ELR Citation: ELR 20665
No(s). 89-1074 (D.C. Cir. Feb 16, 1990)

The court holds that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) erroneously determined that §212 of the Staggers Act, which bars claims of discrimination involving rail rates applicable to different routes, does not apply to recyclable commodities. The ICC had concluded that since Congress intended to strengthen the protection afforded recyclables when it passed the Staggers Act, §212 was not intended to apply to complaints alleging discrimination against recyclables because it would thwart Congress' overall purpose to promote the movement of recyclables. The court first holds that the case is ripe for review, since ICC conceded that its decision is "purely legal" and the court found that it is final agency action. The court next holds that the ICC's interpretation is contrary to the clear language of the statute, which is susceptible to only one interpretation. Congress knew of existing rate limits applicable to recyclables when it added the same-route limitation upon actionable discrimination claims. Thus, although Congress may have intended to promote the use of recyclables when it passed the Staggers Act, it would be a blatant act of revision for the court to conclude that Congress did not mean what it said when it added the same-route limitation.

Counsel for Petitioners
Anne E. Treadway
Conrail
1138 Six Penn Ctr., Philadelphia PA 19103
(215) 977-5009

Counsel for Respondents
Judith A. Albert
Interstate Commerce Commission
12th St. & Constitution Ave. NW, Washington DC 20423
(202) 275-1685

Before WALD, Chief Judge; EDWARDS and D.H. GINSBURG, Circuit Judges.