November 4, 1997 GSBCA 14243-RATE In the Matter of TRI-STATE MOTOR TRANSIT COMPANY John R. Bagileo of Bagileo, Silverberg & Goldman, Washington, DC; and Robert D. Norcom, Auditor, Tri-State Motor Transit Co., Joplin, MO, appearing for Claimant. Jeffrey J. Thurston, Director, Office of Transportation Audits, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, appearing for General Services Administration. Col. James F. Quinn, Staff Judge Advocate, Headquarters, Military Traffic Management Command, Department of the Army, Falls Church, VA, appearing for Department of Defense. GOODMAN, Board Judge. Claimant, Tri-State Motor Transit Company, has requested review of the General Services Administration (GSA) Office of Transporation Audits (OTA) denial of its claims for alleged excess released value charges on trucks, trailers, vans, and other vehicles moved by claimant during 1991 pursuant to thirteen Government bills of lading (GBLs). We conclude that claimant is entitled to the claimed amounts. The thirteen GBLs classified the freight as Freight All Kinds (FAK) falling within Department of Defense (DoD) unique codes 999912 or 999913, but in a few cases identified the freight by National Motor Freight Classification items which pertain to specific vehicles. In all cases, the GBL was annotated in either block 15 or 18 with some variation of the statement "Released value not exceeding $2.50 [or $1.75] per pound per article." The weight of the vehicles was such that multiplying the applicable per pound rate (either $1.75 or $2.50) by the weight of the article resulted in a released value of more than $20,000. Claimant originally billed the Government for each shipment based upon the stated FAK designation without any charges for excess valuation coverage. Upon audit, claimant determined, based upon the released value annotations, that it was entitled to "excess valuation charges" and submitted claims for the following additional amounts: GBL D-0,506,147 $ 21.30 GBL E-0,723,974 $ 63.75 GBL E-0,723,971 $ 63.75 GBL E-0,723,961 $216.30 GBL E-0,508,170 $ 4.20 GBL E-0,983,750 $ 81.00 GBL E-0,723,833 $ 38.25 GBL D-1,010,650 $ 57.45 GBL D-0,559,001 $ 42.75 GBL E-0,861,337 $122.10 GBL E-0,983,748 $ 21.00 GBL E-1,123,617 $ 49.05 GBL E-1,123,616 $ 49.05 Claimant computed these amounts using the methodology set forth in Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC) Freight Traffic Rules Publication No. 1A, Item 190. Taking GBL D- 0,506,147 as a representative example, claimant figured the released value of the truck by taking $1.75 per pound, the released value stated in box 18 of the GBL, multiplied by the weight of the truck, 19,490 pounds, to arrive at a total released value of $34,107.50. Claimant then determined the excess declared value to be $14,107.50 ($34,107.50 less the default released value of $20,000). Claimant then rounded this amount up to $14,200 (the next $100). Claimant applied the rate of $.15 for every $100 to arrive at an excess valuation charge of $21.30. Similar computations were performed for each of the twelve other GBLs to arrive at the amounts claimed. GSA issued settlement certificates which disallowed all of the claims, maintaining that the released value statements on the thirteen GBLs do not entitle claimant to amounts beyond those originally claimed based upon the FAK designation. Claimant requested review of the GSA's denial of the thirteen GBLs by the General Accounting Office (GAO), which GAO docketed as B-266046. GAO did not issue a decision, but did issue a letter dated December 12, 1995, which reads, in relevant part: We acknowledge receipt of your letter . . . requesting review of the . . . GSA['s] denial of Tri-State's claims with respect to government bill of lading D- 0,506,147 and 12 other transactions. As you suggest, GSA's settlements appear to be contrary to our decision Tri-State Motor Transit Company- Reconsideration, B-254378.2 et al., July 5, 1995. Your letter to the . . . Administrator of General Services . . . indicates that you are attempting to enforce our July 5, 1995, decision within GSA. If you are unsuccessful with the Administrator, you may have to pursue other remedies. We have clearly stated our position on this matter, and we have nothing further to add. We will maintain this letter as evidence of your request for review . . . . Please advise if you believe there are further steps we can take. We consider the last paragraph of the above-quoted letter as an indication that the matter remained pending, and had not been resolved by GAO. Since the issuance of GAO's letter, the Comptroller General's responsibility for review of OTA decisions has been transferred by statute to the Administrator of General Services. Pub. L. No. 104-316,  202(o)(2), 100 Stat. 3826, 3844 (1996). By delegation, this Board now exercises this review function on behalf of the Administrator in transportation rate cases. This matter remained pending at GAO until July 1997, when it was transferred to this Board. The Government maintains that the released value statements on the GBLs do not entitle claimant to the additional amounts claimed. Both this Board and GAO have considered this "released valuation" issue in circumstances factually identical to those in the instant case and have concluded that the Government's position is not correct. McGil Specialized Carriers, GSBCA 14127-RATE (Sept. 30, 1997); Tri-State Motor Transit Co., GSBCA 13839-RATE, 97-1 BCA  28,953; Tri-State Motor Transit Co., GSBCA 13746-RATE, 97-1 BCA  28,951; Tri-State Motor Transit Co.--Reconsideration, B-254378.2, et al. (July 5, 1995). We follow our earlier decisions. Claimant is entitled to the amounts claimed as additional payment for the shipment covered by the GBLs at issue. _________________________ ALLAN H. GOODMAN Board Judge