49 C.F.R. § 1331.5

Additional standards for retaining antitrust immunity by passenger bus industry rate bureaus

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Rate bureaus must comply with the terms of their agreements, as approved by the Board. Failure to do so will result in lack of immunity for that activity.

(b) The bureaus are required to maintain detailed minutes of all meetings where immunized matters are discussed. The bureaus will be subject to withdrawal of their immunity for serious continuing violations of Board standards, and individual tariff publications will be subject to rejection, suspension, or investigation for improprieties in the rate bureau process.

(d) For the purposes of the statute, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) A general increase is a proposed general adjustment of substantially all the rates published in a rate bureau's tariff(s).

(2) A broad change in tariff structure modifies in a relatively non-uniform fashion the relationship between most rates published in a rate bureau's tariff, and applies to a large area, either nationally or regionally.

(3) An innovative fare will be determined on a case-by-case basis; the Board will, on request, issue opinions on whether particular rate proposals may be regarded as innovative. Two examples of an innovative fare are:

(i) A fare for unlimited passenger travel; and

(ii) An experimental fare providing for transportation at the passenger's option over the line of one or more carriers.

(4) A promotional fare generally has three characteristics:

(i) Limited duration;

(ii) Attractive price or level of service quality; and

(iii) Some added feature in addition to those normally offered.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1982–1988 · leading case: Am. Trucking Ass'n, Inc. v. United States of Am. & Interstate Com. Comm'n, 688 F.2d 1337 (11th Cir. 1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Am. Trucking Ass'n, Inc. v. United States of Am. & Interstate Com. Comm'n, 688 F.2d 1337 (11th Cir. 1982). “49 C.F.R. 1331.5 states: When independent action is announced and tariff publication is to be made by a [rate bureau], notification thereof will be given by the [bureau] to the same extent and in the same manner that the [bureau] gives notice of [collective] actions.”

Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc. v. United States of Am. & Interstate Com. Comm'n, 826 F.2d 1186 (2d Cir. 1987). “” 49 C.F.R. § 1331.5 (j)(1) (1986). This definition is wholly consistent with the legislative history of the Act.”

Cent. & S. Motor Freight Tariff Ass'n v. United States, 843 F.2d 886 (6th Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “(1) General Rate Increases Exception The Commission, in 49 C.F.R. § 1331.5 (j)(1) (1986), has defined a general increase as “a proposed general adjustment of substantially all the rates published in a rate bureau’s tariff or tariffs.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.