B-136565, JUN. 27, 1958
Highlights
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 24. ALLEGES WAS MADE IN HIS BID OPENED ON JUNE 13. THAT THE UNIT PRICE QUOTED BY HIM FOR THAT ITEM WAS FOR ONE PLASTIC EYE AND NOT FOR TWO PLASTIC EYES AS REQUIRED. THAT THE CORRECT UNIT PRICE FOR THAT ITEM IS $80. THE UNIT FOR ITEM 1 ON WHICH PRICES WERE TO BE BASED IS "TWO EYES" AND THE UNIT FOR ITEM 2 ON WHICH PRICES WERE TO BE BASED IS "EACH" OR ONE PLASTIC EYE. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT MR. SINCE TWO PLASTIC EYES HAVE TO BE FURNISHED UNDER ITEM 1 AT THE UNIT PRICE QUOTED. THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT MR. SINCE IT WAS BELIEVED THAT THE BID OF MR. HIEB WAS ERRONEOUS. SUCH BELIEF WAS CONFIRMED AND THE ERROR WAS EXPLAINED PRIOR TO AWARD.
B-136565, JUN. 27, 1958
TO MR. JOHN W. THOMAS, CONTRACTING OFFICER, VETERANS ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 24, 1958, FILE REFERENCE 5140/134, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO THE ACTION TO BE TAKEN CONCERNING AN ERROR WHICH C. RAY HIEB, DALLAS, TEXAS, ALLEGES WAS MADE IN HIS BID OPENED ON JUNE 13, 1958.
IN RESPONSE TO INVITATION NO. 59-17, C. RAY HIEB SUBMITTED A BID, IN PART, AS FOLLOWS:
CHART "ITEM UNIT
NO. SUPPLIES OR SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
THE PERIOD OF TIME COVERED
BY THIS CONTRACT SHALL BE
FROM JULY 1, 1958 THROUGH
JUNE 30, 1959.
EST
1. PLASTIC EYES, ARTIFICIAL,
CUSTOM MADE (TWO EYES
ORDERED FOR A VETERAN AT
THE SAME TIME, ONE OF TWO
WHICH MAY BE A NIGHT EYE) 2 EYES 40.00 $80.00
2. PLASTIC EYE, ARTIFICIAL,
CUSTOM MADE 16 EA. 40.99 640.00
AGGREGATE .......................... $720.00"
THE ABSTRACT OF BIDS SHOWS THAT THE ONLY OTHER BIDDER QUOTED UNIT PRICES OF $70 AND $40 FOR ITEMS 1 AND 2, RESPECTIVELY.
UPON BEING REQUESTED TO VERIFY HIS BID AS TO ITEM 1, MR. HIEB ADVISED BY LETTER DATED JUNE 16, 1958, THAT THE UNIT PRICE QUOTED BY HIM FOR THAT ITEM WAS FOR ONE PLASTIC EYE AND NOT FOR TWO PLASTIC EYES AS REQUIRED; THAT HE HAD MISINTERPRETED THE UNIT FOR ITEM 1, AND THAT THE CORRECT UNIT PRICE FOR THAT ITEM IS $80.
THE UNIT FOR ITEM 1 ON WHICH PRICES WERE TO BE BASED IS "TWO EYES" AND THE UNIT FOR ITEM 2 ON WHICH PRICES WERE TO BE BASED IS "EACH" OR ONE PLASTIC EYE. MR. HIEB QUOTED AN IDENTICAL UNIT PRICE OF $40 FOR BOTH ITEMS 1 AND 2. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT MR. HIEB DID NOT INTEND TO QUOTE AN IDENTICAL PRICE FOR BOTH ITEMS 1 AND 2, SINCE TWO PLASTIC EYES HAVE TO BE FURNISHED UNDER ITEM 1 AT THE UNIT PRICE QUOTED, WHEREAS UNDER ITEM 2, ONLY ONE PLASTIC EYE HAS TO BE FURNISHED AT THE UNIT PRICE QUOTED.
ON THE RECORD, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT MR. HIEB MADE AN ERROR IN HIS BID, AS ALLEGED. ACCORDINGLY, SINCE IT WAS BELIEVED THAT THE BID OF MR. HIEB WAS ERRONEOUS, AND SUCH BELIEF WAS CONFIRMED AND THE ERROR WAS EXPLAINED PRIOR TO AWARD, THE BID OF MR. HIEB AS TO ITEM 1 MAY BE DISREGARDED IN MAKING THE AWARD.