[Protest of Sole-Source FAA Contract Award]

A firm protested a sole-source contract award by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for automatic data processing equipment. FAA purchased equipment which it had been leasing after it synopsized the intended noncompetitive purchase in the Commerce Business Daily. The notice stated that affirmative responses from capable firms would be considered. Although the protester responded to the synopsis, the contracting officer was not informed, and the leaseholder's equipment was purchased. FAA admitted that the procurement was improperly handled, but stated that the protester was not prejudiced by the award since the awardee had a substantial price advantage and the time required to install other equipment and train operators would have jeopardized ongoing operations. The protester maintained that it could have priced the equipment competitively and that FAA statements that it would take several months before its equipment was operational were without merit. In addition, since FAA had purchased its equipment in the past, the protester claimed that the agency knew that it was capable of performing the present contract. Therefore, the protester maintained that the requirements should be resolicited. GAO found that it was impossible to ascertain whether the protester was prejudiced; however, meaningful competition was feasible in this contract. Despite this conclusion, GAO could recommend no practical relief since the contract had been performed. However, FAA has assured the protester that it would be given the opportunity to compete in the future. Accordingly, the protest was sustained.