B-135147, AUG. 19, 1964

B-135147, AUG. 19, 1964

TO NEW YORK CENTRAL SYSTEM:

IN YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 1, 1964, FILE AG 33-960614-54, YOU REQUEST RECONSIDERATION OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF JANUARY 23, 1958, IN WHICH WE DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,376.70 ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF SEVERAL CARLOADS OF SALVABLE VEHICLES WHICH MOVED FROM FORT CHURCHILL, MANITOBA, CANADA, TO TOLEDO, OHIO, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING WY-2698477 DATED APRIL 28, 1954. THE SETTLEMENT WAS SUSTAINED BY OUR DECISIONS OF AUGUST 25, 1958, AND SEPTEMBER 5, 1962, B-135147. IN YOUR PRESENT REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION YOU CITE IN SUPPORT OF YOUR POSITION THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF CLAIMS IN PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY V. UNITED STATES, CT.CL. NO. 85-59, DECIDED MARCH 13, 1964.

FOR THE SERVICES PERFORMED IN THE PRESENT INSTANCE YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THE BASIS OF A COMBINATION THROUGH RATE COMPOSED OF PUBLISHED TARIFF RATES TO AND BEYOND NEYES, MINNESOTA. ON AUDITY OF THE PAYMENT VOUCHER, OUR OFFICE SUBSTITUTED A RATE PROVIDED IN AAR SECTION 22 QUOTATION NO. 488 BETWEEN NEYES, MINNESOTA, AND THE DESTINATION. IN THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY CASE, SUPRA, THE COURT OF CLAIMS HELD

"IN ORDER TO COMBINE A SECTION 22 QUOTATION WITH ANOTHER QUOTATION, OR WITH A REGULAR TARIFF PROVISION THE INTENTION OF THE PARTIES TO ACCOMPLISH THIS PURPOSE MUST BE APPARENT, EITHER BY EXPRESS PROVISION OR BY NECESSARY INFERENCE.'

SINCE IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE QUOTATION 488 USED BY OUR OFFICE IN THE PRESENT INSTANCE COMPLIES WITH THAT REQUIREMENT, WE HAVE RETURNED YOUR CLAIM TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOR RECONSIDERATION. YOU WILL BE ADVISED BY THAT DIVISION OF THE FINAL DISPOSITION.