B-179317, AUG 31, 1973
Highlights
AGREEMENT THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS ON CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF ERROR AND THAT THE BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN VERIFIED PRIOR TO AWARD. $9. 284 ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT IS $6. 284 ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT IS $6. WHICH FACTORS SHOULD HAVE PLACED THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ON NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF A MISTAKE IN THE BID UPON WHICH THE CONTRACT IS BASED. WE HAVE REVIEWED THE ADMINISTRATIVE FILE AND. WE AGREE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS ON CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF ERROR AND THAT THE BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN VERIFIED PRIOR TO AWARD.
B-179317, AUG 31, 1973
AGREEMENT THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS ON CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF ERROR AND THAT THE BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN VERIFIED PRIOR TO AWARD. $9,284 PRICE IN SALES CONTRACT NO. 98-09-DP-(S)-3-2622 WITH NADELL & CO., INC., FOR ITEM 118 TO BE DECREASED TO THE ESTABLISHED INTENDED PRICE OF $4,284 ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT IS $6,284 MORE THAN THE $3,000 UPSET PRICE AND $5,504 MORE THAN THE SECOND HIGH BID.
TO MR. ARTHUR F. SAMPSON:
BY LETTER DATED JULY 27, 1973, WITH ENCLOSURES, YOUR GENERAL COUNSEL, IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, RECOMMENDED THAT THE $9,284 PRICE IN SALES CONTRACT NO. GS-09-DP-(S)-3-2622 WITH NADELL & CO., INC., FOR ITEM 118 BE DECREASED TO THE ESTABLISHED INTENDED PRICE OF $4,284 ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT IS $6,284 MORE THAN THE $3,000 UPSET PRICE AND $5,504 MORE THAN THE SECOND HIGH BID, WHICH FACTORS SHOULD HAVE PLACED THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ON NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF A MISTAKE IN THE BID UPON WHICH THE CONTRACT IS BASED.
WE HAVE REVIEWED THE ADMINISTRATIVE FILE AND, ON THE BASIS OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN, WE AGREE THAT THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WAS ON CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF ERROR AND THAT THE BID SHOULD HAVE BEEN VERIFIED PRIOR TO AWARD. WE THEREFORE CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE SALES PRICE OF ITEM 118 SHOULD BE CORRECTED TO READ $4,284.