9. Jurisdiction of Commission.--See Greenstein Trucking Co. v. United cates, $212 (a), n. 30.

10. Violation of Act.--Applicant's "frequent and flagrant" violation E the Act resulted in denial of its application.--Metler Hauling & Rigging st.--Loudoun County, Tenn., 117 M.C.C. 557 (558).

25. Convenience and necessity, demand for service, in general.-Ithough it was determined in the prior report, 114 M.C.C. 571, that there is pervasive dissatisfaction with available transportation services (largely int-line) in considered area and a rapidly increasing demand and need for ditional direct, single-line service, the authority granted in the prior eport failed to assure shippers in Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma d shippers located elsewhere having traffic moving to or from these States hat they will be able to obtain the needed single-line service. Of all oplicants in the prior report, only Jones now holds authority in this fourtate area necessary to ensure that supporting shippers will be able to obtain he required single-line service. Application granted to the extent that it ill not needlessly duplicate authority granted in the prior report.--Jones ruck Lines, Inc., Ext.--Atlanta, Ga., 117 M.C.C. 586 (593-94)*.

Public need found to require transportation by applicant of refuse Containers and compactor systems, and of commodities used in the manufacture nd distribution of refuse compactor systems and refuse containers (except onmodities in bulk), from two points in New York to points in 15 additional tates.--Indian Bow Truck Lines, Ltd., Extension--15 States, 117 M.C.C. 671

675)*.

Commodity description: "Double-wides" are sectionalized buildings, nd are not embraced by the commodity description "mobile homes."--Chandler railer Convoy, Inc., Ext.--Lexington Trailers, 117 M.C.C. 653 (657)*.

Economy and efficiency: Applicant seeking to modify its 11 passenger estriction to a 20 passenger restriction in transportation between Wilmington, el., and Philadelphia and between an airport in New York City and points in ennsylvania, on the basis of economy and needed improvements, failed to subtantiate adequately either the alleged economy or the improvements to be erived from the proposed modification. Specifically, applicant did not indiate any consideration of cost difference between operation of the different ize vehicles required to transport the differing number of passengers, and ailed to consider that passengers may not all simultaneously require the ransportation offered. Application denied.--Salem Transp. Co., Inc. Ext.-dditional Passengers, 117 M.C.C. 405 (409)*.

Extended authority to transport sectionalized buildings ("doubleides") granted, inasmuch as authority will result in efficiency and operating conomies redounding to the benefit of the supporting shipper, and whatever light effect limited additional competition from applicant may have upon rotestants was found to be outweighed by shipper's need for additional ervice.--Chandler Trailer Convoy, Inc., Ext.--Lexington Trailers, 117 M.C.C. 53 (658-59)*.

Existing carriers: Shipper's utilization of its primary carrier (Mason and Dixon) found to belie the contention of Chemical Leaman (secondary applicant) that a trend toward bulk shipment justifies or requires an additional carrier, since shipper's use of its primary carrier declined in preceding years. Secondary application denied.--Mason & Dixon Tank Lines Ext.--Florida Chemical, 117 M.C.C. 539 (547)*.

Existing service adequate: Application to transport meats, meat products, and meat byproducts from St. Louis, Mo., and points in Illinois to points in Arizona, New Mexico, and Nevada denied, on basis of adequate existing service.--Ill.-Pac. Coast Transportation Co., Ext.--Three States, 117 M.C.C. 455 (458)*.

Applicant granted authority as sought, with the major exception of Hopkinsville, Ky. The evidence of the proceeding demonstrated that the 20 shippers located in that city had received a consistently satisfactory service from protestant.--Pulaski Highway Express, Inc., Extension--Ky., 117 M.C.C. 552 (554)*.

Application for extension of authority denied on basis of adequate extent service. The preference by shippers to have available the services of an additional motor carrier is not, alone, a sufficient basis for a grant of authority.—Midwestern Express, Inc., Extension--Paper, 117 M.C.C. 720 (723) *.

Fitness in general: Division 1 concluded that applicant had not been shown fit to receive a certificate authorizing its proposed operation as an irregular-route motor carrier of general commodities, with certain exceptions, between 14 Pennsylvania counties and Philadelphia, Pa., restricted to transportation of shipments having prior or subsequent movement by air. The division found that applicant had continued to tack authority set forth in two paragraphs of its lead certificate despite a previous Commission notic that such paragraphs could not be tacked. Such conduct demonstrated a pattem of serious and continual violations inconsistent with a finding that applicant is fit to receive a grant of authority. Application denied.--Conahan Extensi Pennsylvania, 117 M.C.C. 488 (504-05).

