B-134335, NOV. 25, 1957

B-134335: Nov 25, 1957

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 A LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 5. N228S-21131 WAS AWARDED. PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS WERE REQUESTED TO ENTER DESCRIPTION OF EACH ITEM. NOTHING WAS INSERTED IN THE UNIT PRICE COLUMN. ALTHOUGH THE UNIT STATED FOR BIDDING WAS EACH. WHICH WAS ACCOMPANIED BY A BID DEPOSIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $220. WAS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEM 24 ON SEPTEMBER 26. ADVISED THAT THE FIGURE ENTERED ON THE LINE FOR ITEM 24 WAS NOT A BID ON THAT ITEM. WAS A TOTAL BID FIGURE FOR THE OTHER ITEMS IN THAT COLUMN ON THE SUMMARY BID SHEET AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF HIS BID DEPOSIT WOULD SUBSTANTIATE THAT HE HAD NO INTENTION OF BIDDING ON ITEM 24. NO UNIT OR TOTAL PRICE FOR ITEM 24 IS SHOWN ON THE SUMMARY BID WORKSHEET BUT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TOTAL BID PRICE COLUMN.

B-134335, NOV. 25, 1957

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO A LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 5, 1957, WITH ENCLOSURES, FROM THE ASSISTANT CHIEF FOR PURCHASING, BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN CONCERNING AN ERROR WHICH GUS AUTO PARTS, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, ALLEGES IT MADE IN ITS BID ON WHICH SALES CONTRACT NO. N228S-21131 WAS AWARDED.

THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, DISPOSAL DIVISION, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, BY SALES INVITATION NO. B-54-58-228, REQUESTED BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS DESCRIBED UNDER ITEMS 1 TO 54, INCLUSIVE. PROSPECTIVE BIDDERS WERE REQUESTED TO ENTER DESCRIPTION OF EACH ITEM. ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SUMMARY BID SHEET THERE APPEAR FOUR COLUMNS TITLED: (1) ITEM NO., (2) DESCRIPTION, (3) PRICE BID PER UNIT, AND (4) TOTAL PRICE BID, AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SHEET APPEAR FOUR MORE COLUMNS TITLED IN THE SAME MANNER. IN RESPONSE GUS AUTO PARTS SUBMITTED A BID DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 1957, SIGNED BY GUS ALFIER, IN WHICH, ON THE SUMMARY BID SHEET, THERE APPEARED IN THE TOTAL BID PRICE COLUMN OPPOSITE ITEM 24--- THE BOTTOM ITEM ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SHEET--- THE FIGURE $409.35. NOTHING WAS INSERTED IN THE UNIT PRICE COLUMN, ALTHOUGH THE UNIT STATED FOR BIDDING WAS EACH, RATHER THAN THE LOT. THE FIVE OTHER BIDDERS ON ITEM 24 QUOTED UNIT PRICES RANGING FROM $1.50 TO $0.302. THE BID OF GUS AUTO PARTS, WHICH WAS ACCOMPANIED BY A BID DEPOSIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $220, WAS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEM 24 ON SEPTEMBER 26, 1957.

BY LETTER DATED OCTOBER 7, 1957, MR. GUS ALFIER, OWNER OF GUS AUTO PARTS, ADVISED THAT THE FIGURE ENTERED ON THE LINE FOR ITEM 24 WAS NOT A BID ON THAT ITEM, BUT WAS A TOTAL BID FIGURE FOR THE OTHER ITEMS IN THAT COLUMN ON THE SUMMARY BID SHEET AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF HIS BID DEPOSIT WOULD SUBSTANTIATE THAT HE HAD NO INTENTION OF BIDDING ON ITEM 24. IN SUPPORT OF HIS ALLEGATION OF ERROR, MR. ALFIER SUBMITTED HIS WORKSHEETS, WHICH APPEAR TO BE A COPY OF THE SUMMARY BID SHEET AND A COPY OF THE DESCRIPTION SHEET COVERING ITEMS 14 TO 28, INCLUSIVE. NO UNIT OR TOTAL PRICE FOR ITEM 24 IS SHOWN ON THE SUMMARY BID WORKSHEET BUT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE TOTAL BID PRICE COLUMN, BELOW THE LINE ON WHICH THE PRICE FOR ITEM 24 WAS TO BE INSERTED, APPEARS THE FIGURE "424.24.'

ON THE SUMMARY BID SHEET, GUS AUTO PARTS INSERTED IN THE TOTAL BID PRICE COLUMN, OPPOSITE ITEM 24, THE AMOUNT OF $409.35 AND DIRECTLY ABOVE THIS ITEM, IT INSERTED THE PRICES FOR ITEMS 2, 5 TO 10, AND 12 TO 19, INCLUSIVE, THE TOTAL OF WHICH IS $409.35--- THE SAME AMOUNT AS INSERTED BY THE COMPANY OPPOSITE ITEM 24. THE COMPANY ALLEGES THAT IT HAD NO INTENTION OF BIDDING ON ITEM 24 AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF $409.35 WAS INTENDED AS THE TOTAL BID FIGURE FOR THE ITEMS IN THAT COLUMN. SUBSTANTIATION OF ITS STATEMENT THAT IT HAD NO INTENTION OF BIDDING ON ITEM 24, THE COMPANY POINTED OUT THAT THE AMOUNT OF ITS BID DEPOSIT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO COVER, IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER ITEMS BID UPON, A BID ON ITEM 24. THE TOTAL OF ALL ITEMS ON WHICH PRICES WERE QUOTED BY THE COMPANY AMOUNTS TO $1,500.34 WHICH INCLUDES THE AMOUNT OF $409.35 FOR ITEM 24. THE BID DEPOSIT WAS REQUIRED TO BE AT LEAST 20 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL BID. SINCE THE COMPANY SUBMITTED A BID DEPOSIT OF $220--- $80.07 LESS THAN THE AMOUNT OF REQUIRED DEPOSIT ON $1500.34 -- IT IS OBVIOUS THAT SUCH BID DEPOSIT WAS NOT BASED ON THE PURCHASE OF ALL ITEMS ON WHICH PRICES WERE QUOTED THEREON. SINCE THE ONLY ITEM ON WHICH THE COMPANY FAILED TO QUOTE ON THE CORRECT UNIT WAS ITEM 24 AND SINCE THE BID DEPOSIT OF $220 WAS PROPER FOR THE AMOUNT OF THE INTENDED BID, BUT NOT FOR THE TOTAL OF THE AMOUNTS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE BID, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THE BID ON ITEM 24 WITHOUT VERIFICATION.

ON THE RECORD, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR DOUBT THAT GUS AUTO PARTS MADE AN ERROR IN ITS BID, AS ALLEGED. ACCORDINGLY, CONTRACT NO. N228S-21131 MAY BE CANCELED WITHOUT LIABILITY TO THE COMPANY, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER.