Dear Mr K.,
On 19 February 1999 you lodged a complaint with the European Ombudsman on behalf of Chemische Fabrik Fährbrücke GmbH concerning tender procedure WA/BH/98/02 organised by the European Commission.
On 9 March 1999, I forwarded the complaint to the President of the European Commission. The European Commission sent its opinion on 5 July 1999 and I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished. I did not receive any observations from you.
I am now writing to you to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

The Chemische Fabrik Fährbrücke GmbH (hereinafter CFF) participated in a tender procedure (reference : WA/BH/98/02) organised by the European Commission to carry out a project in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The tender was sent on 27 May 1998 by registered mail and the complainant was informed that the Commission had received CFF's letter on 2 June 1998.
The complainant claimed that the European Commission neither acknowledged the receipt of the tender, nor registered it. Furthermore CFF had been informed that its application was not among the tenders opened at the opening session. Several months later, the tender was sent back to CFF without further comments. Finally CFF claimed that it contacted the Commission's services in Sarajevo in relation to this question, but that it never received any reply.
On 19 February 1999, the complainant therefore lodged a complaint with the European Ombudsman. The complainant sought clarifications about the tender he claimed to have sent to the Commission which had never been registered nor considered and which had finally been sent back unopened.

THE INQUIRY

The Commission's opinion
The opinion of the European Commission on the complaint was in summary the following:
CFF was issued the documents for the tender published under reference WA/BH/98/02 and was informed that the deadline for submitting the tenders was fixed at 12:00 AM on 12 May 1998. On the opening day for tender WA/BH/98/02, i.e. 13 May 1998, no tender had been submitted by CFF.
On 2 June 1998, the Commission received CFF's submission with reference WA/BH/98/02. Usually late submissions are immediately returned unopened, but in this case the Commission transmitted the file to its offices in Sarajevo to ascertain that the submission was not intended for some other call for tender organised for Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Given that the CFF's tender was handed in once the call for tender had already been closed, CFF's tender could not be registered and was sent back unopened. This was made in accordance with the standard procedure set out in article 15§2 of the "General Regulations for Tenders and Award of Supply Contracts" applicable to PHARE projects.
The Commission also enclosed two documents with its opinion to the European Ombudsman. One indicated that the complainant was informed by the Commission of an extension of deadline for submitting the tenders. The second was a copy of CFF's fax to the Commission in Sarajevo sent on 21 September 1998. CFF therein confirmed that its submission was indeed made for tender WA/BH/98/02. It also asked to be returned the submission unopened.
The complainant's observations
The complainant did not hand in any observations.

THE DECISION

1 The Commission's failure to register and to consider a tender handed in by the complainant

1.1 The complainant claimed that he sent a tender to the Commission which was never registered nor considered and which was finally sent back unopened. The Commission explained that the complainant's tender was handed in after the deadline and therefore not taken into consideration.
1.2 The Ombudsman notes that on 17 April 1998, CFF confirmed that it received the Commission's communication granting an extended deadline for submitting the tenders (i.e. 12 May 1998 instead of 27 April 1998). According to the documents forwarded by the complainant, CFF's tender was sent on 27 May 1998 and was therefore submitted after the deadline.
1.3 By sending back CFF's submission without registering it, the Commission has followed the appropriate procedure applicable to late submissions . Furthermore, this met CFF's request expressed in its fax of 21 September 1998. The Ombudsman therefore considers that there is no maladministration by the European Commission.
2 Conclusion
On the basis of the European Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Commission. The Ombudsman has therefore decided to close the case.
The President of the European Commission will also be informed of this decision.
Yours sincerely
Jacob SÖDERMAN