B-139849, SEP. 15, 1959
Highlights
INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED AUGUST 26. AS YOU WERE ADVISED IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 24. SINCE YOUR BID WAS AMBIGUOUS AND SUBJECT TO THE INTERPRETATION PLACED THEREON BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER. THERE WAS NO LEGAL BASIS FOR CONCLUDING THAT THE CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER THE INVITATION TO THE BAUER COMPANY OR ANY OTHER CONTRACTOR WERE ILLEGAL. THERE WAS NO DUTY ON THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TO GIVE YOU ANY AWARD UNDER THE INVITATION UPON RECEIPT BY HIM. OF NOTICE THAT HE HAD INTERPRETED YOUR AMBIGUOUS BID TO HAVE A MEANING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU INTENDED.
B-139849, SEP. 15, 1959
TO THE MANHATTAN LIGHTING EQUIPMENT CO., INC.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED AUGUST 26, 1959, CONCERNING YOUR BID SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 16-600-59-47 ISSUED BY THE ENGLAND AIR FORCE BASE, LOUISIANA.
AS YOU WERE ADVISED IN OUR LETTER OF AUGUST 24, 1959, SINCE YOUR BID WAS AMBIGUOUS AND SUBJECT TO THE INTERPRETATION PLACED THEREON BY THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, THERE WAS NO LEGAL BASIS FOR CONCLUDING THAT THE CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER THE INVITATION TO THE BAUER COMPANY OR ANY OTHER CONTRACTOR WERE ILLEGAL. THEREFORE, IN REPLY TO YOUR SPECIFIC INQUIRY, THERE WAS NO DUTY ON THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TO GIVE YOU ANY AWARD UNDER THE INVITATION UPON RECEIPT BY HIM, AFTER THE CONTRACTS ALREADY HAD BEEN AWARDED TO OTHERS, OF NOTICE THAT HE HAD INTERPRETED YOUR AMBIGUOUS BID TO HAVE A MEANING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU INTENDED.