B-154304, JUL. 13, 1964
Highlights
WHICH WAS AWARDED TO INTERSTATE RESTAURANT SUPPLY COMPANY ON MARCH 15. THE BASIS OF THE REQUEST FOR REFORMATION OF THE CONTRACT IS A MISTAKE ALLEGED BY INTERSTATE. TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN ITS BID PRICES FOR ONE OF THE FOURTEEN ITEMS. INTERSTATE WAS ADVISED BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 31. REFORMATION OF THE COMPLETED CONTRACT IS NOT CONSIDERED PROPER. THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST FOR AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT PRICES WILL THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED TO BE A CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE LAST COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLAIMANT WAS ITS LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 18. THE POSSIBILITY THAT CLAIMANT MAY HAVE SECURED SOME ADJUSTMENT FROM ITS SUPPLIER. TO WHOM THE MISTAKE WAS DUE. WE WILL CONSIDER THE MATTER CLOSED IN THE ABSENCE OF FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CLAIMANT.
B-154304, JUL. 13, 1964
TO THE HONORABLE BERNARD L. BOUTIN, ADMINISTRATOR, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION:
THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER DATED MAY 26, 1964, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING OUR APPROVAL OF REFORMATION OF CONTRACT NO. TC-GS-09S-9967, WHICH WAS AWARDED TO INTERSTATE RESTAURANT SUPPLY COMPANY ON MARCH 15, 1962. THE CONTRACT COVERED AN AWARD FOR REQUIREMENTS THROUGH DECEMBER 30, 1962, FOR SOME FOURTEEN DIFFERENT ITEMS OF FOOD PREPARATION AND SERVING EQUIPMENT, AGGREGATING OVER $31,000 BASED ON ESTIMATED REQUIREMENTS.
THE BASIS OF THE REQUEST FOR REFORMATION OF THE CONTRACT IS A MISTAKE ALLEGED BY INTERSTATE, AFTER AWARD, TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN ITS BID PRICES FOR ONE OF THE FOURTEEN ITEMS. INTERSTATE WAS ADVISED BY LETTER DATED AUGUST 31, 1962, THAT IT SHOULD SUBMIT CERTAIN EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS ALLEGATION OF MISTAKE IN ITS BID, AND THAT IT MUST, PENDING DECISION ON ITS REQUEST FOR A PRICE INCREASE, PERFORM UNDER ITS CONTRACT AT THE PRICES ORIGINALLY BID. INTERSTATE SUBMITTED THE EVIDENCE REQUESTED BY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 1962, AND COMPLETED PERFORMANCE UNDER THE CONTRACT BY FILLING ALL ORDERS THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1962.
SINCE THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT EXPIRED AT THE END OF 1962 AND PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO INTERSTATE AT THE PRICES STATED IN THE CONTRACT, REFORMATION OF THE COMPLETED CONTRACT IS NOT CONSIDERED PROPER. THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUEST FOR AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT PRICES WILL THEREFORE BE CONSIDERED TO BE A CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION. HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE LAST COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLAIMANT WAS ITS LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 18, 1962, AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT CLAIMANT MAY HAVE SECURED SOME ADJUSTMENT FROM ITS SUPPLIER, TO WHOM THE MISTAKE WAS DUE, WE WILL CONSIDER THE MATTER CLOSED IN THE ABSENCE OF FUTURE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE CLAIMANT.