Licence For Fuel Tanker Service To Farms Granted

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28987, 31 August 1959, Page 8

Licence For Fuel Tanker Service To Farms Granted

When petrol products were delivered to farmers in drums, the work had been important in the economy of country transport companies, which had suffered a loss with modern tanker services. A diversion of this delivery from oil companies to local licensed carriers would restore this lost work to them.

This evidence was given before the No. 8 Transport Licensing Authority (Mr A. A. Williamson) by John Warren Abernethy, managing director of the Cheviot Lime Company, Ltd., which sought exemption between 30-mile rail restriction between Waipara and farms in the Cheviot county for the carriage of petroleum products for the Atlantic Union Oil Company, Ltd. After an all-day hearing, the application was granted. Mr Williamson was acting as deputy for the No. 9 Transport Licensing Authority. Mr J. S. Haywood appeared for the Cheviot Lime Company, Ltd. The application was opposed by the Railways Department (Mr L. C. Brown). • .<

* Proposed Service The- proposed service by the Cheviot Lime Company, Ltd.. would consist of the cartage of petrol products from a depot at Waipara to farms in the Cheviot county by a tanker truck of 1500 gallons capacity, Abernethy said. The South Island sales manager of the Atlantic Union Oil Company, Ltd., Basil Montague Rice, said that it was his company’s policy, founded on experience, to use local licensed carriers for farm deliveries. This effected a saving in manpower, and economic use of a large tanker. Waipara was the economic point for distribution in the counties of Waipara and Cheviot. It. was proposed to install underground petrol and diesel fuel tanks of 2500 and 1500 gallons capacity, at Waipara at a capital cost of £BOO.

The company's own tanker from Woolston would service these tanks, the company. already possessing a goods-service licence with 30-mile rail restriction exemption between Christchurch and the Conway river. The volume of< trade did not justify a railway tanker service, involving 5000 gallons. This would exceed the planned storage and also require a private siding. Rice said.'

To Mr Brown, Rice said the establishment of a depot to take petrol products railed up to Waipara would cost £6OOO to £BOOO. Storage tanks of 10,000 gallons capacity would be required.

Railways Department Opposition The Railways Department “very, very strongly” opposed the application, not because of the

method of conveyance in. either drums or tankers, which was quite immaterial, but because it involved the cartage of bulk petroleum products beyond the 30-mile exemption and “over the border” from the No. 9 licensing district to the No. 8 district, said Mr Brown. The railway was ideally suited for such cartage of bulk petroleum between depots. The Claverley area was over 100 miles from Christchurch oil depots, a distance quite properly suited for rail cartage. “The Railways Department has no wish to hold farmers to drum supplies, but with bulk deliveries of petroleum products the railway services should be brought into the picture,” Mr Brown said. Original Intention

The original intention of the granting of,a 30-mile rail restriction exemption to the oil company was to allow it to distribute direct to customers from the nearest depot, which was Christchurch. Mr Brown said. This was in the days before the advent of farmers’ underground tanks, and the delivery of. petrol in bulk instead of drums.

If the Atlantic company now proposed to establish a depot at Waipara, that should be supplied from Christchurch by rail. The company's proposal cut right across the original intention of the 30-mile exemption. “That’s how they all start, with small beginnings,” Mr Brown said. “The Railways Department loses ground, which cannot be retrieved at a later date."

Mr Haywood said that the question of cartage from Christchurch to Waipara had rather confused the issue. “Public interest showed that petrol could be carried by road from Christchurch to the Conway river. It has not been attacked,” Mr Haywood said. “All the Authority is asked to consider is if the Cheviot Lime Company should perform a service which is being performed in fact.

“The oil company, if this application is refused, will still perform the service. Why not let the local carrier perform it?" Mr Haywood submitted. "After hearing all the evidence, I think it is in the public interest to grant this application and I give my decision accordingly," the Authority said.