convenience, presented its affirmative evidence at the initial hearing and its counsel did not attend the continued hearing, its interests nonetheless were "covered" by other counsel at the continued hearing; that the date and place of the continued hearing were announced by the presiding examiner, following agreement by all parties, at the conclusion of the initial hearing; that further supporting witnesses were presented by applicant at the continued hearing without objection from opposing counsel; that the witnesses were cross-examined by opposing counsel; and that applicant clearly did not formally rest his case until after the submission of such further evidence. Protestant obviously was not thereby prejudiced in any manner, and its objection is wholly without merit. We see nothing improper in the request "that the application be denied in all respects." Apparently the request is directed primarily to the grant of authority recommended by the examiner and it appears to be a general statement of position based upon protestant's appraisal of the record.

Applicant presently holds no authority from this Commission. He performs authorized intrastate transportation of passengers to racetracks, funerals, and various points of interest in Massachusetts and is experienced in limousine operations. Prior to June 1962, certain interstate transportation of the same character was performed under the impression that "occasional" interstate trips are permissible without authority. After discussing this activity with field personnel of this agency, however, the interstate trips were discontinued and none has been conducted since June 1962. Applicant owns two Cadillac limousines capable of transporting eight passengers each and, if required, he would lease additional vehicles from a local limousine operator. He will comply with all applicable requirements of this Commission. His net worth is approximately $24,000 and in 1962, when he operated one vehicle, his net operating profit was about $2,500. Twenty-one public witnesses supported the application. 1 Of these, all were interested in service originating at Worcester and points within 10 miles of Worcester. Several represented clubs and civic groups whose members would be protential users of the proposed service. Ten expressed an interest in the service to and from racetracks, and most of them had little or no preference as to the particular tracks they desire to attend. Twelve supported

These witnesses are exclusive of three whose testimony related to the transportation of passengers, in special or charter service, on behalf of mortuaries, which the examiner properly found is not subject to regulation by this Commission.

the beano or bingo portion of the application. No testimony, however, was adduced relating to service to East Jaffrey, Greenville, or Pelham. Ten witnesses also supported the charter portion of the application, and testified concerning a desire for limousine service to points of historic, recreational, or religious interests in New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, and Connecticut.

The service requirements of the supporting public witnesses are essentially the same. All desire a door-to-door limousine-type service which will enable them to be picked up at and be returned to their respective homes, thus avoiding the necessity of taking taxicabs or other conveyances to and from bus terminals. Most of them are desirous of traveling in small groups with friends and making stops according to their needs. They do not feel that the terminal-to-terminal operations of buslines are satisfactory for these purposes. Some are elderly and find that getting to and from bus terminals is arduous for them. When buses return at late hours from evening beano or bingo games or the racetracks, passengers who do not live on local bus routes, where late-hour service may be provided, must obtain taxicab service or find other means of transportation to their homes. Others utilize their private automobiles, the use of which they desire to discontinue for such purposes.

Trailways operates over regular routes extending through Worcester County and of course is authorized, under section 208(c) of the Interstate Commerce Act, to perform incidental charter operations from points in the territory served by its routes. It opposes primarily the charter portion of the application, believing that diversion of its potential charter passengers by limousine services will be detrimental to its overall operations. Worcester Bus, as here pertinent, holds (1) regular-route bus authority between Worcester and Burrillville, R. I., with incidental charter rights likewise from points in the involved area served by its routes under section 208(c) of the act, (2) authority to conduct special round trip bus operations (a) between Worcester and the involved racetracks and (b) between Worcester and Hudson, Derry, Nashua, and Pawtucket, limited to passengers traveling to and from beano or bingo games, and (3) authority to conduct special round trip seasonal limousine operations between Worcester and the Narragansett Park and Rockingham Park racetracks. It provides daily express bus service to the tracks, as well as charter service upon request. It operated a weekly service to the

beano or bingo games at Derry from April to September 1961, but discontinued the service shortly thereafter due to insufficient patronage and it had not resumed the service up to the date of the hearing herein. It also has not operated the limousine authority for some time because it believes there is no substantial demand for such service, and it presently owns no limousine equipment.

