[Protest of EPA Contract Award for Facilities Maintenance]

A firm protested an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contract award for facilities maintenance, contending that the awardee did not possess experience applicable to a solicitation subfactor. GAO held that: (1) EPA reasonably determined that both the awardee and protester had adequate technical experience, but made award to the awardee due to its lower bid; (2) EPA was not required to consider experience that was not comparable in size and complexity to the required services; (3) the EPA cost-realism analysis was not unreasonable, since EPA based it on the assumption that some employees would not receive vacation time; and (4) the protester was not prejudiced by any cumulative effect of errors or the failure of EPA to provide preaward notification. Accordingly, the protest was denied.