ity it offers service on vegetable oil from Pensacola to Cleveland via Moultrie. It maintains terminals at four points in Kentucky, each located more than 600 miles from Pensacola, and operates a subsatntial fleet of suitable tank equipment. It holds no authority to transport either fish oil or resinous compounds. Louisiana Tank, a subsidiary of Southern Tank and another motor carrier, holds irregular-route authority to transport animal and vegetable oil from points in Florida to Good Hope and Avondale, La. Louisiana Tank leases all its tank equipment from other tank carriers, including Southern Tank. Chambers, as pertinent, is authorized to transport over irregular routes, vegetable oil, in bulk, in tank vehicles, (1) between points in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee, and (2) from Fox, Ala. (240 miles north of Pensacola), to points in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. By joinder of the above authorities, it may transport vegetable oil from Pensacola through Fox to the States listed in (2) above. In addition, Chambers holds bulk authority to transport naval stores, naval stores products, tall oil, and tall oil products, from Picayune, Miss., to points in numerous States. It is protestant's position that if pine oil and tall oil are included within the description "vegetable oil," then it could further serve the shipper by tacking its operating authority at Picayune. In this connection, in Eldon Miller, Inc., Extension-Shelby County, Tenn.; Hearin Tank Lines, Inc.-Texas; and Smith Transit, Inc., Panama City, Fla., supra, it was found that the term "vegetable oils" includes all oils derived from vegetable sources, and nothing in the present record affords any basis for a different conclusion here. Chambers operates a substantial fleet of tank equipment and maintains a terminal at Mobile, Ala. It has transported vegetable oils and naval stores for many years and has solicited ADM. It has no authority to transport fish oil. In observing its gateway requirements, no material circuity would be involved in movements from Pensacola through Fox to points in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Arkansas where the shipper has customers, or through the Picayune gateway. Hearin, as pertinent, holds irregular-route, common-carrier authority to transport (1) crude tall oil from points in Florida, with certain exceptions not here important, to Bay Minette, and (2) naval stores between Bay Minette and Pensacola, on the one hand, and, on the other, points in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. Protestant operates a substantial fleet of equipment including compartmented insulated tank units suitable for the involved commodities. Term Authority to transport "animal oil" includes fish oil, T. I. McCormack Trucking Co., Inc., Ext.-Hydrolyzed Fats, 77 M.C.C. 121, 135. Alabama (except Bay Minette), Arkansas, Florida (except Pensacola), Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana (except De Quincy and Oakdale), Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. inals are maintained at Bay Minette and Mobile. While Hearin has solicited ADM for business, it has not been offered any traffic. Hearin holds no authority to transport fish oil, its interest herein being confined to the proposed transportation of those vegetable oils which it considers to be naval stores, viz, pine and tall oil. ADM has convincingly shown that there are numerous users of vegetable oil located throughout the 15 destination States, and that it is in the process of developing and expanding its business in this area as it has done in Florida. On the other hand, protestants are authorized and equipped to meet a large proportion of its probable future transportation requirements and are entitled at least to an opportunity to demonstrate their capability before a new operation is authorized. Chambers can transport vegetable oil from Pensacola to points in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee, and by tacking at Fox can also reach points in Arkansas, Kentucky, North Carolina, and South Carolina over reasonably direct routes. No interstate shipments of fish oil have as yet been made from Pensacola, and the mere possibility that the shipper might tender combination shipments of this commodity and vegetable oils in the same vehicle is too remote and speculative to justify a grant of authority. However we shall grant applicant authority to transport vegetable oils (with exceptions) to points in Missouri, Kansas, Ilinois except Jacksonville, Indiana, Texas, and Ohio, including Cleveland. Although Southern Tank is authorized to serve the last-named point, its equipment is based at too great a distance from Pensacola for it to render effective service. No justification has been shown for the restrictions requested by protestants. The record does not contain sufficient information to allow us to determine whether tall oil is a naval store. Since the shipper is only interested in utilizing the proposed service for movements of vegetable oils obtained by compression or other nonchemical means, the authority granted herein will be restricted against the transportation of tall oil and naval stores, with no implication, however, that in doing so we are either accepting or rejecting the contention that tall oil is not a naval store. We find that the present and future public convenience and necessity require operation by applicant, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, over irregular routes, in bulk, in tank vehicles, of vegetable oil, other than tall oil and naval stores, from Pensacola, Fla., to points in Illinois (except Jacksonville), Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, and Texas, that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform such service and to conform to the requirements of the Interstate Commerce Act and our rules and regu lations thereunder; that an appropriate certificate should be granted; and that the application in all other respects should be denied. Upon compliance by applicant with the requirements of sections 215, 217, and 221(c) of the act and with our rules and regulations thereunder, within the time specified in the order entered