Rejection of Proposals. The County reserves the right to reject any and all proposals or to accept the proposal or any part thereof which it determines to best serve the needs of the County and to waive any informalities or irregularities in the proposals. While cost is a factor in any contract award, it is not the only factor and may not be the determining factor.
Rejection of Proposals. At its discretion, the Board may reject all proposals and request new proposals.
Rejection of Proposals. Proposals will be rejected as irregular if prior to the formal opening of the Proposal all of the following documents have not been signed: (1) the bidder shall sign by written signature the Proposal form, (2) the bidder shall sign by written signature the Proposal Certification form, (3) the bidder shall sign by written signature the Proposal Bond form or the Proposal Guarantee, whichever is applicable, (4) the Agent or Attorney-in-Fact representing a Surety Company shall sign by written signature the Proposal Bond, if applicable. In addition, Proposals will be rejected if any of the above signatures are a reproduced copy, such as, but not limited to a photostatic copy or a facsimile transmission. An original, dated and valid Power of Attorney for the Attorney-in-Fact must accompany the Proposal and the Contract. The accompanying Power of Attorney must be dated, and the date must be the exact same date as the date on the Proposal Bond. The Proposal and the Proposal Bond, including the attached Power of Attorney, shall be valid and binding for 60 days subsequent to the date of opening bids. Proposals shall be completed on the forms as issued. Proposals will be rejected as being irregular if they are not prepared on the prescribed forms; if they show any omissions, alterations of form, additions, or conditions not called for, unauthorized alternate bids, or irregularities of any kind; or if they fail to contain a unit price for each item listed. Proposals may be rejected if any of the unit prices contained therein are mathematically unbalanced, either excessive or below the Engineer’s Estimate. Written alterations to unit prices and extensions of the various items in the bid item sheets of the Proposal or, for computer assisted bids (CAB), in the CAB program generated set of bid item sheets will not be cause for rejection of the Proposal, provided each alteration is made in ink and is initialed by a duly authorized official of the company. In case of conflict between altered unit prices or extensions thereof, the unit price in numerals will govern. The Plans and Specifications are as much a part of the proposal form as if they were bound therein. All of the documents contained therein are part of the proposal. Proposals shall not be taken apart. Proposals taken apart may be subject to rejection. Photostatic or facsimile copies of Proposal sheets may not be attached to the Proposal. Proposals containing forms not issued by the CITY/TOWN/COUNTY OF JURSDICTION...
Rejection of Proposals. The Commission is not obligated to award a contract to any Prime Consultant.
Rejection of Proposals. The City reserves the unconditional right to reject any or all proposals received in response to this RFP at any time prior to the City executing a contract that meets the requirements of Section 432.070, RSMo, the City Charter and all applicable City Ordinances.
Rejection of Proposals. The Commission is not obligated to award a contract to any Prime Consultant. Dissemination of Information Information included in this RFP or in any way associated with this Project is intended for use only by the Consultant and the Commission and is to remain the property of the Commission. Under no circumstances shall any of said information be published, copied or used, except in replying to this RFP. Attachment II contains the Commission’s Insurance and Indemnification Requirements that will be incorporated into any Agreement that may be executed in the future with respect to the Project. The requirements set forth in the Commission’s Insurance and Indemnification Requirements shall be properly considered by the Consultant when preparing a response to this RFP and when submitting the completed certification required and in Attachment III.
Rejection of Proposals. The Commission is not obligated to award a contract to any Prime Consultant. Dissemination of Information Information included in this RFP or in any way associated with this Project is intended for use only by the Consultant and the Commission and is to remain the property of the Commission. Under no circumstances shall any of said information be published, copied or used, except in replying to this RFP. There will be no debriefings for unsuccessful responders to this RFP. Attachment II contains the Commission’s Insurance and Indemnification Requirements that will be incorporated into any Agreement that may be executed in the future with respect to the Project. The requirements set forth in the Commission’s Insurance and Indemnification Requirements shall be properly considered by the Consultant when preparing a response to this RFP and when submitting the completed certification required and in Attachment III. Consultants are advised that the Commission’s agreement includes provisions which permit the commission to audit any records and books of account associated with this contract.
Rejection of Proposals. The District reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and to not make an award. The award proposal, if made by the District, will be made to the qualified vendor submitting the most satisfactory proposal based on the criteria 8, if it is to the district’s best interest to accept such a proposal. The right is reserved by the District to waive any informalities or errors in the RFP: that, in the sole opinion of the District, do not materially affect the RFP (RCW 43.19).
Rejection of Proposals. 1. The Purchasing Agent reserves the right to accept or reject in whole or in part, any or all proposals submitted. The Purchasing Agent shall reject the proposal of any Offeror that is determined to be non-responsive. The unreasonable failure of an Offeror to promptly supply information in connection with respect to responsibility may be grounds for a determination of non- responsibility.
Rejection of Proposals. Add the following subparagraphs
