[Protest of GSA Solicitation for Custodial Services]

A firm protested a GSA solicitation for custodial and related services, contending that, as the incumbent contractor, it was prejudiced because GSA: (1) failed to correct a wage determination problem that it raised in an earlier protest; and (2) added a provision to the solicitation that exceeded the government's minimum needs. GAO noted that the solicitation included an old wage determination since a new collective bargaining agreement covering the incumbent contractor's employees did not become effective until after the proposed effective date of the new contract. GAO held that: (1) GSA did not prejudice the incumbent contractor by including the old wage determination since the collective bargaining agreement did not bind the offerers; and (2) GSA properly amended the solicitation to include a 5-month requirement for snow removal services. Accordingly, the protest was denied.