[Protest of Navy Rejection of Bid as Nonresponsive]
Highlights
A firm protested the Navy's rejection of its bid for construction work as nonresponsive because its bid bond was defective. The protester: (1) contended that, although the name of the attorney-in-fact was inadvertently omitted from the power-of-attorney form, the contracting officer knew that the signatory was authorized to bind the surety from other sources; and (2) requested that, as a minor informality, the Navy allow it to submit a correct power-of-attorney form after bid opening. GAO held that: (1) the bid bond was defective since it was not clear that the bond would bind the surety; (2) the fact that evidence of the signatory's authorization was available from other sources at the time of bid opening did not render the bid responsive; and (3) the Navy could not waive a clerical error as a minor informality. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed.