B-204940, OCT 28, 1981
Highlights
DIGEST: PROTESTER'S HAND-CARRIED PROPOSAL DELIVERED AFTER THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION FOR THE RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS WAS PROPERLY REJECTED. WHICH WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION NO. THE SAME DAY PROPOSALS WERE DUE. SBA REJECTED THE PROPOSAL BECAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED LATE. THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT AN OFFEROR HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE TIMELY DELIVERY OF ITS PROPOSAL TO THE PROPER LOCATION AND PERSONNEL. WE ARE AWARE OF NO BASIS WHICH WOULD PERMIT CONSIDERATION OF ADVANCE'S HAND-CARRIED PROPOSAL DELIVERED AFTER THE TIME SET FORTH IN THE SOLICITATION. REJECTION OF THE LATE PROPOSAL WAS PROPER. THE PROTEST IS SUMMARILY DENIED.
B-204940, OCT 28, 1981
DIGEST: PROTESTER'S HAND-CARRIED PROPOSAL DELIVERED AFTER THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION FOR THE RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS WAS PROPERLY REJECTED.
ADVANCE BUSINESS SERVICE INC.:
ADVANCE BUSINESS SERVICE INC. (ADVANCE) PROTESTS THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION'S (SBA) REFUSAL TO CONSIDER ITS PROPOSAL, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION NO. MSB82200100 FOR THE RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS.
ADVANCE STATES THAT ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1981, THE SAME DAY PROPOSALS WERE DUE, IT TELEPHONED THE SBA TO REQUEST AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SUBMITTING ITS PROPOSAL. THE SBA DENIED ADVANCE'S REQUEST TO EXTEND THE 5 P.M. DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS. ADVANCE FURTHER STATES THAT SINCE REGULARLY SCHEDULED FLIGHTS FROM DETROIT TO WASHINGTON, D. C., THE LOCATION FOR DELIVERY OF PROPOSALS, WOULD NOT ARRIVE IN TIME TO ALLOW DELIVERY OF THE PROPOSAL BY 5 P.M., ADVANCE CHARTERED A PRIVATE FLIGHT, WHICH PERMITTED DELIVERY OF ITS PROPOSAL TO THE SBA OFFICE AT 5:15 P.M. SBA REJECTED THE PROPOSAL BECAUSE IT WAS SUBMITTED LATE.
THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT AN OFFEROR HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE TIMELY DELIVERY OF ITS PROPOSAL TO THE PROPER LOCATION AND PERSONNEL. SEE FEDERAL CONTRACTING CORP. ET AL., 54 COMP.GEN. 304 (1974), 74-2 CPD 229. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVED HERE, WE ARE AWARE OF NO BASIS WHICH WOULD PERMIT CONSIDERATION OF ADVANCE'S HAND-CARRIED PROPOSAL DELIVERED AFTER THE TIME SET FORTH IN THE SOLICITATION. SEE HOT LAKE DEVELOPMENT INC.; VALE GEOTHERMAL INC., B-192512, AUGUST 18, 1978, 78-2 CPD 135.
IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, REJECTION OF THE LATE PROPOSAL WAS PROPER. THEREFORE, AFTER CONSIDERATION OF ADVANCE'S PROTEST BASED ON ITS SUBMISSIONS, THE PROTEST IS SUMMARILY DENIED. SEE HOT LAKE DEVELOPMENT INC.; VALE GEOTHERMAL INC., SUPRA.