B-101791, AUG. 2, 1955

B-101791: Aug 2, 1955

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR REQUEST. THE SETTLEMENT DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM BECAUSE THE ALLOWABLE CHARGE FOR THE SERVICE PERFORMED WAS FOUND TO BE FOR COMPUTATION ON THE BASIS OF THE CLASS-E RATES. THE CLASS-E RATING WAS PUBLISHED FOR APPLICATION ON . THIS RATING WAS FOUND PROPER UNDER THE RULE OF ANALOGY. WHICH WAS ACCOMPANIED BY A SUPPLEMENTAL BILL FOR $6. YOU CITE AS AUTHORITY FOR THIS BASIS AN AGREEMENT ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO IN 1928 BY MR. THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE SHIPMENT MOVED UNDER A PREARRANGED AGREEMENT AS TO CHARGES TO BE PAID FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED WAS REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO. THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER AT THE POINT OF SHIPMENT STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECORD OF ANY SPECIAL CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT MADE WITH THE CARRIERS FOR HANDLING THE MOVEMENT.

B-101791, AUG. 2, 1955

TO THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR REQUEST, PER FILE GC-41618, FOR REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT (CERTIFICATE NO. 332422-1/2, DATED JUNE 2, 1947) WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM ON BILL NO. GC-41618-12 FOR ADDITIONAL FREIGHT CHARGES OF $7,091.26, ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF ARTILLERY GUN CARS, MOVING ON OWN WHEELS, FROM HIGHLANDS BEACH, NEW JERSEY, TO FORT MACARTHUR, SAN PEDRO, CALIFORNIA, DURING DECEMBER 1941, UNDER BILL OF LADING WQ-3868069.

THE SETTLEMENT DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM BECAUSE THE ALLOWABLE CHARGE FOR THE SERVICE PERFORMED WAS FOUND TO BE FOR COMPUTATION ON THE BASIS OF THE CLASS-E RATES, LESS LAND GRANT, AND CHARGES DETERMINED ON THAT BASIS HAD BEEN PAID. THE CLASS-E RATING WAS PUBLISHED FOR APPLICATION ON ,CRANES OR DERRICKS, NOIBN * * * MOVED ON OWN WHEELS," AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 28355-A OF CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 14. THIS RATING WAS FOUND PROPER UNDER THE RULE OF ANALOGY, CLASSIFICATION RULE NO. 17. IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW, WHICH WAS ACCOMPANIED BY A SUPPLEMENTAL BILL FOR $6,242.83, YOUR URGE THAT THE CLASS-A RATE, WITHOUT DEDUCTION FOR LAND GRANT, SHOULD BE APPLIED ON 70 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL WEIGHT. YOU CITE AS AUTHORITY FOR THIS BASIS AN AGREEMENT ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO IN 1928 BY MR. B. W. SCHUMAN, COORDINATOR OF TRAFFIC FOR THE GOVERNMENT, AND THE TRANSCONTINENTAL LINES, WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF EASTERN AND SOUTHERN CARRIERS.

THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE SHIPMENT MOVED UNDER A PREARRANGED AGREEMENT AS TO CHARGES TO BE PAID FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED WAS REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO. ON OCTOBER 30, 1944, THE TRANSPORTATION OFFICER AT THE POINT OF SHIPMENT STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RECORD OF ANY SPECIAL CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT MADE WITH THE CARRIERS FOR HANDLING THE MOVEMENT. THE SAME INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED AT A LATER DATE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY. IT MAY BE STATED, ALSO, THAT NO RECORD HAS BEEN FOUND IN OUR OFFICE OF THE AGREEMENT ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO IN 1928. ON THE OTHER HAND, OUR OFFICE HAS INFORMATION TO THE EFFECT THAT IN SEPTEMBER 1928 AND FEBRUARY 1929 THE GENERAL FREIGHT COMMITTEE OF THE CARRIERS IN SOUTHERN FREIGHT ASSOCIATION TERRITORY DETERMINED--- WITH RESPECT TO WEIGHTS AND CHARGES ON GOVERNMENT ARTILLERY ON RAILWAY CARS--- THAT WITHIN SOUTHERN CLASSIFICATION TERRITORY THE SAME BASIS SHOULD BE EMPLOYED AS THAT PUBLISHED FOR APPLICATION ON CRANES OR DERRICKS, NOIBN, ON THEIR OWN WHEELS 1193.

WHILE THE DETERMINATION OF THE SOUTHERN RAILROADS IS NOT CONTROLLING ON TRANSCONTINENTAL MOVEMENTS, IT TENDS TO CREATE DOUBT THAT THE AGREEMENT YOU REFERRED TO HAD THE CONCURRENCE OF EASTERN OR SOUTHERN CARRIERS. ALSO, IT TENDS TO SHOW THAT THE CARRIERS THEMSELVES ARE IN CONFLICT AS TO THE PROPER BASIS OF RATES TO BE APPLIED ON MOVEMENTS OF THE TYPE IN QUESTION.

ACCORDINGLY, FOR THE REASONS STATED, AND IN THE ABSENCE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE AGREEMENT YOU RELY UPON, OUR OFFICE WOULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED IN MODIFYING THE SETTLEMENT, WHICH IS HEREBY SUSTAINED.