B-122644, OCT. 4, 1955

B-122644, OCT. 4, 1955

TO OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 7, 1955, REQUESTING FURTHER REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT DATED APRIL 12, 1955, WHICH DISALLOWED $356.67 OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $668.67 COVERING SERVICES RENDERED UNDER CONTRACT NO. V6008P-181, DATED JUNE 26, 1953 (YOUR INVOICES MY-15577 AND MY-15558). YOU STATE THAT YOUR BID WAS BASED ON YOUR INTERPRETATION THAT UNDER THE PAYMENT PROVISIONS OF THE PROPOSAL YOU WOULD BE REIMBURSED FOR ALL TRAVEL EXPENSES, INCLUDING THE HOURLY RATE SPECIFIED FOR MECHANICS, WHILE YOUR EMPLOYEE OR EMPLOYEES WERE IN A TRAVEL STATUS. ALSO, YOU CONTEND THAT THE WORK COVERED BY YOUR INVOICE NO. MY-15577 SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN EMERGENCY CALL BACK BUT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ANTICIPATED REPAIR WORK EXCLUDED UNDER THE TERMS OF SCHEDULE "B.'

PARAGRAPH 10 OF THE CONDITIONS MADE A PART OF THE CONTRACT SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED THAT IN THE EVENT ANY SPECIAL SERVICES WERE RENDERED, OTHER THAN REGULAR INSPECTION SERVICES,"THE GOVERNMENT WILL PAY FOR THE MECHANIC'S TRAVELLING EXPENSE * * * AND THE CONTRACTOR WILL BEAR ALL COSTS ENTAILED WHILE THE MECHANIC IS ON THE PREMISES.' CLEARLY, THAT PROVISION MEANS THAT THE GOVERNMENT AGREES TO PAY ALL NORMAL EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE MECHANIC IN TRAVELING TO AND FROM THE VETERANS FACILITY IN HOT SPRINGS, SOUTH DAKOTA, AND THAT SUCH EMPLOYEE'S EXPENSES WHILE AT THE SITE WOULD BE BORNE BY YOU. WAGES PAID TO AN EMPLOYEE WHILE TRAVELING, APPARENTLY, IS AN OBLIGATION YOU INCURRED UNDER AN AGREEMENT WITH YOUR EMPLOYEES, AND HAS NO RELATION TO THE TRAVELING EXPENSES OF SAID EMPLOYEES FOR WHICH THE GOVERNMENT AGREED TO PAY YOU ON A REIMBURSABLE BASIS.

THE INSTANT CONTRACT IS CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS AND, AS WAS STATED IN OUR DECISION OF JUNE 27, 1955, B-122744, IT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN HOURLY RATE FOR THE TIME YOUR MECHANIC WAS TRAVELING TO AND FROM THE WORK SITE. THAT WAS THE EXPRESS UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AT THE TIME THE CONTRACT WAS EXECUTED. IF IT WAS YOUR INTENTION TO INCLUDE THE SPECIFIED WAGE RATES AS A PART OF SUCH EXPENSES, THE BID SHOULD HAVE SO STIPULATED. THE FACT THAT THOSE CHARGES WERE MADE A PART OF SUBSEQUENT CONTRACTS, AS YOU SUGGEST, HAS NO LEGAL EFFECT IN THE DETERMINATION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A PROPER CHARGE UNDER THE INSTANT CONTRACT. IN REGARD TO YOUR ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING THE WORK COVERED BY YOUR INVOICE NO. MY-15577, THE SERVICES, WHILE NOT OF AN EMERGENCY NATURE, WERE IN LINE WITH THOSE COVERED BY THE CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS UNDER SCHEDULE ,A.' PAYMENT FOR THE FINAL AMOUNT FOUND TO BE DUE WAS MADE UNDER DATE OF JULY 27, 1955, PURSUANT TO THE REFERRED-TO DECISION OF JUNE 27, 1955.

UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT THE ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN MUST BE AFFIRMED.