B-146598, AUG. 28, 1961

B-146598: Aug 28, 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 DATED AUGUST 4. SIXTEEN BIDS WERE RECEIVED FOR SCHEDULE NO. 1 OF THE INVITATION AND EIGHT BIDS WERE RECEIVED FOR SCHEDULE NO. 2. THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FOR SCHEDULE NO. 1 WAS $3. THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FOR SCHEDULE NO. 2 WAS $1. WAS MADE BY ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTORS. BROADWAY'S BID ON SCHEDULE 1 WAS $6. IT IS REPORTED THAT AT THE TIME OF THE BID OPENING A REPRESENTATIVE OF BROADWAY STATED ORALLY IT WAS THE COMPANY'S INTENTION TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL FOR A COMBINATION OF SCHEDULES NO. 1 AND NO. 2 ONLY. THE CLAIM OF ERROR WAS CONFIRMED BY LETTER OF AUGUST 3. WITH WHICH BROADWAY FURNISHED ITS ORIGINAL SUMMARY SHEET IN SUPPORT OF ITS STATEMENT THAT THE BID WAS COMPUTED FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT AS A WHOLE.

B-146598, AUG. 28, 1961

TO CONTRACTING OFFICER, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED AUGUST 4, 1961, WITH ENCLOSURES, YOUR FILE 150, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN CONCERNING AN ERROR BROADWAY MAINTENANCE CORPORATION ALLEGES IT MADE IN ITS BID OPENED ON JULY 18, 1961.

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DENVER, COLORADO, REQUESTED BIDS FOR CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION AND ELECTRICAL WORK TO BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS NO. DC-5610 FOR THE GLEN CANYON-SHIPROCK 230-KILOVOLT TRANSMISSION LINE, TRANSMISSION DIVISION, ARIZONA-NEW MEXICO, COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT. SIXTEEN BIDS WERE RECEIVED FOR SCHEDULE NO. 1 OF THE INVITATION AND EIGHT BIDS WERE RECEIVED FOR SCHEDULE NO. 2.

THE QUOTED PRICES FOR WORK TO BE PERFORMED UNDER SCHEDULE NO. 1 RANGED FROM A LOW OF $4,221,337, QUOTED BY MORRISON-KNUDSEN COMPANY, INC., TO A HIGH OF $6,881,168. THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FOR SCHEDULE NO. 1 WAS $3,666,730. THE QUOTED PRICES FOR WORK TO BE PERFORMED UNDER SCHEDULE NO. 2 RANGED FROM A LOW OF $566,520, QUOTED BY BROADWAY, TO A HIGH OF $1,221.085. THE ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FOR SCHEDULE NO. 2 WAS $1,213,055. BID OF $4,854,544 FOR BOTH SCHEDULES, ON AN ALL OR NONE BASIS, WAS MADE BY ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTORS. MORRISON-KNUDSEN DID NOT BID ON SCHEDULE NO. 2; BROADWAY'S BID ON SCHEDULE 1 WAS $6,881,168. AWARD ON MORRISON-KNUDSEN'S BID FOR SCHEDULE NO. 1 AND BROADWAY'S FOR SCHEDULE NO. 2 WOULD TOTAL $4,787,857.

IT IS REPORTED THAT AT THE TIME OF THE BID OPENING A REPRESENTATIVE OF BROADWAY STATED ORALLY IT WAS THE COMPANY'S INTENTION TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL FOR A COMBINATION OF SCHEDULES NO. 1 AND NO. 2 ONLY. THE CLAIM OF ERROR WAS CONFIRMED BY LETTER OF AUGUST 3, 1961, WITH WHICH BROADWAY FURNISHED ITS ORIGINAL SUMMARY SHEET IN SUPPORT OF ITS STATEMENT THAT THE BID WAS COMPUTED FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT AS A WHOLE, AND THAT SUBSTANTIAL ITEMS OF COST PROPERLY APPLICABLE TO SCHEDULE 2 WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE BID PRICE THEREON.

WHILE THE INVITATION AND BID FORM COULD HARDLY HAVE BEEN MORE SPECIFIC IN ITS NOTIFICATION TO BIDDERS THAT THEY MIGHT MAKE SUCH STIPULATIONS AS THEY MIGHT DESIRE REGARDING A COMBINATION OF SCHEDULES, BROADWAY'S BID CONTAINED NO SUCH STIPULATION AND ON ITS FACE COULD BE CONSIDERED ONLY AS OFFERING THE TWO SCHEDULES SEPARATELY AT THE RESPECTIVE PRICES STATED.

HOWEVER, THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ITS BID ON SCHEDULE 2 AND THE BUREAU'S ESTIMATE WAS SO GREAT THAT WE FEEL THAT YOU COULD NOT PROPERLY HAVE ACCEPTED THAT BID WITHOUT REQUESTING VERIFICATION. IN THE LIGHT OF BROADWAY'S EXPLANATION OF ITS COST ALLOCATIONS WE THEREFORE CONCLUDE THAT ITS BID MAY BE DISREGARDED.