My warrant was issued with the wrong middle initial, and I always signed things in standard Navy style, R. W. Helbig -

Yes, I asked them to correct it, but then they issued a new one raising my authority with wrong middle initial still. You put up with things like that when you are 3000 miles away - what counts is that DFAS always paid the bill.

By Linda Koone on Wednesday, January 5, 2000 - 07:43 am:

I agree with Vern and Melissa. In fact, I don't think I have ever signed my name on a contract, mod or letter as it actually appears on my CO Certificate of Appointment (preferring to sign with first/middle initials).

The FAR doesn't require the CO to handscribe his or her full legal name. In fact, any symbol (i.e. inspector's stamp) or electonic symbol (i.e. PIIN) could be used. See FAR 2.101: "Signature" or "signed" means the discrete, verifiable symbol of an individual which, 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.

By Vern Edwards on Tuesday, January 4, 2000 - 03:47 pm:

As a follow-up to the question about the contracting officer's signature, some of you may find the following quote from Black's Law Dictionary (West Publishing Co., Centennial Edition, 1990) to be of interest:

Signature. The act of putting one's name at the end of an instrument to attest its validity; the name thus written. A signature may be written by hand, printed, stamped, typewritten, engraved, photographed, or cut from one instrument and attached to another, and a signature lithographed on an instrument by a party is sufficient for the purpose of signing it; it being immaterial with what kind of intrument a signature is made. Maricopa County v. Osborn, 60 Ariz. 290, 136 P.2d 270, 274. And whatever mark, symbol, or device one may choose to employ as representative of himself is sufficient.

The name or mark of a person, written by that person at his or her direction. In commercial law, any name, word, or mark used with the intention to authenticate a writing constitutes a signature. UCC §§ 1-201(39), 3-401(2).

A signature is made by use of any name, including any trade or assumed name, upon an instrument, or by any word or mark used in lieu of a written signature. U.C.C. § 3-104. [Italics at end of first paragraph added.]

By Vern Edwards on Tuesday, January 4, 2000 - 03:33 pm:

As a followup to my last response to the question about form of the contracting officer's signature, some may find the following quote from Black's Law Dictionary (West Publishing Co., Centennial Edition, 1990) to be of interest:

Signature. The act of putting one's name at the end of an instrument to attest its validity; the name thus written. A signature may be written by hand, printed, stamped, typewritten, engraved, photographed, or cut from one instrument and attached to another, and a signature lithographed on an instrument by a party is sufficient for the purpose of signing it; it being immaterial with what kind of instrument a signature is made. Maricopa County v. Osborn, 60 Ariz. 290, 136 P.2d 270, 274. And whatever mark, symbol, or device one may choose to employ as representative of himself is sufficient.

The name or mark of a person, written by that person at his or her direction. In commercial law, any name, word, or mark used with the intention to authenticate a writing constitutes a signature. UCC §§ 1-201(39), 3-401(2).

By Vern Edwards on Tuesday, January 4, 2000 - 02:04 pm:

FAR 4.101, which is entitled, "The contracting officer's signature," does not address this issue. Neither do the DOD, Army, or Corps of Engineers FAR supplements. I am not aware of any case law that answers your question.

I believe that the signature is "legal" no matter how she writes it. The usual reason for requiring a signature to be in a specific form is to ensure proper identification and reduce the chance of forgery. (That's not much of a risk in your case.) As long as the person signing is the person authorized to sign, I don't think the form of the signature has any legal effect. What does your lawyer think?

By Mary Raymundo on Tuesday, January 4, 2000 - 11:46 am:

We have a Contracting Officer whose certificate does not use her middle initial. However, the new PD2 system prints out her initial. Changing the name in the PD2 system involves deleting the user not only from PD2 but also from all other systems (e-mail, financial management system, etc.) and give the person a new login ID. Presumably their password(s) will be changed as well. Then the person has to be added to all of the systems with the new ID and password (if changed), including, for PD2, the terminal server in Portland, which requires logging in as a new user again, changing the default password, and so forth. It also requires the system administrator to set the person up as a new user.
My question is - Just how legal is the contracting officer signature if she signs with her middle initial instead of without, as shown on her certificate?