[Protest of Forest Service Contract Award]

A firm protested a Forest Service contract award, contending that the awardee's bid bond was defective or alternatively that conversations with agency personnel had indicated that it would receive the award. The Forest Service had originally found that the awardee's surety bond was defective and had initiated procedures to confirm the protester's bid and responsibility. During a review, a successor to the original contracting officer determined that the awardee's bond was not defective and that it should receive the award as low, responsible bidder. GAO has held that a bid bond in the proper amount renders a bid nonresponsive only if it is not clear that it will bind the surety. GAO found that: (1) the awardee's surety bond was acceptable; (2) the awardee was not legally prohibited from furnishing evidence of an individual's authority to sign the bond after bid opening; (3) the solicitation stated that the successful bidder would receive written notice of acceptance; and (4) the government is not bound by unauthorized acts of its agents. Accordingly, the protest was denied.