B-147391, JAN. 20, 1964
Highlights
LTD.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR REQUEST. YOU AGAIN URGE THAT EXCLUSIVE USE OF TWO VEHICLES WAS REQUESTED. THAT THE VEHICLES WERE NOT LOADED TO CAPACITY. EVEN IF TWO 40-FOOT VEHICLES WERE IN FACT ORDERED AND USED. ANOTHER UNIT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN LOADED ON EITHER VEHICLE. IS THAT WHEN A VEHICLE IS SO LOADED THAT NO MORE OF THE SHIPMENT IN THE SHIPPING FORM TENDERED CAN BE LOADED IN OR ON THE VEHICLE IT IS THEN LOADED TO CAPACITY. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES CHARGES BASED ON TARIFF PROVISIONS GOVERNING EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE SERVICE ARE NOT APPLICABLE. THAT IT IS MATERIAL WHETHER ONE OR TWO VEHICLES WERE ORDERED AND USED. IN EACH CASE THEY WERE LOADED TO CAPACITY WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE RULE STATED ABOVE.
B-147391, JAN. 20, 1964
TO WESTERN TRUCK LINES, LTD.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR REQUEST, YOUR FILE G-02342, FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF MARCH 6, 1962, B-147391, SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE CHARGES FOR TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FURNISHED UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADINGAF 8758405, DATED AUGUST 6, 1958, AND OUR RECONSIDERATION OF JUNE 4, 1962, AFFIRMING SUCH DECISION. YOU AGAIN URGE THAT EXCLUSIVE USE OF TWO VEHICLES WAS REQUESTED, AND THAT THE VEHICLES WERE NOT LOADED TO CAPACITY.
AS POINTED OUT IN OUR PREVIOUS DECISIONS, THE SHIPMENTS CONSISTED OF CAMERAS MOUNTED ON VEHICLES, TWO UNITS MEASURING 16 FEET EACH BEING LOADED ON EACH VEHICLE. THEREFORE, EVEN IF TWO 40-FOOT VEHICLES WERE IN FACT ORDERED AND USED, ANOTHER UNIT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN LOADED ON EITHER VEHICLE. OUR POSITION, BASED ON THE DECISION OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN CURTIS LIGHTING, INC. V. MID-STATES FREIGHT LINES, 303 I.C.C. 576, IS THAT WHEN A VEHICLE IS SO LOADED THAT NO MORE OF THE SHIPMENT IN THE SHIPPING FORM TENDERED CAN BE LOADED IN OR ON THE VEHICLE IT IS THEN LOADED TO CAPACITY, AND IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES CHARGES BASED ON TARIFF PROVISIONS GOVERNING EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE SERVICE ARE NOT APPLICABLE. WE DO NOT BELIEVE, THEREFORE, THAT IT IS MATERIAL WHETHER ONE OR TWO VEHICLES WERE ORDERED AND USED; IN EACH CASE THEY WERE LOADED TO CAPACITY WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE RULE STATED ABOVE.
WE ACCORDINGLY CONCLUDE THAT OUR PREVIOUS DECISIONS SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM WERE CORRECT AND THEY ARE HEREBY REAFFIRMED. AS WE HAVE INDICATED BEFORE, THE ISSUE RAISED BY TARIFF RULES FOR EXCLUSIVE USE SERVICES IN SITUATIONS WHERE THE VEHICLE IS LOADED TO CAPACITY WITH THE ARTICLE SHIPPED (NOTWITHSTANDING THAT SOME SMALLER SPACE MAY BE AVAILABLE IN THE VEHICLE) IS PRESENTLY BEING LITIGATED IN THE COURTS. SHOULD THESE CASES BE FINALLY DECIDED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, WE WILL, UPON YOUR TIMELY REQUEST, REEXAMINE THE RECORD IN THIS MATTER.