eastern New York, including points on Long Island, on the other, as well as between points in New Jersey within the base territory, on the one hand, and points in this State outside of the base territory, on the other, have not been as substantial as between other points in the claimed territory, considering the actual operations performed, together with the unrefuted testimony that applicant has been engaged in such operations since prior to the statutory date, and since the use of interstate routes might be more practicable in certain instances, it will be granted authority to continue these operations in interstate or foreign commerce.

Viewing the record as a whole, we are of the opinion that applicant has established the right to continue operations (1) between points in New Jersey and New York within 25 miles of Newark, including Newark, and (2) between points in such area, on the one hand, and points in New Jersey and those within the claimed portion of southeastern New York, including Long Island, but exclusive of those points in (1) above, on the other, over irregular routes.

Pennsylvania operations.-The service performed by applicant to and from points in Pennsylvania, since prior to June 1, 1935, is substantially similar to that rendered in New Jersey and New York. Applicant originated in New Jersey within the base territory shipments from such points as Kearny, South Kearny, Jersey City, and Perth Amboy, and transported them to numerous points in that part of Pennsylvania on and east of U. S. Highways 11 and 111. Included among those transported are shipments of slag blocks from Bound Brook to Philadelphia, Pa., asphalt from Hoboken to Pottsville, acid, asphalt joints, metal floor forms, paint, and machinery from Newark to Philadelphia, Laurelton, Harrisburg, and Bethlehem, Pa., and rubber from Jersey City to Philadelphia. There were also some shipments of iron and steel articles to the Navy Yard at Philadelphia. The origin points in New Jersey are fairly representative of points within 25 miles of Newark and the destinations in Pennsylvania of points in the portion of this State on and east of U. S. Highways 11 and 111. In the reverse direction on and after June 1, 1935, applicant transported shipments of wire cloth from York, Pa., to Newark, roofing materials from York to South Kearny, wooden tanks from Darby, Pa., to Newark, steel articles from Philadelphia to Sayreville, N. J., manganese from Philadelphia to Springfield, and Farnaham Park, N. J. fencing, nails, spikes, machinery, and iron and steel articles from Philadelphia to Newark, and spikes from Allentown, Pa., to Newark. There have been fairly regular shipments since the statutory date of wire cloth from York to Newark, with occasional shipments to Asbury Park, and of wire, wooden tanks, nails, spikes, and metal floor forms

from Philadelphia to Newark. There also have been occasional shipments of iron and steel articles and manganese from Harrisburg, Milton, Bethlehem, Williamsport, Stroudsburg, and East Stroudsburg to several points in New Jersey. While the greater portion of the traffic from and to points in Pennsylvania moved to and from points in New Jersey, there were shipments before and after June 1, 1935, from York, Allentown, and Philadelphia to points in the New York portion of the base area, and from New York City to Philadelphia and York.

Applicant will be granted authority to continue the transportation of the specified commodities heretofore described between points in the base territory, on the one hand, and those in Pennsylvania on and east of U. S. Highways 11 and 111, on the other.

Connecticut operations.-Applicant's operations between the base territory and points in Connecticut, west of the Connecticut River, have been similar to those conducted from and to other points in the considered territory. Applicant has, since prior to June 1, 1935, transported numerous shipments from points in the base territory in New Jersey to Danbury, Greenwich, Stamford, Norwalk, South Norwalk, North Madison, Stratford, Georgetown, Westport, Springdale, Norwich, and other points in Connecticut. There were also shipments from New York City to Danbury, Stamford, Greenwich, South Norwalk, and Bethel, Conn. Return shipments of roofing materials and supplies, poultry netting, and wire screen moved regularly from Georgetown to Newark, and there have been other shipments from Stamford and Bethel to such points as Asbury Park and Paterson, N. J., and to Colts Neck, N. Y. Although the preponderance of applicant's traffic in connection with its claimed Connecticut operations, has moved east-bound, there also have been some movements, as previously indicated, in the reverse direction. The representative operations shown to have been performed by applicant, taken together with the unrefuted testimony that it has since prior to June 1, 1935, rendered service from and to points in the western part of this State is, in our opinion, sufficient to warrant a grant of authority for continuance of such operations between points in the base territory, on the one hand, and those in Connecticut on and west of the Connecticut River, on the other.

Maryland operations.-Prior to June 1, 1935, applicant transported two shipments of motor oil from Bayonne and Jersey City to Baltimore and Canton, Md., two shipments of wire from Newark to Baltimore and two shipments of wire fencing material from Baltimore to Newark. The only service shown as having been performed thereafter consisted of single shipments of wire from New York to Elkton, Md., steel products from New York to Baltimore, and nails from

Sparrows Point to Newark in 1940. The representative of applicant's principal shipper indicated that shipments to points in Maryland are very infrequent, and that none had been made since August 1940. Clearly, such infrequent and sporadic movements as were transported by applicant from or to points in Maryland do not satisfy the requirements of the statute with respect to bona fide operations on and since June 1, 1935. The authority sought to continue operations between points in the base territory, on the one hand, and points in Cecil, Harford, and Baltimore Counties, Md., on the other, over irregular routes, must accordingly be denied.

