INTERRUPTION OF SERVICE: See also PURCHASE. Following decision of Federal
Court that Commission erred in finding that discontinuance of service by appli-
cant's predecessor, due to bankruptcy, was an interruption within its control,
denial of "grandfather" application on that ground was reversed. Shawmut
Transp. Co., Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 6 (7);

-

- But extended lapse in certain operations of the predecessor, prior to appoint-
ment of receiver, defeated "grandfather" claim. Id. (9).

Although applicant at informal conference before a Commission representa-
tive, had signed a statement limiting his "grandfather" claim to specific commodi-
ties and had not objected to limited-commodity certificate, failure to continue
general-commodity operation was beyond his control when he was at that time
unaware of his right to formal hearing and determination, and, when informed of
his rights, exercised due diligence by immediately seeking reconsideration.
Bianchi Com. Car Applic., 26 (29, 30).

Applicant conducting a “one-man" business was not responsible for curtailment
of service, due to illness which incapacitated him for active management, when he
made a reasonable attempt to continue a consistent operation. Id. (29, 30).

Unexplained lapse of several months between last shipment by vendor and first
shipment by applicant's predecessor as vendee of claimed rights was an inter-
ruption within the predecessor's control. Southeastern Motor Lines, Inc., Car.
Applic.. 37 (40).

Substantial curtailment of service during 4 months, due to labor and financial
difficulties, did not destroy rights accrued from many years of operation, when
applicant maintained offices and accepted all shipments tendered transporting
them with his remaining equipment or arranging for carriage by others. McMaken
Com. Car. Applic., 55 (57, 58).

ROUTES, SCOPE: See also PASSENGERS (Chartered or Special, etc.); ROUTES.
Before "grandfather" authority may be granted for a territorial operation, past
service must be shown to enough points in the claimed territory to be representa-
tive of the whole. Sullivan, Long & Hagerty, Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 203 (207);
-Although applicant, prior to the "grandfather" date, had transported ship-
ments from only one point adjacent to Hickory, N. C., solicitation and subsequent
transportation of traffic from points within 40 miles of Hickory indicated en-
deavor to serve that territory. Elders Transfer Co., Inc., Com. Car. Applic.,
63 (66);

-When applicant doing business at Cherryville, N. C., held out to serve a
territory, distance from Cherryville to most distant origin served was taken as
radius of territory served prior to the "grandfather" date, and service thereafter
to that and points in 13 counties. which formed a compact group comprising
nearly all the 55-mile area, was considered representative of operation from those
counties as a base area. Carolina Frt. Carriers Corp. Com. Car. Applic., 221
(228);

-Household-goods carrier was granted authority for R. I. and W. Va., although
it had not served them in the past, when they were embraced in its territory,
considered as a whole. Bekins Van & Stor. Co. Com. Car. Applic., 401 (411);
-As brewery's demands for transportation to distributors could be expected
to fluctuate, some latitude in territorial authority of contract carrier serving it
should be allowed. Applicant was entitled to continue operations to States
actually served in the past. Derr Contr. Car. Applic., 437 (440);

-Authority for radial destination territory was broadened to include points
within 250 miles of base point, instead of 150 miles, when the service was a special-
ized one to changing construction sites, and evidence showed that past service,
although infrequent, was continuous in that it was performed whenever requested.
Loraine Transfer Co., Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 569 (571, 572).

Following Supreme Court's directive in remanding "grandfather" proceeding
to Commission, transportation characteristics of the particular service were con-
sidered in determining applicant's rights. Territorial scope of cross-haul opera-
tion was defined broadly when it involved irregular type of service, but scope of
north- and south-bound operations was defined more strictly since they involved
a regular type of service. Carolina Frt. Carriers Corp. Com. Car. Applic., 221
(235).

SCOPE OF OPEration, Generally: An applicant is not entitled, under either
the "grandfather" clause or principles in 315 U. S. 475, to more extensive authority
than its proven bona fide "grandfather" operation, in order to assure it a more
profitable operation than that which it planned or conducted. Sullivan, Long
& Hagerty, Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 203 (210).

