%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-11T15:37-04:00
2021-06-11T15:37-04:00
2021-06-11T15:37-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
05072907
uuid:cef8d1bc-284d-4fb7-ab72-d86252be2251
uuid:686bf73f-f277-4806-9055-ca6035b22917
Acrobat Web Capture 15.0
endstream
endobj
5 0 obj
<>
endobj
6 0 obj
<>
endobj
3 0 obj
<>
endobj
7 0 obj
<>
endobj
8 0 obj
<>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
21 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj
<><><><><><>]/P 18 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
25 0 obj
[32 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(05072907)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(r/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/claims/transportation/Ar\
chived%20-%20HTML/05072907.html)Tj
49.712 0 Td
([6/11/2021 3:37:00 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 734.2497 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
579.749 0 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.7499 733.5 cm
0 0 m
-0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
578.25 0 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 732.7503 cm
0 0 m
0.75 0.75 l
0 1.499 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 594.9999 733.5 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
0.75 0.75 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 644.2497 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
579.749 0 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.7499 643.5 cm
0 0 m
-0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
578.25 0 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 642.7503 cm
0 0 m
0.75 0.75 l
0 1.499 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 594.9999 643.5 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
0.75 0.75 l
h
f
Q
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 749.25 Tm
(September 15, 2005)Tj
0 -3.25 TD
(In Re:)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Stevens Transportation Co., Inc.)Tj
T*
(Claimant)Tj
0 -3.25 TD
(Claims Case No.05072907)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
17.822 -2.125 Td
(CLAIMS APPEALS BOARD)Tj
-1.237 -2.125 Td
(RECONSIDERATION DECISION)Tj
-16.585 -2.125 Td
(DIGEST)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -2.125 TD
(A compromise offer of settlement is not binding on the service unless ac\
cepted by the carrier. )Tj
37.682 0 Td
(If the offer is not accepted)Tj
-37.682 -1.125 Td
(by the carrier, the service may set off)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
15.132 0 Td
(the full amount of the carrier's contractual liability, whether or not i\
t exceeds the)Tj
-15.132 -1.125 Td
(amount of the proposed compromise.)Tj
T*
(When a carrier timely invokes its rights to inspection and the member ha\
s items repaired before the carrier has the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(opportunity to inspect, the carrier must have a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.633 0 Td
(substantial defense involving facts discoverable by inspection of the)Tj
-18.633 -1.125 Td
(specific items to overcome a )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
11.69 0 Td
(prima facie )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
4.833 0 Td
(case of liability. )Tj
6.665 0 Td
(Where the carrier does not)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
10.855 0 Td
(provide clear and convincing)Tj
-34.042 -1.125 Td
(evidence of a substantial defense, the carrier remains liable for the da\
mage.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -2.125 TD
(DECISION)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Stevens Transportation \(Stevens\) requests a reconsideration of the Jun\
e 29, 2005, Appeal Decision in Defense Office of)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(Hearings and Appeals \(DOHA\) Claim)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(No. 05031505.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 274.6211 362.25 Tm
( \(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 274.6211 361.5 cm
0 0 m
13.806 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
/TT1 1 Tf
12 0 0 12 274.1992 332.25 Tm
(Background)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.517 -2.125 Td
(Stevens picked up the shipment in Isle of Palms, South Carolina, on June\
27, 2000, and delivered it to Conyers,)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Georgia, on August 11, 2000. )Tj
(Upon delivery)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
18.108 0 Td
(Stevens' agent and the shipper signed the Joint Statement of Loss or)Tj
-18.108 -1.125 Td
(Damage at Delivery \(DD Form 1840\). )Tj
15.579 0 Td
(A Notice of Loss or Damage \(DD Form 1840R\) was)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(dispatched to Stevens on)Tj
-15.579 -1.125 Td
(October 19, 2000. )Tj
(On November 7, 2000, Stevens did perform an inspection of the reported d\
amage. )Tj
40.573 0 Td
(On June 6, 2001,)Tj
-40.573 -1.125 Td
(the Navy)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(dispatched to Stevens a Demand on Carrier/Contractor \(DD Form 1843\) fo\
r $3,927.56.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(On July 13, 2001, Stevens made an offer to settle the claim for $1,086.2\
3 based on its denial of liability for certain)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(items. )Tj
2.667 0 Td
(On February 19, 2002, the Navy)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(responded agreeing to compromises on various items but disagreeing on ot\
her)Tj
-2.667 -1.125 Td
(items. )Tj
2.667 0 Td
(As a result, the Navy made a compromise offer to settle in the amount of\
)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
29.38 0 Td
($2,686.77. )Tj
(On March 4, 2002, Stevens)Tj
-32.047 -1.125 Td
(responded, thanking the Navy for its acceptance of compromise to various\
items but continued to take exception to the)Tj
T*
(other items. )Tj
4.971 0 Td
(On March 12, 2002, in its final demand letter for the claim, the Navy re\
asserted its position on the various)Tj
-4.971 -1.125 Td
(items, stating that Stevens' liability)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.234 0 Td
(remained at $2,686.77, and again advised Stevens to forward a check in t\
hat amount)Tj
-14.234 -1.125 Td
(within 30 days, otherwise setoff would be initiated. )Tj
20.774 0 Td
(On March 21, 2002,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Stevens responded with an offer of $1,107.73.)Tj
-20.774 -1.125 Td
(On June 11, 2002, the Navy set off $3,927.56 against Stevens. )Tj
25.163 0 Td
(On August 29, 2002, Stevens requested a refund)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
19.607 0 Td
(in the)Tj
-44.771 -1.125 Td
(amount of $2,819.83 \($3,927.56 minus $1,107.73\). )Tj
20.693 0 Td
(Stevens asserted that the main areas of dispute were acceptance of)Tj
-20.693 -1.125 Td
(their offer by the Navy, pre-existing damage, proof of tender, and inspe\
ction rights. )Tj
33.628 0 Td
(On October 17, 2002, the Navy)Tj
-33.628 -1.125 Td
(responded to the carrier's request for refund, allowing a refund in the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
27.753 0 Td
(amount of $508.75.)Tj
-27.753 -2.125 Td
(On January 11, 2005, Stevens appealed the Navy's decision to our Office.\
)Tj
29.7 0 Td
(In its appeal, Stevens asserted that it was due)Tj
-29.7 -1.125 Td
(a $677.77 refund for items that were)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
14.829 0 Td
(part of a compromise settlement offered by the Navy on February 19, 2002\
, and)Tj
ET
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
12 0 0 12 16 39.75 Tm
(that it contends Stevens accepted on March 4, 2002. )Tj
21.078 0 Td
(Stevens further asserted)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
9.802 0 Td
(that it was due refunds for a sewing)Tj
ET
EMC
Q
endstream
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
(|a\)\n}nS\)!n)
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
37 0 obj
<>
endobj
38 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
CI5v!0r t1NzOJ3$#!;cY&a4
̲
0`@^;ͤ|ſZ/Lniv(B&9ag;^`-`!*W_UIspLeYJzik;LbڦsN|.d[1ɷB G)3R3i|ANSȊYkfM|b>!"c@Ιs#993挘ssUy]+M3⊹"fE>̌
)4irM&4;hr쀁{ _|ܟWK3EK̢O
0 +I
endstream
endobj
39 0 obj
<>stream
H|TT}lX\b!.{Ll%/1A,(#*{+QDTlˌ`wXw@JZOgoob#5j#GB¢B-/Z@c}ؐ͋NmaDtϨFcSݞ}G軀G!Տk:T_da$N@gaJ@