B-154825, FEB. 9, 1965
Highlights
TO THE DENVER AND RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED JULY 22. THE "SEC. 25" REFERENCE IN THE NOTATION OBVIOUSLY IS TO THAT SECTION IN JOINT MILITARY PASSENGER AGREEMENT NO. 29. IS THE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSECTION 25 (E) OF JOINT MILITARY PASSENGER AGREEMENT NO. 29. SAID SECTION 25 PROVIDES THAT CHARGES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF MILITARY IMPEDIMENTA IN PASSENGER TRAIN SERVICE WILL BE THE SAME AMOUNT IN DOLLARS AND CENTS AS WOULD APPLY IF THE SHIPMENT WERE MOVED IN REGULAR FREIGHT TRAIN SERVICE UNDER THE CURRENT TARIFFS AND SPECIAL QUOTATIONS. IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE APPLICABLE RATE IS THE COMBINATION OF LOCAL RATES CONSTRUCTED OVER THE ACTUAL ROUTES OF MOVEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE VARIOUS BILLS OF LADING.
B-154825, FEB. 9, 1965
TO THE DENVER AND RIO GRANDE WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED JULY 22, 1964, FILE 5 GB 27225; YOUR TWO LETTERS DATED JULY 23, 1964, FILES 5 GB 27282 AND 5 GB 27394; AND YOUR LETTER DATED JULY 28, 1964, FILE 5 GB 28190. YOU REQUEST A REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENTS ISSUED BY OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIMS, AS ABOVE IDENTIFIED, FOR ADDITIONAL FREIGHT CHARGES ON CERTAIN MOVEMENTS OF TRAINING MATERIALS BY THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION TO AND FROM ROCKY, COLORADO.
EACH OF THE GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING INVOLVED IN THESE CLAIMS BEARS REFERENCE TO "JOINT MILITARY PASSENGER SEC. 25 AND AEC SEC. 22, DATED JULY 1, 1951.' THE "SEC. 25" REFERENCE IN THE NOTATION OBVIOUSLY IS TO THAT SECTION IN JOINT MILITARY PASSENGER AGREEMENT NO. 29. THE ISSUE HERE INVOLVED, THEREFORE, IS THE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSECTION 25 (E) OF JOINT MILITARY PASSENGER AGREEMENT NO. 29, WHICH, AS PROVIDED IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE CITED SPECIAL SECTION 22 QUOTATION OF JULY 1, 1951, MADE TO THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF 49 U.S.C. 22, GOVERNS THE COMPUTATION OF CHARGES FOR THE SPECIAL SERVICES HERE RENDERED. SAID SECTION 25 PROVIDES THAT CHARGES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF MILITARY IMPEDIMENTA IN PASSENGER TRAIN SERVICE WILL BE THE SAME AMOUNT IN DOLLARS AND CENTS AS WOULD APPLY IF THE SHIPMENT WERE MOVED IN REGULAR FREIGHT TRAIN SERVICE UNDER THE CURRENT TARIFFS AND SPECIAL QUOTATIONS.
IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE APPLICABLE RATE IS THE COMBINATION OF LOCAL RATES CONSTRUCTED OVER THE ACTUAL ROUTES OF MOVEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE VARIOUS BILLS OF LADING, EVEN THOUGH FREIGHT SHIPMENTS MOVING IN REGULAR FREIGHT TRAIN SERVICE BETWEEN THE POINTS OF ORIGIN AND DESTINATION INVOLVED WOULD NOT BE MOVED VIA THE JUNCTIONS SHOWN IN THE BILL OF LADING ROUTING DIRECTIONS. THE SETTLEMENT ACTION TAKEN ON THE CLAIMS HERE INVOLVED WAS BASED ON FREIGHT RATES OTHERWISE APPLICABLE BETWEEN THE VARIOUS ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS IN REGULAR FREIGHT TRAIN SERVICE.
THE ISSUE HERE INVOLVED HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF VARIOUS DECISIONS TO YOUR COMPANY. THE VIEWS OF OUR OFFICE AS TO THE PROPER INTERPRETATION OF THE PERTINENT SPECIAL QUOTATION PROVISIONS, PARTICULARLY SECTION 25 (E), JOINT MILITARY PASSENGER AGREEMENT NO. 29, WERE SUMMARIZED AND SET FORTH IN DETAIL IN OUR DECISION B-151820, DATED NOVEMBER 25, 1964 (COPY ENCLOSED), CONCERNING YOUR FILE 5 GB 27346, IN WHICH WE WERE UNABLE TO FIND ANY SOUND REASON FOR REVERSING OR MODIFYING OUR EARLIER DECISION DATED JANUARY 2, 1964, ON THE SAME SUBJECT. OUR LAST CORRESPONDENCE WITH YOU ON THIS MATTER WAS DATED JANUARY 15, 1965, B-153793, REAFFIRMING OUR DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1964, B-153793.
THE REASONING AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE PREVIOUS DECISIONS CONCERNING THIS LONGSTANDING CONTROVERSY ARE EQUALLY APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT CASES. ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED JUNE 28, 1962, DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM NO. 27225; THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED JUNE 22, 1962, DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM NO. 27282; THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED JUNE 27, 1962, DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM NO. 27394; AND THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED JUNE 28, 1962, DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM NO. 28190, ALL APPEAR TO BE CORRECT, AND THEY ARE HEREBY SUSTAINED.