Page images
PDF
EPUB

No. MC-40301 (SUB-No. 1)
R. B. EVANS EXTENSION-CLOVERDALE

Decided August 11, 1938

Public convenience and necessity found to require operation by applicant as a

common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, with exceptions, between certain points in Ohio, over a specified route. Certificate granted. R. B. Evans for applicant.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS AITCHISON, SPLAWN, AND ROGERS BY DIVISION 5:

On July 22, 1938, the following recommended report and a recommended order appended thereto, filed with us by joint board No. 117, were served on the parties. No exceptions to the order have been filed, and, not having been stayed or postponed by us, it has become effective as our order.

REPORT AND ORDER RECOMMENDED BY JOINT BOARD NO. 117, COMPOSED OF

NOEL F. GEORGE OF OHIO

By application filed April 30, 1938, R. B. Evans, of Van Wert, Ohio, doing business as Evans Motor Freight, seeks authority to extend his operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, with certain exceptions," between points in the State of Ohio as follows:

From Van Wert over U. S. Highway 30 to Delphos, thence over Ohio Highway 190 to Fort Jennings, thence over Ohio Highway 189 to Ottoville, thence over U. S. Highway 224 and Ohio Highway 66 to Mandale, thence over Ohio Highway 114 to Cloverdale, thence over county road and Ohio Highway 66 to Oakwood via Dupont; thence over Ohio Highway 113 via Melrose to intersection with U. S. Highway 127 at Latty, thence over U. S. Highway 127 to intersection with Ohio Highway 114, thence over Ohio Highway 114 to Roselms via Grover Hill, thence over county roads to intersection with U. S. Highway 224, and thence along U. S. Highway 224 to Van Wert, serving all intermediate points.

No protest against the granting of the application has been filed.

1 Commodities of unusual value, high explosives, commodities in bulk, commodities re quiring special equipment, commodities injurious or contaminating to other lading, and uncrated household or office furnishings.

It appearing, upon investigation of the matters involved in the application, that no hearing in respect thereof might be necessary the application was referred to joint board No. 117 for appropriate proceedings, in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935.

Applicant is presently operating as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, with certain exceptions, between Van Wert and Toledo, Ohio, over specified routes. Application for authority to continue these operations was filed under the "grandfather" clause of section 206 (a) of the act. Such application is receiving consideration in a separate proceeding.

Applicant is operating over the proposed extension in intrastate commerce by virtue of a certificate of public convenience and necessity granted by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio under date of September 18, 1936. Applicant proposes to handle interstate shipments over said route by means of interchange with interstate carriers at Van Wert. The majority of towns located along the proposed route have no interstate freight service of any description, with the exception of Oakwood and Fort Jennings, which points are served by a rail carrier. Under existing conditions merchants along the route have their merchandise shipped to a point some distance removed from their places of business, from which point each merchant must supply his own transportation of such shipments. Through the medium of the proposed operation overnight service will be afforded the merchants on shipments originating at such points as Chicago, Ill., South Bend, and Fort Wayne, Ind., and Detroit, Mich. Applicant has been engaged in the motortransportation business, together with the garage and storage business, since 1923, and he employs experienced personnel. His equipment consists of one truck, three trailers, and two tractors. Applicant is financially able to conduct the proposed operation.

The joint board finds that public convenience and recessity require the service proposed by applicant; that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform the proposed service and to conform to the provisions of the act and the requirements, rules, and regulations of the Commission thereunder; and that an appropriate certificate should be granted. It is recommended that the appended order be entered.

9 M. C. C.

No. MC-50759 (SUB-No. 1) STEWART & SINCLAIR, INCORPORATED, EXTENSION

DELAWARE-VIRGINIA

Decided August 11, 1938

Operation by applicant as a contract carrier by motor vehicle, of pretzels and

potato chips, from Baltimore, Md., and Columbia, Pa., respectively, over irregular routes, to points in Delaware and Virginia, and of empty containers on return movement, found consistent with the public interest and with the policy declared in section 202 (a) of the act. Permit granted. J. Marshall Stewart for applicant.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS AITCHISON, SPLAWN, AND ROGERS BY DIVISION 5:

On July 22, 1938, the following recommended report and a recommended order appended thereto, filed with us by the examiner, were served on the parties. No exceptions to the order have been filed, and, not having been stayed or postponed by us, it has become effective as our order.