Findings.-On reconsideration, we find that applicant on June 1, 1935, and continuously since, has been engaged in bona fide operations, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle of iron and steel products; building, construction, heating and insulating materials, supplies and equipment; and such commodities as are dealt in by wholesale and retail hardware stores, (1) between points in New Jersey and New York within 25 miles of Newark, N. J., including Newark, and (2) between points in New Jersey and New York within 25 miles of Newark, including Newark, on the one hand, and, on the other, points in Connecticut on and west of the Connecticut River, all points in New Jersey, and those in New York on, south, and east of a line beginning at the Massachusetts-New York State line and extending westerly along U. S. Highway 20 to the junction with New York Highway 30, thence southerly along New York Highway 30 to East Branch, N. Y., thence along New York Highway 17 to Hancock, N. Y., and thence south along an unnumbered highway to the New York-Pennsylvania State line, including points on Long Island, N. Y., but excluding those points authorized in (1) above, and points in Pennsylvania on and east of a line beginning at the New York-Pennsylvania State line and extending along U. S. Highway 11 to Lemoyne, Pa., and thence along U. S. Highway 111 to the Maryland-Pennsylvania State line, over irregular routes, traversing Delaware for operating convenience only; that applicant is entitled to a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing continuance of such operations; and that in all other respects the application should be denied.

Upon compliance by applicant with the requirements of sections 215 and 217 of the act and with our rules and regulations thereunder, an amended certificate will be issued. An order will be entered denying the application except to the extent granted herein.

CHAIRMAN PATTERSON and COMMISSIONERS MILLER and ROGERS dissent.

No. MC-73673

G. & M. MOTOR TRANSFER COMPANY, INCORPORATED, COMMON CARRIER APPLICATION

Submitted April 12, 1944. Decided July 10, 1944

Upon oral argument, applicant's petition for clarification of certificate and for review and modification of certificate to authorize transportation of general commodities between northern and southern portions of present authorized territory without interchange, denied. Prior report, 31 M. C. C. 609.

William M. York for applicant.

Frank X. Masterson for protestants.

R. J. McBride and Thaxton Richardson for interveners.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON ORAL ARGUMENT

BY THE COMMISSION:

The issues presented were raised by a petition filed herein by applicant, G. & M. Motor Transfer Company, Incorporated, of Statesville, N. C., successor to C. H. Gant. The Regular Common Carrier Conference of the American Trucking Associations, Inc., intervened and filed a reply, and the Motor Carrier Traffic Association of Greensboro, N. C., intervened in support of the petition. Oral argument on the petition has been heard, at which the Regular Common Carrier Conference of the American Trucking Associations, Inc., and rail carriers operating in official classification territory opposed the relief sought. In general it is not our practice in disposing of petitions to explain our reasons for the action taken thereon. The instant petition, however, raises issues of interest to the motor-carrier industry as a whole, and we feel that an explanation of the action taken will be helpful to all concerned.

By an application filed under the "grandfather" clause of section 206 (a) of the Interstate Commerce Act, applicant sought a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing operation, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, over irregular routes, of general commodities, with certain exceptions, between all points in Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode

1 Substitution of G. & M. Motor Transfer Company, Incorporated, for C. H. Gant was authorized in No. MC-FC-13378, July 19, 1940. Reference to applicant in the instant report may mean the original applicant or petitioner, or both, according to the period indicated by the context.

Island, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia, parts of New York and Tennessee, and Louisville, Ky.

After hearing, a report and recommended order by an examiner were served upon the parties, and applicant duly filed exceptions to the recommended order.

In its report in the proceeding, 31 M. C. C. 609, division 5 found that applicant on June 1, 1935, was and continuously since has been in bona fide operation, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, (1) of general commodities, except those of unusual value, dangerous explosives, commodities in bulk, and those requiring special equipment, (a) from Elkin and Statesville, N. C., to points in Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia, those in Tennessee on, east, and south of a line beginning at the Georgia-Tennessee State line and extending along U. S. Highway 27 to its junction with U. S. Highway 70, thence along U. S. Highway 70 to Knoxville, and thence along U. S. Highway 11W to the Tennessee-Virginia State line, and those in New York on and south of a line beginning at Oswego and extending along U. S. Highway 134 to Mexico, N. Y., thence along New York Highway 69 to Rome, thence along New York Highway 49 to Utica, thence along New York Highway 5 to Schenectady, thence along New York Highway 7 to Troy, and thence along New York Highway 96 to the New York-Massachusetts State line, and (b) from the above-described destination points to points in North Carolina, and (2) of empty containers from points in North Carolina to points in the above-described States or the indicated portions, over irregular routes in each instance; and granted it a certificate authorizing the continuance of such operations. The application was denied in all other respects. The certificate granted was issued on September 5, 1942.

Applicant has interpreted the certificate as authorizing not only operations from Elkin and Statesville to points in the described territory outside of North Carolina and from points in such described territory to points in North Carolina, but also operations between points in such outside territory through Elkin and Statesville. In other words, applicant's position is that under the certificate it may, for example, lawfully transport a shipment from New York City to a point in the authorized portion of Georgia, providing the movement is through Elkin or Statesville. Our Bureau of Motor Carriers has informally advised applicant that the certificate does not authorize the operation last mentioned, and that any operation of this nature is unlawful and should be discontinued. The petition was filed to resolve this matter.