In a recent pre-award challenge to the terms of a solicitation, a small business contractor challenged the terms of an Air Force solicitation seeking a contractor to provide grounds maintenance at Joint Base Langley-Eustis (JBLE), Virginia. Award was to be made to the lowest-priced, technically acceptable offeror. In its protest, K&K JL Services, Inc. challenged two aspects of the RFP’s past performance instructions which: (1) required the submission of two past performance references; and (2) defined relevant size as a project with a value of at least $1 million per year. K&K argued that these requirements were unduly restrictive of competition because they effectively exclude a number of small businesses that are capable of the work.
GAO denied the protest, finding that K&K “has, in fact, submitted a proposal . . . that identifies two past performance references for grounds maintenance work with dollar values of more than $1 million per year.” As a result, GAO concluded that K&K was unable to demonstrate competitive prejudice—an essential element of every viable protest. As an aside, GAO also noted that, even if K&K could demonstrate that it was prejudiced, GAO nevertheless would have denied the protest. First, GAO noted that failing to submit the two required past performance references would not disqualify an offeror—rather, offerors without sufficient past performance would receive an “Unknown” rating, which would be considered Acceptable. Second, the past performance requirement was reasonable because it was reasonably related to the procurement here, which had a value of approximately $2.4 million for the base year.