B-145895, OCT. 17, 1961

B-145895: Oct 17, 1961

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

LTD.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 9. 256 POUNDS AND MOVED IN TRAILER NO. 6341 WHICH WAS SEALED BY SHIPPER AT POINT OF LOADING AND THE SEALS WERE INTACT UPON ARRIVAL AT DESTINATION. THERE WAS NO REQUEST FOR EXCLUSIVE-USE SERVICE NOR DOES THE RECORD INDICATE THAT INSTRUCTIONS WERE ISSUED THAT THE SEALS WERE NOT TO BE BROKEN. FOR THE SERVICES FURNISHED YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID $1. CONTENDING THAT THE CLASS RATE ORIGINALLY BILLED WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS SHIPMENT AS THE C.I. WAS NOT SHOWN IN RMMTB TRANSCONTINENTAL TERRITORIAL DIRECTORY NO. 20-A. THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $445 CLAIMED BY YOU WAS DERIVED BY USE OF THE RATE SPECIFIED IN C. WHICH YOU CONTENDED WAS THE ACTUAL ROUTE OF MOVEMENT.

B-145895, OCT. 17, 1961

TO THE WESTERN TRUCK LINES, LTD.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 9, 1961, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE OF JANUARY 26, 1961, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM (G -02627) FOR $329.69 ON BILL NO. 49-7-24-57 FOR ADDITIONAL FREIGHT CHARGES FOR A SHIPMENT TRANSPORTED FROM ABERDEEN, MARYLAND, TO YUMA TEST STATION, ARIZONA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING WY 6765459, DATED JUNE 25, 1957.

THE SHIPMENT WEIGHED 7,256 POUNDS AND MOVED IN TRAILER NO. 6341 WHICH WAS SEALED BY SHIPPER AT POINT OF LOADING AND THE SEALS WERE INTACT UPON ARRIVAL AT DESTINATION. THERE WAS NO REQUEST FOR EXCLUSIVE-USE SERVICE NOR DOES THE RECORD INDICATE THAT INSTRUCTIONS WERE ISSUED THAT THE SEALS WERE NOT TO BE BROKEN.

FOR THE SERVICES FURNISHED YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID $1,922, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A THROUGH FIRST-CLASS TRUCKLOAD RATE PUBLISHED IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN MOTOR TARIFF BUREAU TRANSCONTINENTAL CLASS TARIFF NO. 21-A, MF-I.C.C. NO. 95. THEREAFTER, YOU CLAIMED AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $445, CONTENDING THAT THE CLASS RATE ORIGINALLY BILLED WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS SHIPMENT AS THE C.I. WHITTEN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, ONE OF THE CARRIERS DESIGNATED IN THE BILL OF LADING ROUTING BLOCK, WAS NOT SHOWN IN RMMTB TRANSCONTINENTAL TERRITORIAL DIRECTORY NO. 20-A, MF-I.C.C. NO. 79, AS PARTICIPATING IN THE THROUGH RATE PUBLISHED IN RMMTB NO. 21-A, MF- I.C.C. NO. 95.

THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $445 CLAIMED BY YOU WAS DERIVED BY USE OF THE RATE SPECIFIED IN C. I. WHITTEN TENDER NO. 227, A SECTION 22 QUOTATION RATE OFFERED FOR APPLICATION TO SHIPMENTS OF AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES AND FIREWORKS TRANSPORTED FROM ABERDEEN, MARYLAND, TO YUMA TEST STATION, YUMA, ARIZONA, VIA THE ROUTE OF CARRIERS SHOWN ON THE BILL OF LADING. CERTIFICATE OF SETTLEMENT DATED AUGUST 17, 1959, WE ALLOWED YOU $6.96 OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED, BASED ON A COMBINATION OF RATES MADE FROM ABERDEEN TO BALTIMORE, MARYLAND; BALTIMORE TO CINCINNATI, OHIO; AND CINCINNATI TO DESTINATION.

SUBSEQUENT TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE GREATER PART OF YOUR CLAIM FOR THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $445, YOU PRESENTED A SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL BILL IN THE AMOUNT OF $329.69, BASED UPON A COMBINATION OF RATES MADE FROM ABERDEEN TO GAMBRILLS, MARYLAND; GAMBRILLS TO JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA; AND JEFFERSONVILLE TO DESTINATION, WHICH YOU CONTENDED WAS THE ACTUAL ROUTE OF MOVEMENT. THE MILITARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AGENCY, WHEN REQUESTED TO VERIFY THE ACTUAL ROUTE OF MOVEMENT, MADE INQUIRY OF YOUR COMPANY, AS DESTINATION CARRIER. BY LETTER OF OCTOBER 21, 1960, FILE TCREA-TCFA-660, 866, YOU ADVISED THAT THE ROUTE OF MOVEMENT AND INTERCHANGE POINTS WERE AS FOLLOWS: ABERDEEN, MARYLAND, TO GAMBRILLS, MARYLAND, VIA WOOLEYHAM TRANSPORT COMPANY - GAMBRILLS, MARYLAND, TO JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA, VIA WHITTEN TRANSFER COMPANY - JEFFERSONVILLE, INDIANA, TO OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA, VIA MID-CONTINENT FREIGHT LINES - OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA, TO EL PASO, TEXAS, VIA GILLETTE MOTOR TRANSPORT - EL PASO, TEXAS, TO YUMA TEST STATION, ARIZONA, VIA WESTERN TRUCK LINES. BASED UPON THIS INFORMATION OUR OFFICE DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM IN THE AMOUNT OF $329.69 AND ISSUED A NOTICE OF OVERCHARGE (FORM 1003) DATED JANUARY 31, 1961, IN THE AMOUNT OF $704.38, WHICH AMOUNT WAS COLLECTED BY DEDUCTION FROM YOUR BILL NO. 49- 041201.

