Skip to main content

Claim for Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred in the Construction and Test of a Pilot Plant

B-194440 Dec 17, 1979
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

A chemical manufacturer claimed entitlement to payment for expenses incurred in the construction and test of a pilot plant for the decontamination of Herbicide Orange to satisfy a prebid condition on a sale of surplus Department of Defense stocks of the chemical. The claimant asserted that proprietary information developed through its pilot project was disclosed and/or used by the Air Force to obtain from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) an ocean dumping permit required for the destruction of Air Force stocks of Herbicide Orange. The pilot plant project was begun in order to develop a filtration process for the conversion of Herbicide Orange into a marketable herbicide, following an EPA suggestion that the Air Force explore such possibilities. When it became apparent that pursuit of a means for incinerating the residue of the filtering process was technically impractical, the Air Force decided to revive its original plan to destroy the chemical by high-temperature incineration at sea. The Herbicide Orange was destroyed by this method during the latter part of 1977. The value of proprietary information lies in exclusive posession by its owner; once such information becomes public knowledge, its value and status as proprietary information are lost. The publication of the claimant's data by the Air Force in an October 1976 environmental impact statement amendment with the claimant's approval placed the information in the public domain and destroyed any rights the claimant may have had to the information. To reimburse the claimant the expense of preparation of information that allegedly benefited the Air Force would be, in effect, to recast the terms of the request for quotations (RFQ) after the fact. The RFQ clearly and unequivocally required that prospective purchasers document and demonstrate their process for Herbicide Orange decontamination as a prerequisite to bidding on its purchase and specifically and prominently provided that no payment would be made for the information solicited. Further, since there was nothing arbitrary or capricious in the Air Force decision to reject reprocessing as an option for Herbicide Orange disposal and terminate negotiations with the claimant, there was no basis for Air Force liability for proposal preparation costs. Accordingly, the claim was denied.

Downloads

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs