B-123954, JUN. 1, 1955
Highlights
TO THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10. RELATIVE TO AN ERROR ALLEGED BY FELT PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING COMPANY TO HAVE BEEN MADE ON ITEM NO. 5 OF ITS BID SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION NO. WHICH WAS ACCEPTED APRIL 1. ERROR IS APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE COMPANY'S BID SINCE THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.126 FOR ITEM NO. 5 MULTIPLIED BY THE SPECIFIED QUANTITY (960) WILL NOT EQUAL THE TOTAL OF $1. THE COMPANY'S UNIT BID PRICE WAS CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN ANY OF THE TEN OTHER UNIT PRICE BIDS RECEIVED ON ITEM NO. 5. THE DISPARITY BETWEEN THE BIDS AND THE INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE UNIT PRICE AND TOTAL BID PRICE FOR THE ITEM SHOULD HAVE PLACED THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ON NOTICE OF THE PROBABILITY THAT THE COMPANY HAD MADE AN ERROR ON ITEM NO. 5 OF ITS BID AND.
B-123954, JUN. 1, 1955
TO THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF MAY 10, 1955, WITH ENCLOSURES, RELATIVE TO AN ERROR ALLEGED BY FELT PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING COMPANY TO HAVE BEEN MADE ON ITEM NO. 5 OF ITS BID SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION NO. ORD-20-113-55-588, WHICH WAS ACCEPTED APRIL 1, 1955.
ERROR IS APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE COMPANY'S BID SINCE THE UNIT PRICE OF $0.126 FOR ITEM NO. 5 MULTIPLIED BY THE SPECIFIED QUANTITY (960) WILL NOT EQUAL THE TOTAL OF $1,209.60, AS EXTENDED TO THE AMOUNT COLUMN FOR THE ITEM. ALSO, THE COMPANY'S UNIT BID PRICE WAS CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN ANY OF THE TEN OTHER UNIT PRICE BIDS RECEIVED ON ITEM NO. 5. THE DISPARITY BETWEEN THE BIDS AND THE INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE UNIT PRICE AND TOTAL BID PRICE FOR THE ITEM SHOULD HAVE PLACED THE CONTRACTING OFFICER ON NOTICE OF THE PROBABILITY THAT THE COMPANY HAD MADE AN ERROR ON ITEM NO. 5 OF ITS BID AND, THEREFORE, THE COMPANY SHOULD HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO VERIFY ITS BID PRIOR TO AWARD. SEE 15 COMP. GEN. 746. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE INVOLVED, THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE BID DID NOT LEGALLY OBLIGATE THE COMPANY TO FURNISH ITEM NO. 5 AT THE UNIT PRICE QUOTED IN ITS BID. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE IT APPEARS THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO DELIVERY, THE AWARD AS TO ITEM NO. 5 SHOULD BE CANCELED.
THE PAPERS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE STATEMENT OF THE CONTRACTING OFFICER, DATED APRIL 15, 1955, AND COPIES OF THE CONTRACTOR'S LETTERS OF APRIL 4 AND APRIL 12, 1955, ARE RETURNED.