Section 207 of the Act establishes, as preconditions to the issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity, findings (1) that the applicant for a certificate is fit, willing, and able properly to perform a proposed service, and (2) that the proposed service is required by the present or future public convenience and necessity. Both findings must be made. One may not be based on the other. The findings concerning fitness should be based on evidence concerning the applicant alone, and not on how strong a case has been presented by the supporting shipper or protestants.--Metler Hauling & Rigging Ext.-Loudoun County, Tenn., 117 M.C.C. 557 (559-60).

Foreign commerce: It is not any inadequacy among carriers that impedes efficiency in foreign commerce between the United States and Mexico, but rather the stringent requirements of Mexican law regarding use of only Mexican-owned equipment on Mexican soil.--Transportes Azteca Extension--Easter States, 117 M.C.C. 645 (650).

Labor difficulties: The hypothetical possibility of future strikes work stoppages is not a sound basis for a grant of authority. Except in e unusual instance, the appropriate course of relief for such occurrences an application for temporary authority.--Pulaski Highway Express, Inc., tension-Ky., 117 M.C.C. 552 (554)*.

Public interest: Public interest generated by advertisement by plicant in the attempt to obtain support in establishment of public convennce and necessity was neither approved nor acceptable. See also, §206(b), 15.--Transportes Azteca Extension--Eastern States, 117 M.C.C. 645 (651).

Public need: Authority granted to eliminate gaps in applicant's rvice to shipper of transporting bulk chemicals radially between Kingsport, nn., and all points in the contiguous United States.-Mason & Dixon Tank nes Ext.--Florida Chemicals, 117 M.C.C. 539 (547)*.

Rates: Applicant's supporting evidence consisted primarily of mere pressions by shippers that they are desirous of the proposed service, and at protestant's rates and charges are, at times, too high. Absent a showing at such rates effectively embargo the traffic, a shipper's desire for lower tes is not a proper basis for a grant of authority. If shippers believe at existing rates are too high, appropriate relief, such as the filing of a mplaint, is available under the provisions of the Act.--United Parcel Service t.--Tenn., Ark. and Miss. Points, 117 M.C.C. 621 (625).

Special service: The Commission has consistently found it appropriate at carriers specializing in serving shippers with only one or two products, rketed through the same dealer network should be in a position to meet their anging and complete transportation requirements, and that in proper circumances, this constitutes sound reason for authorizing the transportation of ctionalized buildings in markets where a carrier previously held authority ly to transport mobile homes.--Chandler Trailer Convoy, Inc., Ext.--Lexington ailers, 117 M.C.C. 653 (658)*.

Truckaway, driveaway, secondary movement: Applicant granted authority transport in secondary movements and in truckaway service, trailers (mobile nes) designed to be drawn by passenger automobiles, from certain points in orgia to certain points in Florida. Supporting shippers contended that isting carriers were not interested in their traffic, and that existing rriers' lack of ready accessibility to source of traffic would prove econom ally prohibitive.--Marrone Common Carrier Application, 117 M.C.C. 680 (681, 3)*.

30. Extension of operations.-

General principles: Public convenience and necessity found to require eration by applicant, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier motor vehicle, over irregular routes, of trucks (3/4 ton or less) and ssenger automobiles, in secondary movements, in truckaway service, between ints in New Mexico and points in Colorado, restricted against tacking Jupliting authority.--Transport Trucking Co. of Texas Ext.--New Mexico, 117 M.C.C. 7 (521) *.

Applicant's desire to extend its authority was based primarily on a wish to retain in his family the operating rights of the contract carrier owned by his son and daughter-in-law; existing service held adequate. Application denied.--Buanno Transp. Co., Inc., Ext.--Gloversville, N.Y., 117 M.C.C. 700 (704)*.

35. Operations by and within lieu of railroads.--Although the Supreme Court in 355 U.S. 141 made it clear that the Commission enjoys a measure of discretion in determining on specific facts and circumstances that the public interest requires a grant of unrestricted authority to a rail-owned carrier, the Commission has exercised that discretion in conservative fashion when granting functionally unrestricted operating authority to rail motor carrier affiliates since 1957 when that case was decided. Since then there have been few large grants of unrestricted motor carrier authority to rail affiliates, and where large grants have been made they usually have not involved substantial opposition by existing motor common carriers offering copetitive services at small intermediate points.--Southern Pac. Transp. Ext.Elimination of Restrictions, 117 M.C.C. 224 (327).

