About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-188304 1 (1979-01-18)

handle is hein.gao/gaobabjlt0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 



GAO
United States General Accounting Office            Office of
Washington, DC 20548                               General Counsel
                                                   In Reply
                                                   Refer to: B-188304

                ~ ~ January 18, J979
      Western Timber Association    J-              ../.e-
      211 Sutter Street                                      44, 1
      San Francisco, California   94108

           Attention: Wesley R. Higbie, Staff Attorney


Dear Mr. Higbie:


     This is in response to your letter of December 4,
1978, regarding reconsideration of a claim by Zip-O-
Log Mills, B-188304, September 8, 1978, 78-2 CPD 178.

     You question our finding that there must be an
advance written agreement for a design change and
.state that the provision only requires agreement. The
custom in some parts of the country, you add, is for
the parties to agree to a change and to complete the
paperwork after work has begun.

     You appear to be concerned that, under our
decision, in the absence of an advance written agreement,
relief would not be available to a timber purchaser
who had performed additional work to which the Forest
Ser     had informally consented. Although we     -not
decide this except in the context of a specific case,
this appears doubtful so long as the essential elements
for a quantum meruit recovery--a benefit to the Govern-
ment and an express or implied ratification by the
contracting agency--are present.


     In the Zip-O reconsideration, although the parties
disagreed as to the application and scope of the Design
Change Clause, there was no dispute as to the require-
ment for an advance written agreement. Similarly,
Forest Service Headquarters and Zip-O both agreed that
the Department of Agriculture Board of Contract Appeals
(AGBCA) does not recognize constructive changes. In
fact, at a meeting at our Office, counsel for Zip-O argued
that this was one of the primary reasons for requesting
reconsideration of the claim-by our Office, rather than
presenting it to the Board for resolution under the
Disputes Clause of the contract as recommended in our
decision of July 14, 1977. This position was supported \






                     0   3#Z17


oc~/


jq D )qIJ5

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most