B-165883, MAR. 28, 1969
Highlights
IT SEEMS TO BE YOUR POSITION THAT CONDITION 5 ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING DOES NOT APPLY WHEN THE RATE IN QUESTION IS NAMED IN A SECTION 22 QUOTATION AND THAT THE PRINCIPLES OF LAW STATED IN THE CASE OF STRICKLAND TRANSPORTATION COMPANY V UNITED STATES. ARE NOT APPLICABLE. THE ISSUES HERE ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE RAISED IN YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 27. THAT THE ABOVE STRICKLAND CASE IS NOT AUTHORITY FOR RELIANCE ON CONDITION 5 OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING WHERE A SECTION 22 QUOTATION WITH A RELEASED VALUE PROVISION IS USED TO COMPUTE THE CHARGES. WE BELIEVE THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM IS CONSISTENT WITH THE RULING IN THE STRICKLAND CASE AND THAT CONDITION 5 SERVES TO SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF QUOTATION NO. 18 AS TO A STATEMENT OF THE RELEASED VALUE WHICH ENTAILS APPLICATION OF THE QUOTATION CHARGE BASIS.
B-165883, MAR. 28, 1969
TO NAVAJO FREIGHT LINES:
PLEASE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 17, 1969, FURNISHING SOME PAPERS ON YOUR CLAIM 04071 AND REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED OCTOBER 28, 1968 (CLAIM NO. TK-879106), WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL FREIGHT CHARGES IN THE AMOUNT OF $62.04. THE CLAIM CONCERNS A SHIPMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS COMMODITIES (FREIGHT, ALL KINDS) WHICH MOVED FROM LYOTH, CALIFORNIA, TO BAYONNE, NEW JERSEY, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING C-9322310, DATED DECEMBER 9, 1966.
IT SEEMS TO BE YOUR POSITION THAT CONDITION 5 ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING DOES NOT APPLY WHEN THE RATE IN QUESTION IS NAMED IN A SECTION 22 QUOTATION AND THAT THE PRINCIPLES OF LAW STATED IN THE CASE OF STRICKLAND TRANSPORTATION COMPANY V UNITED STATES, 1964, 334 F.2D 172, ARE NOT APPLICABLE.
THE ISSUES HERE ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE RAISED IN YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1968, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIM FILES 25142, 25348 AND 25820, OUR FILES TK -876922, TK-87920 AND TK-878221. WITH OUR DECISION OF MARCH 12, 1969, SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF THOSE CLAIMS WE FURNISHED YOU A COPY OF OUR DECISION DATED NOVEMBER 20, 1968, B 165265, TO GEORGIA HIGHWAY EXPRESS, INC. THAT CARRIER ALSO MAINTAINED THAT ITEM 35 OF SECTION 22 QUOTATION NO. 18 REQUIRES A SPECIFIC STATEMENT OF RELEASED VALUE ON THE BILL OF LADING, AND THAT THE ABOVE STRICKLAND CASE IS NOT AUTHORITY FOR RELIANCE ON CONDITION 5 OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING WHERE A SECTION 22 QUOTATION WITH A RELEASED VALUE PROVISION IS USED TO COMPUTE THE CHARGES. AS SHOWN IN DECISION B-165265 (ANOTHER COPY ENCLOSED FOR READY REFERENCE), WE REJECTED THESE CONTENTIONS.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM IS CONSISTENT WITH THE RULING IN THE STRICKLAND CASE AND THAT CONDITION 5 SERVES TO SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF QUOTATION NO. 18 AS TO A STATEMENT OF THE RELEASED VALUE WHICH ENTAILS APPLICATION OF THE QUOTATION CHARGE BASIS. ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM 04071 IS SUSTAINED.