Williams Electric Company, Inc.

B-275019 Jan 16, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Protest that agency improperly rejected bid as unbalanced is denied where bidder's explanation of why certain costs were properly included under line items. Is based on an unreasonable interpretation of the solicitation. That any award was subject to the availability of funding. A bid that is based on nominal prices for some work and enhanced prices for other work is mathematically unbalanced. A mathematically unbalanced bid cannot be accepted if it is also materially unbalanced. That is. If there is a reasonable doubt that an award based on the bid will result in the lowest cost to the government. Were as follows: CLIN Williams North IGCE 0001 $491. 796 The Army found Williams's bid mathematically unbalanced because it was overstated for CLIN 0001 and understated for CLINs 0002 and 0003. View Decision Matter of: Williams Electric Company, Inc. File: B-275019 Date: January 16, 1997 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Williams Electric Company protests the rejection of its bid as unbalanced and the consequent award of a contract to North Landing Line Company under invitation for bids (IFB) No. DABT57-96-B-0090, issued by the Department of the Army for electrical work involving the replacement of crossarms, poles, and transformers at Fort Eustis, Virginia. We deny the protest. The solicitation schedule required bidders to provide a lump-sum price for each of four line items: CLIN 0001/Base Bid, for "Replacement of crossarms Feeder 'B'"; CLIN 0002/Optional Bid Item 0001, for "Replacement of poles, 85, 86, 87, and 88"; CLIN 0003/Optional Bid Item 0002, for "Replacement of poles 8-24, 8-25, and 8-28A"; [1] and CLIN 0004/Optional Bid Item 0003, to "Replace pad mounted transformers, and 15 KV [kilovolt] oil switches, 800 block." The solicitation provided that the award would be based on the total aggregate amount of the bid for the base and option items, but that any award was subject to the availability of funding. The Army rejected Williams's apparent low bid as unbalanced and made award to North on September 30, 1996 for CLIN 0001/Base Bid. A bid that is based on nominal prices for some work and enhanced prices for other work is mathematically unbalanced. A mathematically unbalanced bid cannot be accepted if it is also materially unbalanced, that is, if there is a reasonable doubt that an award based on the bid will result in the lowest cost to the government. Sawadi Corp., B-265740; B-265741, Dec. 21, 1995, 95-2 CPD para. 279. The bids of Williams and North, and the independent government cost estimate (IGCE), were as follows: CLIN Williams North IGCE 0001 $491,000 $ 99,400 $190,154 0002 $ 6,500 $173,000 $207,479 0003 $ 6,500 $173,000 $217,853 0004 $303,000 $410,500 $369,310 Total $807,000 $855,900 $984,796 The Army found Williams's bid mathematically unbalanced because it was overstated for CLIN 0001 and understated for CLINs 0002 and 0003. In this regard, the Army reports that Williams's prices for CLINs 0002 and 0003 were not sufficient even to cover the material costs for those items, as shown on drawings E-12, E-13 and E-14, which, according to the Army, detail the work for CLINs 0002 and 0003. The Army also found Williams's bid materially unbalanced because it was unsure if it would exercise any of the options, and Williams's bid was low only if all three options were awarded. Williams does not dispute that its proposed price for CLIN 0001 was overstated and its price for CLINs 0002 and 0003 understated if, as the Army contends, drawings E-12, E-13, and E-14 described work that should be included under CLINs 0002 and 0003. Williams argues, however, that the work shown on these drawings was work that was required to be included under CLIN 0001. Consequently, argues Williams, its bid was improperly rejected. Where a dispute exists as to the actual meaning of a solicitation requirement, our Office will resolve the matter by reading the solicitation as a whole and in a manner that gives effect to all provisions of the solicitation. Mobile Medic Ambulance Serv., Inc., B-259045, Feb. 15, 1995, 95-1 CPD para. 92. The solicitation included a packet of 17 drawings that detailed the work required by CLINs 0001, 0002, and 0003: Drawing E-1 was an electrical distribution site plan; Drawings E-2, E-3, and E-4 contained photographs of the individual poles; Drawings E-5 through E-14 detailed work required by the three CLINs; and Drawings E-15 through E-17 provided general construction details for the three line items. The electrical distribution site plan (Drawing E-1), which showed the electrical system in Fort Eustis, had three distinct areas delineated on it: the Base Bid (CLIN 0001) area, Optional Bid Item 0001 (CLIN 0002) area, and Optional Bid Item 0002 (CLIN 0003) area.