Trunk Line Territory Motor Carrier Rates, 24 M. C. C. 501.. Seatrain Lines, 329 U. S. 424.. Page 358 284, 322 258 268 521 720 Valley Steel Products Co. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 255 I. C. C. 177.. 477, 487 Virginia Stage Lines, Inc., Extension-Winston-Salem, N. C., 44 M. C. C. W. A. Sabins & Son Com. Car. Applic., 30 M. C. C. 417.. Willard Storage Battery Co. v. Associated Transport, Inc., 48 M. C. C. 284. 461 270 590 327 791 790 584, 743 536 536 51 297, 475 252 523 523 Yellow Truck Lines, Inc.-Purchase-F & H Truck Lines, 35 M. C. C. 773.. 49 M. C. C. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REPORTS-MOTOR CARRIER CASES No. MC-8681 (SUB-NO. 19) WESTERN AUTO TRANSPORTS, INC., EXTENSION— OREGON Submitted March 4, 1948. Decided November 5, 1948 Public convenience and necessity found to require operation by applicant as a common carrier by motor vehicle of new automobiles, in initial movements, in truck-away service, from Detroit, Mich., to points in Oregon, traversing designated States for operating convenience, over irregular routes. Issuance of a certificate approved upon compliance by applicant with certain conditions, and application in all other respects denied. Truman A. Stockton, Jr., for applicant. REPORT OF THE COMMISSION DIVISION 5, COMMISSIONERS LEE, ROGERS, AND PATTERSON BY DIVISION 5: No exceptions were filed to the order recommended by the examiner, but it was stayed by us. Our conclusions differ somewhat from those recommended. By application filed July 7, 1947, as amended, Western Auto Transports, Inc., of Denver, Colo., seeks a certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing operation, in interstate or foreign commerce, as a common carrier by motor vehicle of new motor vehicles (except trailers), chassis, and parts thereof, in initial movements, in truckaway service, from points in Wayne and Macomb Counties, Mich., to points in Oregon, traversing a number of States for operating convenience, and of rejected shipments of the same commodities on return, over irregular routes. No one opposes the application. The examiner recommended that applicant be granted a certificate to transport new motor vehicles and chassis, in initial movements, in truck-away service, from points in Wayne County to points in Oregon, over irregular routes, traversing Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Idaho, and Washington for operating convenience only, and that the application be denied in all other respects. He also found that trailers are not included within the term "motor vehicles" and therefore did not except trailers from his recommended grant of authority as requested by applicant. Section 203 (a) (13) of the Interstate Commerce Act defines the term "motor vehicle" as "any vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used upon the highways in the transportation of passengers or property, or any combination thereof determined by the Commission *" In our opinion, the term "motor vehicles" as used in grants of authority to motor common and contract carriers has the same meaning and is as inclusive as the quoted definition. Clearly the term "motor vehicles" as used in the instant proceeding would include trailers and chassis. However, for some time past it has been our practice to restrict authorities granted to various motor carriers of motor vehicles to the particular type of vehicle or vehicles for which there was shown to be a need. In the instant application the only supporting shipper is a distributor of passenger automobiles in Oregon. Admittedly, its transportation needs would be completely satisfied by a grant of authority to enable applicant to transport new automobiles from a manufacturer in Detroit to points in Oregon, and a review of the record convinces us that the evidence does not warrant a grant of authority in excess thereof. In the circumstances, we do not deem it necessary to review the other evidence adduced. The application, as indicated, includes a request for authority to transport parts and rejected shipments. Automobile parts, when transported with the vehicle in which they are to be installed or in another vehicle being transported at the same time and in the same manner, may be transported under the authority to transport new automobiles. Shipments which have been rejected by the consignee because damaged in transit or for any other reason, may be returned to their respective origins by the carrier having them in its possession without specific authority, provided such service is covered by an appropriate tariff provision. For these reasons, no authority to transport automobile parts or rejected shipments is included in the findings. Applicant is fit and able, financially and otherwise, to perform the operations authorized herein. 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, of new automobiles, in initial movements, in truck-away service, from Detroit, Mich., to points in Oregon, traversing Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Idaho, and Washington for operating convenience only; 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 regulations thereunder; that a certificate authorizing such operations should be granted; 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 our rules and regulations thereunder, an appropriate certificate will be issued. An order will be entered denying the application, except to the extent granted herein. COMMISSIONER ROGERS Concurs in the result. 49 M. C. C. |