[Protest of NAVFAC Rejection of Bid for Natural Gas Conversion]
Highlights
A firm protested the Navy's rejection of its bid for natural gas conversion, contending that the Navy improperly rejected its bid because it failed to acknowledge a solicitation amendment extending the contract performance period. GAO held that the Navy announced it would take corrective action to grant the relief requested, rendering the protest academic. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.
B-157753, FEB. 9, 1970
CIVIL PAY--SEVERANCE PAY DECISION TO CHAIRMAN, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION CONCERNING ENTITLEMENT TO SEVERANCE PAY WHERE EMPLOYEE DOES NOT MOVE WITH AGENCY. AN EMPLOYEE WHO, AFTER ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER TO TRANSFER WITH HIS FUNCTION TO ACTIVITY OUTSIDE COMMUTING AREA, IS DIRECTED TO REMAIN AT LOSING ACTIVITY FOR PERIOD OF SEVERAL WEEKS TO TWO OR MORE MONTHS AFTER WHICH HE DECIDES NOT TO TRANSFER THE EMPLOYEE MAY BE REGARDED AS HAVING FAILED TO ACCEPT ASSIGNMENT UNDER SECTION 550.705, FPM FOR ENTITLEMENT TO SEVERANCE PAY.
TO MR. HAMPTON:
YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 7, 1969, POINTS OUT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED BY A DEPARTMENT FOR CONCURRENCE IN ITS OPINION THAT AN OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEE WILL NOT BE DENIED SEVERANCE PAY UNDER THE FOLLOWING CIRCUMSTANCES:
"A. THE EMPLOYEE ACCEPTS AN OFFER TO TRANSFER WITH HIS FUNCTION TO AN ACTIVITY OUTSIDE THE COMMUTING AREA OF THE LOSING ACTIVITY. WHEN THE FUNCTIONS TRANSFERRED TO THE GAINING ACTIVITY, SOME WORK REMAINS TO BE PERFORMED AT THE LOSING ACTIVITY. THE EMPLOYEE IS DIRECTED TO REMAIN PHYSICALLY AT THE LOSING ACTIVITY BUT IS ADMINISTRATIVELY PLACED ON THE ROLLS OF THE GAINING ACTIVITY.
"B. AFTER A PERIOD, WHICH IN SOME CASES MAY RANGE FROM SEVERAL WEEKS TO POSSIBLY TWO OR MORE MONTHS, THE EMPLOYEE DECIDES THAT HE WILL NOT MOVE TO THE GAINING ACTIVITY."
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE GAINING ACTIVITY AS WELL AS THE LOSING ACTIVITY ARE IN THE SAME DEPARTMENT (NAVY). ALSO, IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THE NAVY HAS SUFFERED ANY FINANCIAL DETRIMENT RESULTING FROM THE EMPLOYEE'S FAILURE TO ABIDE BY HIS ORIGINAL CONSENT TO TRANSFER TO THE NEW LOCATION.
WE NOTE THE DEPARTMENT CONCLUDES THAT ELIGIBILITY EXISTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMMISSION'S SEVERANCE PAY REGULATIONS SECTION 550.705, FPM SUPP. 990-1, BECAUSE THE EMPLOYEE DID NOT REPORT FOR DUTY AT THE GAINING ACTIVITY. THAT SECTION READS AS FOLLOWS:
"FAILURE TO ACCEPT ASSIGNMENT. WHEN AN EMPLOYEE IS SEPARATED BECAUSE HE DECLINES TO ACCEPT ASSIGNMENT TO ANOTHER COMMUTING AREA AND THE PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT IS THE RESULT OF, OR IN CONNECTION WITH, A TRANSFER OF FUNCTION OR A REDUCTION-IN-FORCE SITUATION, THE SEPARATION IS AN INVOLUNTARY SEPARATION NOT BY REMOVAL FOR CAUSE ON CHARGES OF MISCONDUCT, DELINQUENCY, OR INEFFICIENCY FOR PURPOSES OF ENTITLEMENT TO SEVERANCE PAY."
UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, AS OUTLINED ABOVE, WE SEE NO OBJECTION TO THE ALLOWANCE OF SEVERANCE PAY AS PROPOSED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE.