The city of New York does not designate streets for bus operation but its police department approves or disapproves bus routes requested by operators in Manhattan and limits the number of stops they may make for pick-up and discharge of passengers. Subsequent changes may not be made without approval of that department. All the considered operations in Manhattan converge into the so-called Times Square area, which is a highly congested terminal area from and to which there are local rapid-transit facilities. The operations between this area and the Lincoln Tunnel are essentially in the nature of a terminal pick-up and discharge of passengers, and it is self-evident that a considerable proportion of the passengers use the local facilities in making connections from and to the considered interstate facilities. It becomes relatively unimportant, therefore, as to which routes the operators traverse within the terminal area in Manhattan, and in view of the fact that there is a measure of control by the city over the use of its streets, there appears to be no necessity for designating the routes within Manhattan.

1

The joint board proposed to specify applicant's routes in detail to the extent such routes lie within New Jersey. In conformity with the decision in the Lincoln Tunnel Cases, supra, the board did not, however, undertake to specify the routes to be used within New York City or Philadelphia, the quoted observations concerning operations within New York City being equally applicable to operations within Philadelphia. See also Cincinnati, N. & C. Ry. Co. Common Carrier Application, 30 M. C. C. 423, 439-442. Applicant voiced no exception to the principle on which the joint board's proposed route descriptions are based, but submitted with its exceptions a revised set of descriptions intended to correct numerous minor errors and omissions in the routes set forth in the appendix to the joint board's report.

We are not concerned with the routes traversed within municipalities unless they constitute the very essence of the operation. Nevin Midland Lines Common Carrier Application, 4 M. C. C. 457. To the extent that applicant performs mass transportation service between New York City and the New Jersey metropolitan area adjacent thereto, it is proper to make a complete designation of the routes traversed within New Jersey. Lincoln Tunnel Cases, supra. However, the considerations which prompt this conclusion in respect of the New Jersey area adjacent to New York City are not present to the same extent in connection with service between Philadelphia and the adjacent New Jersey territory. In White Horse Pike Bus Co., Inc., Com. Car. Application, 2 M. C. C. 79, the Commission, division 5, found it unnecessary to describe the routes traversed within municipalities by an applicant performing mass transportation service between Philadelphia and Barrington, N. J., one of the points served

1 Although, in the text of its report, the board stated that it would describe the routes in detail only to the extent such routes lie within New Jersey, it also described in this manner that portion of the New York-Greenwood Lake route extending from the New York-New Jersey State line to Greenwood Lake.

by applicant herein. The remainder of applicant's regular-route service consists of ordinary line-haul or over-the-road operations, for which, of course, it is unnecessary to describe the routes traversed within municipalities.

Applicant's "revised" route descriptions should be further revised to eliminate the designation of all streets traversed within municipal limits except, as above indicated, those in New Jersey adjacent to New York City, over which it performs mass transportation service. We cannot, however, make this correction, because in most instances applicant has described its routes by streets or local designations only which we are unable, from any map of record or otherwise readily available to us, to translate to the corresponding Federal, State, or local highways. In addition to the change already indicated, applicant's revised route descriptions should be further revised to speak in terms of Federal, State, or local highways identified, if possible, by official highway numbers. In the circumstances, we shall hold the record open for a period of 60 days from the service of this report within which time we shall expect applicant to submit a restatement of its routes compiled in conformity with the views herein expressed, with copies thereof to all parties of record. Such statement shall include no routes not included in descriptions set forth in applicant's exceptions and shall be verified under oath as a true and correct statement of the routes operated by applicant on and continuously since June 1, 1935. Twenty days after filing, such statement shall be deemed a part of the record unless within such time objection to the receipt thereof is received. If no objection to the receipt of such statement is received within the time specified, consideration will thereafter be given to the entry of an appropriate order in conformity therewith.

Intermediate-point service.—It is stated in the body of the application that applicant did not serve all intermediate points on the regular routes claimed by it, but, in an appendix thereto, it is said that all intermediate points are served. As to the routes over which applicant performs mass transportation service, it is reasonably clear that (with the exception of operations over the Pulaski Skyway mentioned below) it has provided service at all intermediate points. The evidence is not clear, however, as to other parts of applicant's operations. It is definitely shown that some intermediate points were not served without restriction. Applicant's service at some points on the Greenwood Lake-New York City route, for example, was subject to certain restrictions, and, in operating between Newark and New York City over the Pulaski Skyway, applicant did not pick up passengers at any point between the Broadway exit from the Pulaski Skyway and the intersection of Hudson County Boulevard and Sip Avenue in Jersey City. Applicant also deviates at times from its regular

White Horse Pike route between Atlantic City, N. J., and Philadelphia, using a cut-off between Berlin and Camden, N. J., to avoid traffic congestion, but no passengers are picked up or discharged at points on the cut-off. At times, busses fully loaded when leaving Atlantic City are routed to Philadelphia over the Black Horse Pike. This suggests that no intermediate points on this route are served, but there are of record ambiguous statements by applicant's witness in respect of this route from which it may be inferred that some or all of the intermediate points thereon are served.

In this state of the record, we are unable to determine (with the exception of the Greenwood Lake-New York City and Newark-New York City routes) what intermediate points on applicant's routes have been served by it. Therefore, as a part of the restatement of routes which applicant is to submit, it is directed to indicate separately as to each route the intermediate points which it has served on and continuously since the statutory date.

Special operations.-Prior to the statutory date applicant conducted certain special operations of the type defined in Fordham Bus Corp. Common Carrier Application, supra, (1) from Elizabeth, Jersey City, Newark, and Paterson, N. J., to New York City and to points in Orange, Rockland, and Westchester Counties, N. Y., and return, (2) from Camden, N. J., to Valley Forge, Pa., and return, and (3) from New York City to Greenwood Lake, and return, this last described service being provided, as heretofore indicated, only during that part of the year when applicant did not perform regular-route scheduled service between those points. It has conducted these operations during each year since that date, and is entitled to a certificate authorizing their continuance. In 1936, it conducted similar operations from Philadelphia to Lakehurst, N. J., and return, and, in 1937 and 1938, trips were operated from Philadelphia to Plainsboro, N. J., and return, and from Camden to Philadelphia, and return. The service last mentioned-Camden to Philadelphia and return-was between points on one of applicant's regular routes and may be continued under authority of the regular-route certificate herein granted. The Philadelphia-Lakehurst and Philadelphia-Plainsboro operations, having been instituted subsequent to the statutory date, afford no basis for the grant of any "grandfather" right.

In a separate exhibit, applicant has set forth a description of its various special operations. Among the operations thus described is a periodically recurring operation from Newark to Valley Forge, and return, shown to have been made first in 1928, and one from Newark to Crystal Cave, Pa., and return, first made in 1929. Although the exhibit indicates that an "average" of 8 busses were operated "each season" in the Valley Forge operation and 11 in the Crystal Cave

service, neither of those operations was conducted in any year from 1934 through 1938 (the last year of applicant's showing). As to Crystal Cave, therefore, no "grandfather" rights have been established. This is also true of the Newark-Valley Forge service.

Charter operations.—(1) New Jersey origins.-The bulk of applicant's charter operations from New Jersey originated at points on its regular routes, but, in addition, it originated a substantial number of chartered parties at off-route points. Applicant conceded that it has conducted charter operations more extensive than those which under section 208 (c) it may continue without specific authority, and, accordingly, it asks that authority to continue these operations be stated in its certificate separately and apart from the regular-route authority to which it may be found entitled.

In support of this request, applicant submitted an exhibit indicating the charter operations performed by it during 1934. Similar exhibits were presented covering each subsequent year through 1938. These exhibits do not indicate the exact date of each trip, and it is impossible to determine which of the 1935 operations occurred on or prior to the statutory date. Discussion of the "grandfather" operations necessarily, therefore, will be confined (with the exception of Hackettstown, N. J., as hereinafter explained) to those conducted during 1934.

The chartered parties which applicant originated in New Jersey during 1934 moved from 60 points on its regular routes and from 52 off-route points. While most of these parties originated at points in northeastern New Jersey opposite New York City and/or from New Jersey points within 15 miles of Philadelphia, some were also originated at numerous other points throughout the State. Only Cumberland, Salem, Monmouth, Hunterdon, and Warren Counties failed to yield applicant any charter traffic during 1934. In its exceptions, applicant states that charter groups shown in its exhibits to have originated in 1935 at Hackettstown in Warren County actually were transported therefrom prior to June 1 of that year. It has continued since the statutory date to conduct charter operations substantially similar in scope to those just described.

On this showing, the joint board found that applicant was entitled to authority under the "grandfather" clause of section 206 (a) to originate special or chartered parties at all New Jersey points on its regular routes. Applicant contends that it should be authorized to originate such parties at any point in New Jersey.

No exception is voiced in respect of the destination territory recommended by the board, and it is unnecessary to discuss its finding in this respect except to observe that it is clearly supported by the evidence.

Section 208 (c) of the act provides that any motor common carrier transporting passengers over a regular route or routes pursuant to a certificate granted may transport in interstate or foreign commerce to any place special or chartered parties under such rules and regulations as the Commission shall have prescribed. Such right is incidental to the holding of a certificate authorizing the transportation of passengers over regular routes and between fixed termini, and, in connection with such transportation of special or chartered parties, we are without authority to place any limitation upon the destination territory which such carrier may serve, though we may by special or general rules and regulations appropriately limit the territory within which special or chartered parties may be originated. Peninsula Transit Corp. Common Carrier Application, 1 M. C. C. 440. In Regulations, Special or Chartered Party Service, supra, division 5 prescribed general rules governing all operations conducted under the authority of this section, among which is rule III providing that carriers subject thereto may transport special or chartered parties (1) which originate at any point or points on the route or routes authorized to be served by such carrier or (2) which originate at any point or points within the territory served by its regular route or routes. In the report last cited it was also found that section 208 (c) is not a limitation upon any rights authorized by section 206 (a) of the act, but confers an additional right, without proof, and which is not severable, to carriers operating over a regular route or routes and between fixed termini, except carriers performing, either exclusively or in connection with other certificated rights, special or charter operations under a certificate specifically authorizing such operations.

Since applicant's right to originate special or chartered parties at points on its routes and within the territory served thereby does not depend on the scope of the charter operations actually performed by it since prior to the statutory date, but exists rather as an incident to the holding of a regular-route certificate, it is necessary to state in the certificate herein granted only those charter rights in respect of origins without the territory served by applicant's routes.

All the 52 or 533 off-route origins served by applicant are in northern New Jersey-14 in Bergen County, 8 in Hudson County, 10 in Essex County, 3 in Union County, 7 in Middlesex County, 8 in Morris County, and 1 each in Somerset, Sussex, and Warren Counties. Stated otherwise, they may be said to lie on or north of a line be

3 Depending on whether or not Hackettstown, claimed to have been served in 1935 before June 1, is included.

42 M. C. C.