B-144141, NOV. 15, 1960
Highlights
COUNSELLORS AT LAW: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 28. PROTESTING THE MANNER IN WHICH A CONTRACT WAS AWARDED TO COMFORT COOLING CO. WAS SECOND LOW BIDDER AND THAT COMFORT COOLING CO. WAS THE LOWEST BIDDER AT $28. AWARD WAS MADE TO COMFORT FOR THE AMOUNT OF $32. 850 FROM ITS SUPPLIER FOR INSTALLATION OF A TEMPERATURE CONTROL SYSTEM WAS ERRONEOUSLY ADDED. THE SUM OF THE VARIOUS ITEMS COMPRISING THE TOTAL OF COMFORT'S BID WAS ERRONEOUSLY SHOWN AS $25. 130 TO WHICH WAS ADDED A PROFIT OF 12 1/2 PERCENT ($3. WHICH WAS THEN REDUCED BY $78 AND THE BASIC BID WAS THEN SHOWN AS $28. THERE IS ENCLOSED FOR YOUR INFORMATION A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 13. TO PERMIT WITHDRAWAL OF BIDS WHERE EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED THAT WILL ESTABLISH THAT A MISTAKE WAS MADE.
B-144141, NOV. 15, 1960
TO MELLINGER AND RUDENSTEIN, COUNSELLORS AT LAW:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 28, 1960, PROTESTING THE MANNER IN WHICH A CONTRACT WAS AWARDED TO COMFORT COOLING CO. FOR THE INSTALLATION OF AN AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM IN BUILDING NO. 11 AT THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL, EAST ORANGE, NEW JERSEY.
YOU PROTEST THE FACT THAT YOUR CLIENT, SUPERIOR AIR CONDITIONING CO., WAS SECOND LOW BIDDER AND THAT COMFORT COOLING CO. WAS THE LOWEST BIDDER AT $28,192 BUT THAT, FOR SOME UNEXPLAINABLE REASON, AWARD WAS MADE TO COMFORT FOR THE AMOUNT OF $32,486.
THE LOW BIDDER IN THIS CASE ALLEGED, AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS, THAT IT HAD MADE AN ERROR IN SUBMITTING ITS BID AND IN SUPPORT OF ITS ALLEGATION IT FURNISHED WORKSHEETS, ETC., WHICH SHOWED THAT A QUOTATION OF $3,850 FROM ITS SUPPLIER FOR INSTALLATION OF A TEMPERATURE CONTROL SYSTEM WAS ERRONEOUSLY ADDED, ALONG WITH OTHER AMOUNTS, AS $38.50. THE SUM OF THE VARIOUS ITEMS COMPRISING THE TOTAL OF COMFORT'S BID WAS ERRONEOUSLY SHOWN AS $25,130 TO WHICH WAS ADDED A PROFIT OF 12 1/2 PERCENT ($3,140), OR A TOTAL OF $28,270, WHICH WAS THEN REDUCED BY $78 AND THE BASIC BID WAS THEN SHOWN AS $28,192. THERE IS ENCLOSED FOR YOUR INFORMATION A COPY OF OUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 13, 1960, TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER AUTHORIZING CORRECTION IN THIS CASE.
IT HAS LONG BEEN THE RULE OF OUR OFFICE, IN CONSIDERING MISTAKES ALLEGED BY BIDDERS AFTER OPENING OF BIDS AND PRIOR TO AWARD, TO PERMIT WITHDRAWAL OF BIDS WHERE EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED THAT WILL ESTABLISH THAT A MISTAKE WAS MADE. AND IT HAS BEEN HELD BY OUR OFFICE THAT IF THE EVIDENCE CONCLUSIVELY ESTABLISHES WHAT THE INTENDED BID WOULD HAVE BEEN, THE BID AS TO WHICH MISTAKE HAS BEEN ALLEGED MAY BE CORRECTED AND CONSIDERED ALONG WITH OTHER BIDS IN MAKING AWARD. 35 COMP. GEN. 279. THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO OUR OFFICE WAS REGARDED AS CONCLUSIVELY ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE INTENDED BID PRICE AND THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AT THE INTENDED BID PRICE.