[Protest of Army Rejection of Bid for Construction Services]

A firm protested the Army Corps of Engineers' rejection of its bid and subsequent contract award for excavation services, contending that the Army improperly rejected its bid because the names of the bidding entity and of the principal on the required bid bond were different. GAO held that the Corps improperly rejected the protester's bid as nonresponsive, since evidence available at the time of bid opening clearly established that the bidding entity and the bid bond's principal were the same entity, thereby alleviating any doubt that the surety of the bid bond was legally binding. Accordingly, the protest was sustained, and GAO recommended that the Corps: (1) terminate the awardee's contract and make award to the protester, since it offered the lowest responsive bid; and (2) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.