FAR 14.407-2—Apparent clerical mistakes.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 14.407-2 addresses how contracting officers handle apparent clerical mistakes in sealed bids before award. It covers what counts as a clerical mistake that is obvious on the face of the bid, the requirement to obtain bidder verification of the intended bid before making any correction, examples of common apparent errors such as misplaced decimal points, incorrect discount schedules, reversed FOB origin/destination pricing, and mistakes in unit designation, and the proper way to document corrections in paper and electronic bid files. The section exists to protect the integrity of sealed bidding by allowing obvious, non-substantive errors to be corrected without unfairly changing the competitive standing of bidders or creating post-opening manipulation. In practice, it means the contracting officer must be cautious: if the mistake is truly apparent and the intended bid can be verified, the bid may be corrected before award; if not, the bid must be handled under the more restrictive mistake-in-bid procedures. The documentation rules are also important because the correction must be traceable in the official record, not altered directly on the bid itself. For electronic data interchange bids, the same principles apply, but the recordkeeping is done in the electronic solicitation file.
Key Rules
Only Apparent Clerical Mistakes
The rule applies only to clerical mistakes that are obvious on the face of the bid. It does not authorize correction of ambiguous, judgment-based, or substantive pricing errors that are not readily apparent from the bid itself.
Verification Required First
Before correcting any apparent mistake, the contracting officer must obtain verification from the bidder of the bid intended. This protects against unauthorized changes and ensures the correction reflects the bidder’s actual intended offer.
Examples of Apparent Errors
The regulation gives examples of mistakes that may be corrected, including an obvious decimal-point error, an obviously incorrect discount schedule, a clear reversal of FOB origin and FOB destination pricing, and an obvious mistake in unit designation. These examples illustrate the kind of error that is facially evident and mechanically correctable.
No Direct Alteration of Bid
The correction must not be made on the face of the original bid. Instead, the verification is attached to the original bid and, for paper bids, a copy of the verification is attached to the duplicate bid, with the correction reflected in the award document.
Electronic Bid Recordkeeping
For bids submitted by electronic data interchange, the original bid, the verification request, and the bidder’s verification must be included in the electronic solicitation file. The record must show what was submitted, what was asked, and what was confirmed.
Responsibilities
Contracting Officer
Identify whether a bid contains an apparent clerical mistake, request and obtain bidder verification before any correction, ensure the correction is properly documented, and reflect the corrected bid in the award document rather than altering the bid itself.
Bidder
Review the contracting officer’s verification request and confirm the bid intended so the government can correct only the apparent clerical error and not change the bidder’s actual offer.
Agency/Contract File Manager
Maintain the required documentation in the official file, including the original bid, verification request, verification response, and any related award documentation, whether the bid was paper-based or submitted electronically.
Practical Implications
This rule is meant for obvious mistakes only, so contracting officers should not use it to fix unclear pricing issues or to help a bidder revise a bad bid after opening.
Verification is critical: without it, a correction can be challenged as improper because the government must confirm the bidder’s intended price before changing the bid record.
Documentation matters as much as the correction itself; if the file does not show the original bid, the verification request, and the verification response, the award may be vulnerable to protest or audit findings.
Common trouble spots include decimal errors, discount schedules, FOB terms, and unit-of-measure mistakes, so these should be reviewed carefully during bid evaluation.
For electronic bids, the same substantive rule applies, but the recordkeeping must be complete in the electronic file to preserve the procurement history and support the award decision.
Official Regulatory Text
(a) Any clerical mistake, apparent on its face in the bid, may be corrected by the contracting officer before award. The contracting officer first shall obtain from the bidder a verification of the bid intended. Examples of apparent mistakes are- (1) Obvious misplacement of a decimal point; (2) Obviously incorrect discounts (for example, 1 percent 10 days, 2 percent 20 days, 5 percent 30 days); (3) Obvious reversal of the price f.o.b. destination and price f.o.b. origin; and (4) Obvious mistake in designation of unit. (b) Correction of the bid shall be effected by attaching the verification to the original bid and a copy of the verification to the duplicate bid. Correction shall not be made on the face of the bid; however, it shall be reflected in the award document. (c) Correction of bids submitted by electronic data interchange shall be effected by including in the electronic solicitation file the original bid, the verification request, and the bid verification.