Applicant sought unrestricted operations which were more geographically extensive than those granted since 1957, and the application was opposed to a substantial extent by motor carriers which actually were providing services at most of the small intermediate points involved in the application. However, the quality of the existing service was held lacking, and it is not the purpose of the Act to protect independent motor carriers at all costs where a grant of authority to a rail subsidiary is unlikely to result in undue restraint of competition and where the public interest requires services which the motor carriers are not providing. Granted, subject to restrictions.— Southern Pac. Transp. Ext.--Elimination of Restrictions, 117 M.C.C. 224 (331-32)

See also, $5 (2), n. 2 dual operation.

$208 (b). DEVIATION FROM ROUTES

1. Construction and interpretation.--Carrier's use of superhighways found to require operation over "connecting" highways to such an extent as to comprise a significant portion of the total distance traversed between the point of departure from and point of return to the carrier's authorized underlying service route. Cease and desist order issued.--Philipp Transit Lines, Inc. v. Main Line Hauling Co., 117 M.C.C. 466 (466).

Since respondent's operations between St. Louis and Washington, Mo., and that between St. Louis and Linn, Mo., involve the utilization of nonsuperhighway "connecting" highways which constitute a significant portion of the total over-the-road distance traversed between the point of departure from and the point of return to the underlying authorized regular service route, neither operation may be performed under the Superhighway Rules (49 CFR 1042.3). The Superhighway Rules contemplate the utilization of nonsuperhighway "connecting" or "access" highways extending between the authorized regular service routes and the superhighways merely as incidental to the operation over the superhighways themselves. These regulations do not envision that operation over nonsupe highway "connecting" or "access" highways shall constitute a significant portion

of the total over-the-road distance traversed over the superhighway-nonsuperhighway "connecting" highway route between the point of departure from and the point of return to the underlying authorized regular service route.--Burggrabe Truck Lines, Inc. v. Beaufort Transfer, 117 M.C.C. 567 (576, 577 Note).

Respondent's operation between St. Louis and Hermann, Mo., does fall within the permissible ambit of the Superhighway Rules, since operation over the nonsuperhighway "connecting" highway is incidental to the operation over the superhighway inasmuch as the "connecting" highway constitutes only approximately 18.7 percent of the total superhighway-nonsuperhighway "connecting" highway distance traversed between St. Louis and Hermann. Moreover, the "connecting" highway route is not less than 85 percent of the distance over the underlying authorized service route between these points. Thus the "connecting" highway route comports with the guidelines of, and may be utilized under, the "25-mile" [§1042.3(a) (1)] and "intermediate-point service" [1042.3(b)] provisions as well as the "85-percent" [$1042.3 (a) (2)] provision of the Superhighway Rules.--Id., pp. 577.

As a general rule of thumb and subject to reasonable variations depending upon a particular situation, where operation over nonsuperhighway 'connecting" highway or highways constitutes an over-the-road distance of more than 20 percent of the total superhighway-nonsuperhighway "connecting" highway operation between the point of departure from and the point of return to the underlying authorized regular service route, the nonsuperhighway "connecting" highway operation should be deemed to constitute a significant portion of the said total superhighway-nonsuperhighway "connecting" highway operation, and this total operation, therefore, should be considered as not falling within the permissible scope of the Superhighway Rules (117 M.C.C. 119, 149).--Id., pp. 577, Note.

Petitioner, lacking the authority to serve "all intermediate points (without regard to nominal exceptions)" on its underlying certificated service route, was found not to qualify for operation under the "intermediate-point service" provision of the Superhighway Rules. Petitioner's contention that his authority to serve 11 of 29 intermediate points between Louisville, Ky., on the one hand, and 23 of 41 points between Louisville, Ky., and Sharon, Ind., on the other hand, is tantamount to "all intermediate-point service, based on population, was held unjustified by the Commission. "Nominal exceptions," therefore, refers to intermediate points as such rather than to population figures.--Lafayette, Ind., Superhighway Operations, 117 M.C.C. 660 (662, 667).

Since one-third of petitioner's operation between Indianapolis and Sharon, Ind., involves the utilization of connecting nonsuperhighways, constituting a significant portion of the total over-the-road distance traversed between the points of departure from and return to the authorized regular service route, such operation is not within the scope of and may not be performed under any provisions of the Superhighway Rules.--Id. (666).

Since defendants' operations involved utilization of nonsuperhighway "connecting" highways which constitute a significant portion (52 percent) of the total over-the-road distance traversed between the point of departure from