A-9420, FEBRUARY 11, 1926, 5 COMP. GEN. 612
Highlights
IS NOT SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY TO WAIVE THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE ACT OF JULY 16. PAYMENT WILL NOT BE AUTHORIZED FOR ANY SUCH EXPENSES HEREAFTER INCURRED IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE ACT OF JULY 16. 1926: RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED OF YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 23. FOR REPAIRS TO PASSENGER-CARRYING AUTOMOBILES ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN USED IN CONNECTION WITH STAR ROUTES OPERATED DIRECTLY BY THE POSTAL SERVICE IN THE VICINITY OF WASHINGTON. SHOWING THAT PROPOSALS WERE INVITED FOR THE STAR-ROUTE SERVICE IN QUESTION. THAT THE BIDS RECEIVED WERE CONSIDERED EXORBITANT. THAT THE SERVICE WAS ACCORDINGLY FURNISHED DIRECTLY BY THE POSTAL SERVICE AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 7 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18. WHICH PROVIDES: THAT WHENEVER IN THE JUDGMENT OF THE POSTMASTER GENERAL THE BIDS RECEIVED FOR ANY STAR ROUTE ARE EXORBITANT OR UNREASONABLE.
A-9420, FEBRUARY 11, 1926, 5 COMP. GEN. 612
VEHICLES, PASSENGER-CARRYING - STAR ROUTE SERVICE THE RECEIPT OF EXORBITANT BIDS ON PROPOSALS FOR STAR ROUTE SERVICE, WHILE AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1916, 39 STAT. 161, FOR THE POSTMASTER GENERAL TO FURNISH SUCH SERVICE BY SUCH MEANS AS HE MIGHT DEEM EXPEDIENT, IS NOT SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY TO WAIVE THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE ACT OF JULY 16, 1914, 38 STAT. 508, ON THE PURCHASE, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATION OF PASSENGER-CARRYING VEHICLES WHEN NOT REQUIRED TO FURNISH SERVICE ON STAR ROUTES. CLAIMS ARISING UNDER PAST ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION AS TO THE SCOPE OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1916, MAY, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT, BE ALLOWED, BUT PAYMENT WILL NOT BE AUTHORIZED FOR ANY SUCH EXPENSES HEREAFTER INCURRED IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE ACT OF JULY 16, 1914, OR ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW APPLICABLE TO SUCH EXPENDITURES.
COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE POSTMASTER GENERAL, FEBRUARY 11, 1926:
RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED OF YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 23, 1925, AGAIN REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF THE DECISIONS OF THIS OFFICE OF MAY 19, JUNE 23, OCTOBER 15, AND DECEMBER 19, 1925, ALL OF WHICH CONSIDERED AND SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE CLAIMS OF THE AUTO MART AND THE COMMERCIAL AUTO AND SUPPLY CO. (INC.) IN THE AMOUNTS OF $543.48 AND $372.65, RESPECTIVELY, FOR REPAIRS TO PASSENGER-CARRYING AUTOMOBILES ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN USED IN CONNECTION WITH STAR ROUTES OPERATED DIRECTLY BY THE POSTAL SERVICE IN THE VICINITY OF WASHINGTON, D.C.
YOU NOW SUBMIT EVIDENCE, NOT PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED TO THIS OFFICE, SHOWING THAT PROPOSALS WERE INVITED FOR THE STAR-ROUTE SERVICE IN QUESTION, THAT THE BIDS RECEIVED WERE CONSIDERED EXORBITANT, AND THAT THE SERVICE WAS ACCORDINGLY FURNISHED DIRECTLY BY THE POSTAL SERVICE AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 7 OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1916, 39 STAT. 161, WHICH PROVIDES:
THAT WHENEVER IN THE JUDGMENT OF THE POSTMASTER GENERAL THE BIDS RECEIVED FOR ANY STAR ROUTE ARE EXORBITANT OR UNREASONABLE, OR WHENEVER HE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE THAT A COMBINATION OF BIDDERS HAS BEEN ENTERED INTO TO FIX THE RATE FOR STAR-ROUTE SERVICE, THE POSTMASTER GENERAL BE, AND HE IS HEREBY, AUTHORIZED, OUT OF THE APPROPRIATION FOR INLAND TRANSPORTATION BY STAR ROUTES, TO EMPLOY AND USE SUCH MEANS OR METHODS TO PROVIDE THE DESIRED SERVICE AS HE MAY DEEM EXPEDIENT, WITHOUT REFERENCE TO EXISTING LAW OR LAWS RESPECTING THE EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONAL SERVICE OR THE PROCUREMENT OF CONVEYANCES, MATERIALS, OR SUPPLIES.
UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES NOW APPEARING THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1916, SUPRA, AUTHORIZED FURNISHING THE SERVICE BY SUCH MEANS AS YOU MIGHT DEEM EXPEDIENT. IT IS NOTED, HOWEVER, THAT THE ACTUAL SERVICE ON THESE ROUTES WAS FURNISHED BY TRUCKS OPERATING FROM POINT TO POINT, NO BOX DELIVERY OR COLLECTION SERVICE BEING INVOLVED. THE REPAIRS HERE INVOLVED WERE MADE NOT TO THE TRUCKS USED IN THE OPERATION OF THE ROUTES, BUT TO PASSENGER- CARRYING VEHICLES OF THE FOLLOWING MAKES: STUDEBAKER, STEARNS-KNIGHT, DODGE, LINCOLN, CHEVROLET, AND FORD SEDAN. THE FOURTH ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL HAS STATED THAT THESE AUTOMOBILES WERE USED FOR SUPERVISING AND INSPECTION PURPOSES. THE NECESSITY FOR THE USE OF SO MANY AUTOMOBILES IN SUPERVISING AND INSPECTING TWO OR THREE MINOR ROUTES WITHIN A RADIUS OF 100 MILES FROM WASHINGTON IS NOT APPARENT. NEITHER IS IT APPARENT WHY A GOVERNMENT OPERATED ROUTE INVOLVING NOTHING MORE THAN THE CARRYING OF THE MAILS BETWEEN DESIGNATED POINTS SHOULD REQUIRE ANY MORE INSPECTING OR SUPERVISING THAN A ROUTE OPERATED UNDER CONTRACT. FURTHERMORE, THE EXPENSE OF INSPECTING AND SUPERVISING IS NOT AN EXPENSE OF FURNISHING SERVICE WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1916, SUPRA.
NO FURTHER OBJECTION WILL BE MADE TO SUCH EXPENSES OF SUPERVISION AND INSPECTION HERETOFORE INCURRED UNDER THE ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION AS TO THE SCOPE OF THE ACT OF MAY 18, 1916, IF OTHERWISE LEGAL AND PROPER. BUT PAYMENT WILL NOT BE AUTHORIZED FOR ANY SUCH EXPENSES HEREAFTER INCURRED IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE ACT OF JULY 16, 1914, 38 STAT. 508, OR ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW APPLICABLE TO SUCH EXPENDITURES.
THE CLAIMS OF THE AUTO MART FOR $543.48 AND THE COMMERCIAL AUTO AND SUPPLY CO. (INC.) FOR $372.65 WILL NOW BE ALLOWED.