SCHEDULES. See also CLASSIFICATION (PROPERTY); Contract Carriers;
DESTINATION; INVESTIGATION AND SUSPENSION; LESS THAN TRUCKLOAD;
PARTIES (Defendants); TARIFF CIRCULARS.

APPLICABILITY AND INTERPRETATION: See also COMMODITIES. Tariff rule
that lowest class rates "provided herein" between specific points would apply on
articles rated lower in classification did not apply to articles rated column 40
when tariff named column 40 rates between points involved. Interpretation of
"herein" as referring merely to the rule, thereby invoking proviso for application
of fourth-class (column 50) rates on articles rated lower, was inconsistent with its
use in the proviso to refer to the tariff as a whole, and would make the proviso
independent of the rule instead of a qualification of it. Schaefer, Inc., v. C. A.
Conklin Truck Line, Inc., 333 (335).

As rules providing for computation of charges on light and bulky shipments on
a constructive weight per cubic foot were general rules governing defendants'
class rates, charges thereunder superseded those on actual weight under more
specific 1. t. 1. rating on potato chips, on shipments within physical specifications
of the rule. Bell Potato Chip Co. v. Aberdeen Truck Line, 337 (344).

Finding of inapplicability of rate charged serves as a guide for the future, if
tariff remains unchanged, which both carriers and shippers are obligated to follow.
Id. (344);

—And it is carrier's duty to refund overcharges or shipper's duty to pay under-
charges without order or other action by Commission or resort to courts. Id.
(343).

CHANGES: When changed rates and charges become effective, carriers and
shippers alike are bound to observe them. Bendix Aviation Corp. v. Giaras, 685
(688).

CONSTRUCTION: Tariff provisions must be considered in their entirety and
given a fair and reasonable construction. Bell Potato Chip Co. v. Aberdeen
Truck Line, 337 (344).

Tariff terms must be taken in the sense in which generally or commercially
understood. Federal Glass Co. v. Cleveland, C. & C. Highway, Inc., 721 (724).
DEFINITENESS: See also INTERMEDIATE RULE; TRANSIT. Definition of "freight
consolidator" in tariff naming assembling rates was loosely constructed, too long,
and insufficiently explicit, and should be clarified promptly. Definition of Frt.
Consolidators, 527 (536).

INTENT OF CARRIER: Intent of tariff framers is not controlling on applica-
bility. Line Material Co. v. Hinchcliff, 323 (325).

SEASONAL OPERATION. See PASSENGERS (Chartered or Special, etc.).
SERVICE. See also CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY; OPERATION; SAVING
CLAUSES; TRANSPORTATION; and particular types of carriers or service.

PARCEL: See also COMMON CARRIERS (Definition, etc.). Parcel-delivery
service has many attributes of contract carriage, and a complete delivery service
for a retail store is a specialized service which could not be performed by a common
carrier. Newkirk Contr Car. Applic., 85 (87).

SEDAN: When applicant had used only sedans in week-end service from Phila-
delphia to Tamiment, Pa., until 2 years after the "grandfather" date, authority
was properly restricted to sedan service; but similar restriction was removed from
scheduled service from New York to Tamiment when it was an unrelated operation
in which both sedans and busses had been used during the critical period. Limita-
tion on number of persons to be transported in sedans was modified not to apply
to children under 10, not occupying seats. Campus Travel, Inc., Com. Car
Applic., 421 (424).

SHIPPERS. See ASSEMBLING AND DISTRIBUTION RATES; BROKERS (Fees).
SOLICITATION. See BROKERS (Licenses); OPERATION (Bona Fide); SAVING
CLAUSES (Commodities, Scope) (Routes, Scope).

SPECIAL SERVICES. See also CONTRACT CARRIERS (Definition, etc.); PAS-
SENGERS (Chartered or Special, etc.). Since transportation of oil-field
equipment is specialized, requiring special equipment, and service is frequently
needed on short notice; applicant at Breckenridge, Tex., was the only such carrier
within 100 miles; and shippers in that area had experienced delay and expense in
contacting carriers, extension authority between the Breckenridge area and La
and Okla. was granted. Cox Ext.-Okla. and La., 669 (671).

