Skip to main content

Need for Improved Reviews of Quantity Estimates Prepared by Architect-Engineers for Solicitation of Construction Bids

B-118634 Published: Aug 03, 1967. Publicly Released: Aug 03, 1967.
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

The General Accounting Office has reviewed the contract for the construction of the dam, dikes, and spillway at the Summersville Reservoir Project, Gauley River, West Virginia, administered by the Huntington District, Ohio River Division, Corps of Engineers (Civil Functions), Department of the Army. We also reviewed the designs, plans, specifications, and quantity estimate prepared by an architect-engineer for the dam, dikes, and spillway. Our review was made pursuant to the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921 (31 U.S.C. 53), and the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 67). Because we noted that the price of $15.4 million for the advertised construction contract was increased by about $8.2 million for additional work through negotiations with the contractor and that the cost of the additional work was not subject to the benefits afforded by formal advertising, we initiated a review primarily directed toward determining whether the Corps should have recognized the need for the additional work before the construction contract was awarded and should have provided for the work in the contract. After we had obtained sufficient information to determine the cause of the large increase in the contract price, we directed our examination to the review of quantity estimates prepared by architect-engineers, which appeared to warrant particular attention, and we did not attempt to evaluate the Corps' procedures for the preparation of plans and specifications or the overall administration of the contract. Our review was conducted at the Corps' Huntington District Office in Huntington, West Virginia; the Ohio River Division Office in Cincinnati, Ohio; and the Office of the Chief of Engineers in Washington, D.C. We examined applicable design memorandums, contract drawings and specifications, computations of estimated quantities, records of negotiations, and findings of fact supporting the contract modifications. We also held discussions with appropriate officials of the Corps and an architect-engineer firm. In addition, we obtained information on certain review procedures in four other districts and two other division offices.

Full Report

Office of Public Affairs