[Protest of National Guard Solicitation for Construction Work]

A firm protested an Army solicitation for construction at various National Guard installations, contending that the solicitation was flawed, since the Army was committing itself neither to order a stated minimum quantity of services nor to order all of its requirements from a successful bidder. GAO held that: (1) the solicitation would not have been binding, since the absence of valid mutual promises would have rendered the contract unenforceable; and (2) the solicitation failed to meet the test for formation of a valid indefinite-quantity contract, since the solicitation contained no stated minimum. Accordingly, the protest was sustained, and GAO recommended that the Army: (1) cancel the solicitation and reissue it in a legally sufficient form; and (2) reimburse the protester for its protest costs.