B-149127, AUG. 24, 1962

B-149127, AUG. 24, 1962

TO ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 6, 1962, FILE G-WQ-76999 BG, IN WHICH YOU IN EFFECT REQUEST THE REVIEW OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM, PER BILL WQ-76999-A, FOR $669.25 IN ADDITION TO THE AMOUNT OF $1,355.73 PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION FROM BELLEMONT, ARIZONA, TO THE NEW ORLEANS PORT OF EMBARKATION, BRAITHWAITE, LOUISIANA, FOR EXPORT, OF A SHIPMENT DESCRIBED ON BILL OF LADING WT 7528173 DATED JULY 25, 1945, AS "2319 BXS SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION 255090 RDS T1IDO.'

FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF THIS SHIPMENT YOU CLAIMED ORIGINALLY $2,416.77, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF A FOURTH CLASS RATE OF $2.83 PER 100 POUNDS, LESS CERTAIN LAND-GRANT DEDUCTIONS. THE AMOUNT SO CLAIMED WAS PAID ON VOUCHER 409205 IN THE NOVEMBER 6, 1945, ACCOUNTS OF M. B. HALE, ARMY DISBURSING OFFICER. IN THE AUDIT OF THIS PAYMENT THE CHARGE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION WAS RECOMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE COMMODITY RATE ON EXPLOSIVES, VIZ: CARTRIDGES, LOADED, IN BOXES, OF $1.90 PER 100 POUNDS, PROVIDED IN ITEM 4475 OF TRANS-CONTINENTAL FREIGHT BUREAU EAST-BOUND TARIFF NO. 3-R, I.C.C. 1506, LESS CERTAIN LAND-GRANT DEDUCTIONS. BY GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE FORM 1003, DATED MARCH 14, 1947, YOU WERE REQUESTED TO REFUND AN OVERPAYMENT OF $1,061.04 SO COMPUTED. UPON YOUR FAILURE TO REFUND THIS OVERPAYMENT THE AMOUNT THEREOF WAS COLLECTED, JANUARY 28, 1949, BY DEDUCTION IN MAKING PAYMENT OF OTHER AMOUNTS DUE YOU. THEREAFTER, YOU CLAIMED $669.25, PER SUPPLEMENTAL BILL NO. WQ-76999-A DATED MARCH 19, 1958, SUPPORTED BY A WAR DEPARTMENT SHIPPING DOCUMENT DESCRIBING THE SHIPMENT AS "T1IDO CART. AP INC.CAL. 50 M8 GR-AC T1-36042.' THE AMOUNT CLAIMED BY YOU WAS COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE SAME FOURTH CLASS RATE AS USED IN YOUR ORIGINAL CLAIM, BUT WITH A GREATER LAND-GRANT DEDUCTION. THIS CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED FEBRUARY 3, 1959, FOR THE REASONS STATED THEREIN. IN LETTERS OF OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION DATED SEPTEMBER 7, 1959, SEPTEMBER 29, 1961, AND APRIL 3, 1962, IN RESPONSE TO YOUR REQUESTS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION, SUCH DISALLOWANCE WAS ADHERED TO.

YOU NOW REQUEST REVIEW OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM AND STATE THAT "ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL SHIPPING DOCUMENT, THIS SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF CARTRIDGES ARMOUR PIERCING INCENDIARY 50 CALIBER.' FURTHER, YOU ALLEGE THAT IT IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE WERE NOT LOADED CARTRIDGES, BUT EMPTY.

SINCE THE MARKINGS ON THE BILL OF LADING INDICATE THE SHIPMENT WAS MADE TO THE NEW ORLEANS PORT OF EMBARKATION FOR EXPORT TO LUZON, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, AND THE SHIPMENT WAS MADE DURING JULY 1945 WHEN VARIOUS ISLANDS IN THE PHILIPPINES HAD NOT YET BEEN LIBERATED FROM JAPANESE CONTROL, SEE MARCOS V. UNITED STATES, 122 CT.CL. 641, IT DOES NOT SEEM REASONABLE TO SUPPOSE THAT THE SHELLS SHIPPED WERE EMPTY AND WE NOTE YOU HAVE PRESENTED NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR UNDERSTANDING. HOWEVER, AN ADDITIONAL REQUEST WAS MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FOR A REPORT AS TO YOUR CONTENTIONS. A REPORT DATED JULY 18, 1962, FROM THE CENTRAL TRAFFIC REGION, DEFENSE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SERVICES, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, IS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE MARKINGS ON THE SHIPPING DOCUMENT ARE CONCLUSIVE THAT THE SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF LOADED CARTRIDGES.

IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT PERSONS MAKING CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES MUST ESTABLISH CLEARLY THE FACTS AND PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THEIR CLAIMS ARE BASED AND THE BURDEN IMPOSED BY THE RULE MUST BE MET SQUARELY IN EACH CASE IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS IN CERTIFYING SUCH CLAIMS FOR PAYMENT FROM APPROPRIATED MONEYS. SEE ALSO UNITED STATES V. NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD R.CO., 355 U.S. 253. YOU HAVE NOT MET THAT BURDEN. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM IS SUSTAINED.