Validity of Defaulted Requirements Contract

A contractor requested a legal opinion of the validity of its defaulted requirements contract. The fact that the contractor improvidently bid "no charge" for a substantial number of items provided no basis for questioning the validity of the contract when the contractor was the low, responsive bidder; its bid prices were twice confirmed prior to award and no error had been alleged therein; and it had been determined to be responsible after a preaward survey. The matter of the alleged inadequate number of orders under the contract was considered and resolved by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, so GAO did not consider the matter on its merits.