B-130047, DEC. 19, 1956

B-130047: Dec 19, 1956

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 11. REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN RELATIVE TO AN ERROR ALLEGED BY SMITH AND EDWARDS COMPANY TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN ITS BID ON ITEM 53 OF SALES CATALOG B-85-57-665. IS BASED. THE COMPANY ALLEGED THAT AN ERROR HAD BEEN MADE IN ITS BID IN THAT THE AMOUNT BID ON ITEM 53 WAS INTENDED FOR ITEM 58. THE RECORD INDICATES THAT THE COMPANY'S BID OF $38.88 EACH FOR TWO OF 107 OIL FUSE CUTOUTS LISTED AS ITEM 53 WAS ENTIRELY OUT OF LINE WITH THE OTHER BIDS OF $1.05. THE UNIT ACQUISITION COST OF WHICH WAS SHOWN AS $48.55. SINCE IT APPEARS THAT AN ERROR ACTUALLY WAS MADE AS CLAIMED. THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MAY BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN PUT ON INQUIRY BY THE DISCREPANCIES NOTED.

B-130047, DEC. 19, 1956

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 11, 1956, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN RELATIVE TO AN ERROR ALLEGED BY SMITH AND EDWARDS COMPANY TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN ITS BID ON ITEM 53 OF SALES CATALOG B-85-57-665, ON WHICH CONTRACT NO. N665S-31171, DATED NOVEMBER 16, 1956, COVERING THE SALE OF GOVERNMENT PROPERTY, IS BASED.

BY LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 19, 1956, THE COMPANY ALLEGED THAT AN ERROR HAD BEEN MADE IN ITS BID IN THAT THE AMOUNT BID ON ITEM 53 WAS INTENDED FOR ITEM 58--- NO BID ON THE FORMER HAVING BEEN INTENDED. THE COMPANY FURNISHED ITS WORK COPY OF THE INVITATION, WHICH CONFIRMED ITS CONTENTION OF ERROR. THE RECORD INDICATES THAT THE COMPANY'S BID OF $38.88 EACH FOR TWO OF 107 OIL FUSE CUTOUTS LISTED AS ITEM 53 WAS ENTIRELY OUT OF LINE WITH THE OTHER BIDS OF $1.05, $1.03, $1, $0.67, AND $0.53 EACH RECEIVED ON THIS ITEM, THE UNIT ACQUISITION COST OF WHICH WAS SHOWN AS $48.55. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER STATES THAT HE CONSIDERS THE BID OF $38.88 EACH FOR ITEM 53 EXCESSIVE.

ACCORDINGLY, SINCE IT APPEARS THAT AN ERROR ACTUALLY WAS MADE AS CLAIMED, AND THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MAY BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN PUT ON INQUIRY BY THE DISCREPANCIES NOTED, THE CONTRACT MAY BE CANCELED, WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE COMPANY.

THE PAPERS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE COMPANY'S LETTER OF NOVEMBER 19, 1956, THE STATEMENT OF FACT BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, AND THE ABSTRACT OF BIDS, ARE RETURNED HEREWITH.