DENIED: May 8, 1995 GSBCA 13215 JPB, INC., Appellant, v. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. John A. "Jay" Larson, President of JPB, Inc., Bismarck, ND, appearing for Appellant. Leigh Ann Holt, Office of Regional Counsel, General Services Administration, Denver, CO, counsel for Respondent. DANIELS, Board Judge (Chairman). JPB, Inc., seeks an equitable adjustment to the price of its contract with the General Services Administration (GSA) for alterations to the Federal Building/Post Office/Courthouse in Bismarck, North Dakota. The contractor claims that its installation of tile and cove base in the snack bar of the building was not covered by the contract, and therefore should be subject to additional compensation. JPB elected to have the case considered under the small claims procedure. This decision is consequently being issued by a single judge; it is final and conclusive and may not be set aside except in case of fraud. 41 U.S.C. 608 (1988); Rule 13 (48 CFR 6101.13 (1994)). Findings of Fact The contract mandated that for a fixed sum, JPB perform several tasks at the Bismarck Federal Building. Among these tasks were two which are at issue here. Under the heading "VCT [vinyl composition tile] INSTALLATION FOR SNACK BAR AND BASEMENT CORRIDOR," JPB was required to prepare floors and apply Government-furnished materials in particular ways. The contract says with regard to snack bar flooring, "[I]nstallation will be coordinated through the GSA on site representative." Under the heading "COVE BASE," the contractor had to replace, with Government-furnished vinyl cove base, existing base in the basement and rooms 470 and 476. The contract provides, in chart form, information about the amount of flooring and base to be installed in various locations. Among these places is "BASEMENT CORRIDOR," for which 2195 square feet of VCT and 380 linear feet of base are listed. The chart does not include an entry for the snack bar, which is located in the basement of the building, right off the corridor. The contract states, as a "General Note," "Contractor to verify all measurements." The contract also incorporates by reference Federal Acquisition Regulation clause 52.236-3, which states, "The Contractor acknowledges that it has taken steps reasonably necessary to ascertain the nature and location of the work, and that it has investigated and satisfied itself as to the general and local conditions which can affect the work or its cost. . . . Any failure of the Contractor to take the actions described and acknowledged in this paragraph will not relieve the Contractor from responsibility for estimating properly the difficulty and cost of successfully performing the work, or for proceeding to successfully perform the work without additional expense to the Government." JPB did not verify any measurement before submitting its bid; its president predicated the bid on the belief that the dimensions contained in the chart were correct and included all tile and base to be installed. JPB's president knew that the snack bar was being reconfigured at the time bids were requested, and that the dimensions of the part of the snack bar where tile and base would be installed could not then be known with precision. He assumed that because GSA required the installation of tile and base in the snack bar, but did not specify dimensions of that space separately, the dimensions stated for the basement corridor included the adjacent snack bar. As work progressed in the basement, JPB realized that the amounts of tile and base shown in the contract's chart for the basement corridor were actually for the corridor alone. The snack bar encompassed 1285 square feet of tile and 275 linear feet of base. According to JPB, the value of the labor involved in installing this material, plus appropriate markups for overhead and profit, is $4,299.55. Discussion The invitation for bids on this contract asked for a fixed price to complete various items of work, but it did not fully describe many of those items. For example, it required removal and disposition of carpet, but did not say what kind of carpet was present or how it was installed; it required preparation of walls for painting and floors for carpeting and tiling, but did not explain the condition of the walls and floors; and it required painting of walls, doors, and door frames, but did not state the dimensions of the walls, number of doors, or style of door frames. To make an informed bid on all this work, a reasonably prudent contractor would first have had to gain some familiarity with the building. The installation of vinyl composition tile and cove base in the snack bar falls into the same category: it was clearly required by the contract, but its scope was not described. That there was something special about the area, however, was called to the attention of prospective bidders -- installation in this space, and in this space alone, had to be coordinated with a GSA representative. The fact that the snack bar was being reconstructed while bids were requested should have additionally alerted bidders to the need to pay extra attention to the Government's requirements for this space. Had JPB made even a cursory examination of the building before submitting its bid, it would have realized that the dimensions given for the basement corridor were much too small to encompass the snack bar as well, no matter how that space were to be reconfigured. (The snack bar had an area almost sixty percent as large as the corridor, and a perimeter nearly three-quarters as great.) Even if the contractor might reasonably have concluded, from reading the solicitation alone, that the dimensions for the corridor included the snack bar, a quick look at the space would have told him that the assumption was unreasonable. The Board concludes that JPB should have understood, prior to submitting its bid, that the contract required it to install tile and base in the snack bar without additional compensation. Decision The appeal is DENIED. _________________________ STEPHEN M. DANIELS Board Judge