Request for Review of Deduction Action

A motor freight carrier requested review of a deduction action taken by the General Services Administration (GSA) in connection with an alleged overcharge. The freight was tendered to the carrier, accepted from the manufacturer for shipment, and delivered to the appropriate destination. Payment was made at a rate appropriate for freight which is shipped "other than nested, loose." Subsequently, the carrier was notified that it had been overpaid since the rate applicable to freight "SU (set up), nested in packages," should have been applied. In the absence of refund, the alleged overcharge was recovered by deduction action. The carrier contended that the typed notation "25 ea." in the description space of the original copy of the government bill of lading and the encircled handwritten "25" beside the driver's signature both established that the driver signed for 25 individual pieces and, therefore, that the freight was not nested or in packages. The carrier also contended that GSA presented no evidence that the freight was nested or packaged. The carrier has the burden of providing the correctness of charges collected on freight shipments. The presumption that a bill of lading correctly describes the articles tendered for transportation is not conclusive; the important fact is what was moved, not what was billed. Although the information initially used by GSA to support its overcharge claim did not adequately established that the freight was "in packages," GSA subsequently provided a copy of a commercial bill of lading, prepared by the manufacturer and dated and signed the same as the government bill of lading, bearing the phrase "25 Carts, Hand NOI, SU Nested In Packages." In addition, an official at the destination of the shipment furnished a letter stating that several shipments of the same item had been received over a 10-year period, each with the freight nested together and banded. Further, GSA furnished photographs which establish a reduction in space resulting from nesting the freight of one-third, as required by the lower freight rate. In reviewing GSA claim settlements, GAO must rely solely on the written record. Accordingly, the settlement action was determined to be correct and was sustained.