[Protest of Sole-Source Navy Contract Award]

A firm protested the Navy's sole-source award of a contract to another firm. The protester contended that it should have been afforded the opportunity to participate in the procurement and alleged that certain provisions of the solicitation were unduly restrictive. The determination to negotiate a sole-source contract was based on the contracting officer's finding that the awardee held proprietary data which were necessary to the performance of the contract. However, the Navy did agree to consider proposals from other firms which could otherwise prove their ability to perform the contract work. The Navy stated that the protester did not offer proof of its ability to perform the work, such as by submitting a list of prior contracts or other convincing technical information. GAO has consistently held that, where adequate data are not available to an agency to enable it to conduct a competitive procurement, it will not take exception to a sole-source award to the firm which the agency feels is capable of performing the work. The protester offered no evidence showing that adequate data were available to the Navy to conduct a competitive procurement or that the contract work could be performed without the awardee's proprietary data. Therefore, GAO had no basis upon which to disturb the Navy's source selection decision. The protester's allegation that certain solicitation specifications were restrictive was academic, since it had no effect on the selection of the contractor. Accordingly, the protest was denied.