B-172060, JUN 11, 1971

B-172060: Jun 11, 1971

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

CLAIMANT ALLEGES THAT DELIVERY IN QUESTION WAS MISSENT TO ROBINS AFB. RECORD INDICATES THAT IF THERE WAS AN OVERAGE IN SHIPMENTS TO ROBINS IT WAS A CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS NOT AIRCRAFT RUDDERS. INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 18. THE BASIS OF YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THIS ACTION IS THAT THE FREIGHT WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED AT OLMSTEAD AIR FORCE BASE. UNDER GBL D-0640474 IS SAID TO HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN DELIVERED TO ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE. AT ONE TIME YOU ALLEGED THAT ERRONEOUS MARKING OF THE FREIGHT BY THE GOVERNMENT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE "OVERAGE" DELIVERY TO ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE. IT IS YOUR BELIEF THAT 13 PIECES WERE ACTUALLY DELIVERED INSTEAD OF 12 PIECES CALLED FOR BY BILL OF LADING D-0640472.

B-172060, JUN 11, 1971

TRANSPORTATION CHARGES - NONDELIVERY OF CONSIGNMENT DENIAL OF CLAIM OF RYDER TRUCK LINES FOR $2,816 DEDUCTED FROM FUNDS OTHERWISE DUE FROM THE AIR FORCE BECAUSE OF NONDELIVERY OF AIRCRAFT RUDDERS CONSIGNED FROM MARIANA, FLORIDA, TO OLMSTEAD AFB, PENNSYLVANIA. CLAIMANT ALLEGES THAT DELIVERY IN QUESTION WAS MISSENT TO ROBINS AFB, GEORGIA, AS OVERAGE DUE TO ERRONEOUS FREIGHT MARKING BY GOVERNMENT. RECORD INDICATES THAT IF THERE WAS AN OVERAGE IN SHIPMENTS TO ROBINS IT WAS A CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS NOT AIRCRAFT RUDDERS.

TO RYDER TRUCK LINES, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 18, 1971, AND PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE, PERTAINING TO YOUR CLAIM NO. 9-08863-JB FOR $2,816 DEDUCTED FROM FUNDS OTHERWISE DUE YOUR COMPANY BY THE AIR FORCE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE CENTER AT DENVER, COLORADO, BECAUSE OF A REPORTED NON-DELIVERY OF A CRATE OF AIRCRAFT RUDDERS OR STABILIZERS CONSIGNED FROM MARIANA, FLORIDA, TO OLMSTEAD AIR FORCE BASE, PENNSYLVANIA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING (GBL) D-0640474, DATED JULY 19, 1966.

OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION, BY LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 11, 1971, AGREED WITH THE SETOFF ACTION TAKEN BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE. THE BASIS OF YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THIS ACTION IS THAT THE FREIGHT WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED AT OLMSTEAD AIR FORCE BASE, PENNSYLVANIA, UNDER GBL D-0640474 IS SAID TO HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN DELIVERED TO ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE, GEORGIA, AS "OVERAGE" ON A SHIPMENT CONSIGNED TO ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE TRANSPORTED UNDER GBL D-0640472, DATED JULY 19, 1966. AT ONE TIME YOU ALLEGED THAT ERRONEOUS MARKING OF THE FREIGHT BY THE GOVERNMENT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE "OVERAGE" DELIVERY TO ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE.

IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS YOUR BELIEF THAT 13 PIECES WERE ACTUALLY DELIVERED INSTEAD OF 12 PIECES CALLED FOR BY BILL OF LADING D-0640472, AND YOU HAVE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FURNISHED COPIES OF THREE DELIVERY RECEIPTS AS SHOWING THAT 13 PIECES WERE DELIVERED ON THIS SHIPMENT. YOU INDICATE THAT THESE DELIVERY RECEIPTS SHOW 10 PIECES AS BEING DELIVERED ON RECEIPTS NO. 289668 AND 289669, 2 PIECES ON F.A. 872079 AND 1 PIECE ON F.A. 872577.

RECEIPT PRO. NO. 289668, ISSUED AT TALLAHASSEE ON JULY 20, 1966, LISTED 11 ITEMS, WITH THE NOTATION: "CONTINUED ON NEXT PRO." THE NEXT PRO., NO. 289669, WAS ALSO ISSUED AT TALLAHASSEE ON JULY 20, 1966, AND LISTED ONE CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS. THUS, THE TWO "PROS," COPIES OF WHICH WERE FURNISHED AS A SINGLE SHEET CALL FOR 12 PIECES, THE NUMBER OF PIECES SHOWN ON THE BILL OF LADING. ON PRO. NO. 289669 A COUNT OF THE PIECES IS SHOWN IN THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER AS "1-1-1-1-1-2-1-1-2." THIS TALLY OBVIOUSLY TOTALS 11 PIECES; IN THE LOWER LEFT HAND CORNER OF PRO NO. 289669 IS SHOWN: "STATION 302 UNLOADED BY 189 NO. PCS. 11." STATION NO. 302 IS NOT FURTHER IDENTIFIED IN THIS RECORD BUT WARNER ROBINS IS STATION NO. 307.

