Skip to main content

B-143444, JAN. 12, 1961

B-143444 Jan 12, 1961
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 30. FOR THIS SERVICE YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID CHARGES COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 22. YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID CHARGES COMPUTED ON THE GROSS WEIGHT OF THE SHIPMENT (INCLUDING 300 POUNDS OF DUNNAGE). IN ALL INSTANCES THE CHARGES WERE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A CLASS-55 RATING AT A RATE OF $1.53 PER 100 POUNDS PLUS SIX PERCENT SURCHARGE. STATE THAT THEY WERE ISSUED TO COVER THE 24TH. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE RATING AND RATE OF $1.53 PER 100 POUNDS PLUS SIX PERCENT SURCHARGE USED BY YOU AND AUTHORIZED BY SOUTHERN MOTOR CARRIERS RATE CONFERENCE 5-G. WAS APPLICABLE. UPON YOUR FAILURE TO REFUND THE AMOUNT OF $68.82 FOUND TO HAVE BEEN OVERCHARGED.

View Decision

B-143444, JAN. 12, 1961

TO STRICKLAND TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 30, 1960, WITH ENCLOSURE, FILE STC CLAIM NO. GAO 2982/56, CLAIMANT'S NO. 261233 AND TK-682198, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL BILL NO. 4452-A FOR $68.82 ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION CHARGES ON SHIPMENTS OF CARTRIDGE CASES, EMPTY FOR CANNON, NOT PRIMED, MOVING UNDER GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING WY-182463, WY-182485, WY-182495 AND WY-182455 FROM PROCTOR AND GAMBLE DEFENSE CORPORATION, MILAN ARSENAL, MILAN, TENNESSEE, TO THE LONE STAR ORDNANCE PLANT, DEFENSE, TEXAS, IN DECEMBER 1952.

FOR THIS SERVICE YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID CHARGES COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A MINIMUM WEIGHT OF 22,000 POUNDS FOR EACH VEHICLE USED FOR THE THREE SHIPMENTS WEIGHING LESS THAN 22,000 POUNDS MOVING UNDER BILLS OF LADING WY -182463, WY-182485 AND WY-182495. ON THE SHIPMENT MOVING UNDER BILL OF LADING WY-182455, WEIGHING 24,256 POUNDS, YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID CHARGES COMPUTED ON THE GROSS WEIGHT OF THE SHIPMENT (INCLUDING 300 POUNDS OF DUNNAGE), OR 24,556 POUNDS. IN ALL INSTANCES THE CHARGES WERE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A CLASS-55 RATING AT A RATE OF $1.53 PER 100 POUNDS PLUS SIX PERCENT SURCHARGE. BILL OF LADING WY-182455 BEARS THE FOLLOWING NOTATION:

"THIS B/L ISSUED TO COVER THE 20TH PART OF A COMPLETE SHIPMENT COMPRISING APPROX 648,000 POUNDS, THE FIRST PART THEREOF COVERED BY GBL WY-182381.'

THE OTHER THREE BILLS OF LADING CONTAIN SIMILAR NOTATIONS, REFERRING TO BILL OF LADING WY-182381, AND STATE THAT THEY WERE ISSUED TO COVER THE 24TH, 28TH AND 30TH PARTS OF THE COMPLETE SHIPMENT.

IN OUR AUDIT OF THE PAYMENT VOUCHER, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE RATING AND RATE OF $1.53 PER 100 POUNDS PLUS SIX PERCENT SURCHARGE USED BY YOU AND AUTHORIZED BY SOUTHERN MOTOR CARRIERS RATE CONFERENCE 5-G, MF-I.C.C. NO. 554 AND NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 11, MF-I.C.C. NO. 1, ITEM 4030, WAS APPLICABLE, BUT THAT CHARGES SHOULD BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE ACTUAL NET WEIGHT (WITHOUT DUNNAGE AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE 10 OF NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 11) IN EACH VEHICLE, SINCE THE MOVEMENTS CONSISTED OF PARTS OF A VOLUME SHIPMENT, WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 3 (A) OF RULE 13, NATIONAL MOTOR FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION, WEIGHING APPROXIMATELY 648,000 POUNDS. UPON YOUR FAILURE TO REFUND THE AMOUNT OF $68.82 FOUND TO HAVE BEEN OVERCHARGED, COLLECTION WAS EFFECTED BY DEDUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF 49 U.S.C. 66.

IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST ADDRESSED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REGARDING THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THIS MOVEMENT, INCLUDING SPECIFIC INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THE ENTIRE TONNAGE INVOLVED COMPRISING APPROXIMATELY 648,000 POUNDS WAS AVAILABLE AT ONE TIME, WE WERE FURNISHED INFORMATION BY THE CENTRAL TRAFFIC REGION, MILITARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AGENCY, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, TO THE EFFECT THAT ALL THE TONNAGE SHIPPED WAS AVAILABLE AT ONE TIME; THAT THE TOTAL SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF 31 PARTIALS; THAT THE LOADING WAS EFFECTED WITHIN A FOUR DAY PERIOD, AND THAT THE RECORDS DO NOT REVEAL THAT THERE WAS ANY SPECIAL AGREEMENT OR CONCESSION RELATIVE TO LOADING OF VEHICLES IN THIS MOVEMENT.