IN YOUR LETTER OF MAY 9, 1961, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE DISALLOWANCE YOU STATE THAT "THE ONLY CORRECT APPLICATION OF RATES WOULD BE THE TRUCKLOAD RATES AS ORIGINALLY ASSESSED.' THE BASIS THAT WE HAVE USED IS PREDICATED UPON THE THEORY THAT THIS IS A TRUCKLOAD SHIPMENT. THE COMBINATION RATE APPLIED IS CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS: ABERDEEN TO GAMBRILLS USING THE LESS- TRUCKLOAD RATES PUBLISHED IN MIDDLE ATLANTIC CONFERENCE FREIGHT TARIFF NO. 7-F, MF-I.C.C. NO. A-724, WHICH IS GOVERNED BY THE EXCEPTIONS AND RULES OF MAC FREIGHT TARIFF NO. 10-L, MF-I.C.C. NO. A-800. PARAGRAPH (D) OF RULE 25 OF TARIFF NO. 10-L PROVIDES THAT "WHEN THE CHARGES ON A SHIPMENT IS (SIC) MADE LOWER BY BILLING IT AS A LESS-THAN-TRUCKLOAD SHIPMENT, SUCH LOWER CHARGE WILL APPLY.' FROM GAMBRILLS TO JEFFERSONVILLE THE TRUCKLOAD RATE PUBLISHED IN C. I. WHITTEN TRANSFER COMPANY EXPLOSIVE TARIFF MF- I.C.C. NO. 26 WAS USED. FROM JEFFERSONVILLE TO YUMA WE USED THE LESS-THAN -TRUCKLOAD RATES PUBLISHED IN RMMTB TARIFF NO. 21-A, MF-I.C.C. 95, WHICH IS GOVERNED BY THE RULES PUBLISHED IN RMMTB NO. 20-A, MF-I.C.C. NO. 79. ITEM 680 OF TARIFF NO. 20-A PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, THAT "WHERE BOTH LTL AND VOLUME OR TRUCKLOAD RATES ARE SHOWN FOR THE SAME ARTICLE, THE CHARGE FOR A SHIPMENT MOVING UNDER THE VOLUME OR TRUCKLOAD RATE AT THE MINIMUM WEIGHT SPECIFIED SHALL IN NO CASE EXCEED THE CHARGE FOR THE SAME SHIPMENT MOVING UNDER THE LTL RATE.' FROM YUMA TO YUMA TEST STATION WE USED THE ARBITRARY RATE PUBLISHED IN RMMTB TARIFF NO. 27-C, MF-I.C.C. NO. 87. ITEM 200 OF TARIFF NO. 27-C PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, THAT "WHEN ARBITRARY RATES ARE PUBLISHED IN SECTION 10 ON DIFFERENT MINIMUM WEIGHTS, THE CHARGE BASED ON THE HIGHER OR HIGHEST RATE AT ACTUAL WEIGHT (OR PRESCRIBED MINIMUM WEIGHT IF GREATER) SHALL IN NO CASE EXCEED THE CHARGE BASED ON A RATE APPLYING ON A GREATER MINIMUM WEIGHT.'

THE COMBINATION OF RATES USED IN OUR BASIS TREATS THE SHIPMENT AS A TRUCKLOAD, BUT THREE OF THE FACTORS ARE GOVERNED BY AN ALTERNATIVE RATE RULE WHICH PROVIDES THAT THE CHARGES ASSESSED WILL BE COMPUTED USING EITHER TRUCKLOAD OR LESS-THAN-TRUCKLOAD RATES, WHICHEVER PRODUCES THE LOWER CHARGE. THE TARIFFS COVERING THREE OF THE FACTORS IN THE COMBINATION HAVE RULES WHICH IN EFFECT ESTABLISH THE LESS-THAN TRUCKLOAD CHARGES AS MAXIMA AND THE OTHER FACTOR HAS BEEN CHARGED AT THE TRUCKLOAD RATE SO THAT THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY CONFLICT WITH YOUR CONTENTION THAT TRUCKLOAD RATES SHOULD BE ASSESSED.

ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM AND THE COLLECTION OF THE $704.38 OVERCHARGE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN CORRECT, AND IS SUSTAINED.