B-142022, MAR. 2, 1960

B-142022, MAR. 2, 1960

TO THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO LETTER OF FEBRUARY 11, 1960, WITH ENCLOSURES, FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR LOGISTICS, TRANSMITTING FOR OUR DECISION FOR REQUEST OF LIVSEY AND COMPANY, INC., FOR RELIEF IN THE NATURE OF A REFORMATION OF CONTRACT NO. DA-15-056 AIII-731, BECAUSE OF AN ERROR STATED TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN ITS BID SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 15-056-59-125.

THE RECORD DISCLOSES THAT IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID INVITATION THE CONTRACTOR SUBMITTED AN ITEMIZED BID TO FURNISH THE MATERIAL AND LABOR NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE PROPOSED PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS, BY USE OF EITHER ONE OF TWO ALTERNATE PLANS, WITH THE RIGHT OF ELECTION RESERVED IN THE GOVERNMENT TO AWARD THE CONTRACT UNDER THE PLAN DEEMED TO BEST SERVE THE INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES. THE TWO PLANS, LISTED AS ITEMS NOS. 10 AND 10A OF THE INVITATION, INVOLVED THE EXTENSION OF A GAS DISTRIBUTION LINE TO THE BOILER PLANT. THE INITIAL 550 FEET OF THE EXTENSION WAS COMMON TO BOTH PLANS, BUT FROM THAT POINT ON PLAN A (ITEM NO. 10) FOLLOWED A LONGER ROUTE AND USED LARGER PIPE THAN PLAN B (ITEM NO. 10A). THE SPECIFICATION DRAWING INDICATED EACH PLAN BY CIRCLING THE ROUTE TO BE TAKEN BEYOND THE POINT WHERE THE TWO ROUTES DIVERGED FROM THE END OF THE EXTENSION COMMON TO BOTH PLANS. THUS, BOTH CIRCLES FAILED TO INCLUDE THE INITIAL 550 FEET OF THE NECESSARY EXTENSION, ALTHOUGH THAT INITIAL FOOTAGE WAS SHOWN AND DESIGNATED "PROPOSED 16 INCH GAS LINE.' THE PRICES QUOTED FOR PLANS A AND B WERE AS FOLLOWS:

TABLE

A B

BIDDER NO. 1 $20,000 $10,000

"DO;, NO. 2 20,527 11,381

"DO;, NO. 3 23,304 12,630

"DO;, NO. 4 25,800 15,470

"DO;, NO. 5 (LIVSEY) 22,457 5,485

THE CONTRACTOR'S TOTAL BID UNDER PLAN B WAS $107,854, AS COMPARED TO A TOTAL BID OF $122,018 BY THE SECOND LOW BIDDER (BIDDER NO. 2 ABOVE).

AFTER AWARD OF THE CONTRACT AND DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK, THE LOW BIDDER NOTIFIED THE PROCUREMENT OFFICIAL THAT THROUGH INADVERTENCE IT CONSTRUED SHEET 8 OF DRAWING NO. 2859, AS CALLING FOR INSTALLATION OF THE GAS LINE ONLY FROM THE POINT WHERE THE ROUTES OF THE TWO PLANS SEPARATED. AS A RESULT OF SUCH MISINTERPRETATION OF THE PLANS THERE WERE OMITTED ACTUAL MATERIAL AND LABOR COSTS OF $8,442.92, EXCLUSIVE OF OVERHEAD AND PROFIT, COVERING EXTENSION OF THE INITIAL 550 FEET OF GAS LINE.

THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY DOUBT BUT THAT THE ERROR WAS MADE AS ALLEGED, WHICH ALLEGATION IS SUPPORTED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S WORKSHEETS. MOREOVER, IN SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT DATED JANUARY 19, 1960, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER STATES, IN SUBSTANCE, THAT SINCE THE CONTRACTOR'S BID ON ITEM NO. 10A WAS APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF THAT OF THE NEXT LOWEST BID, THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT DIFFERENCE TO WARRANT AN INQUIRY BEFORE AWARD. WE CONCUR WITH SUCH CONCLUSION AND FEEL THAT SUCH FACTS ARE SUFFICIENT TO CHARGE THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WITH CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE OF ERROR IN THE BID. THIS CONNECTION, WE BELIEVE THE CONSIDERABLY GREATER DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRACTOR'S BIDS ON ITEMS 10 AND 10A IN COMPARISON WITH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE ITEMS IN THE OTHER BIDS, IS ALSO SIGNIFICANT. VIEW THEREOF, AND SINCE THE CONTRACTOR'S BID PRICE, WHEN ADJUSTED TO REFLECT THE OMITTED COSTS, REMAINS APPROXIMATELY $5,800 LESS THAN THE LOWEST CORRECT BID RECEIVED, WE AGREE WITH THE OPINION OF THE DIVISION COMMANDER, AND THE COMMANDING GENERAL, THIRD UNITED STATES ARMY, THAT THE CONTRACTOR IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF.

ACCORDINGLY, THE CONTRACT MAY BE INCREASED TO THE EXTENT OF THE ACTUAL LABOR, MATERIAL, AND RELATED COSTS OMITTED BY THE CONTRACTOR UNDER ITEM NO. 10A OF ITS BID. A COPY OF THIS DECISION SHOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE VOUCHER COVERING PAYMENT OF THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT INVOLVED.