B-142012, FEB. 26, 1960

B-142012: Feb 26, 1960

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

VETERANS ADMINISTRATION SUPPLY DEPOT: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 12. FOUR BIDS WERE RECEIVED AS TO EACH OF THE FIVE ITEMS. THE LOW BID WAS SUBMITTED BY THE PROPPER COMPANY AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.73 FOR EACH ITEM. THE NEXT LOWEST BID AS TO THESE ITEMS WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ARROW GLASS COMPANY AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.80. IT IS REPORTED THAT AFTER REVIEW OF THE BIDS RECEIVED. THE PROPPER COMPANY WAS REQUESTED BY TELEPHONE TO CONFIRM ITS UNIT PRICE OF $0.73 AS TO ITEMS 3. IN THAT ITS UNIT PRICE BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN $1.11 FOR THESE ITEMS. THE EXPLANATION FOR THE ERROR WAS THAT THE BIDDER WAS UNDER THE ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION THAT THE FIVE ITEMS INVOLVED WERE THE SAME ITEM. SINCE YOU ARE ON NOTICE OF THE ERROR.

B-142012, FEB. 26, 1960

TO MR. ADAM E. SHUMAN, CHIEF, MARKETING DIVISION, DENTAL AND SURGICAL SUPPLY, VETERANS ADMINISTRATION SUPPLY DEPOT:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 12, 1960, WITH ENCLOSURES, SUBMITTING FOR CONSIDERATION THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER, IN VIEW OF THE CLAIM OF ERROR, THE BID OF THE PROPPER MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC., LONG ISLAND CITY, NEW YORK, MAY BE AMENDED AS TO ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5 OF INVITATION NO. M1-130-60, DATED JANUARY 14, 1960.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT BY THE CITED INVITATION YOUR DIVISION REQUESTED BIDS--- TO BE OPENED AT 11:00 A.M. ON FEBRUARY 2, 1960--- FOR FURNISHING CERTAIN QUANTITIES OF SYRINGES FOR DELIVERY AT SEVERAL DESTINATIONS. ITEMS 1 AND 2 OF THE INVITATION CALLED FOR THE DELIVERY OF STATED QUANTITIES OF 1 OUNCE SIZE SYRINGES TO SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY, AND HINES,ILLINOIS, AND ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5 OF THE INVITATION CALLED FOR THE DELIVERY OF STATED QUANTITIES OF 3 OUNCE SIZE SYRINGES TO SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY, WILMINGTON, CALIFORNIA, AND HINES, ILLINOIS. FOUR BIDS WERE RECEIVED AS TO EACH OF THE FIVE ITEMS, THE LOWEST AS TO ITEMS 1 AND 2 BEING THE BID SUBMITTED BY THE ARROW GLASS COMPANY AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.36. AS TO THESE ITEMS THE PROPPER COMPANY SUBMITTED A UNIT BID PRICE OF $0.73. AS TO ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5, THE LOW BID WAS SUBMITTED BY THE PROPPER COMPANY AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.73 FOR EACH ITEM. THE NEXT LOWEST BID AS TO THESE ITEMS WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ARROW GLASS COMPANY AT THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.80.

IT IS REPORTED THAT AFTER REVIEW OF THE BIDS RECEIVED, THE PROPPER COMPANY WAS REQUESTED BY TELEPHONE TO CONFIRM ITS UNIT PRICE OF $0.73 AS TO ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5, SINCE THAT CONCERN HAD BID THE SAME UNIT PRICE OF $0.73 FOR ALL ITEMS. THE OTHER THREE BIDDERS ALL BID A HIGHER PRICE FOR ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5 THAN FOR ITEMS 1 AND 2. BY LETTER OF FEBRUARY 9, 1960, THE PROPPER COMPANY ADVISED THAT AN ERROR HAD BEEN MADE AS TO ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5, IN THAT ITS UNIT PRICE BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN $1.11 FOR THESE ITEMS. THE EXPLANATION FOR THE ERROR WAS THAT THE BIDDER WAS UNDER THE ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION THAT THE FIVE ITEMS INVOLVED WERE THE SAME ITEM.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT UPON REQUEST FOR CONFIRMATION OF ITS BID AS TO ITEMS 3, 4 AND 5, THE PROPPER COMPANY ALLEGED ERROR AND EXPLAINED HOW THE ERROR OCCURRED. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND SINCE YOU ARE ON NOTICE OF THE ERROR, IT APPEARS THAT THE BID OF THAT CONCERN CANNOT NOW BE ACCEPTED IN GOOD FAITH. ACCORDINGLY, THE BID OF THE PROPPER COMPANY SHOULD BE DISREGARDED IN MAKING AN AWARD IN THIS CASE.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR REQUEST, THE ENCLOSURES TO YOUR LETTER ARE RETURNED HEREWITH.