[Protest of Specifications Under Air Force Solicitations for Audiovisual Services]

A firm protested under two Air Force solicitations for audiovisual services, contending that the requirement that contractors repair government equipment under fixed-price contracts unduly restricted competition and was unfair because bidders had to include an amount in their bid prices that could not be known in advance. The protester wanted repairs to be a reimbursable cost which would eliminate risk to the contractor. GAO noted that: (1) the solicitations were based on a standard performance work statement used throughout the Air Force in audiovisual services procurement; (2) to assist bidders in calculating their prices, the solicitations listed the equipment to be maintained as well as costs incurred for repair in 1984; (3) bidders were allowed to view the equipment and had access to information pertaining to its age and condition; and (4) five other firms submitted bids under one solicitation and three had indicated they would bid on the other, indicating that the requirements were not unreasonable. GAO has held that the determination of the government's needs and the best method for accommodating them are primarily the responsibility of the contracting agency, and it will not substitute its judgment for that of the agency's absent a showing that the agency's determination was not reasonable. GAO found that the protester failed to show that the solicitation requirements were unreasonable. Accordingly, the protest was denied.