## Facts

- The Air Force needed bilingual-bicultural advisor/subject matter experts (BBA‑SMEs) to support U.S. activities in Iraq, including the January 2005 elections.
- In 2004, the Air Force attempted to place the BBA‑SME requirement under an existing environmental services contract (“GEITA”), even though that contract did not cover linguist/bicultural advisory services.
- By November 2004, the Air Force concluded the requirement was outside GEITA’s scope and decided to proceed without full and open competition under the “unusual and compelling urgency” exception.
- In December 2004, the Air Force awarded a sole-source contract to Operational Support Services (OSS) for BBA‑SME services, asserting urgent need and OSS’s ability to perform without delay.
- In May 2005, the government authorized additional BBA‑SME requirements (more personnel and an extended period of performance).
- In July 2005, the Air Force awarded a second sole-source contract to OSS for the expanded requirement, again citing urgency and treating OSS as the only source that could perform in time.
- WorldWide Language Resources, Inc. and SOS International Ltd. filed bid protests challenging both sole-source awards.

## Issues

1. Whether the Air Force properly relied on the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) “unusual and compelling urgency” exception when the asserted urgency resulted from the agency’s lack of advance planning and procurement errors.
2. Whether, even assuming urgency, the Air Force met its obligation to obtain competition to the maximum extent practicable before making the sole-source awards to OSS.

## Decision

- GAO sustained the protests.
- GAO found the agency’s urgency rationale improper because the time pressure flowed from the Air Force’s own lack of reasonable advance planning, including the erroneous attempt to use an out-of-scope contract vehicle.
- GAO concluded the Air Force did not obtain competition to the maximum extent practicable and lacked a reasonable basis to treat OSS as the only responsible source.
- GAO recommended terminating the July 2005 sole-source contract to the extent practicable and conducting a competitive procurement for remaining requirements.
- GAO recommended reimbursement of the protesters’ reasonable protest costs, including attorneys’ fees.

## Legal Principles

- Under CICA, agencies must obtain full and open competition to the maximum extent practicable.
- The “unusual and compelling urgency” exception permits limiting competition only when the need is urgent and is not attributable to the agency’s lack of advance planning.
- Even when an urgency exception applies, the agency must still seek offers from as many potential sources as practicable under the circumstances.
- A conclusory assertion that one contractor is uniquely capable is insufficient; the agency must have a reasonable, supportable basis for an “only source” determination.
- Using an inappropriate contract vehicle that delays competitive action can constitute lack of advance planning and undermine later reliance on urgency to justify noncompetitive procurement.

## Conclusion

GAO held that the Air Force’s sole-source awards for BBA‑SME services were unlawful because the asserted urgency was largely self-created through avoidable planning and contracting errors, and because the Air Force failed to pursue competition to the maximum extent practicable despite the presence of other potential sources and available lead time.


Matter of WorldWide Language Res., Inc.; SOS Int’l Ltd., B-296984 et al., 2005 WL 3143870 (Comp. Gen. Nov. 14, 2005)