B-146281, JUN. 26, 1962
Highlights
TO ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 8. AFTER EXAMINING THE RECORD WE CONCLUDED WITH THE OPINION THAT THE SUBJECT LADING WAS PROPERLY RATED AS IRON OR STEEL CONTAINERS UNDER THE CLASS 40 RATING NAMED INITEM 13805 OF THE CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION. SINCE THIS DESCRIPTION APPEARED ON THE BILLS OF LADING AND WAS MORE SPECIFIC THAN THE ITEM 13805 DESCRIPTION. YOU ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE PROPER RATE IS THAT NAMED ON THE ITEM 9405 RATING WHICH WOULD RESULT IN $146.72 BEING DUE YOU. OUR CONCLUSION WAS FOUNDED ON THE OPINION THAT SAID ITEM DID NOT CORRECTLY DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES SHIPPED. " THERE WAS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE ON THE BILLS OF LADING WHICH INDICATED THAT THE DESCRIPTION UTILIZED DID NOT REVEAL THE TRUE CHARACTER OF THE ARTICLES SHIPPED AND THAT WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SHIPPED WAS A STEEL CONTAINER FOR 75 MILLIMETER AMMUNITION.
B-146281, JUN. 26, 1962
TO ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 8, 1962, FILE NO. G-WQ 17156-BG, IN WHICH YOU REQUEST THAT WE FURTHER CONSIDER THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN OUR DECISION B-146281, DATED APRIL 3, 1962. THE ISSUE DISCUSSED IN OUR DECISION CONCERNED THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CLASSIFICATION RATING FOR TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES OF "CYLINDERS, SMOKELESS POWDER SHIPPING, IRON OR STEEL," PER ITEM 9405 OF THE CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION, VERSUS THE CLASSIFICATION RATING FOR "CONTAINERS, SHEET IRON OR STEEL, SET UP," PER ITEM 13805 OF THE CLASSIFICATION, ON TWO SHIPMENTS OF AMMUNITION CONTAINERS THAT MOVED FROM GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN, TO DOYLINE, LOUISIANA, DURING JUNE 1945. AFTER EXAMINING THE RECORD WE CONCLUDED WITH THE OPINION THAT THE SUBJECT LADING WAS PROPERLY RATED AS IRON OR STEEL CONTAINERS UNDER THE CLASS 40 RATING NAMED INITEM 13805 OF THE CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION.
IN YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 8, 1962, YOU POINT OUT THAT AT THE TIME THE SHIPMENTS IN ISSUE MOVED THE CLASSIFICATION CONTAINED A SPECIFIC ENTRY FOR "CYLINDERS, SMOKELESS POWDER SHIPPING, IRON OR TEEL" (ITEM 9405), AND SINCE THIS DESCRIPTION APPEARED ON THE BILLS OF LADING AND WAS MORE SPECIFIC THAN THE ITEM 13805 DESCRIPTION, YOU ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE PROPER RATE IS THAT NAMED ON THE ITEM 9405 RATING WHICH WOULD RESULT IN $146.72 BEING DUE YOU. OUR DECISION OF APRIL 3 NECESSARILY TOOK COGNIZANCE OF THE FACT THAT ITEM 9405 APPEARED IN THE CLASSIFICATION AT THE TIME THESE SHIPMENTS MOVED, BUT OUR CONCLUSION WAS FOUNDED ON THE OPINION THAT SAID ITEM DID NOT CORRECTLY DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES SHIPPED. AS WE POINTED OUT, ALTHOUGH THE BILLS OF LADING BORE THE DESCRIPTION "CYLINDERS, SMOKELESS POWDER SHIPPING, IRON OR STEEL," THERE WAS ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE ON THE BILLS OF LADING WHICH INDICATED THAT THE DESCRIPTION UTILIZED DID NOT REVEAL THE TRUE CHARACTER OF THE ARTICLES SHIPPED AND THAT WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SHIPPED WAS A STEEL CONTAINER FOR 75 MILLIMETER AMMUNITION. THE IMPORTANT FACT IN CLASSIFICATION QUESTIONS IS THE REAL CHARACTER OF THE ARTICLE SHIPPED, AND A BILL OF LADING DESCRIPTION TO THE CONTRARY IS NOT CONTROLLING. SEE: PENN FACING MILLS COMPANY, ET AL. V. ANN ARBOR RAILROAD COMPANY, ET AL., 182 I.C.C. 614, 615; BUCH EXPRESS V. UNITED STATES, 132 F.SUPP. 473, 476. WHETHER OR NOT THE CLASSIFICATION ITEM 9405 DESCRIPTION IS MORE SPECIFIC THAN THAT CONTAINED IN ITEM 13805 WOULD NOT APPEAR TO BE RELEVENT SINCE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE FORMER DESCRIPTION IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE SHIPMENTS OF STEEL CYLINDERS MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR FIXED CANNON AMMUNITION.
YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 8, 1962, HAS OFFERED NO NEW EVIDENCE TO SUSTAIN YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE HIGHER CLASS 45 RATING IS PROPER. FOR THIS AND THE REASONS STATED ABOVE, WE MUST, THEREFORE, AFFIRM THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN OUR DECISION OF APRIL 3, 1962.