_____________________________________________ MOTION TO AMEND THE DECISION GRANTED: February 25, 1993 _____________________________________________ GSBCA 11876 THE INTERLAKE COMPANIES, INC., Appellant, v. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. Edward H. Gorens, Senior Project Manager of the Interlake Companies, Inc., Lisle, IL, appearing for Appellant. Kurt Summers and John Cornell, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges HENDLEY and BORWICK. BORWICK, Board Judge. Respondent seeks clarification of our decision in The Interlake Companies, Inc. v. General Services Administration, GSBCA 11876 (Feb. 10, 1993). Rule 32. Respondent argues that we erred there in finding appellant "entitled to the full invoice price for the modification -- $54,563.28 . . . ." as it has paid the $19,650.52 the contracting officer decided was due in his decision. The record was not clear that the contracting officer had sent appellant a check for the $19,650.52. Thus we deemed appellant "entitled" to the full invoice price, and purposefully did not award appellant the full $54,563.28. Now that we know that the contracting officer has actually paid appellant $19,650.52, we clarify our decision to award appellant the difference--$34,912.76.[foot #] 1 Respondent suggests ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 1 On February 22, while attempting to arrange a conference call to discuss this matter, appellant's senior (continued...) ----------- FOOTNOTE ENDS ----------- that the amount should be $32,744.28, but does not explain why appellant should be awarded an amount less than the difference between the full invoice price and the amount which appellant has received from the contracting officer. Decision Respondent owes appellant $34,912.76, plus interest under the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. 611 (1988). _________________________ ANTHONY S. BORWICK Board Judge I concur: _________________________ JAMES W. HENDLEY Board Judge ----------- FOOTNOTE BEGINS --------- [foot #] 1 (...continued) project manager informed the panel chairman's legal staff assistant that appellant had received a check from the contracting officer. Appellant's president was ill and was unable to participate in a conference call.