BNUMBER:  B-271186
DATE:  April 1, 1996
TITLE:  Ed Kocharian & Company, Inc.

**********************************************************************

Matter of:Ed Kocharian & Company, Inc.

File:     B-271186

Date:     April 1, 1996

Herman M. Braude, Esq., and Robert D. Windus, Esq., Braude & 
Margulies, for the protester.
Lynn J. Bush, Esq., Diane D. Hayden, Esq., and George N. Brezna, Esq., 
Department of the Navy, for the agency.
Tania L. Calhoun, Esq., and Christine S. Melody, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision.

DIGEST

Protest against agency's acceptance of late bid is denied where the 
record establishes that the hand-carried bid was received by the 
agency prior to the time set for bid opening; the paramount cause for 
the bid's late receipt at the office designated for bid opening was 
the inappropriately locked door to the office designated for deposit 
of hand-delivered bids followed by the agency's mishandling of the bid 
after its receipt; and the integrity of the procurement system was not 
compromised by the agency's consideration of the bid.

DECISION

Ed Kocharian & Company, Inc. protests the award of a contract to PBM 
Mechanical, Inc. under invitation for bids (IFB) No. N62477-96-B-0020, 
issued by the Department of the Navy to replace chillers at the Naval 
Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C.  The protester argues that 
PBM's bid was delivered late and should not have been considered for 
award.  

We deny the protest.

The IFB stated that bid opening would be held at 2 p.m. on February 7, 
1996.  Bidders were to deposit all hand-delivered bids in the bid box 
of the Plans/Specifications office, located on the first floor of 
Building 212 at the Washington Navy Yard, 901 M Street, SE, 
Washington, D.C., prior to the time set for bid opening.  Twenty-four 
bids were opened at the 2 p.m. bid opening, with Ed Kocharian 
submitting the apparent low bid of $277,800.  PBM's bid of $242,999 
was not opened at that time because it was not in the bid box in the 
Plans/Specifications office.

PBM's representative had arrived at Building 212 shortly before 12 
p.m. on bid opening day.  According to the Navy, PBM's representative 
tried to deliver the firm's bid to the Plans/Specifications office, 
but the door to the office was closed and locked.  A sign on the door 
listing the office hours made no provision for the door to be closed 
at this time.[1]  Another sign directed persons with emergencies to go 
to the contracts office, on the third floor, when the 
Plans/Specifications office was closed.  PBM's representative went to 
the contracts office and encountered a Navy purchasing agent to whom 
he explained his dilemma.  The purchasing agent took him to the 
contract specialist in charge of this bid opening.  The contract 
specialist states that although she could have had the purchasing 
agent take PBM's representative downstairs to the Plans/Specifications 
office, unlock the door, and allow him to deposit PBM's bid in the bid 
box, she did not do so because the purchasing agent was on crutches.  
Instead, since she was in charge of the bid opening, the contract 
specialist told PBM's representative that she would accept the bid, 
take it with her to the bid opening, and deposit the bid in the bid 
box prior to bid opening.  She time/date-stamped the envelope 
containing PBM's bid at
12:05 p.m. and states that she put the bid at her work station.  
However, she forgot to take PBM's bid with her to the bid opening.  In 
light of the circumstances, the contracting officer subsequently 
determined that the government's actions were the paramount cause of 
the bid's late receipt and accepted the bid as timely submitted.  
Award to PBM has been suspended pending resolution of this protest.

Ed Kocharian argues that PBM was the paramount cause of the bid's late 
delivery, and that the bid should not have been considered.  The 
protester contends that PBM's representative should have followed the 
IFB's instructions, declined to accept the contract specialist's offer 
to take the bid, and waited until he could personally deposit the bid 
in the bid box in the Plans/Specifications office.  
 
As a general rule, bidders are responsible for delivering their bids 
to the proper place at the proper time.  Watson Agency, Inc., 
B-241072, Dec. 19, 1990, 90-2 CPD 
 para.  506.  A late hand-carried bid can be considered for award if 
government mishandling after timely receipt at the agency is the sole 
or paramount cause for the bid's late receipt at the office designated 
for bid opening, and if consideration of the late bid would not 
compromise the integrity of the procurement process.  Kelton 
Contracting, Inc., B-262255, Dec. 12, 1995, 95-2 CPD  para.  254; Power 
Connector, Inc., B-256362, June 15, 1994, 94-1 CPD  para.  369; John J. 
Kirlin, Inc., B-250244, Dec. 15, 1992, 92-2 CPD  para.  419.

In determining whether a hand-carried bid was timely received by the 
agency, all relevant evidence, including statements made by government 
personnel, may be considered.  Kelton Contracting, Inc., supra; Power 
Connector, Inc., supra.  Here, the evidence cited by the agency 
reasonably supports a conclusion that timely delivery of the bid to 
the agency was accomplished.  The purchasing agent and contract 
specialist attest to the bid's receipt at approximately noon on 
February 7, 2 hours prior to bid opening, and the bid's envelope bears 
the time/date-stamp of 12:05 p.m. on that date.

Having established that the agency received the bid in a timely 
fashion, we must determine the relative responsibility for the late 
receipt of the bid in the Plans/Specifications office.  In so doing, 
we look to all the circumstances surrounding its delivery and compare 
the actions of the government and the bidder to determine whether the 
bidder acted reasonably.  Power Connector, Inc., supra; Dale Woods, 
B-209459, Apr. 13, 1983, 83-1 CPD  para.  396.  In our view, the record 
shows that PBM acted in a manner reasonably calculated to ensure the 
delivery of its bid before bid opening, and that the agency's actions 
were the paramount cause for the bid's late receipt at the location 
designated for receipt of bids.  

PBM's representative arrived at the Plans/Specifications office 
approximately 2 hours prior to bid opening to deliver the firm's bid.  
He could not do so because the door was closed and locked, with no 
explanation and in seeming contravention of instructions posted on the 
door.  In accordance with a sign on the door, PBM's representative 
went to the contracts office.  Since the contract specialist to whom 
he explained his dilemma was in charge of this bid opening, he agreed 
to give her the bid in reliance on her assurances that it would be 
properly handled for timely receipt in the bid opening box.  We think 
PBM's representative acted reasonably in proceeding to the contracts 
office, considering the signs posted on the door, and further 
reasonably relied upon the assurances of the person to whom he 
delivered the bid, the cognizant contract specialist in charge of this 
bid opening.  See United Teleplex, B-237160.2, Feb. 2, 1990, 90-1 CPD  para.  
146; Baeten Constr. Co., B-210681, Aug. 12, 1983, 83-2 CPD  para.  203.  
Under these circumstances, it is clear that the paramount cause of the 
bid's late receipt was the inappropriately locked Plans/Specifications 
office followed by the contract specialist's subsequent failure to 
take the bid with her to bid opening despite her assurances that she 
would do so.  See Power Connector, Inc., supra; see also L.V. Anderson 
and Sons, Inc., B-189835, Sept. 30, 1977, 77-2 CPD  para.  249.

Finally, the record establishes a reasonable chain of custody for 
PBM's bid after its receipt by the agency at 12:05 p.m., and, Ed 
Kocharian's speculation notwithstanding, shows that the bid was in the 
sole custody of the agency at the time of bid opening and thus could 
not have been changed by PBM.  Therefore, consideration of PBM's bid 
did not introduce any unfair advantage into the competitive process 
and thereby compromise its integrity.  Kelton Contracting, Inc., 
supra; Power Connector, Inc., supra.  

The protest is denied.

Comptroller General
of the United States

1. The sign stated that the office hours were between 7 a.m. and 3 
p.m.