Although retail-store delivery is a specialized service, contract carrier's exten-
sive services for department stores did not warrant relief from requirements as
to contracts, as many other carriers pick up, consolidate, and route merchandise
shipments for particular areas; and many special-commodity haulers perform
services requiring equally specialized equipment and training. United Parcel
Service of Pa., Inc., Filing of Contracts, 689 (695).

Transportation of frozen agricultural commodities and seafoods is a highly
specialized service which cannot be satisfactorily performed by general-commodity
haulers. As the frozen-foods industry was on threshold of development, and ship-
pers in considered territory needed additional service because of shortage of cold-
storage space, extension authority was granted. Newton Ext.-Frozen Foods,
787 (792).

STATES. See COMMON CARRIERS (Qualifications); OPERATING RIGHTS.
STIPULATIONS. See SAVING CLAUSES (Commodities, Scope).
SUBNORMAL RATES. See ASSEMBLING AND DISTRIBUTION RATES.
SUCCESSORS. See SAVING CLAUSES (Interruption of Service).

SUSPENSION OF SCHEDULES. See INVESTIGATION AND SUSPENSION.
SUSPENSION OF SERVICE. See ROUTES (Abandonment).

TARIFF CIRCULARS. See also INTERMEDIATE RULE.

SPECIAL PERMISSION TO DEPART FROM: Orders granting special permission to
depart from tariff regulations as to publication and filing are merely permissive
and constitute neither prescription of rates or charges so filed nor a finding that
they are reasonable. Bendix Aviation Corp. v. Giaras, 685 (687).

Special permission to publish master tariff governing computation of rate
increases "on same basis as authorized * * * in Ex Parte No. 148" was
descriptive of the class of increases proposed, and did not limit them to a maximum
of 6 percent. Motor rates were not in issue in Ex Parte No. 148. and to find that
the special-permission order prescribed such rates would amount to a deter-
mination of their reasonableness prior to filing, without affording shippers and
carriers opportunity to be heard. Id. (687).

TARIFFS. See SCHEDULES; TARIFF CIRCULARS.

TERMINAL AREAS. That all points in each express-rate subblock take
common rates to points beyond, and incidental hauls within the subblock are
therefore free of charge, is irrelevant to question whether motor transportation
entirely within a single subblock is exempt from part II. Such rates are mere
group rates, whose establishment does not make an incidental service within the
group a bona fide collection or delivery. Railway Exp. Agency, Inc., Com. Car.
Applic., 463 (465).

Transportation of express between two points in same rate subblock was an
interterminal road haul not within a terminal area, even where points were con-
tiguous, when express company maintained an office or agent at each and pub-
lished separate pick-up limits for each, which did not include the other. Id.
(466).

TERRITORIES. See PASSENGERS (Chartered or Special, etc.); ROUTES;
SAVING CLAUSES (Routes, Scope).

THROUGH ROUTES. See also PARTIES (Defendants); PASSENGers.

CONTRACT CARRIERS: The act contemplates that a contract carrier's service
shall be as specified in its contract with the shipper. Establishment of through
routes or joint rates with other carriers, or performance by a single contract
carrier of through service under separately granted rights, which is nowhere
authorized by the act, would be inconsistent with such a service. Longshore
Ext.-Salem-Youngstown, Ohio, 755 (758).

ESTABLISHMENT: Permission in sec. 216 (c) to establish through routes and
joint rates is unrestricted except that they must be reasonable. Daniels v. Rose
726 (727).

SINGLE-LINE SERVICE: Common carriers may lawfully render through service
between, authorized points on existing routes and on connecting routes acquired
through extension or purchase, provided they intersect at an authorized common
point. Longshore Ext.-Salem-Youngstown Ohio. 755 (758);

-When neither irregular-route "grandfather" authority for Va.. N. C., and
S. C., nor extension authority from Md. to Richmond was restricted, through
service from Md. via Richmond to the "grandfather" territory was permissible.
Transport Corp. of Va. Ext.-Md., 716 (719);

-But when carrier restricted to rail-auxiliary service lacked intermediate-
point authority for junction with proposed extension route, it might not perform
all-motor service between points on the existing and extension routes. Rock
Island Motor Transit Co., Ext.-Trenton, Mo. 470 (475);

-However, past operation of through service over authorized route segments
connecting at an unauthorized point. while unlawful, was considered as proof of
need for extension over shorter route between same termini. when unlawfulness
of such combinations had only recently been determined and applicant had had
reason to believe such service was lawful. Fitterling Transp. Co., Inc., Ext.-
Detroit-Elkhart. 581 (583 584).

