B-138650, OCT. 19, 1964
Highlights
THERE WAS FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE A LETTER DATED JUNE 4. WE AUTHORIZED REFUNDS TO BE MADE ON THOSE VOUCHERS TO A LIMITED EXTEND BASED UPON A CONCLUSION THAT 79.2 PERCENT OF THE COSTS OF OPERATING THE COMPANY'S ADVERTISING DEPARTMENT WERE NOT ALLOCABLE TO GOVERNMENT COST-PLUS-A FIXED-FEE CONTRACTS. WHEREAS OUR EXCEPTIONS WERE BASED UPON A DETERMINATION THAT ABOUT 98 PERCENT OF THOSE COSTS WERE NOT ALLOCABLE TO SUCH CONTRACTS. IN OUR REVIEW OF THE 24 RECLAIM VOUCHERS WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT THE RECLAIMS ARE ALLOWABLE WITH CERTAIN MINOR EXCEPTIONS. APPARENTLY NO REFUND IS DUE UNDER CONTRACT NO. NONR 936 (00) IS $4.03 INSTEAD OF $15.51 WHICH DOUGLAS CLAIMED ON RECLAIM VOUCHER NO. THE APPARENT DISCREPANCIES TOTALING THE SUM OF $13.39 HAVE REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT DOUGLAS CLAIMED REFUNDS OF A $70 COLLECTION AND A $2.49 VOUCHER DEDUCTION WHICH WERE APPLIED BY G.
B-138650, OCT. 19, 1964
TO COMMANDING OFFICER, NAVY REGIONAL FINANCE CENTER:
BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 11, 1964, FROM THE DEPUTY AUDITOR GENERAL OF THE NAVY, THERE WAS FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE A LETTER DATED JUNE 4, 1964, FROM YOUR OFFICE, REQUESTING AN ADVANCE DECISION AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF PAYMENT ON 24 RECLAIM VOUCHERS UNDER NAVY COST-PLUS-A FIXED- FEE CONTRACTS WITH DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANY, INCORPORATED, STATED AS COVERING CLAIMS FOR PARTIAL RECOVERIES OF GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE FORMAL EXCEPTIONS.
IN 1958 DOUGLAS SUBMITTED RECLAIMS FOR AMOUNTS RECOVERED PURSUANT TO OUR FORMAL NOTICES OF EXCEPTION INVOLVING TWO AIR FORCE CONTRACTS, WHICH EXCEPTIONS RELATED TO APPARENTLY EXCESS REIMBURSEMENTS FOR ADVERTISING COSTS CHARGED TO THOSE CONTRACTS IN CONNECTION WITH OVERHEAD COST ALLOCATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEARS 1953, 1954, 1955 AND 1956. BY DECISION OF OCTOBER 19, 1959, B-138650, WE AUTHORIZED REFUNDS TO BE MADE ON THOSE VOUCHERS TO A LIMITED EXTEND BASED UPON A CONCLUSION THAT 79.2 PERCENT OF THE COSTS OF OPERATING THE COMPANY'S ADVERTISING DEPARTMENT WERE NOT ALLOCABLE TO GOVERNMENT COST-PLUS-A FIXED-FEE CONTRACTS, WHEREAS OUR EXCEPTIONS WERE BASED UPON A DETERMINATION THAT ABOUT 98 PERCENT OF THOSE COSTS WERE NOT ALLOCABLE TO SUCH CONTRACTS.
THE SAME FORMULA HAS BEEN APPLIED BY DOUGLAS IN THE COMPUTATION OF ITS RECLAIMS INVOLVING EXCEPTIONS TAKEN TO ADVERTISING COST REIMBURSEMENTS MADE UNDER THE NAVY COST-PLUS-A-FIXED-FEE CONTRACTS. IN OUR REVIEW OF THE 24 RECLAIM VOUCHERS WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT THE RECLAIMS ARE ALLOWABLE WITH CERTAIN MINOR EXCEPTIONS.
APPARENTLY NO REFUND IS DUE UNDER CONTRACT NO. NOA (S) 54-185, AS TO WHICH DOUGLAS CLAIMED THE AMOUNT OF $1.91 ON RECLAIM VOUCHER NO. R 26. ALSO, IT APPEARS THAT THE REFUND DUE UNDER CONTRACT NO. NONR 936 (00) IS $4.03 INSTEAD OF $15.51 WHICH DOUGLAS CLAIMED ON RECLAIM VOUCHER NO. R- 151. THE APPARENT DISCREPANCIES TOTALING THE SUM OF $13.39 HAVE REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT DOUGLAS CLAIMED REFUNDS OF A $70 COLLECTION AND A $2.49 VOUCHER DEDUCTION WHICH WERE APPLIED BY G. A. CAVINS, NAVY DISBURSING OFFICER, SYMBOL 5235, AGAINST OUR NOTICE OF EXCEPTION NO. 800006 DATED AUGUST 26, 1957. THAT NOTICE OF EXCEPTION DID NOT, HOWEVER, MENTION CONTRACTS NOS. NOA (S) 54-185 AND NONR 936 (00), AND THE COLLECTIONS WERE APPLIED TO OUR NOTICES OF EXCEPTION UNDER OTHER NAVY CONTRACTS.
ACCORDINGLY, THE 24 RECLAIM VOUCHERS PROPOSING PAYMENTS OF AMOUNTS TOTALING THE SUM OF $5,404.92 ARE RETURNED HEREWITH, TOGETHER WITH THEIR ACCOMPANYING PAPERS, AND YOU ARE ADVISED THAT NO PAYMENT SHOULD BE MADE ON RECLAIM VOUCHER NO. R-26, BUT THAT PAYMENT ON THE REMAINING 23 VOUCHERS IS AUTHORIZED IN THE NET TOTAL AMOUNT OF $5,391.53, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.