mately 20 and 15 times a year, on the average, respectively. The next 2 counties, Cabarrus and Mecklenburg, were served an average of 4 and 3 times a year, respectively. The remaining 16 counties were served infrequently, some, once or twice a year, and some, less often.

Applicant's in-bound operations have been substantial and continuous to points in Catawba and Caldwell Counties since the statutory date. As seen, these two counties together with Burke and McDowell Counties constitute the base origin area served in its out-bound operations. All four counties form a fairly compact area around applicant's headquarters at Hickory, and we believe that it has been endeavoring to serve the same area in both directions, that is, in-bound as well as out-bound. Although a larger area may have been served in the prior period, applicant's rights under the "grandfather" clause must be limited to the smaller area served regularly during the subsequent period. Accordingly, we conclude that applicant has performed in-bound operations to a base destination area comprising Catawba, Caldwell, Burke, and McDowell Counties on and continuously since June 1, 1935.

Applicant claims that its in-bound operations have involved service from an outlying origin area comprising nine States and the District of Columbia. However, it only showed service prior to June 1, 1935, from eight points of origin, namely, Newark, Elizabeth, Baltimore, Washington, Norfolk, Saltville, Plasterco, and Charleston. Service is shown since that date from only four of these points: Newark, Elizabeth, Baltimore, and Norfolk. Certain nearby points also have been served, as follows: North Bergen, Seaboard, Jersey City, Bayonne, Hillside, and Elizabethport, N. J., all in the vicinity of Newark, and Portsmouth, Va., just across the Elizabeth River from Norfolk. During the subsequent period, several other points have been served from time to time, for example, Philadelphia and the nearby point of Lansdale, Pa., since 1936, Jamestown, N. Y., New York City, and Richmond since 1937, and Edge Moor, Del., and Trenton since 1938. York, Pa., has been served regularly since September 1936, but there is no evidence of record that it was served prior to the statutory date. A few sporadic shipments have been transported since February 1937 from Pittsburgh and other points in western Pennsylvania.

Although applicant claims to have served the territory along the Atlantic seaboard from South Carolina to New York, the only portions of the territory shown to have been served during the prior and subsequent periods are those in and around Newark, Baltimore, and Norfolk. We conclude, therefore, that applicant's in-bound operations, on and continuously since June 1, 1935, have involved the transportation of general commodities, with exceptions, from points in Hudson,

Essex, and Union Counties, N. J., Baltimore, Norfolk, and Portsmouth to points in Catawba, Burke, McDowell, and Caldwell Counties, N. C., over irregular routes, traversing Pennsylvania, Delaware, and the District of Columbia for operating convenience only.

The exceptions include automobiles, dangerous explosives, articles of unusual value, commodities in bulk, and commodities requiring special equipment. Household goods will be treated as an excepted commodity, as this class of property was not transported from and to the foregoing points prior to the statutory date. However, it was transported from and to other points during the prior period as hereinafter discussed. In the conduct of in-bound, as well as out-bound operations, applicant has transported return movements of empty used containers and rejected articles, and authority to continue this incidental transportation will be granted by our findings herein.

Household goods. In the prior report, applicant was found entitled to "grandfather" rights for the transportation of household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Household Goods, supra, between points in North Carolina, on the one hand, and on the other, points in South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. This finding is not challenged by applicant or protestants, but our review of the evidence convinces us that it should be broadened as to commodities and narrowed as to the base territory. The service rendered by applicant has involved the transportation of "emigrant movables" consisting of farm implements, farm equipment, and livestock as well as household goods, and hence, the commodity description should be enlarged to authorize this complete service. Furthermore, this service has not been sufficiently broad to warrant the grant of State-wide authority in North Carolina as it has been performed since prior to June 1, 1935, from and to points in only three counties, namely, Catawba, Burke and Caldwell Counties. These three counties, together with McDowell County, form the base area which applicant has served in its other operations. Although we have been liberal in our grants of authority to carriers to transport household goods, the evidence here does not justify the grant to applicant of a larger base area for this operation than for its other operations. We conclude that applicant has been in bona fide operation, on and continuously since July 1, 1935, as a motor common carrier of household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Household Goods, supra, and emigrant movables, between points in Catawba, Burke, McDowell, and Caldwell Counties, N. C., on the one hand, and, on the other, points in South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.

