B-149571, AUG. 31, 1962

B-149571: Aug 31, 1962

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 25. DUE TO THE FACT THAT ONE PAGE OF THE SET OF PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE FIRM WAS MISSING. ACCOMPANYING THE BIDDER'S LETTER OF JULY 20 WERE COPIES OF ITS ORIGINAL WORK SHEET SHOWING ITS ITEMIZED COST OF $3. THE RELATED FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SUPPORT THE CONCLUSION THAT A BONA FIDE ERROR WAS MADE AS ALLEGED. SINCE THE ALLEGATION OF ERROR WAS MADE BEFORE AWARD AND SUPPLEMENTED BY SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE.

B-149571, AUG. 31, 1962

TO JAMES B. RING, CONTRACTING OFFICER, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 25, 1962, WITH ENCLOSURES, SUBMITTING FOR OUR CONSIDERATION AND DECISION THE QUESTION WHETHER THE BID OF NEELY TITLE COMPANY SHOULD BE DISREGARDED IN THE AWARDING OF A CONTRACT UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS, SPECIFICATION NO. PM-450-63-19A-2, DATED JUNE 27, 1962.

THE RECORD DISCLOSES THAT AFTER OPENING OF THE BIDS ON JULY 18, 1962, BUT BEFORE AWARD, THE ABOVE-NAMED FIRM STATED IN LETTER OF JULY 20, 1962, THAT IT HAD MADE A MISTAKE IN THE COMPUTATION OF ITS OFFER IN THAT IT QUOTED ON FURNISHING THE NECESSARY MATERIAL AND LABOR TO FINISH ONE TOILET ROOM INSTEAD OF TWO, DUE TO THE FACT THAT ONE PAGE OF THE SET OF PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE FIRM WAS MISSING. ACCOMPANYING THE BIDDER'S LETTER OF JULY 20 WERE COPIES OF ITS ORIGINAL WORK SHEET SHOWING ITS ITEMIZED COST OF $3,904, BASED ON ONE ROOM, AND A CORRECTED BREAKDOWN OF PROBABLE COSTS TOTALING $7,255.74, COMPUTED ON TWO ROOMS.

THE RELATED FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SUPPORT THE CONCLUSION THAT A BONA FIDE ERROR WAS MADE AS ALLEGED. A COMPARISON OF THE NEELY BID OF $3,904 WITH THE LOWEST CORRECT BID OF $6,886 AND THE GOVERNMENT'S ENGINEERING ESTIMATE OF $8,000 FURNISHES SUBSTANTIAL PROOF OF THE MISTAKE. SINCE THE ALLEGATION OF ERROR WAS MADE BEFORE AWARD AND SUPPLEMENTED BY SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE, THE BID OF NEELY TITLE COMPANY MAY BE DISREGARDED. SEE UNITED STATES V. METRO NOVELTY MANUFACTURING CO., 125 CT.CL. 713; 35 COMP. GEN. 136.