B-125549, AUG. 16, 1956
Highlights
TO THE RIVER PLATE CORPORATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF JUNE 26. GS-OOP-3365 (SCM) WAS ALLOWED IN THE AMOUNT OF $309.80 AND THE BALANCE DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS OF THE COMPUTATIONS EXPLAINED IN THE SETTLEMENT. THE REQUEST FOR REVIEW PRIMARILY IS PREDICATED ON THE STATEMENTS OF YOUR FORMER TRAFFIC MANAGER AS SET FORTH IN HIS LETTER OF MAY 28. WHILE IT IS ADMITTED THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS ENTITLED TO 13 DAYS AND 12 DAYS FREE TIME AS REFLECTED IN OUR SETTLEMENT IN COMPUTING THE DEMURRAGE CHARGES ON THE SHIPMENTS DISCHARGED FROM THE S.S. THE OPINION IS EXPRESSED BY YOUR TRAFFIC MANAGER THAT CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO A FREE TIME ALLOWANCE OF 6 DAYS IN EACH INSTANCE AND ADJUST THE SETTLEMENT TO THAT EXTENT.
B-125549, AUG. 16, 1956
TO THE RIVER PLATE CORPORATION:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF JUNE 26, AUGUST 6 AND 7, 1956, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF APRIL 24, 1956, IN WHICH YOUR CLAIM IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,579.30 FOR DEMURRAGE CHARGES, ETC., IN CONNECTION WITH CERTAIN SHIPMENTS OF QUEBRACHO EXTRACT UNDER CONTRACT NO. GS-OOP-3365 (SCM) WAS ALLOWED IN THE AMOUNT OF $309.80 AND THE BALANCE DISALLOWED ON THE BASIS OF THE COMPUTATIONS EXPLAINED IN THE SETTLEMENT.
THE REQUEST FOR REVIEW PRIMARILY IS PREDICATED ON THE STATEMENTS OF YOUR FORMER TRAFFIC MANAGER AS SET FORTH IN HIS LETTER OF MAY 28, 1956, FORWARDED AS AN ENCLOSURE WITH YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 26, 1956. WHILE IT IS ADMITTED THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS ENTITLED TO 13 DAYS AND 12 DAYS FREE TIME AS REFLECTED IN OUR SETTLEMENT IN COMPUTING THE DEMURRAGE CHARGES ON THE SHIPMENTS DISCHARGED FROM THE S.S. CAPTAIN K. PAPAZOGLOU AND THE S.S. AFROS, RESPECTIVELY, THE OPINION IS EXPRESSED BY YOUR TRAFFIC MANAGER THAT CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO A FREE TIME ALLOWANCE OF 6 DAYS IN EACH INSTANCE AND ADJUST THE SETTLEMENT TO THAT EXTENT. IT IS STATED IN SUBSTANCE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICIALS WERE AWARE OF THIS ALLOWANCE AT THE TIME THE PURCHASE WAS MADE AND THAT THE GREATER ALLOWANCE WAS MADE POSSIBLY ONLY THROUGH THE DISCHARGE OF THE CARGO AT THE PORT OF NEWARK RATHER THAN THE PORT OF NEW YORK.
THE SUBJECT CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR DELIVERY AT EX-DOCK U.S. NORTH ATLANTIC PORT. IT FURTHER PROVIDES THAT IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO PAY AND BEAR THE COSTS, LANDING CHARGES, AND TAXES, IF ANY; PROVIDED HOWEVER, THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHALL BE LIABLE FOR ANY CHARGES FOR WHARFAGE, TOLLAGE, OR HANDLING ON DOCK, IN EXCESS OF SUCH CHARGES AT PORT OF NEW YORK, IF DELIVERY IS MADE AT A NORTH ATLANTIC PORT OTHER THAN PORT OF NEW YORK. THE PORT OF NEW YORK AUTHORITY HAS CONFIRMED THE REPORT THAT THE VESSELS IN QUESTION WERE BERTHED AT PUBLIC PIERS AND THEREFORE SUBJECT TO THE APPLICABLE CHARGES AUTHORIZED IN SCHEDULE 2A, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 1949. A REEXAMINATION OF THE COMPUTATION DISCLOSES THAT THE APPLICABLE FREE TIME SHOWN UNDER SECTION "F" OF SAID SCHEDULE IS PROPERLY REFLECTED IN THE SETTLEMENT. SINCE IT IS REPORTED THAT THE PORT OF NEWARK IS AN INTEGRAL PORT OF THE PORT OF NEW YORK, IT FOLLOWS THAT THE CHARGES HERE IN QUESTION ARE NOT FOR THE GOVERNMENT'S ACCOUNT. FURTHERMORE, YOUR FORMER TRAFFIC MANAGER IN HIS STATEMENT OF MAY 28, 1956, ADMITS THE CORRECTNESS OF SUCH CHARGES AS COMPUTED IN THE SETTLEMENT. HENCE, THERE IS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE FREE TIME CREDITED IN THE SETTLEMENT.
ACCORDINGLY, THE ACTION TAKEN IN THE SETTLEMENT OF APRIL 24, 1956, IS SUSTAINED.