Med-National, Inc., B-277430, September 8, 1997

B-277430 Sep 08, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights DIGEST Late hand-carried proposal was properly rejected as late where a preponderance of the evidence does not establish that the protester's courier delivered the offer to the designated location prior to the time set for closing. Med-National argues that the agency should have accepted its proposal notwithstanding its late receipt because the government's action was the paramount cause for the delay. Proposals were to be mailed or hand-carried to: Department of Labor ATTN: Contract Facilitator. Was in Room 515 prior to 1 p.m. but no one was present to accept delivery of the proposal. Med-National therefore argues that the government should accept its late-delivered proposal because the government was the paramount cause for the delay. View Decision Matter of: Med-National, Inc. File: B-277430 Date: September 8, 1997 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Med-National, Inc. protests the rejection of its proposal as late under request for proposals (RFP) No. 52WCNA706028SH, issued by the Department of Commerce to obtain employee assistance program services. Med-National argues that the agency should have accepted its proposal notwithstanding its late receipt because the government's action was the paramount cause for the delay. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND Commerce issued this solicitation as part of its role in providing acquisition support services to a consortium of Cooperative Administrative Support Units (CASU) and Department of the Treasury Franchise Business Activities (FBA). [1] The consortium requires contracting support to provide employee assistance program services to its customer agencies throughout the United States. These services enable employees with alcohol, drug, mental, emotional, family or other personal problems to obtain services from appropriate prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation programs. Commerce contracted with a private contractor, Ms. Lynda McBroom, to provide the acquisition support services for these contracts. She, in turn, contracted with Mr. John Thorslev to assist her. These two contract facilitators, both former federal contracting officers, share a cubicle in Department of Labor (DOL) office space at 71 Stevenson Street, Room 515, in San Francisco, California. The solicitation, as amended, set forth the closing time for receipt of proposals as June 4, 1997, 1 p.m. Pacific Daylight Savings Time, and included the full text of the clause at Federal Acquisition Regulation Sec. 52.215-10, "Late Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Proposals." Proposals were to be mailed or hand-carried to: Department of Labor ATTN: Contract Facilitator, Lynda McBroom 71 Stevenson Street, Room 515 San Francisco, CA 94105 The agency received 12 proposals prior to the 1 p.m. closing time, but did not receive Med-National's proposal until 1:11 p.m. Ms. McBroom contacted the contracting officer to relay her account of the events surrounding the late receipt of Med-National's proposal, and the contracting officer determined that the proposal could not be considered. This protest followed. Med-National contends that its courier, from the commercial carrier EagleUSA, was in Room 515 prior to 1 p.m. but no one was present to accept delivery of the proposal. Med-National therefore argues that the government should accept its late-delivered proposal because the government was the paramount cause for the delay. Commerce counters that the evidence does not support Med-National's contention that its courier was in Room 515 prior to 1 p.m. DISCUSSION Legal Standard It is an offeror's responsibility to deliver its proposal to the proper place at the proper time, and late delivery generally requires rejection of the proposal. The Staubach Co., B-276486, May 19, 1997, 97-1 CPD Para. 190 at 3. By choosing a method of delivery other than those methods specified in the late proposal clause, an offeror such as Med-National assumes a high degree of risk that its proposal will be rejected if untimely delivered. Seer Publishing, Inc., B-237359, Feb. 12, 1990, 90-1 CPD Para. 181 at 5. The reason for the rules governing late proposals is that the manner in which the government conducts its procurements must be subject to clearly defined standards that apply equally to all offerors so that fair and impartial treatment is ensured. Id. A proposal delivered to an agency by commercial carrier, as here, is considered to be hand-carried. A hand-carried proposal that arrives late may be considered where improper government action was the paramount cause for the late submission, and where consideration of the proposal would not compromise the integrity of the competitive procurement process. Occu- Health, Inc., B-250043, Oct. 30, 1992, 92-2 CPD Para. 314 at 3. Improper government action in this context is affirmative action that makes it impossible for the offeror to deliver the proposal on time. Id.