About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-183599 1 (1975-11-28)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadcre0001 and id is 1 raw text is: L THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL ~DECISION -/)OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON. D. C. 20546 FILE: B-183599 DATE:November 28,1975 MATTER OF: Park Services, Inc. DIGEST: Prior decision denying rescission of contract is affirmed where request for reconsideration does not show that deci- sion involved any mistake of relevant fact or law warranting its reversal or modification, and reasons cited as bases for reconsideration were either matters related to contract per- formance or they are irrelevant to issues initially raised. By letter.dated September 4, 1975, Park Services, Inc. (Park), requests that our decision, Park Services Inc., B-183599, May 8, 1975, be reconsidered. The decision denied Park's request for rescission of its con- tract awarded tinder invitation for bids (IFB) No. DACW56-75-B-0024 issued by the United States Army Corpsof Engineers, Tulsa District, Tulsa, Oklahoma, for cleaning services at Denison Dam, Lake Texoma, Oklahoma and Texas. Rescission was sought due to Park's alleged discovery after award of a mistake in its bid. The record shows that the Park bid was $48,742 below the next higher bid at the December 18, 1974, bid opening. The company's president was advised of the disparity in bids and requested to review Park's bid for a possible mistake. Park's president initially stated that he was willing to bid some- what low so that he might have an opportunity to expand his opera- tion into the Tulsa District. Nevertheless, he agreed to check the bid and confirm it in writing. By letter dated December 20, 1974, Park verified the bid as submitted. Prior to award, the president and another Park representative visited the project on January 2, 1975, and also indicated to the Resident Engineer, Denison Dam, that they. would perform the contract in accordance with the specifications for the amount bid. Since Park was determined to be a responsible bidder, the firm was awarded contract No. DACW56-75-C-0079 on January 3, 1975. Under the aforementioned circumstances our decision concluded that there was no legal basis to authorize rescission of the contract. We found that the contract price was not unconscionable and award had been made at an amount for which the Government was not obviously getting something for nothing. - 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most