TICKETS. See COMPETITION.

TRANSIT. STOPPAGE: Rule proposed by irregular-route carrier, limiting stops
for partial loading or unloading to intermediate points on direct routes "over
which operations are generally conducted." was ambiguous and under carrier's
interpretation of it as applying via all highways serving the stop-off point. deliv-
eries requiring out-of-line hauls exceeding 150 miles would be made at same rate
as at intermediate points on short-line routes. Such rules were unlawful, but
would be reasonable if limited to routes not over 12.5 percent circuitous. Rules
of Mich. and Nebr. Transit Co., 269 (272-276).

Evidence that failure of connecting carriers promptly to accept traffic involving
stop-offs restricted respondent's use of its equipment at a time when traffic offered
exceeded its facilities, constituted prima facie justification, which was unrebutted
by any showing of commercial necessity, for cancelation of its participation in
stop-off rules. Stopping in Transit, Mich. Motor Frt. Lines, 329 (330. 332).

Although carriers generally need not provide stop-off rules except to remove
-prejudice and discrimination, they may be required to do so. even in absence of
such unlawfulness, when circumstances show that such services should be estab-
lished as a just and reasonable practice. Id. (331).

TRANSPORTATION. ADEQUATE SERVICE: See also INTERMEDIATE POINTS;
PASSENGERS; SPECIAL SERVICES. When applicant operating largely with leased
equipment had conducted trucking activities for many years, and owners of
trucks used had failed to seek carrier rights or to prosecute applications. his
service was not a new one which would intensify competition, and denial of certif-
icate would deprive the public of a long-used service superior to that otherwise
available. Moore Com. Car. Applic.. 91 (112).

When lack of interstate bus service on certain N. J. routes forced passengers
for New York City to transfer from intrastate to interstate busses or rail lines,
in some instances entailing delays, or to climb steep grades to reach interstate
routes, and industrial development of one area had been hampered by lack of direct
service. grant of authority to carriers which could render through service was
warranted. Public Serv. Interstate Transp. Co.-Bergen Turnpike, 599 (607, 621).
Bus line operating via Lincoln Tunnel was denied authority for alternate
route serving Teaneck, N. J., when its existing routes or other bus routes were
reasonably convenient. Moreover, trend of traffic was via George Washington
Bridge routes, which in combination with subways afforded quicker and cheaper
service than tunnel routes: and failure to patronize competing tunnel line re-
futed any need for applicant's service. Id. (617).

Public need for applicant's service as a common instead of a contract carrier
of petroleum products was apparent when it was the only carrier of such products
in its territory with permanent authority, and contract-carrier service was in-
sufficiently flexible to meet demands of shippers who distributed each other's
products under exchange agreements. Rogers Cartage Co., Ext.-Petroleum
Products, 749 (752).

Although in recent years carrier had transported only occasional pay-loads
to off-route and intermediate points on certain routes, or in irregular-route
territory, and had interchanged smaller shipments, it had maintained rates and
had continued service to the extent possible with available equipment. As
demands for transportation would decrease with diminishing solicitation, and
no shipper had filed complaint, finding of failure to render reasonably continuous
and adequate service was not warranted. R. D. Fowler Motor Lines, Inc. v.
Colonial Motor Frt. Lines, Inc., 781 (783, 785);

-Since calls for service at off-route or irregular-route points are infrequent,
standard of adequate service differs from that for points on regular routes. Id.
(785).

UNDERCHARGES. See SCHEDULES (Applicability and Interpretation). USE.
A difference in rates based on difference in use of an article may be a source
of discrimination and prejudice. As engines used in airplanes are also used in
automobiles, military tanks, and boats, a higher rate on airplane engines than
on other internal-combustion engines would be based on use. Airplane Engines
Between Points in Southwest, 242 (245).

VALUE. See DENSITY.