B-127950, JUL. 17, 1957

B-127950, JUL. 17, 1957

TO THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW, UNDER FILE G 386398, OF OUR AUDIT ACTION RESULTING IN A DEDUCTION FOR OVERPAYMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH SIX CARLOADS OF TRACTORS AND ROAD-MAKING IMPLEMENTS STORED IN TRANSIT AT THE GRANITE CITY ENGINEER DEPOT, GRANITE CITY, ILLINOIS, AND FORWARDED TO OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, IN SEPTEMBER 1944.

THE SUBJECT SHIPMENTS ORIGINATED AT CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, AND PEORIA, ILLINOIS, AND MOVED INTO THE GRANITE CITY ENGINEER DEPOT VIA THE GULF, MOBILE AND OHIO (ALTON) RAILROAD, THE ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD, AND THE CHICAGO AND EASTERN ILLINOIS RAILROAD. ST. LOUIS-EAST ST. LOUIS TERMINAL LINES' SWITCHING TARIFF NO. 1-W, I.C.C. NO. 3438, SHOWS THE GRANITE CITY ENGINEER DEPOT AS BEING SERVED BY THE MERCHANTS BRIDGE TERMINAL RAILWAY AND THE NEW YORK CENTRAL (C) SYSTEM.

THE OUTBOUND MOVEMENTS IN THIS CASE WERE VIA THE ALTON RAILROAD FOR BILLS OF LADING NOS. WV-3873794, WV-3873750, AND WV-3873754, ON ALTON WAYBILLS NOS. 9116, 9107, AND 9105, RESPECTIVELY, AND VIA THE ST. LOUIS SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY COMPANY FOR BILLS OF LADING NOS. WV-3873756, WV 3873764, AND WV-3873638. SINCE APPROPRIATE INBOUND TRANSIT REFERENCE WAS GIVEN IN EACH OUTBOUND BILL OF LADING, ULTIMATELY SUPPORTED BY A COMPLETED WAR DEPARTMENT T.C. FORM 213, USED AS A "RECORD OF TRANSIT FREIGHT BILL AND TONNAGE CREDITS," OUR AUDIT ACTION WAS TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROAD SECTION 22 QUOTATION NO. 16-E, AUTHORIZING TRANSIT PRIVILEGES AT VARIOUS POINTS, INCLUDING THE GRANITE CITY ENGINEER DEPOT.

YOUR OBJECTION TO SUCH ACTION SEEMS TO BE THAT THE OUTBOUND SHIPMENTS WERE TENDERED TO A CARRIER OTHER THAN THE INBOUND CARRIER. YOU STATE THAT "AAR QUOTATION 16 ITEM 15 PARAGRAPH B PROVIDES THAT THE INBOUND CARRIER MUST HANDLE THE OUTBOUND MOVE. IN OTHER WORDS, THE TRANSIT ARRANGEMENT MUST BE MADE AND HANDLED BY THE INBOUND CARRIER.'

ITEM NO. 15 (B) OF THE QUOTATION NO. 16-E PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:

"THE INBOUND LINE-HAUL CARRIER SERVING THE TRANSIT POINT SHALL SUPERVISE AND MANAGE THE TRANSIT PRIVILEGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS QUOTATION AND KEEP ALL RECORDS REQUIRED OF THE CARRIERS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. ALL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE OUTBOUND MOVEMENT OF EACH SHIPMENT FROM SUCH TRANSIT POINT MUST BE MADE WITH SUCH INBOUND CARRIER.'

THERE SEEMS TO BE NO SUPPORT IN THE ABOVE ITEM FOR THE CONCLUSION THAT THE SAME CARRIER WHICH PERFORMED THE INBOUND SERVICE MUST PARTICIPATE IN THE OUTBOUND MOVEMENT. ON THE CONTRARY, THE WORDING OF THE ITEM CONTEMPLATES A SITUATION LIKE THE PRESENT ONE IN WHICH TRANSIT WAS GRANTED AT A JUNCTION POINT. ITEM NO. 15 (B) GENERALLY APPEARS TO REFLECT STANDARD REQUIREMENTS PREVALENT IN TRANSIT TRANSACTIONS IN THAT TRANSIT IS AUTHORIZED AND THE RECORDS ARE KEPT BY THE INBOUND CARRIER AND IN THAT ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE OUTBOUND MOVEMENT MUST BE MADE WITH THAT CARRIER, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY DESIGNATED AS THE INITIAL OUTBOUND CARRIER EVEN THOUGH IT MIGHT BE IN A POSITION TO SO HANDLE A PARTICULAR SHIPMENT.

THE PERTINENT WAR DEPARTMENT, T.C. FORM NO. 213,"RECORD OF TRANSIT FREIGHT BILL AND TONNAGE CREDITS," IN EACH INSTANCE HERE INVOLVED SHOWS THAT THE INBOUND SHIPMENT WAS RECORDED FOR TRANSIT WITH THE INBOUND CARRIER. THE OUTBOUND APPLICATION SHOWS THE OUTBOUND CARRIER TO WHICH THE SHIPMENT WAS TENDERED AT THE TRANSIT POINT. A COPY OF THIS RECORD ORDINARILY IS FURNISHED TO THE RESPONSIBLE INSPECTION BUREAU REPRESENTATIVE OR RAILROAD AGENT WHEN THE INBOUND TONNAGE IS FULLY CREDITED AGAINST OUTBOUND BILLING. SEE ITEM 15 (D) OF QUOTATION 16-E, IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHICH FORM NO. 213 WAS FILED. IT APPEARS SIGNIFICANT IN THIS MATTER THAT ALTHOUGH THREE OF THESE SHIPMENTS WERE TENDERED AT GRANITE CITY FOR ROAD-HAUL MOVEMENT VIA THE GULF, MOBILE AND OHIO (ALTON) RAILROAD, AND THE REMAINING THREE SHIPMENTS WERE TENDERED FOR MOVEMENT VIA THE ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO RAILWAY, ALL SIX BILLS OF LADING WERE EXECUTED FOR THE CARRIERS BY THE SAME AGENT,"F.E. SAWYER, PER NOBLE.' THIS SUGGESTS THE EXISTENCE OF A JOINT AGENCY AT EAST ST. LOUIS, ILLINOIS, WHERE TRANSIT RECORDS AND OTHER BILLING INFORMATION WOULD BE READILY AVAILABLE.

UNDER THE FOREGOING CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS APPARENT THAT THE TRANSIT OPERATION WAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ITEM 15 (B) OF QUOTATION 16-E. IT MAY BE NOTED, IN THIS CONNECTION, THAT THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE OUTBOUND BILLS OF LADING REFLECTS CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ITEM NO. 15 (E) OF QUOTATION NO. 16-E.

ACCORDINGLY, OUR AUDIT ACTION IS NOT FOUND TO BE IN ERROR AND REVISION OF SUCH ACTION WOULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED.