B-126597, JAN. 30, 1956
Highlights
SMITH AND SON: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 6. ORDINARILY OUR OFFICE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO INTERVENE IN MATTERS INVOLVING DISPUTES OR CLAIMS BETWEEN GOVERNMENT PRIME CONTRACTORS AND THEIR SUPPLIERS OR SUBCONTRACTORS. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT SUBCONTRACTS OR AGREEMENTS TO FURNISH SUPPLIES TO PRIME CONTRACTORS ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTS WITH THE GOVERNMENT GENERALLY DO NOT RESULT IN PRIVITY OF CONTRACT BETWEEN THE SUBCONTRACTORS AND MATERIALMEN AND THE UNITED STATES. YOU HAVE FURNISHED NO FACTS TO INDICATE THAT THE GENERAL RULE IS NOT FOR APPLICATION HERE.
B-126597, JAN. 30, 1956
TO HAROLD S. SMITH AND SON:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 6, 1956, PROTESTING AGAINST THE NON-PAYMENT OF MONEYS ALLEGEDLY DUE YOU FOR MATERIALS FURNISHED THE CITY ELECTRIC OF ANCHORAGE, INC., THE PRIME CONTRACTOR WITH THE GOVERNMENT UNDER CONTRACT NO. DA-95-507-ENG-706 DATED JULY 30, 1954.
ORDINARILY OUR OFFICE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO INTERVENE IN MATTERS INVOLVING DISPUTES OR CLAIMS BETWEEN GOVERNMENT PRIME CONTRACTORS AND THEIR SUPPLIERS OR SUBCONTRACTORS. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT SUBCONTRACTS OR AGREEMENTS TO FURNISH SUPPLIES TO PRIME CONTRACTORS ENGAGED IN THE PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTS WITH THE GOVERNMENT GENERALLY DO NOT RESULT IN PRIVITY OF CONTRACT BETWEEN THE SUBCONTRACTORS AND MATERIALMEN AND THE UNITED STATES. YOU HAVE FURNISHED NO FACTS TO INDICATE THAT THE GENERAL RULE IS NOT FOR APPLICATION HERE. SEE KELLOGG V. UNITED STATES, 7 WALL. 361; UNITED STATES V. DRISCOLL, 96 U.S. 421; JOSEPH PETRIN, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES, 90 C.CLS. 670; AND H. HERFURTH, JR., INC. V. UNITED STATES, 89 C.CLS. 122.
ACCORDINGLY, ON THE PRESENT RECORD, THERE APPEARS TO BE NO ACTION WE PROPERLY MAY TAKE IN THIS MATTER.