JULY 27, 1922, 2 COMP. GEN. 64

JULY 27, 1922, 2 COMP. GEN. 64

DELAY IN COMPLETION OF INFORMAL CONTRACTS DELAYS IN COMPLETION OF INFORMAL CONTRACTS OF THE QUARTERMASTER GENERAL, OR THE QUARTERMASTER CORPS, INVOLVING LESS THAN $500, OR IN DELIVERY THEREUNDER, DO NOT NECESSITATE A CERTIFICATE AS TO THE MONEY DAMAGE RESULTING FROM SUCH DELAY, BUT THERE SHOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE VOUCHER A STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND REASON FOR ACCEPTANCE, NOTWITHSTANDING THE DELAY AND HOW THE NEED AT THE TIME WAS MET. (SEE 2 COMP. GEN., 385.)

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE SECRETARY OF WAR, JULY 27, 1922.

I HAVE YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 3, 1922, REQUESTING DECISION WHETHER WHERE FORMAL CONTRACTS ARE NOT REQUIRED AND PURCHASE ORDERS ARE GIVEN FOR SUPPLIES OR SERVICES WHICH ARE NOT COMPLETED WITHIN A SPECIFIED TIME LIMIT THERE MUST BE FURNISHED A CERTIFICATE OF NO DAMAGE BY REASON OF DELAY IN COMPLETION.

I UNDERSTAND, FROM THE CORRESPONDENCE SUBMITTED IN CONNECTION WITH THE REQUEST FOR DECISION, THAT IT RELATES TO CASES INVOLVING LESS THAN $500 PROCUREMENTS.

THE ACT OF MARCH 4, 1915, 38 STAT., 1078, REQUIRES THAT WHENEVER CONTRACTS ARE MADE BY THE QUARTERMASTER GENERAL OR THE QUARTERMASTER CORPS WHICH ARE NOT TO BE PERFORMED WITHIN 60 DAYS AND ARE IN EXCESS OF $500 IN AMOUNT "SUCH CONTRACTS SHALL BE REDUCED TO WRITING AND SIGNED BY THE CONTRACTING PARTIES.'

THE AFFIRMATIVE DIRECTION OF THE ENACTMENT THAT CONTRACTS SHALL BE REDUCED TO WRITING WHERE THEY ARE ABOVE THE PERIOD OF 60 DAYS FOR PERFORMANCE OR IN EXCESS OF THE SPECIFIED AMOUNT OF $500, HAS BEEN CONSTRUED AS AN AUTHORITY FOR PROCUREMENTS IN LESSER PERIODS OR INVOLVING LESSER AMOUNTS NOT TO BE IN WRITING. THE INTENT OF THE ENACTMENT, AS THUS CONSTRUED, BEING THAT THE FORMALITY OF WRITTEN CONTRACTS WAS NOT REQUIRED, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT IF ALL THE CONDITIONS AND TERMS ATTENDING WRITTEN CONTRACTS WERE TO BE ATTACHED TO PROCUREMENTS OF LESS THAN $500 PRACTICALLY THE SAME ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONS WOULD RESULT AS IF THE CONTRACTS WERE WRITTEN, AND IT WOULD BE LESS COMPLICATED AND MORE PRACTICAL ADMINISTRATIVELY TO HAVE THEM WRITTEN. WHILE THIS OFFICE BELIEVES THAT A WRITTEN SHOWING OF AN AGREEMENT IS DESIRED IN ALL CASES, YET THE PRACTICABILITY OF THE SITUATION APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN DETERMINED BY THE ENACTMENT.

IF A FORMAL CONTRACT IS NOT MADE BECAUSE OF THE TIME WITHIN WHICH THE PURCHASE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE COMPLETED OR DELIVERED, THEN IF IT IS NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THAT TIME IT IS A QUESTION WHETHER THE PROPER ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION SHOULD NOT BE TO TERMINATE ITS ARRANGEMENT AND PROCURE ELSEWHERE RATHER THAN TO ALLOW THE TIME TO RUN INDEFINITELY. IS THIS CONDITION OF ALLOWING COMPLETION AFTERWARDS THAT RAISES QUESTIONS GOING EVEN TO WHETHER THERE WAS REAL JUSTIFICATION IN THE FIRST INSTANCE FOR MAKING THE PURCHASE AS MADE, BUT CONSIDERING THE MATTER WHOLLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE AMOUNT INVOLVED, TO WIT, LESS THAN $500, IT DOES NOT SEEM POSSIBLE THAT SUCH AN EXPENDITURE WOULD INVOLVE ANY SUCH QUESTION OF DAMAGE BY REASON OF FAILURE TO COMPLETE WITHIN A SPECIFIED TIME AS TO BE EITHER MATERIAL OR ENFORCEABLE WITHOUT AN EXPRESSED STIPULATION THEREON.

I ACCORDINGLY CONCLUDE THAT WITH RESPECT TO INFORMAL PROCUREMENTS INVOLVING LESS THAN $500, NO CERTIFICATION AS TO A MONEY DAMAGE IS REQUIRED IF COMPLETION OR DELIVERY BE NOT WITHIN THE TIME THAT MAY HAVE BEEN STIPULATED, BUT A PROPER RECORD REQUIRES THAT THERE BE ATTACHED TO THE VOUCHER A STATEMENT OF THE FACTS OF THE DELAY AND THE REASON FOR ACCEPTANCE NOTWITHSTANDING THE TIME STIPULATION AND HOW THE NEED AT THAT TIME WAS MET.