[Protest of Navy Purchase Order for ADP Equipment Maintenance]

A firm protested the Navy's issuance of a purchase order for computer equipment maintenance pursuant to the awardee's nonmandatory schedule contract for such services, contending that the Navy issued the purchase order even though it offered to perform essentially the same services at a lower cost than the awardee. The Navy publicized its intent to award the purchase order, and the protester submitted a competitive proposal. The Navy contacted the protester and determined that it could not provide the services within the required time. GAO held that: (1) the Navy prejudiced the protester by failing to specify its minimum needs with respect to response time; (2) the protester could have offered the same response time as the awardee; (3) the Navy failed to seek adequate competition before deciding to use the schedule contract; and (4) the Navy should seek adequate competition in future procurements for the same services. Accordingly, the protest was sustained.