Page images
PDF
EPUB

The examiner finds that public convenience and necessity require and will require operation by applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce of household goods, between Millington and points within 12 miles thereof, on the one hand, and all points in Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Ohio, on the other hand, over irregular routes; that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform the proposed services and to conform to the act and the rules, regulations, and requirements 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-62986 (SUB-No. 1)
JAMES MATT HINES EXTENSION OF OPERATIONS

SALTVILLE, VA.

Decided July 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
plaster materials, between Mount Airy, N. C. and Saltville, Va., over
regular route. Certificate granted.
James Matt Hines for applicant.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS EASTMAN, CASKIE, AND ROGERS
BY DIVISION 5:

On June 21, 1938, the following recommended report and a recommended order appended thereto, filed with us by joint board No. 7, 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. 7, COMPOSED OF

STANLEY WINBORNE OF NORTH CAROLINA AND H. LESTER HOOKER OF VIRGINIA

By application filed April 14, 1938, James Matt Hines, of Mount Airy, N. C., seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of plaster materials, between Mount Airy, N. C., and Saltville, Va., over a regular route. 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. 7 for appropriate proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935.

By application filed February 7, 1936, applicant claimed certain "grandfather” rights to continue operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, and, accordingly, an order was issued by this Commission on March 30, 1938, author

izing the granting of a certificate to applicant to continue transporting plaster, lime, building materials, and coal over irregular routes between certain points in Virginia, North Carolina, and West Virginia, upon the condition that applicant would comply with sections 215, 216, and 217 of the act and with the rules and regulations of the Commission thereunder. This authority included the transportation of plaster from Plasterco, Va., to Mount Airy.

Applicant is a building contractor and when he is not busy with his own work he hauls for the public generally. It appears that he has been in the building and hauling work for about 15 years. There are no direct rail connections between the towns involved in this application, and to the knowledige of applicant, there is no common carrier by motor vehicle rendering a similar service. This call-anddemand service requires the use of applicant's equipment. Applicant's present operations are profitable and he appears to be financially and otherwise able to conduct the proposed operations.

The joint board finds that pre-ent and future public convenience and necessity require operation by applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of plaster materials, between Mount Airy, N. C., and Saltville, Va., over U.S. Highway 52 to Fort Criswell, Va., thence over C. S. Highway 11 to Chilhowie, Va., and thence over an unnumbered county road, returning over the same route and serving no interinediate points; that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform such 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.

OM.(..

No. MC-79446 (SUB-No. 1)
JAMES BOTTI COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION

Decided July 11, 1938

Public convenience and necessity found to require operation by applicant as

a common carrier by motor vehicle, of malt and brewed beverages and of empty containers, between Jeannette, Pa., and certain points in Maryland.

Certificate granted.
Lewis E. Mai for applicant.
Samuel P. Delisi for protestants.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS EASTMAN, CASKIE, AND ROGERS
By Diviston 5:

On June 10, 1938, the following recommended report and a recommended order appended thereto, filed with us by joint board No. 74, were served on the parties. No exceptions to the order were filed, but on June 30, 1938, we postponed to July 11, 1938, the date on which the said order should become the order of the Commission and become effective. Not having been stayed or further postponed by us, it has become effective as our order.

REPORT AND ORDER RECOMMENDED BY JOINT BOARD NO. 74, COMPOSED OF

HAROLD E. WEST OF MARYLAND AND RICHARD J. BEAMISH OF PENNSYLVANIA

By application filed October 6, 1937, James Botti, of Wilmerding, Pa., seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle, of malt and brewed beverages, in interstate or foreign commerce, between Jeannette, Pa., and certain points in Maryland, over a regular route.

In accordance with the provisions of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935, the application was referred to joint board No. 74 for hearing and the recommendation of an appropriate order thereon. Hearing has been held. Rail carriers in trunk-line territory opposed the granting of the application.

1 The application originally sought authority to extend an existing operation covered by an Application under the "grandfather" clause of the Motor Carrier Act, 1935, but the latter application was dismissed on request of applicant.

Applicant has been operating since 1936, but such operation, in respect of the commodities considered, has been limited to Pennsyl. vania since August 1937. He now transports beer and empty containers within Pennsylvania for the Victor Brewing Company, which is located in Jeannette, and he desires to extend that operation between points and over the routes shown below:

Route 1, between Jeanette and Cumberland, Md.: From Jeanette over U. S. Highway 30 to Bedford, Pa., thence over U. S. Highway 220 to Cumberland.

Route 2, between Jeanette and Oakland, Md.: From Jeanette to Cumberland over same routes as above, thence from Cumberland over U. S. Highway 40 to Frostburg, and thence over U. S. Highway 219 to Oakland.

Route 3, between Jeanette and Baltimore, MD.: From Jeanette to Cumberland over same route as above, thence U. S. Highway 40 to Hagerstown, Frederick, and Baltimore.

Route 4, between Jeanette and Annapolis, Md.: From Jeanette to Baltimore, same as route above, thence Maryland Highway 2 to Annapolis.

Route 5, between Jeanette and Texas, Md.: From Jeanette to Baltimore, same as route above, thence U. S. Highway 111 to Texas, Md.

His present equipment consists of one tractor and one open-top trailer. If demands require, he will inclose this trailer and purchase new equipment. There has been a demand for his services and the transportation of beer is to some extent seasonal, that is, more beer is transported during the summer months than in the winter. Applicant is familiar with the safety regulations, and his tractor and trailer are equipped with safety devices. He has had no serious accidents in the past. His net worth was shown to be $2,000 at the time the application was filed, and was approximately the same when the application was heard.

A witness for applicant representing the Victor Brewing Company, hereinafter referred to as the brewing company, stated that applicant had transported for his company within Pennsylvania, that his services had been satisfactory, and that there was a daily neer! for them in respect of transportation to the points in Maryland referred to. This company also owns its own equipment and has used that of another motor carrier, but the services of the latter have been unsatisfactory because of the limited capacity of the equipment. The witness further stated that the brewing company is located on the tracks of the Pennsylvania Railroad, but that rail service is unsatisfactory because of the limited storage facilities of distributors in the destination territory, and because of the inability of rail carriers to effect delivery in less than four or five days. By the use of motor-carrier services, its shipments could reach destination overnight. This company disposes of the bulk of its product in Pennsylvania, but would ship between 1,000 and 2,000 cases of bottled beer into Maryland each day if it had satisfactory motor-carrier

BM.cc.

« PreviousContinue »