[Protest of Allegedly Restrictive Provisions in Air Force IFB]

A firm protested the allegedly restrictive specifications of an Air Force solicitation which was a small business set-aside for food service attendants. The protester contended that a requirement for performance and payment bonds did not comply with Federal Acquisition Regulations for other than construction projects. However, GAO stated that performance bonds may be required when necessary to protect the government's interest or where government property is used by the contractor to perform the contract. Where a decision to require bonds is found to be reasonable and in good faith, GAO will not disturb the decision. In this case, the Air Force decided to require performance bonds because continuous performance of the services was necessary, and the solicitation provided for the contractor to use and be responsible for government property. GAO found that both of these reasons were sufficient to uphold the bond requirement. The protester also argued that a requirement for supervisory personnel was unduly restrictive because it exceeded the government's minimum needs. GAO will not question an agency's determination of its minimum needs absent a clear showing that it is unreasonable. The protester failed to show that the requirement was clearly unreasonable. Accordingly, the protest was denied.