B-122367, JUN. 15, 1955

B-122367, JUN. 15, 1955

TO ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY:

CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN GIVEN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT (CLAIM NO. TK-411089) DATED OCTOBER 16, 1953, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM, PER BILL NO. 91656-SD, FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES OF $247.63 ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FROM SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, TO MONCKS CORNER, SOUTH CAROLINA, OF A SHIPMENT DESCRIBED AS "TRUNKS NESTED 303 LOOSE CASE SHIPPING SPEC. NO. 340," UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING NO. WT-8141730, IN JULY 1944.

FOR THIS SERVICE YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID $467.83, COMPUTED AT A THIRD- CLASS RATE OF $1.67 PER 100 POUNDS, REDUCED TO $1.37857 BY LAND GRANT DEDUCTIONS. THIS RATING WAS NAMED IN ITEM 43275 OF CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 16 FOR APPLICATION ON CARLOAD SHIPMENTS OF TRUNKS.

IN THE AUDIT OF YOUR BILL IN OUR OFFICE IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPER CHARGES WERE $220.20, COMPUTED AT A NET RATE OF 64.887 CENTS PER 100 POUNDS, DERIVED FROM A COLUMN-31 1/2 RATE OF 76 CENTS PER 100 POUNDS, NAMED IN ILLINOIS FREIGHT ASSOCIATION TARIFF NO. 15-E, AGENT R. G. RAASCH'S I.C.C. NO. 485. THE COLUMN-31 1/2 RATING WAS AUTHORIZED BY ITEM 2410 OF ILLINOIS FREIGHT ASSOCIATION TARIFF NO. 90-A, AGENT R. G. RAASCH'S I.C.C. NO. 581, FOR APPLICATION ON SHIPMENTS OF NESTED WOODEN BOXES NOT OTHERWISE INDEXED BY NAME. BY OFFICE FORM 1003, DATED OCTOBER 24, 1950, YOU WERE REQUESTED TO REFUND THE AMOUNT OF $247.63 DETERMINED TO HAVE BEEN OVERPAID, AND WHEN YOU FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUEST THE OVERPAYMENT WAS RECOVERED BY DEDUCTION FROM AN AMOUNT OTHERWISE DUE YOUR COMPANY. YOUR CLAIM, PER BILL NO. 91656-SD, FOR THE AMOUNT THUS RECOVERED WAS DISALLOWED AND BY LETTER DATED DECEMBER 16, 1953, FILE NO. 3972-G CY-ACL 91656, YOU REQUESTED REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT, ALLEGING THAT---

"IN ADDITION TO THE DESCRIPTION ON THE WAYBILL READING "303 LOOSE CASE SHIPPING SPEC. NO. 0340" THE SHIPMENT IS DESCRIBED AS "TRUNKS NESTED.' THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, WASHINGTON, D.C., ADVISED IN A LETTER DATED MAY 20TH 1952, THAT ...'IT IS THE OPINION OF THE OFFICE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION THAT THE FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION SHOULD BE "TRUNKS" ITEM 43275, CFC NO. 16," A COPY OF THIS LETTER BEING ATTACHED TO OUR SUPPLEMENTAL BILL.'

YOU REQUEST THAT A COPY OF THE CONTRACT REFERRED TO IN THE BILL OF LADING BE FURNISHED YOU, OR MADE AVAILABLE HERE FOR EXAMINATION.

THE BILL OF LADING SHOWS THAT THE SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF SHIPPING CASES MANUFACTURED UNDER ,SPEC. NO. 40340," AND BEARS THE NOTATION "TRUNKS NESTED.' ARMY AIR FORCE SPECIFICATION NO. 40340, EMBODYING THE SPECIFICATIONS PERTAINING TO "CASE, SHIPPING (AIR FORCE ORGANIZATION EQUIPMENT)," SHOWS THAT EACH "CASE" WAS TO "CONSIST OF FOUR NESTING SHIPPING CONTAINERS" WHICH WERE TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF "3/8-INCH, THREE PLY PLYWOOD," AND THAT THE OUTSIDE AND THE INSIDE OF THE CONTAINERS WERE TO BE COVERED WITH A SURFACING MATERIAL GLUED TO THE PLYWOOD. THE CASES ARE SHOWN TO BE FOR USE BY SQUADRONS FOR STORING AND SHIPPING RECORDS OR EQUIPMENT.

APPARENTLY, YOU ARE RELYING UPON A LETTER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, IN WHICH IT IS SAID TO BE THE OPINION OF THAT OFFICE THAT THE ARTICLES COVERED BY BILL OF LADING WT- 8141730 SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS TRUNKS, AND RATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ITEM 43275 OF CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 16. HOWEVER, ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES ARE FOR SETTLEMENT AND ADJUSTMENT IN THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE (31 U.S.C. 71), AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT OR RECOMMENDATION IS NOT CONCLUSIVE ON THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE IN THE EXERCISE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED IN IT TO SETTLE AND ADJUST ALL CLAIMS. 20 COMP. GEN. 573, 576-578.

IT SEEMS CLEAR FROM THE RECORD IN THIS CASE THAT THE ARTICLES SHIPPED UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING NO. WT-8141730 WERE NOT "TRUNKS," WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT TERM IN CLASSIFICATION ITEM NO. 43275. ON THE CONTRARY, THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF NESTED WOODEN BOXES WITH AN INSIDE AND AN OUTSIDE COVERING, PRESUMABLY ADDED FOR PROTECTION AGAINST DETERIORATION, ETC. THE ADDITION OF THIS COVERING, HOWEVER, WOULD NOT CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ARTICLES OR REQUIRE THAT THEY BE SUBJECT TO THE RATING ON TRUNKS. THE WOODEN BOXES HERE INVOLVED DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN "OTHERWISE INDEXED BY NAME" IN THE SUBJECT CLASSIFICATION, AND THERE HAS NOT BEEN FOUND IN THAT CLASSIFICATION ANY COMMODITY DESCRIPTION MORE SPECIFIC THAN WOODEN BOXES IN RELATION TO THE ARTICLES HERE INVOLVED.

EFFORTS TO LOCATE THE CONTRACT REFERRED TO IN THE BILL OF LADING HAVE BEEN UNAVAILING TO DATE, BUT SINCE THE PRESENT CONTROVERSY CONCERNS ONLY THE IDENTITY OF THE ARTICLES SUPPLIED THEREUNDER, IT IS PRESUMED THAT YOUR EXAMINATION OF THE CONTRACT WOULD BE CONCERNED SOLELY WITH THE MATTER OF SPECIFICATION NO. 40340. THIS MATTER HAS BEEN CONSIDERED ABOVE, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO THE MATERIAL USED, THE METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION, AND THE INTENDED USE OF THE ARTICLES.

FOR THE REASONS GIVEN ABOVE, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THIS MATERIAL WAS PROPERLY RATED AS WOODEN ..END :