REPORT AND ORDER RECOMMENDED BY THE EXAMINER By application filed May 20, 1938, Stewart & Sinclair, Incorporated, of Baltimore, Md., seeks a permit authorizing operation, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a contract carrier by motor vehicle, of pretzels, potato chips, and other bakery products, from Baltimore, Md., and Columbia, Pa., to points in Delaware and Virginia, over irregular routes. No protest against the granting of the application was filed.

It appearing, upon investigation of the matters involved in the application, that no hearing in respect thereof might be necessary, the application was referred to the examiner for appropriate proceedings, in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935.

In Stewart & Sinclair, Inc., Contract Carrier Operation, 6 M. C. C. 121, a permit was granted to applicant for the transportation of pretzels from Baltimore, Md., and of potato chips from Columbia. Pa., over irregular routes, to points in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and the District of Columbia, and of empty containers on return movement.

Applicant is engaged in transportation for one shipper in making deliveries of potato chips and pretzels to distributors employed by the shipper. The shipper has now secured distributors in Delaware and Virginia and the instant application is filed for authority to extend operations.

The service proposed is specialized in that satisfactory transportation requires careful handling, equal distribution of the load, and proper packing within the truck. The spring suspensions and the shock absorbers on the vehicles are specially built to insure transportation of the pretzels with a minimum of breakage. Empty containers are carried on the return trips.

Applicant has filed a schedule of minimum rates with the Commission and appears financially and otherwise able to conduct the proposed operations. Applicant alleges that the proposed service is not competitive with any existing carrier.

The examiner finds that operation by applicant as a contract carrier by motor vehicle of pretzels from Baltimore and of potato chips from Columbia, over irregular routes, to points in Delaware and Virginia, and of empty containers on return movement, will be consistent with the public interest and with the policy declared in section 202 (a) of the act; that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform the services of a contract carrier by motor vehicle and to conform to the provisions of the act and the requirements, rules, and regulations of the Commission thereunder; and that an appropriate permit should be issued upon compliance by applicant with the requirements established generally in Contracts of Contract Carriers, 1 M. C. C. 628. It is recommended that the appended order be entered.

9M.C.C.

No. MC-61599 (SUB-No. 13)
QUEEN CITY COACH COMPANY EXTENSION OF

OPERATIONS-CHERAW-LANCASTER, S. C.

Decided August 11, 1938

1 Public convenience and necessity found to require operation by applicant

as a common carrier by motor vehicle, of passengers and their baggage, and of express, mail, and newspapers in the same vehicle with passengers, in interstate or foreign commerce, between Cheraw and Lancaster,

S. C., over a specified route. Certificate granted. 2. Applicant authorized to conduct special or charter operations from territory

served by the proposed route to any place within the United States. K. J. Kindley for applicant.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS AITCHISON, SPLAWN, AND ROGERS BY DIVISION 5:

On July 22, 1938, the following recommended report and a recommended order appended thereto, filed with us by joint board No. 177, were served on the parties. No exceptions to the order have been filed, and, not having been stayed or postponed by us, it has become effective as our order. REPORT AND ORDER RECOMMENDED BY JOINT BOARD NO. 177, COMPOSED OF

JOHN C. CONEY OF SOUTH CAROLINA By application filed March 17, 1938, the Queen City Coach Company, a corporation of Charlotte, N. C., seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity to extend its present operations, authorizing operation in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, of passengers and their baggage, and of express, mail, and newspapers in the same vehicle with passengers, between Cheraw and Lancaster, S. C., over South Carolina Highway 9, serving all intermediate points. No protests against the granting of the application have been filed.

It appearing, upon investigation of the matters involved in the application, that no hearing in respect thereof might be necessary, the application was referred to joint board No. 177 for appropriate

1 Applicant's application for a certificate under the "grandfather" clause of section 206 (a) of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935, is receiving the Commission's consideration in another proceeding.

« PreviousContinue »