B-146167, JUN. 27, 1961

B-146167: Jun 27, 1961

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 16. BIDS WERE REQUESTED FOR FURNISHING LABOR AND MATERIALS AND PERFORMING ALL WORK REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LEMON DAM AND RELOCATION OF A COUNTY ROAD. THE WORK TO BE PERFORMED WAS DIVIDED INTO 105 ITEMS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING BIDS AND MAKING PAYMENTS FOR THE WORK. 145 AND THE GOVERNMENT'S ESTIMATE FOR THE WORK WAS $5. ITEMS 16 AND 17 ARE FOR THE EXCAVATION OF EARTH FILL. ITEM 18 IS FOR THE EXCAVATION OF SAND. THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE CORPORATION STATED AS FOLLOWS: "WE HAVE DISCOVERED OMISSIONS IN OUR BID THAT AFFECT ITEMS 16. THERE ARE ENCLOSED BID SHEET 2 AND 3 SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNIT PRICES USED IN THE BID.

B-146167, JUN. 27, 1961

TO THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND CHIEF ENGINEER, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 16, 1961, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN CONCERNING ERRORS THE J. F. WHITE ENGINEERING CORPORATION ALLEGES IT MADE IN ITS BID OPENED ON JUNE 1, 1961.

BY SPECIFICATIONS NO DC-5575, BIDS WERE REQUESTED FOR FURNISHING LABOR AND MATERIALS AND PERFORMING ALL WORK REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LEMON DAM AND RELOCATION OF A COUNTY ROAD, FLORIDA PROJECT, COLORADO. THE WORK TO BE PERFORMED WAS DIVIDED INTO 105 ITEMS FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING BIDS AND MAKING PAYMENTS FOR THE WORK. IN RESPONSE THE J. F. WHITE ENGINEERING CORPORATION, ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, SUBMITTED A BID DATED JUNE 1, 1961, OFFERING TO PERFORM THE WORK UNDER ITEMS 1 THROUGH 105, INCLUSIVE, AT THE VARIOUS UNIT AND JOB PRICES WHICH TOTALED $4,822,513. THE FOUR OTHER BIDS ON THE PROJECT RANGED FROM $5,820,807 TO $6,793,145 AND THE GOVERNMENT'S ESTIMATE FOR THE WORK WAS $5,517,406.

YOU STATE THAT IN RESPONSE TO A LETTER DATED JUNE 2, 1961, REQUESTING INFORMATION REGARDING ITS QUALIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE WORK REQUIRED UNDER THE SPECIFICATIONS, THE CORPORATION IN A LETTER DATED JUNE 7, 1961, STATED THAT IT HAD DISCOVERED OMISSIONS IN ITS BID AFFECTING ITEMS 16, 17, 18 AND 22 OF THE SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUESTED THAT IT BE ALLOWED TO INCREASE ITS BID BY $352,974, AS ACTUAL COST OF THE OMITTED WORK WITHOUT ALLOWANCE FOR OVERHEAD OR PROFIT. ITEMS 16 AND 17 ARE FOR THE EXCAVATION OF EARTH FILL, ITEM 18 IS FOR THE EXCAVATION OF SAND, GRAVEL AND COBBLE FILL, AND ITEM 22 INVOLVES EARTH FILL IN THE DAM EMBANKMENT, ZONE 1. IN AN AFFIDAVIT DATED JUNE 9, 1961, THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE CORPORATION STATED AS FOLLOWS:

"WE HAVE DISCOVERED OMISSIONS IN OUR BID THAT AFFECT ITEMS 16, 17, 18, AND 22. THERE ARE ENCLOSED BID SHEET 2 AND 3 SHOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNIT PRICES USED IN THE BID. THE COST FIGURES IN EACH ITEM COME FROM WORK SHEETS WHICH ARE USED TO PRICE THE EQUIPMENT COSTS APPLICABLE TO THE ITEM. ORIGINAL SHEETS RELATING TO THE ABOVE ITEMS ARE ENCLOSED. APPARENTLY, SOME OF THESE SHEETS WERE MISLAID OR CONFUSED DURING THE LAST MINUTE RUSH OF PREPARING THE BID. WE FIND NOW THAT SHEET 2 FOR ITEM 16 WAS ACTUALLY ENTERED ON THE BID LINE FOR ITEM 17, WHEREAS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE TOTALS OF SHEET 1, ITEM 16. THE SHEET FOR ITEM 17 WAS OMITTED ENTIRELY. FOR ITEM 18 ONLY THE FIRST OF TWO WORK SHEETS WAS ENTERED ON THE BID LINE; SHEET 2, THIRD SEASON WORK WAS OMITTED. SHEET 19 WAS CORRECTLY ENTERED, AS WERE SHEETS 20 AND 21. FOR ITEM 22 THERE WERE AGAIN 2 WORK SHEETS, ONLY ONE OF WHICH WAS ENTERED. THESE WERE THE ONLY ITEMS FOR WHICH MORE THAN ONE WORK SHEET WAS USED, AND WE FOUND THESE SHEETS FILED WITH THE MATERIAL QUOTATIONS AFTER WE BEGAN RECHECKING THE BID.

"WE HAVE PREPARED A SUPPLEMENTAL BID SUMMARY FOR BID ITEMS 16, 17, 18, AND 22 SHOWING THE CORRECT COSTS TOTALS. THE DIFFERENCE IN COST, NOT INCLUDING ANY MARKUP FOR OVERHEAD OR PROFIT, IS $352,974.00. THIS WOULD MADE THE TOTAL BID $5,175,487.00.'

WITH THE AFFIDAVIT THE CORPORATION SUBMITTED CERTIFIED COPIES OF ITS ORIGINAL BASIC WORKSHEETS FOR ITEMS 16, 17, 18 AND 22 AND SUMMARY BID SHEETS FOR ITEMS 9 TO 24, INCLUSIVE. THE CORPORATION ALSO SUBMITTED A REVISED BID SUMMARY SHEET FOR ITEMS 16, 17, 18 AND 22. YOU STATE THAT IF THE UNIT PRICES SHOWN IN THE CORPORATION'S REVISED SUMMARY BID SHEET FOR ITEMS 16, 17, 18 AND 22 ARE USED IN CORRECTING THE CORPORATION'S BID, THE TOTAL INCREASE IN THE CORPORATION'S BID WOULD BE $356,000 RATHER THAN $352,974 AND THAT YOU WOULD USE THESE UNIT PRICES IF THE BID IS CORRECTED.

ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE OF RECORD, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR DOUBT THAT ERRORS WERE MADE IN THE BID OF THE J. F. WHITE ENGINEERING CORPORATION, AS ALLEGED. THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE PRESENT CASE, HOWEVER, ARE NOT SUCH AS WOULD WARRANT A DEPARTURE FROM THE GENERAL RULE THAT BIDS MAY NOT BE CHANGED AFTER THE BIDS HAVE BEEN OPENED. SEE 17 COMP. GEN. 575; 38 ID. 76. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE THE ERRORS WERE ALLEGED AND EXPLAINED PRIOR TO AWARD, THE BID OF THE J. F. WHITE ENGINEERING CORPORATION MAY BE DISREGARDED.