B-146577, NOV. 21, 1962
Highlights
B. JAMES FREIGHT LINES: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 2. N-22274037 WAS AUTHORIZED TO BE ALLOWED. THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT. EXCLUSIVE USE WAS NOT REQUESTED AND THAT THE EXCLUSIVE-USE RULE 110. PROVIDES THAT "WHEN SHIPMENT IS COMPLETELY LOADED ON EQUIPMENT ORDERED AND FURNISHED. THESE NOTATIONS APPEAR TO INDICATE THAT 40 FEET OF VEHICLE SPACE WAS ORDERED FOR EACH SHIPMENT AND THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD HERE SHOWING THAT ANYTHING ELSE WAS FURNISHED. THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CHARGES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THESE TWO SHIPMENTS ARE THE CHARGES PROVIDED FOR UNDER ITEM 110. YOU HAVE BEEN PAID THOSE CHARGES. WHEN CONSIDERED WITH THE LACK OF SHOWING THAT ANY EQUIPMENT OTHER THAN THE 40 FOOT TRUCKS WERE FURNISHED.
B-146577, NOV. 21, 1962
TO A. B. JAMES FREIGHT LINES:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 2, 1962, FILE NO. N- 694/51, UC-112, TK-707706, IN EFFECT, REQUESTING THE FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF B-146577 OF FEBRUARY 19, 1962, WHICH SUSTAINED, IN PART, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $81.99 ($38.63, $11.93 AND $31.43) IN ADDITION TO THE AMOUNTS PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FURNISHED UNDER BILLS OF LADING NOS. N-14224270, N 14204421 AND N-22274037 IN SEPTEMBER 1951. IN OUR DECISION OF FEBRUARY 19, 1962, PAYMENT OF $31.43 CLAIMED IN CONNECTION WITH BILL OF LADING NO. N-22274037 WAS AUTHORIZED TO BE ALLOWED.
YOUR PRESENT SUBMISSION CONCERNS THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS OF $38.63 AND $11.93 CLAIMED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE SHIPMENTS FROM OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, TO SAN DIEGO AND NORTH ISLAND, CALIFORNIA, UNDER BILLS OF LADING NOS. N-14224270 AND N-14204421, RESPECTIVELY, AND RELATES TO THE APPLICATION THERETO OF RULE 110 AND PARAGRAPH (B) OF RULE 120 OF SOUTHWESTERN MOTOR TARIFF BUREAU, U.S. GOVERNMENT QUOTATION NO. 1.
THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT, AS TO THE INSTANT SHIPMENTS, EXCLUSIVE USE WAS NOT REQUESTED AND THAT THE EXCLUSIVE-USE RULE 110, CONSIDERED ALONE, HAS NO APPLICATION. HOWEVER, RULE 120 (B), THE LIGHT AND BULKY ARTICLES RULE, PROVIDES THAT "WHEN SHIPMENT IS COMPLETELY LOADED ON EQUIPMENT ORDERED AND FURNISHED, THEN CHARGES UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ITEM SHALL NOT EXCEED THE CHARGES THAT WOULD ACCRUE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ITEM 110.' THE BILLS OF LADING INVOLVED BEAR ANNOTATIONS APPARENTLY MADE BY THE SHIPPING AGENCY "1 LB. TRUCKS SET DBLES 40 FT TYPE AND LGTH" AND "1 NO. TRUCKS LENGTH AND TYPE SET OF DBLS 40 FT.' THESE NOTATIONS APPEAR TO INDICATE THAT 40 FEET OF VEHICLE SPACE WAS ORDERED FOR EACH SHIPMENT AND THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD HERE SHOWING THAT ANYTHING ELSE WAS FURNISHED. APPLYING ITEM 120 (B) TO SUCH SITUATION, THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CHARGES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THESE TWO SHIPMENTS ARE THE CHARGES PROVIDED FOR UNDER ITEM 110. YOU HAVE BEEN PAID THOSE CHARGES.
REGARDING YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE RECORD FAILS TO SHOW THE SHIPPER ANNOTATED THE BILL AS TO THE SIZE OF EQUIPMENT ORDERED AND FURNISHED, RULE 120 (B) DOES NOT REQUIRE SUCH AN ANNOTATION; AND, THE QUOTED NOTATIONS ON THE BILLS OF LADING SEEM SUFFICIENT, WHEN CONSIDERED WITH THE LACK OF SHOWING THAT ANY EQUIPMENT OTHER THAN THE 40 FOOT TRUCKS WERE FURNISHED, TO SHOW THE SHIPMENTS WERE LOADED ON THE EQUIPMENT ORDERED OR REQUESTED BY THE SHIPPING AGENCY. ALSO, YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE DECISION CONTRADICTS CERTAIN LANGUAGE IN B-131798 DATED MARCH 2, 1959 (AND SIMILAR LANGUAGE IN B-130525 DATED NOVEMBER 24, 1958) WAS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED IN OUR B- 148053 DATED MAY 14, 1962, COPY ATTACHED.
ACCORDINGLY, WE ADHERE TO THE DECISION SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCES OF THE AMOUNTS OF $38.63 AND $11.93.