Findings. On reconsideration, we find that applicant's predecessor was, on June 1, 1935, and that the predecessor and applicant continuously since have been, in bona fide operation, in interstate or foreign

commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, of (1) new furniture from points in Catawba, Burke, McDowell, and Caldwell Counties, N. C., to New York, N. Y., all points in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia, all points in Maryland located north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, and west of Elk River and Chesapeake Bay, and all points in Virginia located west of Chesapeake Bay, with empty used containers and rejected articles in the reverse direction, (2) general commodities, except automobiles, dangerous explosives, articles of unusual value, commodities in bulk, commodities requiring special equipment, and household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Household Goods, supra, from points in Hudson, Essex, and Union Counties, N. J., Baltimore, Md., and Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va., to points in Catawba, Burke, McDowell, and Caldwell Counties, N. C., with empty used containers and rejected articles in the reverse direction, and (3) household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Household Goods, supra, and emigrant movables, between points in Catawba, Burke, McDowell, and Caldwell Counties, N. C., on the one hand, and, on the other, points in South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia, over irregular routes, traversing Delaware and West Virginia where necessary; that applicant is entitled to a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing the 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 Interstate Commerce Act, and our rules and regulations thereunder, an appropriate certificate will be issued. An order will be entered denying the application except to the extent granted in this report on reconsideration.

LEE, Commissioner, concurring in part:

I approve the report except that I think applicant should be authorized to transport household goods between points in North Carolina and points in Virginia, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

Commissioner SPLAWN joins in this expression.

43 M. C. C.

No. MC-28546

C. D. GAMMON COMPANY COMMON CARRIER

APPLICATION

Submitted April 12, 1943. Decided January 12, 1944

1. Applicant found to have been engaged since prior to June 1, 1935, in bona fide operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of general commodities, with certain exceptions, between points in the Chicago, Ill., commercial zone, as defined in Chicago Ill., Commercial Zone, 1 M. C. C. 673, over irregular routes.

2. Holding by applicant of a certificate authorizing continuance of the abovedescribed operations and a permit authorizing continuance of operations as a contract carrier of special commodities in the same territory, found not consistent with the public interest or the national transportation policy. Application denied unless suggested steps taken to eliminate dual operations within 90 days from issuance of this report.

John S. Burchmore, Helen W. Munsert, and Luther M. Walter for Company, Inc., withdrew its opposition.

George S. Mullins for intervener.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS LEE, ROGERS, AND PATTERSON BY DIVISION 5:

Exceptions were filed by applicant to the recommended order of the joint board. Our conclusions differ from those recommended.

By application filed February 6, 1936, as amended, under the "grandfather" clause of sections 206 (a) and 209 (a) of the Interstate Commerce Act, C. D. Gammon Company, a corporation of Chicago, Ill., seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity, or a permit authorizing continuance of operations, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common or contract carrier by motor vehicle, of general commodities, except groceries, sand, gravel, coal, livestock, and liquids in bulk, between Chicago and points within 40 miles thereof in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, over irregular routes. Steel Transportation Company, Inc., appeared in opposition to the application. At the hearing, applicant disclaimed any desire for authority to serve points other than those in the Chicago commercial zone, as defined in Chicago, Ill., Commercial Zone, 1 M. C. C. 673, whereupon Steel Transportation Company, Inc., withdrew its opposition.

By permit dated May 6, 1942, in No. MC-64819, applicant herein was authorized to operate as a contract carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, of iron, steel, copper, and brass articles, structural steel, paints, and machinery, over irregular routes, from De Kalb, Joliet, and Waukegan, Ill., and points in the Chicago commercial zone to Chicago and points in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, within 150 miles of Chicago, with no transportation for compensation on return.

Applicant was incorporated in 1918. It was a member of the Carters Exchange of Chicago in 1933 and 1935, and was registered under the code of fair competition for the trucking industry in 1934. On August 30, 1935, the Indiana commission granted it authority to conduct interstate motor transportation service over certain routes. On June 1, 1935, applicant had 40 trucks, 8 tractors, and 3 semitrailers. In November 1942, it was operating approximately 63 open-top straight trucks and tractor-trailer combinations. These vehicles were used interchangeably by it in both common- and contract-carrier operations.

Applicant's vice president testified generally as to the operations which were conducted on the "grandfather" date and since. With the original application were filed certain shipping documents and supporting statements which have to do principally with the operation which applicant conducts as a contract carrier. Some time prior to the hearing herein, certain other shipping documents and records having to do with the operations conducted under the instant application were released to applicant's then counsel. Applicant since that time has been unable to secure the return thereof.

The joint board recommended that applicant be authorized to operate, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in collection and delivery service, of general commodities, except livestock, poultry, dangerous explosives, commodities in bulk, groceries, articles of unusual value. household goods as defined in Practices of Motor Common Carriers of Hcusehold Goods, 17 M. C. C. 467, iron, steel, copper and brass articles, structural steel, paints, and machinery, between points in the Chicago commercial zone, over irregular routes. The described grant of authority was recommended on the premise that applicant performs a pick-up and delivery service for freight forwarders within the whole of the Chicago commercial zone, and beyond the terminal areas of such freight forwarders. Applicant excepts to the recommended order of the joint board, and claims (1) that iron and steel, copper and brass articles, structural steel, paints, and machinery should not have been excepted from its general-commodity grant, and (2) that dual operations should have been authorized in respect of the commodities specified in its permit.