[Protest of VA Contract Award for Replacement of Water Chillers]

A firm protested a Veterans Administration (VA) contract award to complete work partially performed under its previously terminated contract, contending that: (1) it was improperly excluded from competing for the reprocurement; and (2) the agency's refusal to permit it to submit an offer violated both the Competition in Contracting Act and the Small Business Act. GAO noted that: (1) performance on the contract was suspended because of perceived deficiencies in the protester's work; (2) VA executed a surety takeover agreement in order to have the terminated work completed; and (3) the contractor's failure to complete the project created an extremely hazardous situation that had to be resolved immediately. GAO found that: (1) award was based on unusual and compelling circumstances; (2) noncompetitive procedures may be used when an agency's need is of such an unusual and compelling urgency that the government would be injured unless the agency is permitted to limit the number of sources; (3) the protester was not a responsible contractor to perform the work since its performance under two recent construction contracts was deemed unsatisfactory; (4) VA asked two firms known to have satisfactory work experience to submit offers and ultimately awarded a contract to the low offerer; and (5) VA was not in a position to solicit a large number of firms in light of the urgent situation. Accordingly, the protest was denied.