B-143784, OCT. 31, 1961

B-143784, OCT. 31, 1961

TO THE MASON AND DIXON LINES, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 16, 1961, FILE GOV-T CARRIER BILL 10878, WHICH IN EFFECT REQUESTS A FURTHER REVIEW OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $244.50 IN ADDITION TO $244.50 PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF SIX EMPTY ROCKET HEADS, WEIGHING 12,321 POUNDS, SHIPPED BY THE DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANY, INC., CHARLOTTE ORDNANCE MISSILE PLANT, FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER, U.S. ARMY ORDNANCE DISTRICT, FROM CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA, TO LETTERKENNY ORDNANCE DEPOT, PENNSYLVANIA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING NO. WY 8743641, DATED OCTOBER 21, 1958.

YOUR PRESENT SUBMISSION REITERATES YOUR PREVIOUS CONTENTIONS THAT THIS SHIPMENT WAS TRANSPORTED IN TWO TRAILERS. THOSE CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION BY OUR OFFICE. THE ORIGINAL REPORT DATED NOVEMBER 23, 1959, OF THE SHIPPING AGENCY, ON THE LOADING OF THIS SHIPMENT IS AS FOLLOWS:

"1. SHIPMENT WAS LOADED ON ONE (1) TRAILER, TENDERED AS AN L.T.L.

2. SIZE OR NUMBER OF TRAILER WAS NOT RECORDED BY THE CONTRACTOR.'

THE SECOND REPORT DATED DECEMBER 16, 1960, FROM THE SHIPPING AGENCY IS AS FOLLOWS:

"1. THIS OFFICE HAS NO RECORD THAT TWO (2) TRAILERS WERE USED, NOR THE SIZE USED.

2. THE ROCKET HEADS WERE SHIPPED IN METAL CONTAINERS, DIMENSIONS OF WHICH (SIC) ARE 99.25 INCHES BY 54.25 INCHES BY 64 INCHES, AS INDICATED ON INSPECTOR'S REQUEST FOR GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING, COPY ATTACHED.

3. BILL OF LADING WY-8743641 DOES NOT SHOW THAT TWO (2) TRAILERS WERE USED FOR PICKUP.'

THE ATTACHED COPY OF INSPECTOR'S REQUEST CONTAINS NO INDICATION THAT MORE THAN ONE VEHICLE WAS REQUESTED.

THUS, IT APPEARS EACH ROCKET HEAD, AS PACKED FOR SHIPMENT, HAD A CUBIC MEASUREMENT OF 344,596.5 CUBIC INCHES (99.25 INCHES BY 54.25 INCHES BY 64 INCHES) OR LESS THAN 200 CUBIC FEET. THERE IS NOTHING ON THE CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE (THE BILL OF LADING) TO SHOW THAT MORE THAN ONE TRAILER WAS REQUIRED TO TRANSPORT THE SHIPMENT. YOU HAVE FURNISHED NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THIS SHIPMENT WAS NOT LOADED ON ONE TRAILER WHEN DELIVERED TO YOU. AN EXAMINATION OF BILL OF LADING WY-8743641, SHOWS THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS SIGNED FOR YOUR ACCOUNT APPARENTLY BY EARL WINGATE.

YOU HAVE PRESENTED COPIES OF TWO FREIGHT BILLS PREPARED BY YOU INDICATING THAT TWO TRAILERS WERE USED TO TRANSPORT THIS SHIPMENT CONSISTING OF SIX ROCKET HEADS WEIGHING 12,321 POUNDS, AND HAVING A CUBIC MEASUREMENT OF LESS THAN 1,200 CUBIC FEET. YOU REPORT THAT EACH OF THESE OPEN TOP 35- FOOT TRAILERS HAD AN INSIDE LENGTH OF 412 3/4 INCHES, AND INSIDE WIDTH OF 90 3/4 INCHES, AND AN INSIDE HEIGHT OF 83 1/2 INCHES. THUS, EACH TRAILER HAD AN INSIDE CAPACITY OF OVER 1,800 CUBIC FEET. THE FREIGHT BILLS INDICATE THAT THREE ROCKET HEADS WERE TRANSPORTED ON EACH OF TWO TRAILERS. THE THREE ROCKET HEADS WEIGHED APPROXIMATELY 6,160 POUNDS, AND WERE OF A CUBIC MEASUREMENT OF 600 (3 BY 200) CUBIC FEET. THUS, YOUR FREIGHT BILLS SHOW THAT THREE ROCKET HEADS WITH A CUBIC MEASUREMENT OF 600 CUBIC FEET "LOADED TO VISIBLE CAPACITY" A 35-FOOT TRAILER OF 1,800 CUBIC FEET INSIDE CAPACITY. CLEARLY, THAT STATEMENT ON YOUR FREIGHT BILL IS IN ERROR AND CASTS DOUBT ON THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ENTIRE DOCUMENTS.

CONCERNING YOUR STATEMENTS RELATIVE TO LOADING THESE SIX ROCKET HEADS ON A SINGLE TRAILER, THE ORIGINAL REPORT OF THE SHIPPING OFFICER IS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE "SHIPMENT WAS LOADED ON ONE (1) TRAILER.' YOU HAVE PRESENTED NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT WHEN THE SHIPMENT WAS DELIVERED TO YOU IT WAS NOT SO LOADED. THE ROCKET HEADS IF LOADED UPRIGHT WOULD HAVE REQUIRED TWENTY-SEVEN FEET TWO INCHES OF SPACE IN A 35-FOOT TRAILER. APPARENTLY, THIS LEFT AMPLE SPACE IN WHICH TO PLACE REMOVABLE CROSS ARMS FOR SIDEWALL SUPPORT BETWEEN EACH OF THE ROCKET HEADS. YOU STATE THAT IF THE ROCKET HEADS WERE LOADED UPRIGHT, THE HEIGHT OF THE LOAD WOULD HAVE BEEN 2 3/4 INCHES UNDER THE STATUTORY HEIGHT LIMIT. THE STATUTORY HEIGHT LIMIT OF A LOADED TRAILER OF 12 FEET SIX INCHES WAS PRESCRIBED BY STATE OFFICERS AS A SAFETY MEASURE. YOU ADMIT THAT A TRAILER HEIGHT IF LOADED WITH ROCKET HEADS IN AN UPRIGHT POSITION WOULD BE LESS THAN THE SAFE LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY STATUTE. ALSO WHILE WE NOTE YOUR STATEMENT THAT IT IS YOUR OPINION THAT ROCKET HEADS SO LOADED WOULD HAVE BEEN UNSAFE, SUCH CONCLUSION APPEARS NOT TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE RECORD OR ANY INFORMATION AVAILABLE HERE.

ACCORDINGLY, YOU HAVE PRESENTED NOTHING WHICH WOULD WARRANT A MODIFICATION OF OUR DECISION OF MARCH 10, 1961 (B-143784) SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM, AND THE CONCLUSION REACHED THEREIN IS ADHERED TO. ..END :