B-126585, FEB. 27, 1956
Highlights
TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 1. YOU URGE THAT THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION IS PROPERLY RATED BY ANALOGY AS CHEMICALS. IS SUBJECT TO THE THIRD-CLASS RATING IN THE WESTERN CLASSIFICATION. " WAS THE SOLE ISSUE IN THE CASE OF UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY V. WHEREIN IT WAS FOUND THAT NAPALM IS A GRANULAR OR POWDERED SOAP. WAS BASED ON THE RATE NAMED IN ITEM 7615 OF TRANSCONTINENTAL FREIGHT BUREAU TARIFF 1-Y. NO QUESTION OF RATING BY ANALOGY IS INVOLVED. WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF CLAIMS IN THE UNION PACIFIC CASE CITED ABOVE AND. IS SUSTAINED.
B-126585, FEB. 27, 1956
TO SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 1, 1955, FILE YG-85 581744, REQUESTING A REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 22, 1954 (CLAIM NO. TK-218143), WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM, PER BILL NO. D 581744 APRIL 1945, FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES OF $180.76 FOR TRANSPORTING A SHIPMENT OF 1,206 BOXES OF NAPALM THICKENER, WEIGHING 60,300 POUNDS, FROM NEW CUMBERLAND, PENNSYLVANIA, TO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, UNDER BILL OF LADING NO. WV- 8638505, DATED MARCH 9, 1945.
YOU URGE THAT THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION IS PROPERLY RATED BY ANALOGY AS CHEMICALS, N.O.I.B.N., AND IS SUBJECT TO THE THIRD-CLASS RATING IN THE WESTERN CLASSIFICATION. THE QUESTION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THE COMMODITY KNOWN AS "NAPALM" OR "NAPALM THICKENER," WAS THE SOLE ISSUE IN THE CASE OF UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY V. THE UNITED STATES, 117 C.CLS. 757, DECIDED NOVEMBER 7, 1950, WHEREIN IT WAS FOUND THAT NAPALM IS A GRANULAR OR POWDERED SOAP.
THE OVERPAYMENT OF $180.76, STATED ON GAO FORM 1003 DATED JULY 10, 1953, WAS BASED ON THE RATE NAMED IN ITEM 7615 OF TRANSCONTINENTAL FREIGHT BUREAU TARIFF 1-Y, WHICH SPECIFICALLY COVERS ,SOAP, N.O.S., OTHER THAN LIQUID.' SINCE THE CITED TARIFF ITEM NAMED A COMMODITY RATE ON "SOAP, N.O.S., OTHER THAN LIQUID," AND THE SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF THAT IDENTICAL COMMODITY, NO QUESTION OF RATING BY ANALOGY IS INVOLVED.
THE SETTLEMENT ACTION OF DECEMBER 22, 1954, WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF CLAIMS IN THE UNION PACIFIC CASE CITED ABOVE AND, ACCORDINGLY, IS SUSTAINED.