B-220527: Dec 16, 1985

GAO was asked to determine whether the Economic Development Administration (EDA) obligated fiscal year (FY) 1983 grant funds when it offered a grant to a town that was accepted by an unauthorized official. EDA offered the grant 1 day before the end of FY 1983 and the official purportedly accepted on the last day of the year. However, the town council, which was the only entity legally authorized t...

B-220527: Dec 16, 1985

WAS CONDITIONED ON ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFER BY BOTH PARTIES BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30. AN UNAUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE APPLICANT TOWN PURPORTED TO ACCEPT THE OFFER ON THE LAST DAY OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND HER ACTION WAS. RATIFIED 6 MONTHS LATER BY THE TOWN COUNCIL WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT THE GRANT OFFER. THE GRANT OFFER WAS NO LONGER AVAILABLE FOR ACCEPTANCE. THAT WAS ACCEPTED WITHIN THE F...

B-220527: Aug 11, 1987

The First Selectman did not have the authority to accept the grant. So that there was no valid grant from EDA in fiscal year 1983. By use of the doctrine of equitable estoppel the Town seeks to prevent EDA from denying that there was a valid grant. Were responsible for the expenditure of funds for the project. The doctrine of equitable estoppel is not applicable to this case. There was no new gran...

B-220527: Aug 11, 1987

A town requested that GAO consider its claim for reimbursement for engineering study costs it incurred on the promise of a grant from the Department of Commerce's Economic Development Administration (EDA). GAO noted that, since a town official signed the agreement without authority to do so, it was the town which prevented a valid grant award. The town contended that EDA should reimburse it becaus...