B-136081, MAY 20, 1958

B-136081: May 20, 1958

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

W. TODD ENGINEERING AND SUPPLY COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 18. STATING THAT THERE WERE NO COMMERCIAL FACILITIES LOCALLY FOR DOING THE WORK AND THAT YOU MADE AN ADVANCE IN THE SUM OF $374.43 TO COVER THE COST OF DIP-GALVANIZING MATERIAL WEIGHING 5. UPON RECEIPT OF THE TOWERS AT THE SHIPYARD IT WAS FOUND THAT THEY WERE TOO LARGE TO BE PLACED IN THE GALVANIZING TANK. YOU WERE SO ADVISED BY TELEPHONE AND TOLD THAT THE TOWERS COULD BE SPRAY-GALVANIZED BUT THAT THIS METHOD WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTORY AS THE HOT DIP METHOD AND THAT THERE WAS NO ASSURANCE THAT RUST WOULD NOT EVENTUALLY DEVELOP. THE TOWERS WERE SPRAY-GALVANIZED IN A NORMAL MANNER. FIRST BEING SANDBLASTED TO REMOVE ANY RUST WHICH MIGHT BE PRESENT AND IT WAS NOT UNTIL MAY 23.

B-136081, MAY 20, 1958

TO N. W. TODD ENGINEERING AND SUPPLY COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 18, 1958, AND TO PRIOR CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THE BALANCE DUE THE UNITED STATES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,060 FOR GALVANIZING SERVICES RENDERED YOUR COMPANY UNDER SPECIAL DEPOSIT ACCOUNT NO. 59-348.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU REQUESTED THE NAVAL SHIPYARD AT CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, TO GALVANIZE FOR YOU TWO SIREN TOWERS, STATING THAT THERE WERE NO COMMERCIAL FACILITIES LOCALLY FOR DOING THE WORK AND THAT YOU MADE AN ADVANCE IN THE SUM OF $374.43 TO COVER THE COST OF DIP-GALVANIZING MATERIAL WEIGHING 5,349 POUNDS. UPON RECEIPT OF THE TOWERS AT THE SHIPYARD IT WAS FOUND THAT THEY WERE TOO LARGE TO BE PLACED IN THE GALVANIZING TANK. YOU WERE SO ADVISED BY TELEPHONE AND TOLD THAT THE TOWERS COULD BE SPRAY-GALVANIZED BUT THAT THIS METHOD WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTORY AS THE HOT DIP METHOD AND THAT THERE WAS NO ASSURANCE THAT RUST WOULD NOT EVENTUALLY DEVELOP. YOU, NEVERTHELESS, REQUESTED THE SHIPYARD TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK. THE TOWERS WERE SPRAY-GALVANIZED IN A NORMAL MANNER, FIRST BEING SANDBLASTED TO REMOVE ANY RUST WHICH MIGHT BE PRESENT AND IT WAS NOT UNTIL MAY 23, 1957, AFTER ADDITIONAL GALVANIZING HAD BEEN DONE FOR YOU THAT THE MATTER OF DEFECTIVE WORK AROSE.

IN YOUR LETTER YOU CATEGORICALLY DENY THE GOVERNMENT'S STATEMENTS THAT YOU WERE INFORMED THAT THE SPRAY METHOD OF GALVANIZING WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTORY AS THE DIP METHOD AND THAT THERE WAS NO ASSURANCE THAT RUST WOULD NOT EVENTUALLY FORM. ALSO, YOU IMPLY THAT THE GALVANIZING PERFORMED AT THE NAVY YARD DID NOT MEET THE STANDARD COMMERCIAL QUALITY OF WORKMANSHIP EXPECTED FROM CIVILIAN CONCERNS.

WITH RESPECT TO YOUR ALLEGATIONS AND THE CONTENTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT, OUR OFFICE HAS NO FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS AND NECESSARILY MUST RELY ON THE REPORT OF THE SHIPYARD RELATIVE TO THE CLAIM. THAT REPORT IS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE TOWERS WERE SPRAY GALVANIZED IN A NORMAL MANNER, AFTER THE RUST HAD BEEN REMOVED BY SAND BLASTING. IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE LEGALLY SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE CORRECTNESS OF SUCH REPORT, IT IS THE INVARIABLE RULE OF THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT TO ACCEPT THE STATEMENT OF FACT AS REPORTED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS AND IT MUST BE HELD THAT THE WORK DONE BY THE SHIPYARD WAS DONE PROPERLY.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING OUR OFFICE HAS NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO AGAIN REQUEST YOU TO PAY THE BALANCE OF $1,060 DUE THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED YOUR COMPANY.