M.R. Dillard Construction

B-271518.2 Jun 28, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights An unsigned bid is responsive where the individual that signed the Certificate of Procurement Integrity was authorized to bind the bidder at the time the bid was submitted. On which the bidder is to execute its offer and the government make award. Although in this case bidders were instructed to instead enter their prices on a bid schedule included on a separate continuation sheet. Dillard's bid indicated that the bidding entity was owned by M.R. Which was executed by Harry Q. Dillard's rubber stamp facsimile signature was used on documents throughout the rest of the bid. Dillard on the day of bid opening but was inadvertently omitted during the preparation of the bid package. The Corps waived as a minor informality Dillard's failure to have included in its bid the back of the SF 1442 with its owner's signature. View Decision Matter of: M.R. Dillard Construction File: B-271518.2 Date: June 28, 1996 An unsigned bid is responsive where the individual that signed the Certificate of Procurement Integrity was authorized to bind the bidder at the time the bid was submitted. Attorneys DECISION M.R. Dillard Construction protests the cancellation of the award of contract No. DACA27-96-C-0040 to Dillard by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. DACA27-96-B-0014, for the installation of additional railroad track at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. [1] We sustain the protest. Dillard submitted the low bid by the February 22, 1996, bid opening. Dillard's bid omitted the back of Standard Form (SF) 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award, included with the IFB, on which the bidder is to execute its offer and the government make award. The back of the SF 1442 contains an offer section including, among other items, spaces for the bidder to enter the name and title of the person authorized to sign the offer, a space for that person's signature, and spaces to acknowledge amendments. The offer section also provides a space for a bidder to enter the dollar amount of its bid, although in this case bidders were instructed to instead enter their prices on a bid schedule included on a separate continuation sheet. The back of the SF 1442 contained other material provisions such as the minimum bid acceptance period and the bidder's agreement to furnish performance and payment bonds. Dillard's bid did contain the front side of the SF 1442. Dillard's bid indicated that the bidding entity was owned by M.R. Dillard. The bid included a Certificate of Procurement Integrity (CPI) in the representations and certifications section, which was executed by Harry Q. Horner, Dillard's general superintendent with his original signature. M.R. Dillard's rubber stamp facsimile signature was used on documents throughout the rest of the bid, including an additional procurement integrity certification on the continuation sheet of the bid schedule as well as on the amendments and the required bid bond. After bid opening, Dillard submitted the completed back of the SF 1442, which it explained had been signed by Mr. Dillard on the day of bid opening but was inadvertently omitted during the preparation of the bid package. Dillard also explained that Mr. Horner had the authority to contractually bind Dillard as well as to use the owner's rubber stamp facsimile signature. As a result, the Corps waived as a minor informality Dillard's failure to have included in its bid the back of the SF 1442 with its owner's signature, and awarded the contract to Dillard on March 7. Following a protest filed with our Office on March 22 by Firth Construction Co., Inc., the second low bidder, the Corps determined that Dillard's bid should have been rejected as nonresponsive because it did not contain an original signature that could bind Dillard to the terms of the IFB. In this regard, the Corps found nothing submitted by Dillard prior to bid opening that authorized the use of the owner's rubber stamp facsimile signature or that authorized Dillard's superintendent to bind Dillard contractually. The Corps declared that it had improperly awarded the contract to Dillard and then took corrective action by canceling the award. We dismissed Firth's protest as academic on April 23. Dillard protested on April 26. The Corps is withholding award to Firth pending our decision. As a general rule, an unsigned bid must be rejected as nonresponsive because without an appropriate signature, the bidder would not be bound should the government accept the bid. Stafford Grading and Paving Co., Inc., B-245907, Jan. 14, 1992, 92-1 CPD Para. 66. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec.