Skip to Highlights

A carrier requested review of a freight loss settlement disallowing its offsetting claim against the Army for the loss of a helicopter blade, contending that: (1) it delivered the blade to the Army, and the Army later returned the blade to another Army facility; (2) the Army notified it of the blade's return; (3) the Army's delivery practices made it difficult to prove that it delivered the blade. GAO held that: (1) there was no documentation establishing delivery; and (2) the claimant did not have substantial evidence proving delivery. Accordingly, the settlement was sustained.


GAO Contacts