[Protest of Any Army Contract Award for Custodial Services]

A firm protested any Army contract award for custodial services, contending that: (1) defective solicitation specifications resulted in misunderstanding of the Army's requirements; and (2) the disparity in bids indicated some latent solicitation defect. GAO held that the: (1) protester untimely filed its protest regarding solicitation defects after bid opening; and (2) Army's receipt of disparate bids did not by itself establish the existence of solicitation defects. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.