B-153430, MAR 2, 1971

B-153430, MAR 2, 1971

CONTRACTS - PROPRIETARY INFORMATION DENYING REQUEST THAT THE DECISION OF MAY 21, 1964, B-153430, BE REVERSED ON BASIS THAT THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD TO INDICATE THAT THE DECISION WAS IN ERROR IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY COPY OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE'S ADVICE TO FOLLOW THE DISPUTES CLAUSE IN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS IN PERSUING CLAIM AGAINST THE COAST GUARD'S USING RUBBISH CONTAINERIZATION IDEAS WITHOUT PERMISSION.

TO MR. VINCENT S. LUKAS:

THIS IS IN REPLY TO YOUR LETTER DATED JANUARY 14, 1971, WITH ENCLOSURES, RELATIVE TO OUR DECISION OF MAY 21, 1964, B-153430. OUR DECISION ADVISED YOU THAT THIS OFFICE WAS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT, OR PASS UPON THE MERITS, OF YOUR CLAIM FOR ALLEGED UNAUTHORIZED USE OF YOUR RUBBISH CONTAINERIZATION IDEAS BY THE U.S. COAST GUARD.

YOUR LETTER INDICATES THAT YOU HAVE BEEN ADVISED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE THAT YOUR CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED UNDER THE PROCEDURES PROVIDED FOR BY THE "DISPUTES" CLAUSE WHICH IS INCORPORATED IN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS. YOU THEREFORE ALLEGE THAT THIS OFFICE SHOULD NOT HAVE ISSUED ITS DECISION OF MAY 21, 1964, AND YOU REQUEST THAT WE SO ADVISE THE COAST GUARD AND THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

SINCE YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED A COPY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE'S ADVICE TO YOU, WE ARE UNABLE TO EVALUATE THE BASIS FOR SUCH ADVICE OR RESPOND THERETO. HOWEVER, THE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE DO NOT INDICATE THAT THERE WAS A WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN YOU AND THE GOVERNMENT, AND SINCE THE EXISTENCE OF A WRITTEN CONTRACT IS ESSENTIAL TO INVOKING THE STANDARD DISPUTES PROCEDURES PROVIDED IN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS, WE PERCEIVE NO BASIS ON WHICH THOSE PROCEDURES WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO YOUR SITUATION. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHING IN THE RECORD TO INDICATE THAT THIS CONCLUSION IS IN ERROR, WE BELIEVE THAT OUR ACTIONS IN THIS MATTER WERE PROPER, AND YOUR REQUEST THAT WE UNDERTAKE TO CORRECT THE EFFECT OF OUR DECISION OF MAY 21, 1964, IS THEREFORE DENIED.