Organizational and Consultant Conflict of Interest Comptroller General New OCI Waiver As discussed in our last decision, the record presented at that time showed that the agency had concerns about the activities of an individual identified as Mr. The agency expressed interest in Mr.
Unacceptable or offers not in compliance with solicitation Comptroller General - Key Excerpts New First, as noted above, the RFP detailed specific requirements for the documentation in proposal volume VI, which included the cover letter and SF With respect to the offeror's cover letter, the RFP required that the letter "[a]ddresses compliance to all RFP requirements and instructions to include any exceptions to the Terms and Conditions of the solicitation [and be] signed by an officer of the Offeror that is authorized to bind the Offeror's company.
In DSI's cover letter, the firm's chief executive officer CEO --who signed the letter in ink--wrote, "This submission addresses compliance to all RFP requirements and instructions that include any exceptions to the Terms and Conditions of the solicitation.
We find unobjectionable the agency's assessment that DSI's cover letter failed to comply with the solicitation. In this respect, as noted, the RFP required that an offeror address in its cover letter compliance with the RFP, as well as whether the firm was taking exception to any solicitation terms.
Moreover, the RFP expressly cautioned against restating solicitation requirements. Despite these warnings and the clear instructions, DSI "simply restated the requirement," which left the contracting officer unclear as to whether DSI complied with all of the RFP terms and conditions and whether the firm was taking exception to any terms.
In this respect, DSI's cover letter did not affirmatively represent that the firm intended to comply with the solicitation requirements or unambiguously indicate that the firm did not take exception to any solicitation terms, as anticipated by the RFP.
Next, with respect to the SF 33, the RFP required that that an offeror's proposal "contain a completed and signed SF 33 and a signed copy of amendment [sic], if any. An official authorized to bind the company shall sign the SF Form 33 with blocks 12 through 18 completed.
The agency assessed DSI's SF 33 as noncompliant with these instructions because the firm's SF 33, which also was being used by DSI to acknowledge the solicitation amendments, did not include an "original signature. Here, the record shows that while block 16 of DSI's SF 33 identified the firm's CEO as the person authorized to sign the offer, the SF 33 only included the typewritten name of the CEO in a cursive font in block 17, the signature block.
Notably, the form did not include the CEO's actual handwritten signature in ink or an authenticated digital signature. Nevertheless, DSI maintains that this typewritten name complied with the solicitation requirements and legally bound the company if the agency had accepted the offer.
The FAR defines "signature" or "signed" as "the discrete, verifiable symbol of an individual that, when affixed to a writing with the knowledge and consent of the individual, indicates a present intention to authenticate the writing. This includes electronic symbols.
Under the circumstances here, the typewritten name of the CEO in the signature block, albeit in a cursive script font, is not a signature, as contemplated by the FAR. While the use of computer font arguably resulted in an "electronic symbol," the typewritten name itself did not constitute a discrete, verifiable symbol that was sufficiently distinguishable to be authenticated.
That is, anyone can type a person's name; without a signature that could be authenticated, the named individual could just as easily disavow the legal instrument on which the typed name is affixed. Further, DSI's proposal lacked any documentation that expressly authorized typewritten names to bind the company.
More specifically, there is no indication in the contemporaneous record that DSI adopted the typewritten form of the CEO's name as his official signature. Indeed, SPAWAR's concern regarding the typewritten name is particularly understandable given that the CEO's handwritten signature was used on other parts of the proposal.
On this record, we find persuasive the contracting officer's concern that the government's acceptance of the proposal might not have resulted in a binding contract. Given that the CEO's typewritten name does not qualify as a signature, we see nothing unreasonable with the agency's assessment that the protester's SF 33 failed to comply with the RFP.How This Report Was Generated This report is a sample of the type of compre hensive acquisition proposal that you can quickly create with MoneySoft’s DealSense® Plus+ and Financial Report Builder™ enhancement.
DealSense Plus+ was used to analyze the target company, determine purchase price and terms, and. grupobittia.com is the Federal Government's premier electronic source for the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).
It contains Product Service Codes (PSC), the Federal Service Contract Inventory, FAR Archives, eBook versions of the FAR, optimized search engine for the FAR and other resources to improve Acquisition for contracting professionals.
The mission of this course is to survey the drivers of success in mergers and acquisitions We will explore the influence of conduct in areas such as acquisition search, due diligence, negotiation and bidding, dealing with laws, regulations, and the judicial system, deal design, other four include the deal proposal exercise and a.
Components of the acquisition package, NAWCTSD. Objective To assemble all documents needed to acquire supplies or services to satisfy approved requirements in a timely, efficient manner and at the most reasonable cost to the Government. NOTE - The FARSite is the authoritative source for the AFFARS only.
The FARSite is only an electronic representation of the FAR and the other supplements. An acquisition is a situation whereby one company purchases most or all of another company's shares in order to take control. This makes it easier for the investor to exercise due diligence.