Matter of: R.P. Richards Construction Company; PW Construction, Inc.

Matter of: R.P. Richards Construction Company; PW Construction, Inc. TITLE: Matter of: R.P. Richards Construction Company; PW Construction, Inc. BNUMBER: B-274859.2; B-274859.3 DATE: January 22, 1997 ********************************************************************** Comptroller General of the United States Washington, D.C. 20548 Decision Matter of: R.P. Richards Construction Company; PW Construction, Inc. File: B-274859.2; B-274859.3 Date: January 22, 1997 C. Patrick Stoll, Esq., Herrig & Vogt, for R.P. Richards Construction Company, a protester. Paul G. Marshall, Jr., PW Construction, Inc., a protester. Hayes P. Haddox, Esq., and Robert W. Pessolano, Esq., Department of the Army, for the agency. Wm. David Hasfurther, Esq., and Michael R. Golden, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST Bidder is not entitled to bid correction under the mistake-in-bid rules for judgmental errors in using an inappropriate subcontractor quotation and in relying on its own estimate instead of a supplier quote for certain materials. DECISION R.P. Richards Construction Company requests correction, which had been denied by the agency, of the low bid price upon which it received award of a construction contract under Department of the Army (Corps of Engineers) invitation for bids (IFB) No. DACA27-96-B-0038. It alleges two clerical errors involving quotations received from subcontractors. PW Construction, Inc., the next low bidder, contends that Richards's bid should be rejected and that award should be made to P.W. Construction. We deny both the request for correction and the protest of the award to Richards. The IFB, issued July 15, 1996, requested bidders to submit prices for a base bid (which consisted of five items) and for each of five options. Bids were opened on August 29. Richards submitted the low bid with a total price of $10,731,000. Three other bids were received in the amounts of $12,627,003, $12,980,587, and $13,233.250. The government estimate for the work was $14,739,450. Subsequent to bid opening, Richards informed the agency by a letter of August 29 that it had made two clerical errors in computing its prices, and it requested that its total bid price be increased by $646,336. The specific errors concerned the structural steel work (including erection) in item 1 of the base bid and in the second optional item. Richards stated that it relied on a quotation from H&M Steel, received about 30 minutes prior to bid opening, of $415,000 and $143,000 for the respective items. The person who priced the bid submitted a statement explaining that he had interpreted the H&M quotation--which listed various lines of excluded items from its quotation including the line stating "Erection, rebar & taxes"--to include the cost of erection for everything but rebar. However, it learned after bid opening, while attempting to discover the reason for the large variance between its price and the other prices received, that H&M's quotation did not include the cost of erecting the steel structure and that the quote was limited to materials. Since Richards had obtained a quotation from W&W Steel for both materials and erection of the steel structure prior to receiving H&M's quotation, Richard bases its request for correction on the difference between W&W's quotation of $1,061,000 for the work and the H&M price of $558,000 it used in formulating its bid price. The second mistake claimed by Richards involved the specifications for wire mesh partitions. The price Richards used in its computations for the partitions was its own estimate of $2,000, rather than a price of $91,760 based on a quotation from Nevada Casters which it had received 2 days prior to bid opening. On this basis, Richards argues that it should be permitted to increase the price for the partitions by $89,760. Adding this figure to the difference between the two quotations received on the structural steel work totals $592,760. Adding intended profit to this figure results in the amount of the requested correction. After numerous discussions between the parties, the agency denied the request for correction on the basis that Richards was attempting to recalculate its prices. However, award was made to Richards on its original total bid price with Richards retaining the right to obtain a decision from our Office regarding its request for bid correction. A bidder's request for upward correction of a bid before award may be granted only where the request is supported by clear and convincing evidence of both the mistake and the intended bid. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) �14.407-3(a). Correction based on subcontractors' mistakes is permitted if the standard for correction is otherwise satisfied. See Pacific Components, Inc., B-252585, June 21, 1993, 93-1 CPD � 478; Department of the Interior--Mistake in Bid Claim, B-222681, July 23, 1986, 86-2 CPD � 98.