Huber, Hunt & Nichols, Inc.

B-271112 May 21, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Was inadvertently transferred from its hand-written "subcontract bid recording sheet" to Trafalgar's computerized bidding system as "$1. The agency's conclusion that Trafalgar had submitted clear and convincing evidence of its intended bid was unreasonable. HHN also contends that when Trafalgar was selecting a drywall subcontractor's quote to include in its final bid sheet. It should have noticed the wide disparity (of more than $700. It was negligent in preparing its bid and should be required to accept the award at the uncorrected bid price or withdraw its bid. The protester contends that selection of the lower amount must have been deliberate. ANALYSIS Mistakes in a bid generally do not render the bid unacceptable if the errors are correctable under the mistake in bid procedures set out in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 14.407. View Decision Matter of: Huber, Hunt & Nichols, Inc. File: B-271112 Date: May 21, 1996 Agency properly allowed low bidder to correct mistake in its bid prior to award where the agency reasonably concluded that clear and convincing evidence established the mistake and the intended bid price, and the corrected bid remains low. Attorneys DECISION Huber, Hunt & Nichols, Inc. (HHN) protests the award of a contract to Trafalgar House Construction, Inc. under invitation for bids (IFB) No. 9515-AE, issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for improvements to the Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana. The protester contends that the VA, after bid opening but before award, improperly permitted an upward correction to Trafalgar's bid. We deny the protest. The IFB sought bids for general construction, including several alternate items, and contemplated the award of one contract on the basis of the lowest aggregate bid. The agency received the following five bids by bid opening on September 28, 1995: Trafalgar $23,387,000 HHN 24,370,000 R.L. Turner 24,725,000 Centex 25,193,000 F.A. Wilhelm 29,240,000 On September 29, Trafalgar informed the contracting officer that its bid contained a mistake. In subsequent correspondence to the agency, Trafalgar explained that a subcontractor's quote for drywall services, for $1,715,050, was inadvertently transferred from its hand-written "subcontract bid recording sheet" to Trafalgar's computerized bidding system as "$1,071,505." A "0" thus had been mistakenly entered in the hundred-thousandth column instead of a "7," resulting in a bid mistake of $643,545 ($1,715,050 minus $1,071,505). Trafalgar requested that it be allowed an upward correction to its bid to include the omitted amount, for a total corrected bid of $24,030,545. Based on its review of the documents Trafalgar submitted in support of its mistake claim, including its "subcontractor bid recording sheet" and other workpapers, the VA concluded that Trafalgar had submitted clear and convincing evidence of the mistake and of its intended bid, and permitted the firm an upward correction to its bid. On December 22, the VA awarded the contract to Trafalgar at the corrected bid price, $24,030,545. This protest to our Office followed an agency-level protest, which the VA denied. PROTESTER'S CONTENTIONS The protester maintains that Trafalgar's "subcontract bid recording sheet" shows the drywall subcontractor's quote Trafalgar intended to use in preparing its bid as $1,700,000. HHN points out that even when including other work Trafalgar added to that base price the column on the worksheet corresponding to that drywall subcontractor does not add up to $1,715,050, the alleged intended bid. HHN maintains that in light of that inconsistency in the worksheet, the agency's conclusion that Trafalgar had submitted clear and convincing evidence of its intended bid was unreasonable. HHN also contends that when Trafalgar was selecting a drywall subcontractor's quote to include in its final bid sheet, it should have noticed the wide disparity (of more than $700,000) between the amount it entered on its bid sheet and the other subcontractor's quote for the same work. Because Trafalgar failed to do so, HHN argues, it was negligent in preparing its bid and should be required to accept the award at the uncorrected bid price or withdraw its bid. Alternatively, the protester contends that selection of the lower amount must have been deliberate, and therefore did not constitute a mistake subject to correction. ANALYSIS Mistakes in a bid generally do not render the bid unacceptable if the errors are correctable under the mistake in bid procedures set out in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 14.407. P. K. Painting Co., B-247357, May 5, 1992, 92-1 CPD para. 424. Correction is proper if clear and convincing evidence establishes both the existence of the mistake and the bid actually intended, and the corrected bid does not displace other bids. FAR Sec. 14.407-3(a).