B-119909, JAN. 13, 1956

B-119909: Jan 13, 1956

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

YOU CLAIMED ORIGINALLY AND WERE PAID FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE RADIO TUBES $481.31. YOU URGE THAT THE ARTICLE WAS DESCRIBED ON THE BILL OF LADING AS RADIO RECEIVING TUBES. BECAUSE NO MENTION WAS MADE AS TO THE DIMENSIONS OF THE TUBES. THE TARIFF ITEM ON WHICH YOU CLAIMED CHARGES ORIGINALLY WAS INAPPLICABLE. FOR WHICH THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES HERE INVOLVED WERE RENDERED. " ARE 1.5 INCHES IN MAXIMUM HEIGHT BY .400 INCHES IN MAXIMUM DIAMETER. IS UNDERSTOOD THAT SUCH TUBES ARE GENERALLY KNOWN AS "2 INCH RADIO RECEIVING TUBES.'. THE SETTLEMENT ACTION DISALLOWING YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WAS PROPER. IS SUSTAINED.

B-119909, JAN. 13, 1956

TO INTERNATIONAL FORWARDING COMPANY:

CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN GIVEN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT OF APRIL 23, 1953 (CLAIM NO. TK-410013), WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM, PER BILL NO. 11849, FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES OF $100.66 ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF 179 CARTONS OF RADIO RECEIVING TUBES WEIGHING 5,785 POUNDS--- INCLUDED IN A SHIPMENT OF RADIO TUBES, TRANSFORMERS AND PAPER WEIGHING 9,353 POUNDS--- FROM WALTHAM, MASSACHUSETTS, TO OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING NO. N-32293907, IN MARCH 1951.

YOU CLAIMED ORIGINALLY AND WERE PAID FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE RADIO TUBES $481.31, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A RATE OF 832 CENTS PER 100 POUNDS AS NAMED IN FREIGHT FORWARDING TARIFF BUREAU, INC., TARIFF NO. 6-A, AGENT T. J. FOX, I.C.C.-F.F. NO. 36, ITEM 2965-B, SUPPLEMENT 19. THEREAFTER YOU CLAIMED, PER SUPPLEMENTAL BILL NO. 11849, $100.66 ADDITIONAL, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE 1 1/2 TIMES FIRST-CLASS RATE OF 1006 CENTS PER 100 POUNDS, SHOWING AS AUTHORITY THEREFORE ITEM NO. 16245 OF CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 19 AND GROUP 5, ITEM 4000 OF FREIGHT FORWARDER TARIFF BUREAU TARIFF NO. 1 AND SECTION 2 OF FREIGHT FORWARDER TARIFF BUREAU TARIFF NO. 2. YOU URGE THAT THE ARTICLE WAS DESCRIBED ON THE BILL OF LADING AS RADIO RECEIVING TUBES, IN CARTONS, AND THAT, BECAUSE NO MENTION WAS MADE AS TO THE DIMENSIONS OF THE TUBES, THE TARIFF ITEM ON WHICH YOU CLAIMED CHARGES ORIGINALLY WAS INAPPLICABLE.

THE CITED TARIFF ITEM NO. 2965-B PROVIDES A RATE OF 832 CENTS PER 100 POUNDS FOR APPLICATION ON---

"TUBES, VACUUM, ELECTRONIC OR RADIO, VIZ:

TUBES, NOIBN, EXCEEDING 7 INCHES IN GREATEST DIMENSION, IN CRATES, TUBES, NOIBN, NOT EXCEEDING, 7 INCHES IN GREATEST DIMENSION, IN BOXES * * *"

IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST THEREFOR, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, ELECTRONIC SUPPLY OFFICE, FOR WHICH THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES HERE INVOLVED WERE RENDERED, HAS FURNISHED ADVICE THAT THE DIMENSIONS OF THE SAID TUBES, DESCRIBED IN THE PURCHASE CONTRACT AS:

"TUBE, ELECTRON TYPE 2E35 SUBMINIATURE, PENTODE NAVY STOCK NO. N16-T 52475,"

ARE 1.5 INCHES IN MAXIMUM HEIGHT BY .400 INCHES IN MAXIMUM DIAMETER. IS UNDERSTOOD THAT SUCH TUBES ARE GENERALLY KNOWN AS "2 INCH RADIO RECEIVING TUBES.'

ACCORDINGLY, UPON THIS RECORD, THE SETTLEMENT ACTION DISALLOWING YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WAS PROPER, AND IS SUSTAINED.