B-156591, JUN. 25, 1965
Highlights
WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE BEEN FURNISHED A COPY OF THE DECISION. SINCE THE PERTINENT FACTS AND REGULATIONS WERE DISCUSSED THEREIN THEY NEED NOT BE REPEATED HERE. THE ISSUE IN THIS CASE IS CLEAR. IF THE EFFECTS WERE SHIPPED UNCRATED YOUR MAXIMUM WEIGHT ALLOWANCE ON EACH SHIPMENT WAS 7. IF THE EFFECTS WERE REQUIRED TO BE AND. WERE CRATED. THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE FOR EACH WAS 8. YOU HAVE STATED THAT THE EFFECTS WERE CRATED AND AS EVIDENCE THEREOF YOU HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THE CARRIER'S INVOICES REFLECT CHARGES FOR SUCH INVOICES APPEAR TO REFUTE RATHER THAN SUPPORT YOUR CONTENTION. NO CRATING CHARGE WAS MADE. THERE IS SHOWN THE USE OF THE CASE OF THE FIRST SHIPMENT NO CRATING CHARGE WAS MADE.
B-156591, JUN. 25, 1965
TO MR. WALTER A. RADELOFF:
THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 5, 1965, CONCERNING YOUR INDEBTEDNESS ARISING FROM TWO SHIPMENTS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS INCIDENT TO YOUR EMPLOYMENT WITH THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION.
SPECIFICALLY YOU ASK WHETHER YOU MAY APPEAL FROM OUR DECISION OF MAY 21, 1965, B-156591, TO THE AGENCY CONCERNING THE MATTER AND IF SO THE PROCEDURE TO FOLLOW. ALSO YOU ASK THAT WE MAKE KNOWN TO YOU "THE AVENUES OF ASSISTANCE THAT EXIST IN THIS TYPE OF SITUATION.'
WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE BEEN FURNISHED A COPY OF THE DECISION. SINCE THE PERTINENT FACTS AND REGULATIONS WERE DISCUSSED THEREIN THEY NEED NOT BE REPEATED HERE.
THE ISSUE IN THIS CASE IS CLEAR. IF THE EFFECTS WERE SHIPPED UNCRATED YOUR MAXIMUM WEIGHT ALLOWANCE ON EACH SHIPMENT WAS 7,000 POUNDS. IF THE EFFECTS WERE REQUIRED TO BE AND, IN FACT, WERE CRATED, THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE FOR EACH WAS 8,750 POUNDS, THE ADDITIONAL 1,750 POUNDS TO COMPENSATE FOR THE WEIGHT OF THE CRATING MATERIALS USED.
YOU HAVE STATED THAT THE EFFECTS WERE CRATED AND AS EVIDENCE THEREOF YOU HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THE CARRIER'S INVOICES REFLECT CHARGES FOR SUCH INVOICES APPEAR TO REFUTE RATHER THAN SUPPORT YOUR CONTENTION. FOR THE FIRST SHIPMENT WEIGHING 9,400 POUNDS THE INVOICE SHOWS THE USE OF 5 SMALL CRATES WHICH, ON THE BASIS OF THE CHARGE THEREFOR, REFLECT A TOTAL CAPACITY OF ONLY 24.8 CUBIC FEET. NO CRATING CHARGE WAS MADE. FOR THE SECOND SHIPMENT, WEIGH 9,420 POUNDS, THERE IS SHOWN THE USE OF THE CASE OF THE FIRST SHIPMENT NO CRATING CHARGE WAS MADE. HENCE, WE CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT THE EFFECTS WERE NOT CRATED.
THE SHIPMENTS WERE MADE IN 1959 AND 1962. THE AGENCY HAS REQUESTED IN SUPPORT OF YOUR ASSERTION THAT THE EFFECTS WERE CRATED. IN REPLY, YOU HAVE ASKED TO BE ADVISED OF THE "FORM AND NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE REQUIRED" AND IN YOUR PRESENT LETTER YOU ASK THAT WE "MAKE KNOWN TO (YOU) THE AVENUES OF ASSISTANCE THAT EXIST IN THIS TYPE OF SITUATION.'
THE TRAVEL ORDER OF JANUARY 30, 1962, SHOWS THE TITLE OF YOUR POSITION AS "INVESTIGATION SPECIALIST.' THEREFORE, WE ASSUME THAT YOU ARE NOT WITHOUT EXPERIENCE IN THE COLLECTING AND PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION. ADDITION, YOU HAVE FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRANSACTIONS HERE INVOLVED. NEITHER THIS OFFICE NOR THE AGENCY IS AWARE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU AND CANNOT ADVISE YOU AS TO THE "FORM AND NATURE" THEREOF NOR INFORM YOU OF "AVENUES OF ASSISTANCE" IN THE MATTER.
OUR CONCLUSIONS WERE BASED UPON THE REPORT OF THE AGENCY WHICH INCLUDED COPIES OF THE TRAVEL ORDERS, THE CARRIER'S INVOICES AND PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN YOU AND THE AGENCY. THEREFORE, UNLESS YOU HAVE FURTHER EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION OF THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CARRIER'S ITEMIZED INVOICES AND OTHER ITEMS OF RECORD, NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY A FURTHER REVIEW OF THE MATTER.
CONCERNING APPEALS FROM OUR DECISIONS, YOU ARE INFORMED THAT OUR DECISIONS ARE FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE UPON THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT.