B-156949, MAR. 8, 1966

B-156949, MAR. 8, 1966

TO RINGSBY TRUCK LINES, INC.:

WE AGAIN REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 15, 1965, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 8, 1965, B 156949.

IN OUR OCTOBER 8 DECISION WE SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL FREIGHT CHARGES OF $1,186.60, BECAUSE YOU HAD FAILED TO PRESENT SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE THAT EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE SERVICE WAS REQUESTED BY AND FURNISHED FOR THE GOVERNMENT ON A SHIPMENT OF PROJECTILE PARTS. THE SHIPMENT WAS TRANSPORTED FROM ALLIED FEDERAL INDUSTRIES, NEWARK, NEW JERSEY, TO HAWTHORNE, NEVADA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING NO. A- 3033868, DATED MAY 11, 1962.

IN YOUR REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION, YOU CONTEND THAT THE RECORD NOW CONTAINS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE SERVICE WAS REQUESTED BY AND FURNISHED FOR THE GOVERNMENT. WE AGREE THAT THE RECORD NOW SHOWS THAT ON THIS SHIPMENT THE SUPERIOR SERVICE WAS FURNISHED; HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT SHOW THAT THE SUPERIOR SERVICE WAS ORDERED BY THE GOVERNMENT.

PARAGRAPH 2 OF ITEM 940 OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN TARIFF BUREAU TARIFF NO. 2- D, MF-I.C.C. NO. 132, PROVIDES, IN PART, THAT:

"UPON REQUEST OF THE CONSIGNOR, THE CARRIER WILL FURNISH A VEHICLE * * * WHICH VEHICLE WILL BE ASSIGNED TO, AND EXCLUSIVELY USED BY THE CARRIER FOR, THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE SHIPMENT. ONLY ONE VEHICLE PER SHIPMENT WILL BE FURNISHED AND A BILL OF LADING, BEARING A NOTATION INDICATING THAT THE SHIPPER REQUESTS SUCH EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE VEHICLE, MUST BE PROVIDED FOR EACH SUCH SHIPMENT * * *.'

THUS WHERE EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE SERVICE IS REQUESTED, THE TARIFF REQUIRES THAT THE BILL OF LADING BEAR AN ANNOTATION INDICATING SUCH REQUEST BY THE SHIPPER. AS INDICATED IN OUR OCTOBER 8 DECISION, THE HANDWRITTEN NOTATION ON BILL OF LADING NO. A-3033868 IS NOT PHRASED IN A FORM INDICATING THAT THE SHIPPER REQUESTS THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF A VEHICLE. COMPARE CAMPBELL "66" EXPRESS, INC. V. UNITED STATES, 302 F.2D 270 (1962).

THE REVERSE OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING, UNDER THE HEADING "ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIONS," PROVIDES IN PART IN PARAGRAPH 2 THAT:

"WHERE ACCESSORIAL OR SPECIAL SERVICES ARE ORDERED INCIDENT TO THE LINE- HAUL TRANSPORTATION, SUCH AS EXCLUSIVE USE OF CAR OR TRUCK * * * THE BILL OF LADING SHALL BE INDORSED TO SHOW THE NAME OF THE CARRIER UPON WHICH THE REQUEST WAS MADE, AND THE KIND AND SCOPE OF THE SPECIAL SERVICES ORDERED. THIS INDORSEMENT MAY BE PLACED ON THE FACE HEREOF UNDER THE "DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES" OR IN THE BLOCK RESERVE FOR "MARKS," IF SPACE IS AVAILABLE, OR IN THE SPACE PROVIDED ON THIS PAGE FOR "SPECIAL SERVICES ORDERED," AND SHALL BE SIGNED BY OR FOR THE PERSON WHO ORDERED THE RVICES.'

IN OUR OPINION THE ANNOTATION,"EXCLUSIVE USE OF TRAILER LT," ON BILL OF LADING NO. A-3033868, DOES NOT COMPLY WITH, NOR MEET, THE AFOREMENTIONED REQUIREMENTS.

FINALLY, THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY WHICH AUTHORIZED THE SHIPMENT TELLS US THAT THE PERSON WHO ALTERED THE ORIGINAL BILL OF LADING BY PLACING ON IT THE HANDWRITTEN NOTATION "EXCLUSIVE USE OF TRAILER LT" HAD NO AUTHORITY TO DO THAT ACT. SEE, IN THIS CONNECTION, PARAGRAPHS 214014 AND 214084 OF THE MILITARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT REGULATION, AR 55 355, MARCH 1958.

SINCE THE CARRIER HAS FAILED TO FURNISH SATISFACTORY PROOF THAT EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE WAS REQUESTED BY THE GOVERNMENT, THERE IS NO BASIS UPON WHICH TO MODIFY OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 8, 1965, B-156949. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS AFFIRMED.