THERE IS NO SIGNATURE OR DELIVERY ACKNOWLEDGMENT ON PRO. NO. 289668, BUT PRO. NO. 289669 IS SIGNED "7/25/66 ROBINSON." ACROSS THE FACE OF THIS DELIVERY RECEIPT IS NOTED: "2 TO FOLLOW ON FA 872079." IT APPEARS THAT THE TALLY OF 11 PIECES WAS MADE AT SOME PLACE OTHER THAN WARNER ROBINS, AND THAT ONLY NINE PIECES WERE DELIVERED UNDER PRO. NO. 289669. THE RECEIPT (A SINGLE SHEET WITH PRO. NO. 289668 ON THE TOP) WAS TIME-STAMPED AT WARNER ROBINS AT 8:30 A.M., JULY 25, 1966.

THUS, IT SEEMS THAT 10 PIECES WERE DELIVERED ON THE DELIVERY RECEIPTS NO. 289668 AND 289669 AND THE QUESTION IS WHETHER TWO OR THREE PIECES WERE DELIVERED ON DELIVERY RECEIPTS NO. 872079 AND 872577.

PRO. NO. F.A. 872079 APPARENTLY WAS ISSUED AT TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA, ON JULY 21, 1966; IT LISTS 2 CRATES OF AIRCRAFT RUDDERS OR STABILIZERS, WITHOUT ANY SHOWING OF WEIGHT. THIS DOCUMENT IS SIGNED "VANDERFORD 7 26- 66," AND THE TIME STAMP IS 1:00 P.M., JULY 26, 1966, AT WARNER ROBINS. THE DELIVERY SO EVIDENCED ACCOUNTS FOR THE TWO ITEMS TO FOLLOW, AS MARKED ON PRO. NO. 289669 ON JULY 25, 1966.

PRO. NO. F.A. 872577 WAS ISSUED AT MACON, GEORGIA, DATED JULY 25, 1966; IT LISTS ONE CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS, WEIGHT 600 POUNDS. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THIS ITEM IS ALSO SIGNED "VANDERFORD 7-25-66" AND THE TIME STAMP IS 8:30 ON JULY 25, 1966. THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME TIME THE ITEMS WERE RECEIVED UNDER PRO. NO. 289668 AND 289669. SINCE THE TIME STAMPS ARE THE SAME, IT IS REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT THE CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS MUST HAVE BEEN ON THE SAME TRUCK CONTAINING THE OTHER ARTICLES LISTED ON PRO. NO. 289668. POSSIBLY, THE LOAD WAS SEPARATED DURING THE TRANSFER AT STATION NO. 302 (NOT IDENTIFIED), WHICH ACCOUNTED FOR THE FACT THAT THE SECOND FREIGHT BILL WAS PREPARED AT MACON.

IT SEEMS CLEAR THEN THAT ONLY THE TWO CRATES OF AIRCRAFT RUDDERS WERE DELIVERED ON JULY 26; ALL THE OTHER FREIGHT WAS DELIVERED AT WARNER ROBINS AT 8:30 A.M. ON JULY 25. WHILE WE BELIEVE THAT ONLY ONE CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS WAS SHIPPED AND DELIVERED, IF PRO. NO. 289669 AND F.A. 872577 (BOTH LISTING 1 CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS AND BOTH RECEIPTED FOR ON JULY 25, 1966) HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANCE, THE OVERAGE WOULD HAVE BEEN ONE CRATE OF ALUMINUM TANKS AND NOT AIRCRAFT RUDDERS.

IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE DO NOT BELIEVE THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY YOU CONSTITUTE CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE MISSING CRATE OF AIRCRAFT RUDDERS WAS DELIVERED AT WARNER ROBINS. THIS VIEW IS SUBSTANTIATED BY THE FACT THAT THE AIR FORCE HAS REPORTED SEVERAL TIMES THAT THERE WAS NO OVERAGE RECEIVED ON THE SHIPMENT COVERED BY GBL NO. D-0640472.

ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR THE VALUE OF THE AIRCRAFT RUDDERS RECOVERED BY SETOFF BY THE AIR FORCE, IS SUSTAINED.