B-125998, NOV. 30, 1955

B-125998: Nov 30, 1955

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TO THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO A LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 3. IS BASED. THE BID OF THE UNEX PRODUCTS CORPORATION AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.05 WAS DETERMINED TO BE THE HIGHEST BID RECEIVED FOR ITEM 55 AND CONTRACT N228S-10493 WAS AWARDED TO THE CORPORATION ON JUNE 22. IT IS REPORTED THAT WHEN THE FORMAL CONTRACT WAS PREPARED THE EXTENDED PRICE OF ITEM 55 WAS INCORRECTLY FIGURED AT $12.60 INSTEAD OF $126 AND THAT A REFUND OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BID DEPOSIT AND $12.60 AND AUTHORIZED AND PAID ON JUNE 22. DELIVERY OF THE MATERIAL WAS MADE ON JUNE 1. 1955 A CORRECTED COPY OF THE CONTRACT INSTRUCTIONS WAS FORWARDED TO THE CONTRACTOR WITH A NOTE EXPLAINING THE ERROR AND REQUESTING THE BALANCE DUE OF $113.40.

B-125998, NOV. 30, 1955

TO THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO A LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 3, 1955, WITH ENCLOSURES, FROM THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY (MATERIAL) REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO BE TAKEN WITH RESPECT TO AN ERROR THE UNEX PRODUCTS CORPORATION, NEW YORK, NEW YORK, ALLEGES IT MADE IN ITS BID SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION NO. B-370-55 ON WHICH CONTRACT NO. N228S-10493 DATED JUNE 22, 1955, IS BASED.

THE INVITATION ISSUED BY THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTED BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SLIDE FASTENERS, TAPE, CLOTHING, GOGGLES, AND FLYING MASKS, AND CLOTH, DESCRIBED UNDER ITEM 1 TO ITEM 94 INCLUSIVE. IN RESPONSE TO THE INVITATION THE UNEX PRODUCTS CORPORATION SUBMITTED A BID DATED JUNE 7, 1955, OFFERING TO PURCHASE, AMONG OTHER ITEMS, THE SLIDE FASTENERS DESCRIBED UNDER ITEM 55 AT A UNIT PRICE OF $0.05 OR A TOTAL PRICE OF $12.60. THE BID OF THE UNEX PRODUCTS CORPORATION AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.05 WAS DETERMINED TO BE THE HIGHEST BID RECEIVED FOR ITEM 55 AND CONTRACT N228S-10493 WAS AWARDED TO THE CORPORATION ON JUNE 22, 1955.

IN THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S STATEMENT DATED OCTOBER 10, 1955, IT IS REPORTED THAT WHEN THE FORMAL CONTRACT WAS PREPARED THE EXTENDED PRICE OF ITEM 55 WAS INCORRECTLY FIGURED AT $12.60 INSTEAD OF $126 AND THAT A REFUND OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BID DEPOSIT AND $12.60 AND AUTHORIZED AND PAID ON JUNE 22, 1955. DELIVERY OF THE MATERIAL WAS MADE ON JUNE 1, 1955, AND, ON JULY 15, 1955 A CORRECTED COPY OF THE CONTRACT INSTRUCTIONS WAS FORWARDED TO THE CONTRACTOR WITH A NOTE EXPLAINING THE ERROR AND REQUESTING THE BALANCE DUE OF $113.40.

BY LETTER OF JULY 27, 1955, THE CONTRACTOR CLAIMED A CLERICAL ERROR IN THE PREPARATION OF ITS BID IN THAT THE UNIT PRICE OF ITEM 55 SHOULD HAVE BEEN $0.005 INSTEAD OF $0.05. ON AUGUST 4, 1955,THE CONTRACTOR WAS INFORMED THAT IN CASES OF ERROR, THE UNIT PRICE WOULD GOVERN, AND THAT THE BALANCE DUE SHOULD BE FORWARDED. THE CONTRACTOR, BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 18, 1955, RESTATED HIS CLAIM OF ERROR, AND REQUESTED CANCELLATION OF THE SALE.

THE STATEMENT OF THE CONTRACTOR THAT ITS INTENDED BID ON ITEM 55 WAS $0.005 EACH, INSTEAD OF $0.05 EACH, IS SUPPORTED BY THE FACT THAT IF THE FORMER PRICE BE MULTIPLIED BY THE QUANTITY SPECIFIED FOR THE LOT AND THE PRODUCT THEREOF BE ADDED TO THE TOTAL PRICE OF THE SIX OTHER ITEMS UPON WHICH PRICES WERE QUOTED AND THERE BE APPLIED TO THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT THE DEPOSIT RATE OF 20 PERCENT USED BY THE BIDDER, THE RESULT EQUALS THE AMOUNT OF THE DEPOSIT. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE BIDDER SHOULD HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO VERIFY ITS BID AS TO ITEM 55 PRIOR TO AWARD.

WHILE THE INVITATION TO BID PROVIDED THAT IN CASE OF ERROR IN EXTENSION THE UNIT PRICES CONTAINED IN THE BID WOULD GOVERN AND WHILE IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THERE IS NOT DUTY UPON A CONTRACTING OFFICER TO COMPUTE THE EXTENSIONS OF UNIT PRICES CONTAINED IN BIDS IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE CORRECTNESS THEREOF, SUCH HOLDINGS CLEARLY ARE NOT FOR APPLICATION WHERE, AS HERE, AN ERROR IS APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE BID AND THE CONTRACTING OFFICER SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON NOTICE OF SUCH ERROR PRIOR TO AND AT THE TIME OF MAKING THE AWARD. SEE 15 COMP. GEN. 746.

ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES IN THIS CASE THIS OFFICE WILL RAISE NO QUESTION AS TO THE SALE OF ITEM 55 AT A TOTAL PRICE OF $12.60.

A REFERENCE TO THIS DECISION SHOULD BE MADE ON THE CONTRACT.

THE PAPERS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER'S STATEMENT, ARE RETURNED.