B-146118, JUN. 30, 1961
Highlights
ONE BID WAS RECEIVED FROM PAUL H. A TELEGRAM WAS RECEIVED FROM LAMSON CORPORATION. LAMSON'S BID WAS RECEIVED AT THE CONTRACTING OFFICE. IT WAS POSTMARKED GLEN BURNIE. YOU ADVISE THAT THE LATE BID WAS MAILED TO YOUR BALTIMORE OFFICE FROM THE HOME OFFICE. WAS SCHEDULED TO ARRIVE IN YOUR BALTIMORE OFFICE ON FRIDAY. SINCE THE BALTIMORE OFFICE IS CLOSED ON SATURDAY. THE BID WAS NOT RECEIVED IN HAND BY YOU UNTIL MONDAY MORNING. IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO HAND CARRY THE BID TO WASHINGTON. THE INVITATION PROVIDES THAT LATE BIDS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED UNLESS THEY ARE RECEIVED BEFORE THE AWARD. IT IS DETERMINED THAT FAILURE TO ARRIVE ON TIME WAS DUE SOLELY TO DELAY IN THE MAILS FOR WHICH THE BIDDER WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE.
B-146118, JUN. 30, 1961
TO LAMSON CORPORATION:
WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 12, 1961, PROTESTING AGAINST AN AWARD TO ANY OTHER BIDDER UNDER INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 600-1136-61, ISSUED ON MAY 15, 1961, BY THE U.S. NAVY PURCHASING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D.C.
THE SUBJECT INVITATION REQUESTED BIDS ON THE NECESSARY SERVICES, LABOR AND MATERIALS TO INSTALL A PNEUMATIC TUBE SYSTEM AT THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, NORFOLK, VIRGINIA. BY THE TIME OF BID OPENING, 10:30 A.M., JUNE 12, 1961, ONE BID WAS RECEIVED FROM PAUL H. WERRES CO., IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,212. AT 10:46 A.M., ON THE SAME DATE, A TELEGRAM WAS RECEIVED FROM LAMSON CORPORATION, DATELINED BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, 10:10 A.M., JUNE 12, 1961. THE TELEGRAM READ "IFB 600-1136-61 NORFOLK NAVAL BASE OUR PRICE PER PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENT 50,410.00.' ON JUNE 13, 1961, LAMSON'S BID WAS RECEIVED AT THE CONTRACTING OFFICE. IT WAS POSTMARKED GLEN BURNIE, MARYLAND, 10:00 A.M., JUNE 12, 1961.
YOU ADVISE THAT THE LATE BID WAS MAILED TO YOUR BALTIMORE OFFICE FROM THE HOME OFFICE, IN SYRACUSE, NEW YORK, ON JUNE 8, AND WAS SCHEDULED TO ARRIVE IN YOUR BALTIMORE OFFICE ON FRIDAY, JUNE 9. HOWEVER, IT DID NOT ARRIVE ON THAT DATE AS EXPECTED. SINCE THE BALTIMORE OFFICE IS CLOSED ON SATURDAY, THE BID WAS NOT RECEIVED IN HAND BY YOU UNTIL MONDAY MORNING, JUNE 12. BECAUSE OF A LACK OF TIME, IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO HAND CARRY THE BID TO WASHINGTON, D.C., IN TIME FOR THE JUNE 12, 10:30 A.M., BID OPENING. INSTEAD, YOU MAILED THE TELEGRAM AND BID, APPROXIMATELY 25 MINUTES PRIOR TO BID OPENING. BASED ON THE FOREGOING YOU REQUEST THAT YOUR BID BE CONSIDERED.
THE INVITATION PROVIDES THAT LATE BIDS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED UNLESS THEY ARE RECEIVED BEFORE THE AWARD, AND IT IS DETERMINED THAT FAILURE TO ARRIVE ON TIME WAS DUE SOLELY TO DELAY IN THE MAILS FOR WHICH THE BIDDER WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE. HERE, THE ALLEGED DELAY IN MAIL OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE TIME THE BID WAS ACTUALLY SENT TO THE GOVERNMENT. SUCH DELAY AS YOU ALLEGE IS NOT DUE SOLELY TO DELAY IN THE MAIL FOR WHICH THE BIDDER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE. THE SITUATION CONTEMPLATED BY THE INVITATION IS WHERE MAIL DELAY OCCURS BETWEEN THE TIME THE BID IS MAILED TO THE PROPER GOVERNMENT OFFICE AND THE TIME OF RECEIPT BY THAT OFFICE.
WITH REGARD TO TELEGRAPHIC BIDS, PARAGRAPH 2 (A) OF INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS PROVIDES THAT ,TELEGRAPHIC BIDS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY THE INVITATION.' TELEGRAPHIC BIDS WERE NOT AUTHORIZED IN THE INVITATION. OUR OFFICE HAS RECENTLY RULED THAT WHERE AN INVITATION PRECLUDES THE CONSIDERATION OF TELEGRAPHIC BIDS, ANY SUCH BIDS SHOULD BE DISREGARDED. 40 COMP. GEN. 279 (SPECIFICALLY OVERRULING OUR PRIOR DECISION OF AUGUST 25, 1953, B-116567). THIS RULE WE BELIEVE, BEST SERVES THE INTERESTS OF THE GOVERNMENT, AS WELL AS ALL POTENTIAL SUPPLIERS TO THE GOVERNMENT.
ACCORDINGLY, WE CONCLUDE THAT YOUR BID MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR AWARD UNDER THE SUBJECT INVITATION.