B-125659, OCT. 12, 1955

B-125659: Oct 12, 1955

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

PUBLIC PRINTER: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 30. IS BASED. YOU STATE THAT WHEN THE BIDS WERE EXAMINED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HE NOTED THAT THE BID OF THE MOORE-ESSICK COMPANY WAS PROBABLY IN ERROR BECAUSE IT WAS OUT OF LINE WITH THE FIVE OTHER BIDS RECEIVED. THE COMPANY WAS REQUESTED BY TELEGRAM TO REVIEW THS SPECIFICATIONS AND CONFIRM ITS BID PRICE. YOU STATE FURTHER THAT BETWEEN THE TIME THE CONTRACTING OFFICER REQUESTED THE COMPANY TO VERIFY ITS BID AND THE TIME THAT A REPLY WAS RECEIVED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WAS ASKED IF THE DELIVERY DATE COULD BE EXTENDED SO THAT THE MATTER OF THE ERROR COULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE FOR A DECISION. THE COMPANY WAS DIRECTED BY TELEPHONE TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK ON THE BASIS OF ITS BID PRICE OF $660.

B-125659, OCT. 12, 1955

TO HONORABLE RAYMOND BLATTENBERGER, PUBLIC PRINTER:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1955, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN REGARDING AN ERROR THE MOORE-ESSICK COMPANY ALLEGES IT MADE IN ITS BID ON WHICH PURCHASE ORDER NO. 5238 DATED SEPTEMBER 21, 1955, IS BASED.

THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE REQUESTED BIDS UNDER JACKET NO. 357263 FOR PRINTING 10,005 COPIES OF ONE POSTER. THE SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDE THAT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WEATHERPROOF THE FACE, BACK AND EDGES OF THE POSTERS. RESPONSE, THE MOORE-ESSICK COMPANY SUBMITTED A BID DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 1955, OFFERING TO FURNISH THE POSTERS FOR THE LUMP SUM OF $660.

YOU STATE THAT WHEN THE BIDS WERE EXAMINED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER HE NOTED THAT THE BID OF THE MOORE-ESSICK COMPANY WAS PROBABLY IN ERROR BECAUSE IT WAS OUT OF LINE WITH THE FIVE OTHER BIDS RECEIVED, RANGING FROM $970.49 TO $1,325, AND WITH THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE ESTIMATE OF $852.62; THAT ON SEPTEMBER 20, 1955, THE COMPANY WAS REQUESTED BY TELEGRAM TO REVIEW THS SPECIFICATIONS AND CONFIRM ITS BID PRICE; AND THAT ON THE SAME DAY THE COMPANY ADVISED BY TELEPHONE THAT IT HAD MADE AN ERROR IN ITS BID IN THAT IT HAD FAILED TO INCLUDE IN ITS BID PRICE THE COST OF WEATHERPROOFING (PARAFFINING) THE POSTERS. YOU STATE FURTHER THAT BETWEEN THE TIME THE CONTRACTING OFFICER REQUESTED THE COMPANY TO VERIFY ITS BID AND THE TIME THAT A REPLY WAS RECEIVED THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WAS ASKED IF THE DELIVERY DATE COULD BE EXTENDED SO THAT THE MATTER OF THE ERROR COULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE FOR A DECISION. UPON RECEIPT OF THE DEPARTMENT'S REPLY THAT A DELAY COULD NOT BE ALLOWED, THE COMPANY WAS DIRECTED BY TELEPHONE TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK ON THE BASIS OF ITS BID PRICE OF $660, SUBJECT TO CORRECTION, IF AUTHORIZED, BY THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE.

BY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 20, 1955, THE COMPANY CONFIRMED ITS VERBAL ALLEGATION OF ERROR AND REQUESTED THAT ITS BID PRICE BE INCREASED FROM $660 TO $897. IN SUPPORT OF ITS ALLEGATION OF ERROR, THE COMPANY SUBMITTED ITS ORIGINAL JOB ESTIMATE SHEET WHICH SHOWS VARIOUS ITEMS OF COST TOTALING $660.50, WHICH WAS REDUCED BY THE COMPANY TO $660, THE AMOUNT OF ITS BID. NONE OF THE VARIOUS ITEMS OF COST MAKING UP THE BID PRICE APPEAR TO INCLUDE THE COST OF WEATHERPROOFING THE POSTERS.

ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE OF RECORD, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR DOUBT THAT THE COMPANY MADE AN ERROR IN ITS BID, AS ALLEGED. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE IT WAS BELIEVED THAT THE BID OF THE MOORE-ESSICK COMPANY WAS ERRONEOUS AND SINCE SUCH BELIEF WAS CONFIRMED PRIOR TO AWARD--- WHICH AWARD WAS SUBJECT TO CORRECTION BY THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE--- PURCHASE ORDER NO. 5238 MAY BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE FOR A TOTAL PRICE OF $897, IF IT BE ADMINISTRATIVELY DETERMINED THAT THE PRICE IS REASONABLE FOR THE ADDITIONAL WORK INVOLVED, AND PAYMENT IS AUTHORIZED TO BE MADE ON THAT BASIS.

A REFERENCE TO THIS DECISION SHOULD BE MADE ON THE AMENDMENT TO BE ATTACHED TO THE PURCHASE ORDER.

THE PAPERS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1955, AND ITS ESTIMATE SHEET, ARE RETURNED.