Skip to main content

B-145121, MAY 12, 1961

B-145121 May 12, 1961
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 28. THE REFERRED-TO MATTER WAS CONSIDERED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 26. TO YOU AND IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO REJECT THE LOWER BIDS RECEIVED ON THE READVERTISEMENT AND AWARD THE CONTRACT AT THE HIGHER PRICE THAT CAPITAL BID ON THE FIRST ADVERTISEMENT. YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 28 AGAIN STRESSES YOUR CONTENTION THAT BIDDERS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED A "SECOND CHANCE" TO BID ON A JOB WHERE AS IN THIS CASE THERE WAS A REJECTION OF BIDS AND . THE SECRETARY OF YOUR ASSOCIATION WAS INFORMED IN A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS UNDER THE FIRST INVITATION THAT THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE FOR THE COST OF THE WORK WAS CORRECT AND THAT THE BIDS WERE REGARDED AS BEING EXCESSIVE.

View Decision

B-145121, MAY 12, 1961

TO THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA, INC.:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 28, 1961, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF YOUR PROTEST IN BEHALF OF THE CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AGAINST THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO ANY OTHER BIDDER FOR THE CONVERSION OF AN AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE SHOP AT FOREST PARK, GEORGIA, UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. ENG-09-133-61-36.

THE REFERRED-TO MATTER WAS CONSIDERED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 26, 1961, TO YOU AND IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO REJECT THE LOWER BIDS RECEIVED ON THE READVERTISEMENT AND AWARD THE CONTRACT AT THE HIGHER PRICE THAT CAPITAL BID ON THE FIRST ADVERTISEMENT. YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 28 AGAIN STRESSES YOUR CONTENTION THAT BIDDERS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED A "SECOND CHANCE" TO BID ON A JOB WHERE AS IN THIS CASE THERE WAS A REJECTION OF BIDS AND ,IMMEDIATE RE BIDDING OF A JOB ON THE SAME LABOR, MATERIALS, ETC., MARKET WITHOUT SUFFICIENT LAPSE OF TIME" WHICH GIVES COMPETITORS A SECOND CHANGE TO OBTAIN BUSINESS.

AS INDICATED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 26, THE SECRETARY OF YOUR ASSOCIATION WAS INFORMED IN A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION AFTER THE OPENING OF BIDS UNDER THE FIRST INVITATION THAT THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE FOR THE COST OF THE WORK WAS CORRECT AND THAT THE BIDS WERE REGARDED AS BEING EXCESSIVE. IT WAS NOT UNTIL FEBRUARY 6, 1961, THE DAY BEFORE THE OPENING OF BIDS ON THE SECOND INVITATION, THAT IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAD MADE AN ERROR IN ITS ESTIMATE. BY THAT TIME THE BIDDERS WHO SUBMITTED SECOND BIDS NO DOUBT HAD PERFORMED THE WORK OF RECHECKING THEIR FIRST BIDS. AS TO TWO BIDDERS THERE WAS REALLY NO "SECOND CHANCE" TO OBTAIN THE CONTRACT AS THEY HAD NOT SUBMITTED ANY BID ON THE FIRST INVITATION.

WHILE IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE ERROR IN THE GOVERNMENT ESTIMATE WAS NOT DISCOVERED BEFORE A SECOND INVITATION WAS ISSUED, THE MERE FACT THAT CAPITAL OR ANY OTHER BIDDER REDUCED HIS BID PRICE ON THE READVERTISEMENT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN, AS YOU ALLEGE, THAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL RECEIVE AN INFERIOR PRODUCT OR SERVICES UPON AWARD OF A CONTRACT TO A PARTY THAT HAS SUBMITTED A BID ON THE FIRST INVITATION.

WE CAN UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN IN MATTERS OF THIS KIND BUT UPON A RECONSIDERATION OF THE CASE WE CANNOT FIND ANY PROPER BASIS FOR CONCLUDING THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE REJECTED THE LOWER BIDS RECEIVED ON THE READVERTISEMENT AND AWARDED THE CONTRACT TO CAPITAL AT THE HIGHER PRICE THAT IT BID IN RESPONSE TO THE FIRST INVITATION.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs