[Protest of Bonding Requirement Under Coast Guard Solicitation for Facilities Maintenance]

A firm protested the bonding requirement under a Coast Guard cost-comparison solicitation for facilities maintenance, contending that the: (1) requirement was unreasonable; (2) amount of the payment bond was unreasonable; and (3) bonding requirement created an unfair advantage for the government. GAO held that: (1) the Coast Guard reasonably imposed the bonding requirement; (2) there was no basis to question the propriety of the bond amount; and (3) the government's potential cost advantage did not render the cost comparison defective. Accordingly, the protest was denied.