[Protest of Air Force Sole-Source Contract Award]

A firm protested the Air Force's sole-source contract award to another firm for computer hardware and software to augment an existing government-owned network. The protester's response to the Air Force's notice in the Commerce Business Daily (CBD) was rejected because its software was not compatible with the Air Force's existing software. The protester argued that the CBD contained no mention of such a compatibility requirement. GAO found that the CBD notice: (1) did not identify the Air Force's existing software, so an offerer could not make any representation concerning compatibility; and (2) stated that it was for information and planning purposes only and did not constitute a solicitation for bids or proposals. As a result, GAO held that vendors could have reasonably assumed that, so long as they responded to the requirements contained in the CBD notice, they would be meeting the Air Force's stated purpose. In addition, GAO determined that the Air Force lacked a reasonable basis for rejecting the protester as a source of supply because it failed to contact the protester for further information concerning the compatibility of its software, despite the fact that its hardware was acceptable. Accordingly, the protest was sustained but, because the hardware and software had already been delivered, GAO did not recommend contract termination. However, it recommended that steps be taken to prevent the recurrence of the deficiencies found in this procurement.