B-238803, Feb 5, 1991, 91-1 CPD ***

B-238803: Feb 5, 1991

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

000 pounds that occupy a truck's full visible capacity but is silent with respect to similar shipments of 10. There is no basis to conclude that there is any special minimum charge on shipments of more than 10. Filled an entire truck that otherwise could have held more than 40. The Military Traffic Management Command's Freight Traffic Rules Publication No. 1 (MFTRP 1) was in effect at the time of shipment. The specific rules that apply here are the same as those in MFTRP 1A. The provision stated that the charge for such shipments was computed at the rate set out in the carrier's tender for the lowest minimum weight over 10. We held that there was no exception in MFTRP 1A that would allow a charge based on the highest minimum weight charge where the weight of the shipment was 10.

B-238803, Feb 5, 1991, 91-1 CPD ***

PROCUREMENT - Payment/Discharge - Shipment costs - Rate schedules - Interpretation DIGEST: When applicable rate publication specifically applies a minimum charge for shipments of less than 10,000 pounds that occupy a truck's full visible capacity but is silent with respect to similar shipments of 10,000 pounds or more, there is no basis to conclude that there is any special minimum charge on shipments of more than 10,000 pounds.

Double "M" Transport - Minimum Charge

Double "M" Transport, a motor carrier, requests that our Office review an audit action by the General Services Administration (GSA) on a Government Bill of Lading (GBL) shipment (GBL C-0,165,199). The shipment weighed 13,910 pounds, but filled an entire truck that otherwise could have held more than 40,000 pounds. The carrier contends that GSA incorrectly computed applicable charges by basing them on a minimum weight of 20,000 pounds, the lowest one in the carrier's tender, instead of 40,000 pounds, the highest one. As the carrier indicates, GSA's methodology results in the government paying half of the charge for using the entire truck, yet does not permit the carrier to add other cargo.

The Military Traffic Management Command's Freight Traffic Rules Publication No. 1 (MFTRP 1) was in effect at the time of shipment, and set out the rules for applying carrier-established rates. The specific rules that apply here are the same as those in MFTRP 1A, which superceded MFTRP 1, and which we addressed in our decision in Eastern Express, Inc., B-235118, Feb. 2, 1990. We noted that Item 70 in MFTRP 1A provided a special rule for loads of less than 10,000 pounds that filled the truck's visible capacity. The provision stated that the charge for such shipments was computed at the rate set out in the carrier's tender for the lowest minimum weight over 10,000 pounds. We held that there was no exception in MFTRP 1A that would allow a charge based on the highest minimum weight charge where the weight of the shipment was 10,000 pounds or more, even if the visible capacity of the vehicle was filled. GSA's audit action regarding Double "M" Transport is consistent with our holding in Eastern Express, and therefore is sustained.

As we noted in Eastern Express, however, effective June 1, 1989, MFTRP 1A was revised to provide that the charge for any shipment that occupied the full truck would be based on the highest minimum weight in the carrier's tender (or the actual weight if greater), at the accompanying rate.