B-167805, OCT. 3, 1969
Highlights
HAVE BEEN TAKEN. INASMUCH AS ACCEPTANCE OF DUPLICATE FOR LOST OR DESTROYED ORIGINAL INVOICES IS CONTEMPLATED IN AFORE -SAID MANUAL SECTION. TEXACO INDICATES THAT THE ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE INVOICE WAS DAMAGED AND COULD NOT BE PROCESSED THROUGH THEIR ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT. TEXACO ALSO ASSERTS THAT XEROX COPIES ARE LEGAL DOCUMENTS ACCEPTED BY MOST FEDERAL AGENCIES IN LIEU OF ORIGINALS AND THAT IT WILL CERTIFY THAT NO DUPLICATE BILLINGS WILL RESULT FROM ACCEPTING THE XEROX COPY. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BILLED ORIGINALLY REFUSED PAYMENT BECAUSE THEIR CONTROL OVER DUPLICATE PAYMENTS WAS BASED ON SUBMISSION OF TEXACO'S ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE INVOICE. WE ASSUME LIABILITY IS ACCEPTED SINCE YOU STATE ONLY THAT PAYMENT WAS REFUSED BECAUSE OF TEXACO'S DEPARTURE FROM THE ESTABLISHED PRACTICE OF SUBMITTING THEIR ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE INVOICE.
B-167805, OCT. 3, 1969
VOUCHERS AND INVOICES--COPIES--XEROX RECLAIM VOUCHER SUBMITTED WITH SUPPORTING XEROX COPY RATHER THAN ADMINISTRATIVELY REQUIRED ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE, WHICH HAD BEEN TOO DAMAGED FOR PROCESSING, MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT UPON RECEIPT OF STATEMENT THAT STEPS REQUIRED BY 7 GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL FOR GUIDANCE OF FEDERAL AGENCIES 22.8 (7 GAO 22.8) -- TO PREVENT DUPLICATION OF PAYMENT -- HAVE BEEN TAKEN, INASMUCH AS ACCEPTANCE OF DUPLICATE FOR LOST OR DESTROYED ORIGINAL INVOICES IS CONTEMPLATED IN AFORE -SAID MANUAL SECTION, ABSENT SHOWING OF FRAUD OR EXISTENCE OF CONTROLLING CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT TO CONTRARY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE.
TO MR. KARL J. KELLNER:
YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 14, 1969, REQUESTS AN ADVANCE DECISION ON WHETHER TEXACO, INC.'S RECLAIM VOUCHER, SUBMITTED WITH A SUPPORTING XEROX COPY OF AN ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE (HARD COPY) INVOICE INSTEAD OF THE ORIGINAL- DUPLICATE, CAN BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT.
TEXACO INDICATES THAT THE ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE INVOICE WAS DAMAGED AND COULD NOT BE PROCESSED THROUGH THEIR ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT. TEXACO ALSO ASSERTS THAT XEROX COPIES ARE LEGAL DOCUMENTS ACCEPTED BY MOST FEDERAL AGENCIES IN LIEU OF ORIGINALS AND THAT IT WILL CERTIFY THAT NO DUPLICATE BILLINGS WILL RESULT FROM ACCEPTING THE XEROX COPY. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BILLED ORIGINALLY REFUSED PAYMENT BECAUSE THEIR CONTROL OVER DUPLICATE PAYMENTS WAS BASED ON SUBMISSION OF TEXACO'S ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE INVOICE.
EVEN THOUGH YOU NOWHERE ACKNOWLEDGE LIABILITY FOR TEXACO'S CLAIM, WE ASSUME LIABILITY IS ACCEPTED SINCE YOU STATE ONLY THAT PAYMENT WAS REFUSED BECAUSE OF TEXACO'S DEPARTURE FROM THE ESTABLISHED PRACTICE OF SUBMITTING THEIR ORIGINAL-DUPLICATE INVOICE.
IN B-145894, JULY 21, 1961, WE ALLOWED A PHOTOSTATIC COPY OF AN ORIGINAL TO SUPPORT A CLAIM. ALSO, SECTION 22.8 OF TITLE 7, GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR GUIDANCE OF FEDERAL AGENCIES (7 GAO 22.8) CONTEMPLATES ACCEPTANCE OF DUPLICATES FOR LOST OR DESTROYED ORIGINAL INVOICES. UNLESS THERE IS SOME KIND OF CONTROLLING CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT TO THE CONTRARY BETWEEN THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AND TEXACO, OR UNLESS FRAUD IS SHOWN, THE XEROX COPY MAY BE ACCEPTED IN THIS INSTANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 7 GAO 22.8.
THE VOUCHER, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT, IS RETURNED AND MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT UPON RECEIPT FROM TEXACO OF A STATEMENT THAT STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO PREVENT DUPLICATION OF THE PAYMENT, AS REQUIRED BY 7 GAO 22.8.