B-163662, APR. 2, 1968

B-163662, APR. 2, 1968

TO LEROY HIGHTOWER COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF FEBRUARY 21, FEBRUARY 22 AND FEBRUARY 23, 1968, WHICH WERE FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE FOR REVIEW BY SENATOR CLINTON P. ANDERSON. YOU HAVE PROTESTED AGAINST THE CANCELLATION OF THE INVITATION FOR BIDS ISSUED ON JANUARY 29, 1968, BY THE ALBUQUERQUE REGIONAL OFFICE OF THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, VA, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF VARIOUS SERVICES TO PROPERTY OF THE VA AS ASSIGNED BY THE MANAGEMENT BROKER. THE SERVICES WHICH WERE DESCRIBED IN ITEMS 1 THROUGH 5 INCLUDED INITIAL AND RECURRING CLEAN-UP AND YARD MAINTENANCE.

THE INVITATION ISSUED ON JANUARY 29, 1968, INVITED BIDDERS TO INSERT A "BID PER UNIT" UNDER EACH OF THE 5 DESCRIBED SERVICES. HOWEVER, BIDDERS WERE NOT GIVEN ANY INFORMATION AS TO THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF UNITS TO BE SERVICED UNDER EACH ITEM. AFTER BID OPENING THE VA FOUND THAT BIDDERS DID NOT HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE SERVICES WHICH WERE TO BE PERFORMED APPARENTLY BECAUSE BIDDERS WERE NOT FURNISHED WITH INFORMATION REGARDING THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF UNITS TO BE SERVICED. CONSEQUENTLY, THE VA DECIDED TO CANCEL THE INVITATION.

THE NUMBER OF UNITS TO BE SERVICED IN THE INSTANT PROCUREMENT INFLUENCES THE "BID PER UNIT" PRICES QUOTED BY BIDDERS. IT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN THAT BIDDERS WERE AWARE OF THE ACTUAL OR ESTIMATED NUMBER OF UNITS BEFORE BID OPENING. THE FAILURE TO ADVISE BIDDERS OF THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF UNITS WHICH WERE TO BE SERVICED COULD ONLY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE ABILITY OF BIDDERS TO COMPUTE THE COSTS OF PERFORMING THE SERVICES DESCRIBED IN ITEMS 1 THROUGH 5 WITH ANY DEGREE OF ACCURACY.

IN B-148888, AUGUST 7, 1962, AN INVITATION ADVISED BIDDERS THAT DELIVERY WOULD BE ACCEPTED F.O.B. ORIGIN, WITH SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS TO BE FURNISHED AT A LATER DATE. INADVERTENTLY, THE INVITATION OMITTED THE NUMBER OF ESTIMATED DESTINATIONS AND, AS A RESULT, BIDDERS WERE UNABLE TO COMPUTE WITH ANY DEGREE OF ACCURACY THE COST OF PACKING AND HANDLING WHICH WERE MATERIAL FACTORS, AND WHICH WOULD INCREASE PROPORTIONATELY WITH ANY ADDITIONAL NUMBER OF DESTINATIONS. AT LEAST ONE BIDDER LIMITED ITS OFFER TO ONE DESTINATION. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WE CONCURRED WITH THE PROCUREMENT OFFICIALS THAT THE INVITATION WAS MATERIALLY DEFECTIVE SINCE PROSPECTIVE SUPPLIERS WERE NOT AFFORDED A COMMON GROUND UPON WHICH TO COMPETE. THE RECORD IN THE INSTANT CASE ALSO INDICATES THAT THE INVITATION DID NOT AFFORD BIDDERS A COMMON GROUND UPON WHICH TO COMPETE; CONSEQUENTLY, WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE VA'S DECISION TO REJECT ALL BIDS.