Representatives of A. B. C., Inc. (ABC) and Wilson Bus Lines, Inc. (Wilson) also testified in support of Worcester Bus. Of these carriers, as here pertinent, ABC is authorized to provide incidental charter service from points in the Worcester area under section 208(c) of the act, as well as special round trip bus operations from Worcester to beano or bingo games at Central Falls. Until recently its smaller capacity buses were 37-passenger vehicles, but it has now purchased three 12-passenger buses which were being readied for service at the time of the hearing. It operates one schedule a night to the Tuesday and Sunday beano or bingo games at Central Falls and believes that, but for the competition of unauthorized limousine services, it could offer two such schedules nightly. Wilson holds authority, as here pertinent, to perform charter bus operations from points in Worcester County to points in all of the involved States except Vermont and special bus operations between several points in Worcester County, including Worcester, and the involved beano or bingo games. The latter authority is currently not being operated because of excessive competition. It is further believed that the charter service proposed by applicant would have an adverse effect on Wilson's operations.

While there can be little doubt that the authorization of applicant's proposed limousine service may divert some traffic now handled by existing buslines, we are not persuaded that the amount of diversion will be substantial. Moreover, it must be recognized that limousine service of the type here proposed, involving a more flexible, nonscheduled, door-to-door service for the transportation of small parties, is a significantly different type of service from the bus service offered by protestants. It is a premium service necessarily involving a different rate structure. Where a public need for such a distinctive service is clearly demonstrated, we do not believe that the existence of reasonably adequate bus service should preclude a grant of authority. See Nudelman Common Carrier Application, 28 M.C.C. 91, and Greenfield Common Carrier Application, 43 M.C.C. 555. We are impelled to conclude that such a need has been shown here. With respect 95 M.C.C.

to the extent of the need, however, it is noted that no showing of need has been made as to origins in Worcester County other than Worcester and points in the immediate vicinity of Worcester. Nor does the evidence evince a need for service to East Jaffrey, Greenville, and Pelham.

Protestants urge that applicant is not capable of meeting the demands for service with two vehicles and the examiner concluded that the use of leased vehicles would create an undesirable situation from the standpoint of effective control by applicant and regulation by this Commission. We are not convinced that the demand for service, especially at the commencement of operation, will be so great as to require applicant to augment his equipment to any substantial degree. Should he be so required in the future, however, it appears that he is financially able to add more limousines to his fleet, either by purchase or through legitimate leasing of additional equipment. While applicant may have conducted numerous interstate trips unlawfully over a period of time, he ceased all such trips when informed of the impropriety of the service by Commission personnel, and he is desirous of conforming fully with all Commission regulations, including those relating to the leasing of equipment. We conclude that applicant is fit and able, financially and otherwise, to conduct the proposed operation.

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 passengers and their baggage, in nonscheduled door-todoor service, limited to the transportation of not more than eight passengers in any one vehicle (not including the driver thereof and children under 10 years of age who do not occupy a seat or seats), (1) in round trip special operations beginning and ending at Worcester, Mass., and points within 10 miles of Worcester and extending to Pawtucket, Providence, and Central Falls, R. I., and Nashua, Hudson, and Derry, N. H., restricted to the transportation of passengers, who, at the time, are traveling for the purpose of participating in beano or bingo games, (2) in round trip special operations beginning and ending at Worcester, Mass., and points within 10 miles of Worcester and extending to the Narragansett Race Track at Pawtucket, R. I., Lincoln Downs at Lincoln, R, I., and the Rockingham Race Track at Salem, N. H., during the authorized racing seasons at such racetracks, and (3) in charter operations beginning and ending at Worcester, Mass.,

and points within 10 miles of Worcester and extending to points in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York; that applicant is fit, willing, and able properly to perform such service and to conform to the requirements of the Interstate Commerce Act and the Commission's rules and regulations 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 the Commission's 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.

95 M.C.C.