B-117556, SEP. 14, 1956
Highlights
TO NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR ATTORNEY'S LETTER OF AUGUST 22. SINCE WE HAVE NO FACILITIES OR PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING DISPUTED QUESTIONS OF FACT. " WHEREAS IT WAS STATED IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 3. THAT "IT IS REPORTED THAT FURTHER INVESTIGATION REVEALS THAT NO PART OF THE OVERRUN IN EXCAVATION WAS DUE TO ANY REVISION OF SLOPES IN THE PARKING AREA. USED AS A BASIS FOR RECEIVING BIDS" AND HIS CONTENTION AS TO THE ALLEGED UNDUE DELAY IN AWARDING THE COMPLETION CONTRACT WERE COVERED IN OUR LETTER OF JUNE 6. HIS CONTENTION AS TO ALLEGED EXCESSIVE COST OF ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION WAS COVERED AS COMPLETELY AS AVAILABLE INFORMATION WOULD PERMIT IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 3.
B-117556, SEP. 14, 1956
TO NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR ATTORNEY'S LETTER OF AUGUST 22, 1956, RELATIVE TO YOUR INDEBTEDNESS TO THE UNITED STATES ARISING FROM THE DEFAULT OF SUPERIOR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY UNDER CONTRACT NO. I2R-18869.
THIS OFFICE, OF COURSE, HAS NO FIRST-HAND INFORMATION RELATIVE TO THE FACTS OF THE MATTER, BUT MUST RELY UPON THE RECORDS AND STATEMENTS OF THE OFFICIALS CHARGED WITH ADMINISTRATION OF THE CONTRACT. SINCE WE HAVE NO FACILITIES OR PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING DISPUTED QUESTIONS OF FACT, WE FOLLOW THE ESTABLISHED RULE OF THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT TO ACCEPT THE REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS ON SUCH QUESTIONS IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE CLEARLY SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE PRESUMPTION OF THE CORRECTNESS THEREOF. 31 COMP. GEN. 288.
WITH RESPECT TO THE INCONSISTENCY REFERRED TO BY YOUR ATTORNEY, IN THAT OUR LETTER OF JUNE 6, 1955, CONTAINED A STATEMENT, IN SUBSTANCE, THAT ADJUSTMENTS OF GRADES IN THE PARKING AREA RESULTED IN "A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE VOLUME OF EXCAVATION," WHEREAS IT WAS STATED IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 3, 1956, THAT "IT IS REPORTED THAT FURTHER INVESTIGATION REVEALS THAT NO PART OF THE OVERRUN IN EXCAVATION WAS DUE TO ANY REVISION OF SLOPES IN THE PARKING AREA," IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE USE OF THE WORDS "FURTHER INVESTIGATION REVEALS" CONSTITUTES A COMPLETE EXPLANATION.
YOUR ATTORNEY'S CONTENTION AS TO THE ALLEGED UNDERESTIMATION OF THE "QUANTITY OF EXCAVATION, ETC., USED AS A BASIS FOR RECEIVING BIDS" AND HIS CONTENTION AS TO THE ALLEGED UNDUE DELAY IN AWARDING THE COMPLETION CONTRACT WERE COVERED IN OUR LETTER OF JUNE 6, 1955, INSOFAR AS THE INFORMATION HERE AVAILABLE PERMITS. LIKEWISE, HIS CONTENTION AS TO ALLEGED EXCESSIVE COST OF ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION WAS COVERED AS COMPLETELY AS AVAILABLE INFORMATION WOULD PERMIT IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 3, 1956.
FOR THE REASONS INDICATED, THERE APPEARS TO BE NO BASIS FOR FURTHER DELAYING THE REFERENCE OF THIS MATTER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, SUCH REFERENCE WILL BE MADE AS PROMPTLY AS PRACTICABLE.