B-155427, JUN. 14, 1965
Highlights
FOR SERVICES PERFORMED YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THE BASIS OF THE THROUGH RATE SET OUT IN NAVAJO FREIGHT LINES. SINCE IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THERE IS ANYTHING IN WHITTEN TENDER NO. 37 USED IN THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE CHARGES BY OUR OFFICE EITHER EXPRESSLY OR BY NECESSARY IMPLICATION WHICH WOULD JUSTIFY COMBINATION OF THE QUOTATION WITH THE TARIFF RATE OR THAT AN INTENTION TO PERMIT SUCH COMBINATION IS OTHERWISE MANIFEST. WE HAVE RETURNED YOUR CLAIM TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOR RECONSIDERATION. YOU WILL BE ADVISED BY THAT DIVISION OF THE FINAL DISPOSITION. TK- 750328 AND TK-745724) HAVE BEEN REFERRED TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE RECORD AND YOU WILL BE ADVISED FURTHER AS TO SUCH SETTLEMENTS AFTER EXAMINATION OF THE PAPERS.
B-155427, JUN. 14, 1965
TO NAVAJO FREIGHT LINES, INC.:
IN YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 12, 1964, YOU REQUESTED, IN EFFECT, A REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED AUGUST 27, 1963, TK-745731, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM BY BILL NO. 3849-12020A, FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES IN THE AMOUNT OF $759.60 FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF EXPLOSIVES FROM INDIAN HEAD, MARYLAND, TO SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING A- 1175949 AND A-1175958 DATED SEPTEMBER 8 AND 9, 1960, RESPECTIVELY.
FOR SERVICES PERFORMED YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THE BASIS OF THE THROUGH RATE SET OUT IN NAVAJO FREIGHT LINES, INC., UNIFORM TENDER NO. 60-4, IC.C. NO. 268, VIA THE ROUTE OF MOVEMENT. ON AUDIT OF THE PAYMENT VOUCHER, OUR OFFICE ADJUSTED THE CHARGES PAID ON A LOWER COMBINATION RATE MADE OVER AMARILLO, TEXAS, USING AS ONE FACTOR C. I. WHITTEN TRANSFER COMPANY I.C.C. TENDER NO. 37, SUPPLEMENT NO. 5, ROUTE (62), AND EASTERN CENTRAL MOTOR CARRIERS ASSOCIATION, INC., TARIFF 32-B, MF-I.C.C. NO. A-182, TO AMARILLO, AND BEYOND AMARILLO, AS ANOTHER FACTOR, RATES BASED ON ITEM 35515 OF NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. A- 4, MF-I.C.C. NO. 1, AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN MOTOR TARIFF BUREAU TARIFF 21-B, MF -I.C.C. NO. 117. SUCH ACTION IN EFFECT ATTEMPTED TO COMBINE A SECTION 22 QUOTATION RATE WITH A TARIFF RATE TO PRODUCE CHARGES LOWER THAN A SECTION 22 ONE-FACTOR THROUGH RATE.
THE COURT OF CLAIMS HAS HELD THAT IN ORDER TO COMBINE A SECTION 22 QUOTATION WITH ANOTHER QUOTATION, OR WITH A REGULAR TARIFF PROVISION, THE INTENTION OF THE PARTIES TO ACCOMPLISH THIS PURPOSE MUST BE APPARENT, EITHER BY EXPRESS PROVISION OR NECESSARY INFERENCE. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY V. UNITED STATES, CT.CL. NO. 85-59 (1964). SINCE IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THERE IS ANYTHING IN WHITTEN TENDER NO. 37 USED IN THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE CHARGES BY OUR OFFICE EITHER EXPRESSLY OR BY NECESSARY IMPLICATION WHICH WOULD JUSTIFY COMBINATION OF THE QUOTATION WITH THE TARIFF RATE OR THAT AN INTENTION TO PERMIT SUCH COMBINATION IS OTHERWISE MANIFEST, WE HAVE RETURNED YOUR CLAIM TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOR RECONSIDERATION. YOU WILL BE ADVISED BY THAT DIVISION OF THE FINAL DISPOSITION.
IN YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10, 1965, IN ADDITION TO THIS MATTER (TK 745731), YOU APPEAR TO REQUEST REVIEW OF TK-730724, TK-750328 AND TK 745724, AND ASK THAT YOUR PROTESTS TO DEDUCTIONS TOTALING $5,630.39 BE ANSWERED.
THE REQUESTS FOR REVIEW OF THE THREE CLAIMS SETTLEMENTS (TK-730724, TK- 750328 AND TK-745724) HAVE BEEN REFERRED TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE RECORD AND YOU WILL BE ADVISED FURTHER AS TO SUCH SETTLEMENTS AFTER EXAMINATION OF THE PAPERS. ALSO, YOUR REQUEST THAT ACTION BE TAKEN ON YOUR PROTESTS TO DEDUCTIONS TOTALING $5,630.39 HAS BEEN REFERRED TO THE TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FOR APPROPRIATE HANDLING, AND YOU WILL BE ADVISED BY THAT DIVISION IN DUE COURSE OF ITS ACTION THEREON.