B-142919, AUG. 2, 1960

B-142919, AUG. 2, 1960

TO THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10, 1960, IN WHICH YOU REQUEST A REVIEW OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $631.10 ON SUPPLEMENTAL BILL NO. 629040 COVERING TWO SHIPMENTS DESCRIBED ON GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING WY-3479726 AND WY-3479727, DATED JULY 9, 1954, AS ,SPRAYERS, NOIBN, W/ENGINES, SU (DECONTAMINATING APPARATUS, POWER DRIVEN, TRUCK MOUNTED, M3A2)" MOVING FROM LANSING, MICHIGAN, TO ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO.

FOR THIS SERVICE, YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID TRANSPORTATION CHARGES BASED ON THE CLASS 85 RATING APPLICABLE ON MOTOR VEHICLE CHASSIS, SET-UP PROVIDED BY ITEM 43770 OF UNIFORM FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 2. THE AUDIT OF THIS ACCOUNT OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOUND THE PROPER CHARGES APPLICABLE TO BE BASED ON THE CLASS 45 RATING AT A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 24,000 POUNDS SUBJECT TO RULE 34 APPLICABLE ON "SPRAYERS, NOIBN" PROVIDED BY ITEM 41017 OF UNIFORM FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 2. THE RESULTING OVERPAYMENT OF $631.10 SUBSEQUENTLY WAS COLLECTED BY SETOFF AGAINST OTHER AMOUNTS DUE YOU.

IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW YOU CONTEND THAT THE PROPERTY SHIPPED WAS A COMBINATION ARTICLE RATEABLE AS A MOTOR VEHICLE CHASSIS UNDER RULE 18 OF THE GOVERNING CLASSIFICATION. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION YOU STATE THAT INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM THE FOURTH TRANSPORTATION ZONE OFFICE ON SIMILAR SHIPMENTS INDICATES THAT THE CHASSIS UPON WHICH THE DECONTAMINATING APPARATUS IS MOUNTED IS A STANDARD ARMY VEHICLE. YOU ALSO STATE THAT DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY TECHNICAL MANUAL TM 9-2800 SHOWS VARIOUS OTHER TYPES OF EQUIPMENT MOUNTED ON THE SAME TYPE CHASSIS THUS PROVING THAT THIS TRUCK CHASSIS IS NOT SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTED TO RECEIVE THE APPARATUS.

IN REPLY TO A LETTER FROM THIS OFFICE, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION STATED WITH REFERENCE TO SHIPMENTS OF POWER DRIVEN DECONTAMINATING APPARATUS OF THE TYPE HERE CONSIDERED, THAT THE AUTOMOTIVE CHASSIS AND THE SPRAYER UNIT WERE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED OR CONSTRUCTED TO BE USED WITH EACH OTHER, AND THAT THE SPRAYER AND AUTOMOTIVE CHASSIS COMPOSED A SINGLE WORKING UNIT. FURTHER, THAT IT WOULD NOT BE PRACTICAL TO USE THE AUTOMOTIVE CHASSIS FOR THE PURPOSE OF HAULING FREIGHT WITHOUT STRUCTURAL MODIFICATION, AND THAT THE SPRAYER MECHANISM COULD NOT BE USED AT THE JOB SITE WITHOUT THE SUPPORT AND POWER OF THE AUTOMOBILE CHASSIS AND MOTOR. IT SEEMS THEN THAT THE SEPARATE COMPONENTS ARE SO MATERIALLY ADAPTED TO EACH OTHER THAT NEITHER COULD OPERATE INDEPENDENTLY FOR THE DISTINCTIVE SEPARATE PURPOSES INVOLVED WITHOUT MAJOR CONSTRUCTION CHANGES. THUS, THE ARTICLE HERE CONCERNED FALLS WITHIN THE CLASS OF ARTICLES ON WHICH IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE COMBINED ARTICLE IS A COMPLETE ENTITY, AND NOT A COMBINATION ARTICLE SUBJECT TO RULE 18 OF THE UNIFORM FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION. SEE STEWART AND STEVENSON SERVICES, INC. V. B. AND O.RY.CO., 276 I.C.C. 156, 157. SINCE THIS DECONTAMINATING APPARATUS IS A COMPLETE UNIT, EACH PART DEPENDENT UPON THE OTHER FOR USE, AND NEITHER BEING SUSCEPTIBLE TO USE BY ITSELF WITHOUT MODIFICATION AND RECONSTRUCTION, THE DECONTAMINATING APPARATUS SEEMS PROPERLY RATEABLE AS A "SPRAYER, NOIBN.' SEE, IN THIS CONNECTION, OAKLAND TRUCK SALES CO. V. B. AND O.RY.CO., 270 I.C.C. 548 AND HARRISON CONSTRUCTION CO. V. CINCINNATI, N.O. AND T.P.RY.CO., 266 I.C.C. 313.