B-227039, MAY 15, 1987, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL
Highlights
THE CONTRACTOR'S ATTORNEY IS ADVISED THAT SINCE THE CONTRACTOR HAS NOT EXHAUSTED ITS ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR. OUR OFFICE WILL NOT DECIDE THE MERITS OF THE ISSUES RAISED AT THIS TIME. THE DEMAND IS FOR PAYMENT OF $61. OUR OFFICE WILL NOT DECIDE THE MERITS OF THE ISSUES YOU SEEK TO RAISE AT THIS TIME. OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED IN THIS MATTER IS AS FOLLOWS. WILL REFER THE MATTER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FOR DISPOSITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS IN 29 C.F.R. INSOFAR AS THEY ARE WITHIN GAO'S JURISDICTION.
B-227039, MAY 15, 1987, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL
PROCUREMENT - SOCIO-ECONOMIC POLICIES - LABOR STANDARDS - CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS - VIOLATION - ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES DIGEST: CONTRACTOR'S ATTORNEY PURPORTS TO APPEAL TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL FOR REVIEW OF AND RELIEF FROM THE DEMAND OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR PAYMENT OF $61,854.73 FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE DAVIS-BACON ACT RELATING TO THE PROPER CLASSIFICATION OF EMPLOYEES. THE CONTRACTOR'S ATTORNEY IS ADVISED THAT SINCE THE CONTRACTOR HAS NOT EXHAUSTED ITS ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, OUR OFFICE WILL NOT DECIDE THE MERITS OF THE ISSUES RAISED AT THIS TIME.
COLLINS & COMPANY, INC. - PRIME CONTRACTOR STANDARD MACHINE AND FABRICATION, INC. - SUBCONTRACTOR:
YOUR LETTER TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL, DATED APRIL 15, 1987, HAS BEEN REFERRED TO ME FOR REPLY.
BY YOUR LETTER, YOU PURPORT TO APPEAL TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL FOR REVIEW OF AND RELIEF FROM THE DEMAND SET FORTH IN THE LETTER FROM LT. COL. JERRY T. HINES, CORPS OF ENGINEERS CONTRACTING OFFICER, TO YOUR CLIENT, COLLINS & COMPANY, INC., DATED MARCH 12, 1987. THE DEMAND IS FOR PAYMENT OF $61,854.73 FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE DAVIS-BACON ACT, 40 U.S.C. 276A TO 276A-5 (1982), IN CONNECTION WITH CONTRACT NO. DACA21-83-C-0027.
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT SINCE YOUR CLIENT HAS NOT EXHAUSTED ITS ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, OUR OFFICE WILL NOT DECIDE THE MERITS OF THE ISSUES YOU SEEK TO RAISE AT THIS TIME.
OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED IN THIS MATTER IS AS FOLLOWS. YOU SHOULD PRESENT YOUR CLIENT'S POSITION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS. IF THERE REMAINS A CONFLICT OVER THE ISSUES PRESENTED, THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS PROCEDURES, WILL REFER THE MATTER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FOR DISPOSITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS IN 29 C.F.R. PARTS 5-7. AFTER YOUR CLIENT HAS EXHAUSTED ITS ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND IF YOUR CLIENT DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S FINAL RECOMMENDATION IN THE MATTER, YOU MAY THEN APPEAL TO THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL FOR FINAL RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED, INSOFAR AS THEY ARE WITHIN GAO'S JURISDICTION. SEE INGLESIDE CONTRACTORS OF MARYLAND, B-202821, AUGUST 5, 1982.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION, I AM ALSO ENCLOSING COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS CONCERNING OUR OFFICE'S DAVIS-BACON ACT JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURES: ROUSE CONSTRUCTION, INC., B-217812, AUGUST 13, 1985; B-3368, MARCH 19, 1957; GAO ORDER NO. 0140.9.53 (APRIL 18, 1985).