B-131135, APR. 1, 1957

B-131135: Apr 1, 1957

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 MARCH 19. WHEN THE BIDS WERE EXAMINED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER BEFORE AWARD HE NOTED THAT THE BID OF $21. 000 PADS PROBABLY WAS IN ERROR SINCE IT WAS ENTIRELY OUT OF LINE WITH THE OTHER BIDS WHICH RANGED FROM $72. THE LATTER ADVISED THAT THE BID WAS IN ERROR IN THAT THE QUANTITY SHOULD READ 50. THAT THE MAXIMUM QUANTITY IT COULD HANDLE WAS 50. THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT THE ERROR ALLEGED BY SMITH-BROOKS WAS IN FACT MADE. SINCE IT WAS BELIEVED THAT THE BID OF THE COMPANY WAS ERRONEOUS. AS SUCH BELIEF WAS CONFIRMED AND THE ERROR EXPLAINED BY THE BIDDER PRIOR TO AWARD.

B-131135, APR. 1, 1957

TO THE HONORABLE RAYMOND BLATTENBERGER, PUBLIC PRINTER:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 19, 1957, WITH ENCLOSURES, IN WHICH YOU REQUEST DECISION AS TO WHETHER YOU MAY PROPERLY DISREGARD THE BID FROM SMITH-BROOKS PRINTING COMPANY IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION DATED FEBRUARY 25, 1957, IN WHICH YOUR OFFICE INVITED BIDS ON THE PRODUCTION OF 293,000 PADS. THE SPECIFICATION REQUESTED A QUOTATION OF PRICES FOR 50,000 PADS AND A PRICE FOR EACH ADDITIONAL 1,000 PADS.

WHEN THE BIDS WERE EXAMINED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER BEFORE AWARD HE NOTED THAT THE BID OF $21,230.40 FOR 293,000 PADS PROBABLY WAS IN ERROR SINCE IT WAS ENTIRELY OUT OF LINE WITH THE OTHER BIDS WHICH RANGED FROM $72,957 TO $80,575. UPON TELEGRAPHING THE BIDDER, THE LATTER ADVISED THAT THE BID WAS IN ERROR IN THAT THE QUANTITY SHOULD READ 50,000, INSTEAD OF 293,000, PADS FOR $21,230.40, AND ADDITIONAL PADS AT A PRICE OF $419.90 PER THOUSAND, BUT THAT THE MAXIMUM QUANTITY IT COULD HANDLE WAS 50,000 PADS.

IN VIEW OF THE WIDE DISPARITY BETWEEN THE PRICE OF SMITH-BROOKS PRINTING COMPANY FOR THE FURNISHING OF 293,000 PADS AND THE PRICES QUOTED BY THE OTHER BIDDERS FOR THE SAME QUANTITY, THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT THE ERROR ALLEGED BY SMITH-BROOKS WAS IN FACT MADE. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE IT WAS BELIEVED THAT THE BID OF THE COMPANY WAS ERRONEOUS, AND AS SUCH BELIEF WAS CONFIRMED AND THE ERROR EXPLAINED BY THE BIDDER PRIOR TO AWARD, THE BID OF THE SMITH-BROOKS PRINTING COMPANY MAY BE DISREGARDED.