge concludes that a grant of authority to White Glove to serve the
route between Austin and the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport would
have only negligible negative impact on Protestant Jefferson Lines.
The Administrative Law Judge has recommended that the grant of regular
route authority be limited to providing service in luxury sedans, limousines,
and vans with a passenger capacity of not more than 12 persons. This
restriction is proposed because the only need demonstrated by the Petitioner
relates to the provision of service in such equipment. It is the type and
size of the equipment to be used that establishes the need. The
Administrative Law Judge, therefore, believes it appropriate to limit the
grant of additional authority given to providing service in such equipment.
The Protestants argue that the service Petitioner proposed to provide is
not, in fact, a regular route service. This argument is made because the
Petitioner, while operating under temporary authority, has required an advance
registration of 24 hours for passengers. If at least one advance reservation
is not made along the route, all or a portion of a particular trip may not
occur. There is no evidence in the record of how often a trip has not been
undertaken because of a lack of advance reservations. White Glove also
apparently operates its service between Winona and Rochester on a similar
reservation system.
One of the distinguishing characteristics of regular route service is
that service is provided according to a fixed schedule. Protestants argue
that the service to be provided by White Glove is essentially an "on-call"
service and, hence, not within the definition of regular route service
contained in Minn. Stat. 221.011, subd. 9 (1990): See also Minn. Stat.
221.011, subd. 11 (1990). The governing characteristic of operating on a
fixed schedule, as opposed to "on-call" service is whether there is a pattern
of departures and arrivals which the public comes to know and rely upon for
its transportation needs. Application_of_Wendell Moore (unpublished), slip
op. at 3-4, (Minn. Railroad & Warehouse Commission) August 14, 1961; Murphy
Motor Freight Lines,-Inc. y.-Hyman-Freightways- Inc., 0295-BT, November 20,
1972; Minnesota Department of Public Service v, New-Ulm-Transfer, Inc,,
C-BT-IRCC & LS 31677, CC & LS 28454-1 (Minnesota Public Service Commission),
April 14, 1976 Quast_TrAnsfer, Inc._v.. Minnesota Transportation Regulation
Board, 428 N.W.2d 462 (Minn. App. 1988); D & A Truck Line, RRCC 515V IRCC
6955/C-89-54, 1991 WL 80680 (Minn. App. 1991) (unpublished).
The Administrative Law Judge believes that having the regular schedules
published by the Petitioner makes the service a regular route service, even if
a particular trip is not made because of a lack of reservations. The schedule
is fixed in that one cannot arrange the time of the pickup as one could with
an "on-call" service. If service is to be undertaken, it must occur according
to the time schedule of the Petitioner. The customer can rely on the
availability of the Petitioner's service according to the fixed schedule, if
that customer or another customer makes a reservation. Each customer, then,
has the ability, by making a reservation, to require the transportation
service to occur according to the fixed schedule of the Petitioner. This is,
in reality, no different than requiring a person who wishes a regular route
pick up to contact the carrier's dispatch facility to request that the carrier
stop for a pick up.
-14-
Requiring a reservation is also reasonable in the context of small luxury
equipment that is only likely to be used by a distinct segment of the
travelling public. Almost all patrons will be traveling in conjunction with
airline trips. Most customers plan airline trips well in advance according to
known arrival and departure times. Under such circumstances, it is not
unreasonable to require advance reservations for the transportation service.
If the Board disagrees with the conclusion of the Administrative Law
Judge that the service to be offered by White Glove with advanced reservations
is a regular route service, the Petitioner has stated that it would run all
trips irrespective of reservations, if required to do so by the Transportation
Regulation Board. Therefore, the fact that the Petitioner's interpretation of
Minn. Stat. 221.011, subd. 9 and subd 11 (1990), differs from the position
of the Protestants does not require a rejection of the request for additional
authority. If the Board disagrees with the conclusion of the Administrative
Law Judge relating to the requirement of reservations, it should clearly
specify in its order that all trips must be completed irrespective of advance
reservations.
Protestants also argue that the service offered by White Glove meets the
definition of "personal transportation service", as that term is defined in
Minn. Stat. 221.011, subd. 34 (1992). The Administrative Law Judge does not
believe that the service offered by White Glove is in fact a "personal
transportation service". A personal transportation service may not be
provided over a regular route and it must involve a charge of more than a taxi
cab fare for a comparable trip. Neither of the conditions mentioned would be
true of the service to be provided by White Glove.
The Administrative Law Judge has recommended to the Board that it
authorize incidental charter rights under Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990), from
the counties of Freeborn, Mower, Steele, Rice, Dakota, Scott and Hennepin to
all points in Minnesota and return. The Board does not have discretion in
granting incidental charter rights to regular route carriers of passengers.
Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990). It may, however, impose reasonable terms and
conditions on the exercise of such authority. The Administrative Law Judge
believes that a reasonable term or condition to be imposed on the grant of
incidental charter rights under Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990), would limit
White Glove to providing such service in luxury sedans, limousines and vans
with a capacity of not more than 12 passengers per vehicle. This is the only
kind of equipment that White Glove operates. The need it has demonstrated for
regular route service has also been limited to that kind of equipment Most
importantly, all of the business experience and expertise of the Petitioner is
related to the operation of smaller, luxury equipment. Under such
circumstances it is reasonable to limit the incidental charter authority
granted pursuant to Minn. Stat. 221.051 (1990), to operations in luxury
sedans, limousines and vans with a passenger capacity of not more than
12 persons.
B.D.C.
-15-