B-141978, FEB. 19, 1960
Highlights
TO EMPIRE PETROLEUM COMPANY: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED JANUARY 29. YOU CONTEND THAT THE FAULT NECESSITATING THE RETURN OF THE SHIPMENT OF FUEL OIL HERE IN QUESTION WAS THE GOVERNMENT-S. YOU WERE PREVIOUSLY ADVISED THAT SETTLEMENT OF YOUR CLAIM BY OUR OFFICE MUST BE BASED UPON THE RECORD BEFORE US. YOU HAVE PRESENTED NO ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF YOUR CLAIM. 000 GALLONS FRIDAY 20 JULY 1956" IT IS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE ORDER FOR 5. WAS CANCELED. 922 GALLONS WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPOT AND CHARGED AGAINST THE ORDER FOR THAT DATE. WHICH THE DEPOT REFUSED TO ACCEPT NOT ONLY BECAUSE THE DEPOT STORAGE FACILITIES WERE FULL BUT. BECAUSE IT WAS A SHIPMENT IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT OF FUEL OIL ORDERED FOR DELIVERY TO THE DEPOT ON THAT DATE.
B-141978, FEB. 19, 1960
TO EMPIRE PETROLEUM COMPANY:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED JANUARY 29, 1960, IN THE NATURE OF A REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE SETTLEMENT DATED JANUARY 22, 1960, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR $120.09, REPRESENTING CHARGE FOR OUT-BOUND FREIGHT PLUS 25 PERCENT OF IN-BOUND FREIGHT ON 5,967 GALLONS OF FUEL OIL DELIVERED BY YOU ON JULY 20, 1956, TO THE PUBLIC ORDNANCE DEPOT, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, AND NOT ACCEPTED BY THE DEPOT.
YOU CONTEND THAT THE FAULT NECESSITATING THE RETURN OF THE SHIPMENT OF FUEL OIL HERE IN QUESTION WAS THE GOVERNMENT-S. YOU WERE PREVIOUSLY ADVISED THAT SETTLEMENT OF YOUR CLAIM BY OUR OFFICE MUST BE BASED UPON THE RECORD BEFORE US, BUT YOU HAVE PRESENTED NO ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF YOUR CLAIM.
THE RECORD SHOWS THAT, BY LETTER DATED JULY 13, 1956, TO YOU, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER OF THE PUEBLO ORDNANCE DEPOT REQUESTED THAT 20,000 GALLONS OF "NUMBER FIVE FUEL OIL" BE DELIVERED TO THE DEPOT AND CHARGED AGAINST PURCHASE ORDER NO. N-598-56, DATED JUNE 7, 1956 (CONTRACT NO. ASP- 14538), AS FOLLOWS:
TABLE
"10,000 GALLONS WEDNESDAY 18 JULY 1956
5,000 GALLONS THURSDAY 19 JULY 1956
5,000 GALLONS FRIDAY 20 JULY 1956"
IT IS ALSO INDICATED THAT THE ORDER FOR 5,000 GALLONS OF FUEL OIL TO BE DELIVERED ON THURSDAY, JULY 19, WAS CANCELED. THE RECORD FURTHER SHOWS THAT YOU MADE TWO SHIPMENTS OF OIL ON JULY 20, ONE OF 5,922 GALLONS WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DEPOT AND CHARGED AGAINST THE ORDER FOR THAT DATE. THE SAME DATE YOU MADE A SECOND SHIPMENT OF 5,967 GALLONS OF OIL, WHICH THE DEPOT REFUSED TO ACCEPT NOT ONLY BECAUSE THE DEPOT STORAGE FACILITIES WERE FULL BUT, ALSO, BECAUSE IT WAS A SHIPMENT IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT OF FUEL OIL ORDERED FOR DELIVERY TO THE DEPOT ON THAT DATE. IT IS APPARENT, THEREFORE, THAT THE RETURN TO YOUR PLANT OF THE SECOND SHIPMENT OF 5,967 GALLONS OF FUEL OIL, HERE IN QUESTION, DID NOT RESULT FROM ANY FAULT OF THE GOVERNMENT BUT WAS DUE SOLELY TO YOUR ERROR IN MAKING THE EXCESS SHIPMENT.
IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO LEGAL BASIS FOR AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM. ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT OF JANUARY 22, 1960, IS SUSTAINED.