Summary

A firm protested an Air Force sole-source contract award to another firm for aircraft spare parts, contending that the Air Force: (1) unreasonably excluded it from the procurement by failing to provide complete information, which prevented it from submitting an offer for items it could furnish; (2) improperly awarded certain contract line items, since procurement regulations required that it solicit other offers before proceeding to award the items on a sole-source basis; and (3) should reimburse it for its protest preparation costs. GAO held that the Air Force: (1) violated statutory presolicitation requirements by publishing a synopsis of its intent to issue a sole-source solicitation, which failed to indicate that there were other items beyond the two it described; and (2) properly awarded the sole-source contract for two items, since the items were critical and the agency had neither the data needed to procure the items competitively nor the time necessary to qualify a new source. Accordingly, the protest was sustained in part and denied in part, and the claim was denied. GAO recommended that the Air Force terminate the contract for those items omitted from the synopsis and resolicit for those items.