Matter of:Integrity International Security Services, Inc.

B-276012 May 01, 1997 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights -requiring offerors to have completed two security guard contracts of at least 175. Is unduly restrictive of competition is denied since the magnitude and nature of the procurement. Reasonably justify the restriction in order to ensure that contractors have a minimally adequate track record of past performance with comparable security guard projects. Have performed two similar security guard contracts involving at least 175. Is unduly restrictive. The Ronald Reagan Building will be the second largest federal office building in the United States. [1] As specified in the solicitation. GSA estimates that the facility will require approximately 350. Which is one of the largest security guard service requirements in the industry. View Decision Matter of: Integrity International Security Services, Inc. File: B-276012 Date: May 1, 1997 DIGEST Attorneys DECISION Integrity International Security Services, Inc. protests the terms of request for proposals (RFP) No. GS-11P-96-MPC-0510, issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) for security guard services at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C. The protester contends that the RFP's minimum experience requirement--which limits eligibility for award to those offerors who, within the past 5 years, have performed two similar security guard contracts involving at least 175,000 hours each--is unduly restrictive. We deny the protest. When completed, the Ronald Reagan Building will be the second largest federal office building in the United States. [1] As specified in the solicitation, GSA estimates that the facility will require approximately 350,000 security guard hours per year--which is one of the largest security guard service requirements in the industry. The challenged minimum experience requirement, which is set forth as an evaluation factor at section M of the RFP, provides in pertinent part as follows: ". . . each offer[or] must demonstrate performance of at least two (2) contracts of a similar size and nature within the past five (5) years. [Emphasis in original.] . . . . A contract is comparable in size if the required manhours are equivalent to or greater than 50 [percent] of the productive hours required by this solicitation." [Emphasis added.] The solicitation also provides that failure to meet this "minimum" experience requirement "will render the offer technically unacceptable." GSA concedes that the minimum experience provision prevents Integrity from competing; however, the agency maintains that the provision is unobjectionable because the restriction is necessary to protect human life and safety. GSA reports that it typically requires security guard service competitors to demonstrate successful performance of at least one similar security guard contract involving labor hours equivalent to 80 percent of a solicitation's labor hour estimate; however, in this case, because the RFP's labor hour estimate--350,000 hours--is so high, GSA lowered the minimum experience requirement to 50 percent of the RFP's stated labor hour estimate--175,000 hours. Since this reduction was made to foster competition, and since GSA is aware of 11 federal and 18 other security guard service contracts which would satisfy the experience requirement, GSA argues that the minimum experience requirement is not unduly restrictive and that the protest should be denied. Integrity argues that the current eligibility provision is unduly restrictive because it prevents responsible sources with comparable large security guard contract experience--such as Integrity--from competing. In this regard, Integrity explains that because it has successfully performed one comparable 175,000-hour project, the firm possesses the necessary large contract experience, competence, and management expertise to successfully fulfill the agency's needs in this procurement. As relief, Integrity requests that the agency amend the solicitation either to permit consideration of offerors who have performed only one comparable 175,000- hour security guard contract, or, alternatively, to replace the current go/no-go minimum experience requirement with an open-ended provision that provides for a comparative evaluation of each offeror's past experience. Under the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 (CICA), an agency is required to specify its needs and solicit offers in a manner designed to achieve full and open competition, so that all responsible sources are permitted to compete. 41 U.S.C. Sec. 253a(a)(1)(A) (1994). A contracting agency may include restrictive provisions or conditions only to the extent necessary to satisfy the agency's needs. 41 U.S.C. Sec. 253a(a)(2)(B).