U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

The Appeal of COPIGRAPH, INC.
Docket No. GPO BCA 20-86
May 25, 1989

MICHAEL F. DiMARIO
Administrative Law Judge

SUMMARY OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

BACKGROUND

        The above-captioned appeal of Copigraph, Inc., 940 Main
        Street, Waltham, MA 02154 (Appellant), is from the "final
        decision" of R. W. Wildbrett, Contracting Officer, Dallas
        Regional Printing Procurement Office, U.S. Government
        Printing Office (CO/Respondent), dated November 20, 1986,
        which reduced the price the Government would pay
        Appellant for printing certain "Naval Institute Guides,"
        under Jacket Nos. 662-190 through -193, and -196,
        Purchase Order K-6312 by 20.3 percent ($481.31).  (Rule 4
        File, hereinafter "R4 File," Tab A.)

        Appellant alleges that the price should not be reduced
        because:  (1) It properly interpreted the following
        provisions of the contract to require it to manually trim
        the 11 1/4 x 9 1/4" covers received from the Government
        to 11 x 8":  "TRIM SIZE:  All 11 x 8 1/2 (tab dividers 11
        x 9 including 1/2" tab).  G.P.O. WILL FURNISH:
        Preprinted, two-piece, covers . . . to the contractor.
        Covers are .035" Green polyetylene [sic] plastic, trimmed
        to size."  "BINDING:  Punch text, tab dividers, and
        covers on the 11" dimension."  (Emphasis supplied by
        Appellant.) (Official File, Tab 5.); and (2) The Roadway,
        Inc. trucking company's delivery receipt which it
        furnished shows no entry that the goods were delivered in
        damaged form as alleged by the CO's decision.  (Official
        File, Tab 5.)

DECISION

        Contrary to Appellant's theory, the issue is not whether
        the specifications call for the covers to be 11 x 8 1/2"
        but rather whether they authorized Appellant to trim the
        covers in any respect whatsoever.  Given the "G.P.O. will
        furnish . . . trimmed to size." language of the
        specification, we think that they did not.  Indeed, it is
        the opinion of the Board that this language creates an
        exclusive right in Respondent to trim the covers to any
        size it deemed appropriate. Therefore, since the
        Government has a right to enforce strict compliance with
        its specifications, S.S. Silberblatt, Inc. v. United
        States, 193 Ct. Cl. 269, 433 F.2d 1314 (1970), the
        Government had a right under the contract to reject the
        product altogether or to reduce its price, as it has done
        here.

        Additionally, the Board finds the issues respecting the
        cartons to be immaterial, inasmuch as the record makes
        clear that no consideration of such issues entered into
        the CO's price reduction determinations.  (R4 File, Tab
        C.)

DECISION

        Accordingly, the appeal is denied and the CO's decision
        is affirmed.

        IT IS SO ORDERED.