B-155525, JUN. 28, 1968
Highlights
TO NORTHEAST SERVICE CORPORATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 14. IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT PEASE AIR FORCE BASE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF ALL MATERIAL WHICH YOU ALLEGE WAS LEFT ON THE BASE AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF YOUR CONTRACT FOR TOWEL SERVICE. THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO A SETTLEMENT OF YOUR CLAIM FOR THE FULL AMOUNT CLAIMED. YOU HAVE FURNISHED NO NEW EVIDENCE OR ANY LEGAL BASIS FOR ANY FURTHER ACTION. UNDER THE LAW IT IS INCUMBENT UPON YOU TO FURNISH EVIDENCE SATISFACTORILY ESTABLISHING YOUR CLAIM. THIS YOU HAVE FAILED TO DO. A CAREFUL REVIEW OF THE EXISTING RECORD FAILS TO SHOW ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR MODIFYING OUR PREVIOUS CONCLUSION THAT YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY AMOUNT IN ADDITION TO THE $115.06 ALLOWED ON DECEMBER 6.
B-155525, JUN. 28, 1968
TO NORTHEAST SERVICE CORPORATION:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 14, 1968, PROTESTING AGAINST OUR DECISION OF MAY 15, 1967, WHICH SUSTAINED THE PREVIOUS DISPOSITION OF YOUR CLAIM BY OUR DECISION OF DECEMBER 6, 1966.
IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT PEASE AIR FORCE BASE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF ALL MATERIAL WHICH YOU ALLEGE WAS LEFT ON THE BASE AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF YOUR CONTRACT FOR TOWEL SERVICE, AND THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO A SETTLEMENT OF YOUR CLAIM FOR THE FULL AMOUNT CLAIMED. HOWEVER, YOU HAVE FURNISHED NO NEW EVIDENCE OR ANY LEGAL BASIS FOR ANY FURTHER ACTION. UNDER THE LAW IT IS INCUMBENT UPON YOU TO FURNISH EVIDENCE SATISFACTORILY ESTABLISHING YOUR CLAIM. THIS YOU HAVE FAILED TO DO, AND A CAREFUL REVIEW OF THE EXISTING RECORD FAILS TO SHOW ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR MODIFYING OUR PREVIOUS CONCLUSION THAT YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANY AMOUNT IN ADDITION TO THE $115.06 ALLOWED ON DECEMBER 6, 1966.
ACCORDINGLY, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN OUR DECISION OF MAY 15, 1967.