B-156805, AUG. 23, 1965

B-156805: Aug 23, 1965

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TO ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 12. FOR THIS SERVICE YOU WERE PAID $4. CLEARLY READS MINIMAL WEIGHT IS 60. THIS SITUATION IS SIMILAR TO THAT INVOLVED IN OUR DECISION TO YOU. WHEREIN THE SAME QUOTATION AND THE APPLICATION OF RULE 24 THERETO WERE CONSIDERED. THE CONCLUSIONS STATED THEREIN ARE APPROPRIATE FOR APPLICATION TO THE PRESENT CASE.

B-156805, AUG. 23, 1965

TO ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 12, 1965, FILE G-AR-67000 BG, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED SEPTEMBER 14, 1964 (CLAIM TK-774059) WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL BILL AR 67000-A FOR $683.69 ADDITIONAL FREIGHT CHARGES ON A SHIPMENT OF FIVE ARMY TRACTOR TANKS W/O GUNS, LOADED ON A 60-FOOT CAR, AND A 53-FOOT CAR, TOTAL WEIGHT 96,025 POUNDS, FROM SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA, TO FORT KNOX, KENTUCKY, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING B-0146019, DATED AUGUST 4, 1961.

FOR THIS SERVICE YOU WERE PAID $4,118.20 BY THE ARMY FINANCE OFFICE, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA. IN OUR AUDIT OF THE PAYMENT VOUCHER WE DETERMINED THAT THE ALLOWABLE CHARGES SHOULD BE $3,434.51, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE CLASS 35 RATE OF $3.49 APPLIED TO THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF 57,615 POUNDS, AS 60,000 POUNDS MINIMUM, LOADED IN THE FIRST CAR AND THE ACTUAL OVERFLOW WEIGHT OF 38,410 POUNDS IN THE SECOND CAR, RELYING UPON THE APPLICATION OF RULE 24 OF THE UNIFORM FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 6, IN EFFECT AT THE TIME THE SHIPMENT MOVED, AND TRAFFIC EXECUTIVE ASSOCIATION--- EASTERN RAILROADS SECTION 22 QUOTATION NO. A-1412-A.

IN PROTESTING OUR AUDIT ACTION YOU STATED IN A LETTER DATED OCTOBER 29, 1964, THAT

"SECTION 22 TEA 1412-A AMENDMENT NO. 7, ITEM 1, CLEARLY READS MINIMAL WEIGHT IS 60,000 POUNDS PER CARLOAD SUBJECT TO EXCEPTIONS 1 AND 2.

"THE PHRASE "PER CARLOAD" CLEARLY PRECLUDES THE USE OF RULE 24 ON THE CLASS 35 RATING FOR SHIPMENTS GOVERNED BY THIS SECTION 22.'

THIS SITUATION IS SIMILAR TO THAT INVOLVED IN OUR DECISION TO YOU, B- 154018, DATED AUGUST 24, 1964 (COPY ENCLOSED), WHEREIN THE SAME QUOTATION AND THE APPLICATION OF RULE 24 THERETO WERE CONSIDERED. SINCE YOUR PRESENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW EMBODIES ARGUMENT SIMILAR TO THAT SET FORTH IN YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 20, 1964, FILE NO. G-AFR-61360 BG, WE FEEL THAT OUR PREVIOUS DECISION B-154018 CONSIDERED ALL ASPECTS OF THE BASIC ISSUE AND FULLY EXPLAINED THE POSITION OF OUR OFFICE, AND THE CONCLUSIONS STATED THEREIN ARE APPROPRIATE FOR APPLICATION TO THE PRESENT CASE.

IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE MUST SUSTAIN THE SETTLEMENT ACTION TAKEN ON YOUR BILL NO. AR-67000-A. ..END :