concurrently herein, an appropriate certificate will be issued. An appropriate order will be entered. APPENDIX Birmingham, Fox, Tuscaloosa, and Montgomery, Ala.; Little Rock and Fort Smith, Ark.; Atlanta, Chamblee, Brunswick, Savannah, Augusta, and Columbus, Ga.; Kansas City and Wichita, Kans.; Kansas City, Mo.; New Orleans, Lake Charles, and Shreveport, La.; Akron, Alliance, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Mansfield, and Miamisburg, Ohio; Chicago, Evanston, and Webber, Ill.; Indianapolis, Ind.; Lexington and Louisville, Ky.; Bude, Gulfport, Jackson, Meridian, Natchez, and Vicksburg, Miss.; Greensboro, Nashville, Charlotte, High Point, and Lenior, N.C.; Spartanburg and Sumter, S.C.; Chattanooga, Jackson, Memphis, and Nashville, Tenn.; and Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, Port Arthur, and Chathan, Tex. 84 M.C.C. No. MC-26396 (SUB-No. 22)1 STAR TRANSFER COMPANY EXTENSION-SALT Decided December 8, 1960 1. In Nos. MC-58212 (Sub-No. 19), MC-103435 (Sub-No. 88), and MC-105556 (Sub-No. 30), public convenience and necessity found to require operation by each applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle, over irregular routes, of salt from Williston, N. Dak., and points within 10 miles thereof, to points in specified States. 2. In No. MC-26396 (Sub-No. 22), public convenience and necessity found not shown to require operation by applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle, over irregular routes of (1) dry fertilizer, in bulk and in bags from specified areas of Montana and North Dakota to points in four States, and (2) of salt, salt products, and salt compounds from Williston, N. Dak., to points in Montana and six Wyoming counties. Application denied. 3. In Nos. MC-113855 (Sub-No. 40) and MC-115669 (Sub-No. 7), public convenience and necessity found not shown to require operation by each applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle, over irregular routes, of salt from Williston, N. Dak., and points within 10 miles thereof, to points in specified States. Applications denied. 4. In No. MC-113879 (Sub-No. 5), on further consideration, public convenience and necessity found not shown to require operation by applicant, as a common carrier by motor vehicle, over irregular routes, of salt from Williston, N. Dak., and points within 15 miles thereof, to points in four States. Application denied. J. F. Megler for applicant in No. MC-26390 (Sub-No. 22). Franklin S. Logan for applicant in No. MC-105556 (Sub-No. 30). 1This report also embraces Nos. MC-58212 (Sub-No. 19), Maas Transport, Inc., Extension-Salt from Williston, N. Dak.; MC-103435 (Sub-No. 88), Buckingham Freight Lines Extension Salt from Williston, N. Dak.; MC-105556 (Sub-No. 30), Houck Transport Company Extension-Williston, N. Dak.; MC-113855 (Sub-No. 40), International Transport, Inc., Extension-Salt from Williston, N. Dak.; MC-113879 (Sub-No. 5), Eugene C Fischer Extension-Salt from Williston, N. Dak.; and No. MC-115669 (Sub-No. 7), Howard N. Dahlsten Extension-Williston, N. Dak. Applicant in the title proceeding is hereinafter referred to as Star, and applicants in the other proceedings, in the order listed, are hereinafter called Maas, Buckingham, Houck, International, Fischer, and Dahlsten. In No. MC-58212 (Sub-No. 19), Maas Transport, Inc., Extension-Salt From Williston, N. Dak., the examiner's report embraced No. MC-101075 (Sub-No. 59), Transport, Inc., Extension-Salt From Williston, N. Dak., in which the recommended order denying the applications became effective by operation of law in the absence of exceptions. Marion F. Jones for intervener in support of the application in No. MC-58212 (Sub-No. 19). Alan Foss for intervener in support of the application in No. MC113855 (Sub-No. 40). James L. Nelson, Ward A. Shanahan, Robert W. Sawyer, Alan Foss, Marion F. Jones, Robert S. Stauffer, Lyle W. Selbo, F. J. Smith, Charles A. Feste, Ronald B. Pitsenbarger, John R. Davidson, and Jerome Anderson for protestants and intervener in opposition in one or more of the proceedings. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION 2 DIVISION 1, COMMISSIONERS MURPHY, GOFF, AND HERRING BY DIVISION 1: These seven applications deal with related issues and will be disposed of in one report. Star's application was separately heard and was the subject of a separate report and recommended order of the examiner. The applications of Maas, Buckingham, International, and Fischer were heard on a consolidated record and were the subject of a single report and recommended order of the examiner. Houck's and Dahlsten's applications were heard on a consolidated record and were subjects of separate reports and recommended orders of the examiner. Exceptions to the orders recommended by the examiners and replies to these exceptions were filed by certain applicants and protestants. Our conclusions in certain proceedings differ from those recommended. Each applicant seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing operation as a common carrier by motor vehicle, in interstate or foreign commerce, over irregular routes, from and to the points and in the manner described in the appendix hereto. As shown therein all applicants seek to transport salt from Williston, N. Dak., to points in specified areas. Star also seeks authority to transport dry fertilizer from certain points in Montana and North Dakota to specified areas. The appendix also lists the parties in opposition to each application. The examiner hearing the Star application recommended that the applicant be granted authority to transport (1) dry fertilizer, in bulk and bags, from the ports of entry to points in the destination territory sought, except from Sweetgrass, Mont., to points in Montana and Wyoming, and (2) salt, salt products, and salt compounds, from 2 On further consideration in No. MC-113879 (Sub-No. 5). No timely exceptions were filed by a party of record to the recommended order of the examiner in Fischer's application, and it became effective by operation of law. However, applicant has filed a petition for reconsideration, and since related issues are involved in all seven applications, we will reopen that proceeding for disposition in the instant report. |