B-128699, SEP. 18, 1956

B-128699, SEP. 18, 1956

TO CRAFTSMAN PRESS, INCORPORATED:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO LETTER DATED AUGUST 22, 1956, FROM JESSE B. MESSITTE, ESQUIRE, REQUESTING ON YOUR BEHALF RECONSIDERATION OF DECISION DATED JULY 31, 1956, TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, B-128699.

IT WAS HELD IN THE DECISION THAT, ALTHOUGH THE BID OF CRAFTSMAN PRESS, INCORPORATED, CONTAINED NO EXPRESS QUALIFICATION, THE PRICES QUOTED ON ITEMS 10 AND 20 WERE SUCH THAT IT CLEARLY INDICATED THAT THE BIDDER HAD MADE AN ERROR OR WAS QUOTING ON A BASIS NOT COMPLYING WITH THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; THAT THE BIDDER HAD CONFIRMED THE FACT THAT ITS BID ON THE TWO ITEMS WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE BASED ON SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS; AND THAT, WHILE THE BIDDER AGREED, AFTER THE BID OPENING, TO ABIDE BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS AT THE SAME PRICES, IT COULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO DO SO AND THAT THE BID SHOULD BE DISREGARDED.

IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, IT IS CONTENDED THAT THE BID OF CRAFTSMAN PRESS WAS WITHOUT QUALIFICATION OR RESERVATION OF ANY KIND AND ON ITS FACE MET THE CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF THE INVITATION IN ALL RESPECTS; THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INVITATION WERE FULLY UNDERSTOOD; AND THAT THE BID ON THE VARIOUS ITEMS, INCLUDING ITEMS 10 AND 20, WERE MADE ON THE BASIS THEREOF FOR SOUND BUSINESS REASONS. IT IS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THE LETTER OF JUNE 22, 1956, SHOULD BE DISREGARDED AS SURPLUSAGE SINCE CRAFTSMAN PRESS STATED THAT IT WOULD HOLD TO ITS BID AND CONFIRMED ITS BID PRICES ON ITEMS 10 AND 20 AND STATED THAT IT WOULD FURNISH NEGATIVES FULLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

THE PRICES QUOTED BY CRAFTSMAN PRESS ON ITEMS 10 AND 20 WERE SUCH THAT IT APPEARED OBVIOUS THAT AN ERROR HAD BEEN MADE OR THAT THE BID ON THE TWO ITEMS WAS NOT BASED UPON SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE CONTRACTING OFFICER REQUESTED THE BIDDER TO CONFIRM ITS BID PRICES ON THE ITEMS AND THAT IT UNDERSTOOD THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SPECIFICATIONS. IN A LETTER DATED JUNE 22, 1956, THE BIDDER INDICATED THAT THE PRICES QUOTED ON ITEMS 10 AND 20 WERE BASED ON PROCESS NOT MEETING THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS, AND THAT IF THAT PROCESS WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE, IT WOULD HOLD TO ITS BID PRICES ON THE ITEMS AND FURNISH NEGATIVES FULLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

NOTWITHSTANDING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NOW FURNISHED, THE EVIDENCE RELIED UPON IN DISREGARDING THE BID OF CRAFTSMAN PRESS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT THE BIDDER DID NOT INTEND TO FULLY COMPLY WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PRICES QUOTED. FURTHERMORE THE BID AS SUBMITTED WAS AN UNBALANCED BID AND, BECAUSE OF THE UNBALANCED BID, THE GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE HAD TO PERMIT THE BIDDER TO WITHDRAW IF IT HAD CHOSEN TO ALLEGE ERROR. THE BIDDER PLACED ITSELF IN THE POSITION WHERE, AFTER THE OPENING OF THE BIDS, IT HAD THE OPTION OF ALLEGING THAT THE PRICES QUOTED ON ITEMS 10 AND 20 EITHER WERE OR WERE NOT BASED ON SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

ACCORDINGLY, THERE APPEARS NO SOUND BASIS TO MODIFY THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN THE DECISION OF JULY 31, 1956.