Consolidated Contracting & Engineering

B-274319 Nov 06, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights A bidder's failure to initial changes in a bid is a matter of form that may be considered an informality and waived if the bid leaves no doubt as to the intended price. This rule also applies where changes in the bid are initialed by someone other than the person who signed the bid. Consolidated asserts that Marenco's low bid should have been rejected as nonresponsive because Marenco failed to acknowledge a material amendment to the solicitation. The IFB was issued on May 23. Was amended six times prior to bid opening. The only effect of which was to reflect that amendment No. 0002 had lowered the bond requirement from 100 percent/$1 million to 20 percent of the bid price. 000 for the base period was the lowest of the five bids received by bid opening. View Decision Matter of: Consolidated Contracting & Engineering File: B-274319 Date: November 6, 1996 Agency acted reasonably in waiving a bidder's failure to acknowledge an amendment that had no material effect on bidder's obligations. A bidder's failure to initial changes in a bid is a matter of form that may be considered an informality and waived if the bid leaves no doubt as to the intended price. This rule also applies where changes in the bid are initialed by someone other than the person who signed the bid. Attorneys DECISION Consolidated Contracting & Engineering protests the award of a requirements contract to Marenco, Inc. to replace fire alarm systems at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, under invitation for bids (IFB) No. F6550l-96-B-0003, issued by the Department of the Air Force. Consolidated asserts that Marenco's low bid should have been rejected as nonresponsive because Marenco failed to acknowledge a material amendment to the solicitation. We deny the protest. The IFB was issued on May 23, 1996, and was amended six times prior to bid opening. The IFB, as originally issued, required a performance bond with a penal amount of 100 percent of the contract price, but not to exceed $1 million. Amendment No. 0002, among other things, reduced the bond requirement to 20 percent of the bid price, but did not include a revised bid schedule. Amendment No. 0007 (in actuality the sixth and final amendment) replaced two pages of the bid schedule, the only effect of which was to reflect that amendment No. 0002 had lowered the bond requirement from 100 percent/$1 million to 20 percent of the bid price. Marenco's bid of $711,000 for the base period was the lowest of the five bids received by bid opening. Consolidated's bid of $948,582 for the base period was second lowest. Marenco acknowledged five of the six amendments, failing to acknowledge the sixth amendment that provided the revised bid schedule pages. Marenco submitted its bid on the old bid schedule which differed only in that it contained a line item designating a $1 million performance bond. Also, in the bid schedule submitted by Marenco, the "unit price" entered in item No. 0001 (CLIN 1) was initially written, then crossed out. Above the crossed out figure was written the figure ".00961" followed by the initials "SRS." Since Marenco's price for CLIN 1 was substantially lower than that of the other bidders, the contracting officer requested verification of this line item on August 27. Marenco verified the amount on August 29. Subsequently, the contracting officer waived Marenco's failure to acknowledge the amendment as a minor informality. Consolidated asserts that Marenco's failure to acknowledge amendment No. 0007 renders its bid nonresponsive. Consolidated contends that the amendment concerned a specific line item that was utilized in computing the overall price for the bid and is therefore material. The protester also argues that Marenco's bid should be rejected because Marenco failed to initial the changes made in its bid schedule. Lastly, the protester contends that Marenco's price for CLIN 1 reflects a mistake because it was substantially lower than the prices of the other bidders for the same item. Generally, a bid that does not acknowledge a material amendment must be rejected because absent such an acknowledgment, the acceptance of the bid would not obligate the contractor to comply with the amendment's terms. Gulf Elec. Constr. Co., Inc., 68 Comp.Gen. 719 (1989), 89-2 CPD Para. 272. However, an amendment is not material if it does not impose any legal obligations on the bidder different from those in the original solicitation; the failure to acknowledge an amendment that merely clarifies an existing requirement therefore may be waived. See Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sec. 14.405(d)(2); Mechanical Resources, Inc., B-241403, Jan. 30, 1991, 91-1 CPD Para. 93.