Skip to Highlights
Highlights

TO PANHANDLE AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 7. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO YOUR CLAIM AND THE BASIS FOR OUR ACTION WERE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF DECEMBER 14. THE SOLE ISSUE IN CONTROVERSY IS WHETHER THE CHARGES COMPUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT AT A ONE-FACTOR THROUGH RATE ARE APPLICABLE VIA THE ROUTE SPECIFIED ON THE BILLS OF LADING BY THE SHIPPER. YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THAT BASIS BUT SUBSEQUENTLY CLAIMED ADDITIONAL CHARGES COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A COMBINATION OF RATES APPLYING TO AND BEYOND STAFFORD. WHICH CLAIM WAS THE SUBJECT OF THE DISALLOWANCE IN QUESTION. YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE FACT THAT SECTION 3 OF THE CITED ITEM NO. 1000 ON WHICH YOU RELY IS MADE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL ROUTING NAMED IN ITEM NO. 1010 OF THE SAME TARIFF.

View Decision

B-146498, MAY 1, 1962

TO PANHANDLE AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 7, 1962, YOUR FILE NO. 105260- GA, ACKNOWLEDGED MARCH 15, 1962, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION, B-146498, DATED DECEMBER 14, 1961, WHICH SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR AN ADDITIONAL ALLOWANCE OF $376.56 IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRANSPORTATION OF IRON BODY GATE VALVES FROM BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, TO BUTLER (CUSTER COUNTY), OKLAHOMA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILLS OF LADING NOS. I-271450 AND I-271451, DATED MARCH 24, 1959.

THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING RISE TO YOUR CLAIM AND THE BASIS FOR OUR ACTION WERE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF DECEMBER 14, 1961, B- 146498. THE SOLE ISSUE IN CONTROVERSY IS WHETHER THE CHARGES COMPUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT AT A ONE-FACTOR THROUGH RATE ARE APPLICABLE VIA THE ROUTE SPECIFIED ON THE BILLS OF LADING BY THE SHIPPER. YOU ORIGINALLY CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THAT BASIS BUT SUBSEQUENTLY CLAIMED ADDITIONAL CHARGES COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A COMBINATION OF RATES APPLYING TO AND BEYOND STAFFORD, OKLAHOMA, WHICH CLAIM WAS THE SUBJECT OF THE DISALLOWANCE IN QUESTION.

IN YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 7, 1962, YOU URGE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3, ITEM NO. 1000 OF SOUTHWESTERN LINES FREIGHT TARIFF NO. SW/S 1007, I.C.C.NO. 4000, PRECLUDE THE APPLICATION OF THE ONE-FACTOR THROUGH RATE. HOWEVER, YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE FACT THAT SECTION 3 OF THE CITED ITEM NO. 1000 ON WHICH YOU RELY IS MADE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL ROUTING NAMED IN ITEM NO. 1010 OF THE SAME TARIFF. SECTION 1 OF THE LATTER ITEM EMBRACES THE SHIPMENTS IN QUESTION, SINCE THEY MOVED FROM A STATION IN SOUTHERN TERRITORY--- BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, VIA THE SOUTHERN RAILWAY SYSTEM AND ITS CONNECTIONS--- ON THE ONE HAND, VIA GATEWAYS MEMPHIS AND ST. LOUIS (BOTH NAMED IN SUBPARAGRAPH (C) (, TO A STATION IN SOUTHWESTERN TERRITORY- -- BUTLER (CUSTER COUNTY), OKLAHOMA--- ON THE OTHER. SUBPARAGRAPH (A) PROVIDES THAT IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES RATES WILL APPLY FROM BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, VIA THE GATEWAY OF MEMPHIS, THENCE VIA THE ST. LOUIS GATEWAY, SUBJECT TO ROUTING INSTRUCTIONS PUBLISHED IN SOUTHWESTERN LINES FREIGHT TARIFF NO. 222-E, I.C.C.NO. 4288, APPLICABLE FROM THE LAST-NAMED GATEWAY, ST. LOUIS. THE AUTHORITIES REFERRED TO ABOVE AUTHORIZE THE ROUTE WHICH IS SHOWN IN DETAIL IN OUR DECISION OF DECEMBER 14, 1961, AND THIS ROUTE APPEARS TO BE IDENTICAL WITH THAT SHOWN IN THE BILLS OF LADING AND THE DESTINATION CARRIER'S FREIGHT BILLS COVERING THE SHIPMENTS IN QUESTION.

THE CONTENTS OF YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 7, 1962, HAVE BEEN CAREFULLY CONSIDERED AND YOU HAVE NOT PRESENTED ANY FACTS OR EVIDENCE THAT WOULD WARRANT ANY MODIFICATION OF THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN OUR DECISION OF DECEMBER 14, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN THAT DECISION IS AFFIRMED.

GAO Contacts