Tri-State Motor Transit Company

B-260748 Sep 19, 1995 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights The Department of Defense is charged for a minimum of 5. " and there is nothing in the record suggesting that the article did not meet the definition of a Class A initiating explosive described in title 49. It is reasonable to conclude that the article shipped was such an initiating explosive. It was not necessary to include the word "wet" in the GBL description because. The facts are not in dispute. It is entitled to rate this dromedary shipment as a minimum 5. Dromedary service will be subject to line-haul rates alternating between the lower minimum weight of 2. Will be subject to a line-haul minimum weight of 5. The issue here is distinguishable from the one we are reconsidering in B-253293.2 et al. View Decision Matter of: Tri-State Motor Transit Company File: B-260748 Date: September 19, 1995 Under item 325(1)(c) of the Military Traffic Management Command's Freight Traffic Rules Publication 1A, the Department of Defense is charged for a minimum of 5,000 pounds when it ships a lesser amount of "initiating or priming explosives, wet . . . ." Thus, when the Army shipped 10.2 pounds of an article that it described on the government bill of lading (GBL) as "CLASS A-EXPLOSIVE-INITIATING EXPLOSIVE-DANGEROUS-DO NOT STORE OR LOAD WITH HIGH EXPLOSIVES," and there is nothing in the record suggesting that the article did not meet the definition of a Class A initiating explosive described in title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (49 C.F.R.), Secs. 173.70 through 173.78, it is reasonable to conclude that the article shipped was such an initiating explosive. It was not necessary to include the word "wet" in the GBL description because, generally, the substances listed in 49 C.F.R. Secs. 173.70 through 173.78 cannot be transported in a dry condition. DECISION The facts are not in dispute. On June 5, 1990, Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, tendered a shipment weighing 10.2 pounds to Tri-State for dromedary transportation service to Englewood, Colorado. The GBL described the article shipped as "CLASS A-EXPLOSIVE-INITIATING EXPLOSIVE-DANGEROUS-DO NOT STORE OR LOAD WITH HIGH EXPLOSIVES." Tri-State argues that under item 325(1)(c) of the Military Traffic Management Command's (MTMC) Freight Traffic Rules Publication 1A (MFTRP 1A), it is entitled to rate this dromedary shipment as a minimum 5,000 pound shipment. At the time of shipment, Item 325(1)(c) (2d Rev. page 89) stated: "c. Dromedary service will be subject to line-haul rates alternating between the lower minimum weight of 2,500 pounds and the higher minimum weight of 5,000 pounds. Shipments of white phosphorus or, initiating or priming explosives, wet: Diazodinitrophenol, fulminate of mercury, guanyl, nitrosamino guanylidene hydrazine, lead azide, lead styphnate, nitro mannite, nitrosoguanidine, pentaerythrite tetranitrate, tetrazene, lead mononitroresorcinate, will be subject to a line-haul minimum weight of 5,000 pounds or actual weight, if greater, at the 5,000 pound tender rate. (See Note 3)." Note 3 after item 325(3)(c) of MFTRP 1A involved the minimum weight for a shipment of a commodity with additional descriptive information following its hazardous material description which identified it as "chemical ammunition with incendiary charges or white phosphorus." In its administrative report, GSA stated that our reconsideration of Tri-State Motor Transit Company, B-253293 et al., Dec. 10, 1993, would be dispositive of the issue here. Otherwise, in its Settlement Certificate, GSA denied Tri-State's claim, noting that item 325(1)(c) involved shipments of initiating or priming explosives, wet, while the shipment in issue involved Class A Explosive-Initiating Explosive. MTMC stated that the 5,000 pound minimum weight charge did apply to the commodity shipped here even though it did not include the word "wet" in the commodity description "because 'dry' cannot be transported or tendered for shipment." The issue here is distinguishable from the one we are reconsidering in B-253293.2 et al. Our reconsideration, B-253293.2 et al., involves the interpretation of Note 3, particularly, whether certain commodities were "chemical ammunition with incendiary charges or white phosphorus." Nothing indicates that the commodity here involves "chemical ammunition with incendiary charges or white phosphorus;" therefore, Note 3 is not involved. The issue is whether "CLASS A-EXPLOSIVE-INITIATING EXPLOSIVE," as described on the GBL, is a shipment of "initiating or priming explosives, wet." In our view, the record supports the conclusion reached by MTMC that the commodity shipped was "initiating or priming explosives, wet" as described in item 325(1)(c). The description of an article on a GBL is prima facie correct. See Yellow Freight System, Inc., B-197298, Sept. 12, 1980, 80-2 CPD Para. 193 and Yellow Freight System, Inc., B-192872, May 7, 1979.