B-167195, AUG. 25, 1969

B-167195, AUG. 25, 1969

BID MISTAKE - AFTER AWARD DECISION TO SECRETARY OF INTERIOR CONCERNING DECISION OF JUNE 23, 1969, ON A MISTAKE IN BID CLAIM OF BRAUN-BRUMFIELD INC. UNDER CONTRACT WITH BUREAU OF FISHERIES. WHERE CONTRACTING OFFICER IN REQUESTING VERIFICATION OF ITEM IN BID WHICH WAS $3,476 LESS THAN ITEM QUOTED BY ONLY OTHER BIDDER MERELY TOLD BIDDER HE WAS CHECKING ON PRICE AND DID NOT INDICATE POSSIBILITY OF MISTAKE THERE WAS NOT ADEQUATE REQUEST FOR VERIFICATION. THEREFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVELY PROPOSED ADDITIONAL PAYMENT REPRESENTING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ITEM QUOTED BY THE TWO BIDDERS MAY BE ALLOWED.

TO MR. SECRETARY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO A LETTER DATED AUGUST 13, 1969, FROM THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION, RELATIVE TO OUR DECISION, B 167195, JUNE 23, 1969, ON A MISTAKE IN BID CLAIM OF BRAUN-BRUMFIELD, INCORPORATED, ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN, UNDER A CONTRACT WHICH WAS AWARDED TO THAT COMPANY PURSUANT TO BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES ADVERTISED SOLICITATION NO. CF4-100, DATED OCTOBER 3, 1968, AS AMENDED.

THERE WAS INVOLVED A QUESTION WHETHER THERE HAD BEEN AN ADEQUATE REQUEST FOR VERIFICATION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S ITEM NO. 1 JOB PRICE OF $3,610, AN AMOUNT WHICH IS $3,476 LESS THAN THE ITEM NO. 1 JOB PRICE OF $7,086, QUOTED BY THE ONLY OTHER BIDDER. WE SUGGESTED THAT AN ADDITIONAL STATEMENT BE OBTAINED FROM THE CONTRACTING OFFICER REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION OF OCTOBER 23, 1968, WHICH RESULTED IN A CONFIRMATION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S BID. IN THAT CONNECTION, THERE WAS ENCLOSED WITH THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY'S LETTER OF AUGUST 13, 1969, A MEMORANDUM DATED JULY 29, 1969, FROM THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT OFFICER OF THE BUREAU OF COMMERCAIL FISHERIES AT ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN, ADVISING THAT, WHEN HE TELEPHONED THE CONTRACTOR HE WAS MERELY CHECKING ON THE PRICE BID AND HE DID NOT GIVE THE CONTRACTOR'S REPRESENTATIVE "ANY REASON TO THINK THERE WAS A POSSIBLE MISTAKE.'

WE AGREE WITH THE OPINION EXPRESSED IN THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY'S LETTER THAT THIS DID NOT CONSTITUTE ADEQUATE NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTOR OF THE EXTENT OF THE POSSIBLE MISTAKE IN THE QUOTED ITEM NO. 1 JOB PRICE AND THAT THE CONTRACT PRICE SHOULD BE INCREASED BY THE AMOUNT OF $3,476 ON ACCOUNT OF THE MISTAKE WHICH WAS MADE IN THE CONTRACTOR'S BID. THE CLAIM OF MISTAKE WAS BASED UPON A CONTENTION THAT THE ITEM NO. 1 JOB PRICE WAS INTENDED TO BE DOUBLE THE QUOTED PRICE OF $3,610. HOWEVER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GENERAL RULE IN SUCH CASES, THE ADMINISTRATIVELY PROPOSED ADDITIONAL PAYMENT TO THE CONTRACTOR REPRESENTS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ITEM NO. 1 JOB PRICES QUOTED BY THE TWO BIDDERS WHO RESPONDED TO THE SOLICITATION OF OCTOBER 3, 1968, AS AMENDED. SEE 21 COMP. GEN. 362.