SECTION 1 OF RULE 13 OF MOTOR FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 11 DEFINES A SHIPMENT AS "A LOT OF FREIGHT RECEIVED FROM ONE SHIPPER, AT ONE POINT AT ONE TIME FOR ONE CONSIGNEE AT ONE DESTINATION AND COVERED BY ONE BILL OF LADING.' IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT THE MERE ISSUANCE OF MULTIPLE, CROSS- REFERENCED BILLS OF LADING, AS HERE, RATHER THAN A SINGLE BILL OF LADING, TO COVER THE ENTIRE SHIPMENT DOES NOT CONVERT WHAT OTHERWISE WOULD CONSTITUTE A VOLUME SHIPMENT INTO MULTIPLE SHIPMENTS. SEE IN THIS CONNECTION, WILLINGHAM V. SELIGMAN, 179 F.2D 257; EXPOSITION COTTON MILLS V. SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO., 234 I.C.C. 441; AND 36 COMP. GEN. 119. A VOLUME MINIMUM, AS EMPLOYED IN MOTOR FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION, IN DISTINGUISHED FROM A TRUCKLOAD MINIMUM IN THAT THE VOLUME RATE APPLIES WHEN A SHIPPER TENDERS THE VOLUME MINIMUM WEIGHT FOR TRANSPORTATION AT ONE TIME, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY EXCEED THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF THE CARRIER'S VEHICLES, AND MUST BE TRANSPORTED IN TWO OR MORE OF THEM. SEE STOVES FROM ALABAMA AND TENNESSEE TO INTERSTATE POINTS, 4 M.C.C. 641, 643 (FOOTNOTE); GULF PORTS-- - ALABAMA, GEORGIA AND TENNESSEE--- COMMODITY RATES, 10 M.C.C. 106 (FOOTNOTE); AND WILLINGHAM V. SELIGMAN, SUPRA. THUS, THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT THE SEVERAL SEPARATE BILLS OF LADING HERE INVOLVED WERE IN FACT ALL PARTS OF A MASTER BILL OF LADING COVERING A VOLUME SHIPMENT TENDERED BY A SINGLE SHIPPER AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE CARRIERS AT ONE TIME FOR SHIPMENT FROM THE SAME POINT OF ORIGIN TO THE SAME CONSIGNEE AT THE SAME DESTINATION. THE ISSUANCE OF SEPARATE BILLS OF LADING COVERING THE PORTIONS OF THE ENTIRE SHIPMENTS LOADED ON EACH VEHICLE APPARENTLY WAS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE CARRIERS, AS WELL AS THE GOVERNMENT, IN ACCOUNTING FOR THE PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE SHIPMENT COVERED THEREBY.

REGARDING YOUR ASSERTION THAT "NONE OF THE TRAILERS INVOLVED WERE LOADED TO CAPACITY," YOU MAY BE ADVISED THAT THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD BEFORE US TO SUPPORT SUCH ASSERTION. HOWEVER, IF SUCH FACT COULD BE ESTABLISHED, IT COULD NOT HAVE CONVERTED THIS VOLUME SHIPMENT INTO MULTIPLE SHIPMENTS SINCE OBVIOUSLY AMPLE TONNAGE WAS AVAILABLE TO LOAD THE VEHICLES FURNISHED TO CAPACITY IF THE ORIGIN CARRIER HAD ELECTED TO DO SO.

IN REQUESTING REVIEW OF THIS MATTER, YOU RELY ON THE CASE OF GUS BLASS COMPANY V. POWELL BROTHERS TRUCK LINES, 53 M.C.C. 603, AS AUTHORITY FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE TRUCKLOAD MINIMUM WEIGHT ON EACH INDIVIDUAL TRUCK. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THAT CASE WAS WHETHER EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE CHARGES MIGHT BE ASSESSED ON A MIXED SHIPMENT OF COMMODITIES HAVING FAR LESS THAN THE APPLICABLE TRUCKLOAD MINIMUM WEIGHT, WHERE THE VEHICLE WAS SEALED BY THE SHIPPER, DEPRIVING THE CARRIER OF THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE USE OF THE UNUSED CAPACITY OF THE VEHICLE. THUS, THAT CASE HAS NO RELEVANCE WHATEVER HERE, SINCE THE VOLUME SHIPMENT TENDERED HERE WAS SUFFICIENT TO LOAD SEVERAL VEHICLES TO CAPACITY AND, THEREFORE, IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT THE SEALS WERE APPLIED AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE SINCE THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REPORTS THERE WERE NO SPECIAL AGREEMENTS OR CONCESSIONS RELATIVE TO LOADING OF THE VEHICLES IN THIS MOVEMENT.

IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE MUST CONCLUDE, ON THE BASIS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT BEFORE US, THAT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WAS MADE AVAILABLE AT ONE TIME IN AN AMOUNT FAR IN EXCESS OF THE PRESCRIBED VOLUME MINIMUM WEIGHT OF ANY VEHICLE USED AND THE APPLICABLE CHARGES ARE THOSE COMPUTED AT THE VOLUME RATE AND THE ACTUAL WEIGHT COVERED BY EACH BILL OF LADING. THE SETTLEMENT DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM WAS CONSISTENT WITH THIS BASIS AND, ACCORDINGLY, IS SUSTAINED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs