[Protest of GSA Solicitation for Security Guard Services]

A firm protested a General Services Administration (GSA) solicitation for security guard services, contending that: (1) various portions of the solicitation were ambiguous; and (2) GSA should reimburse it for its protest costs. GAO held that: (1) the solicitation, when read as a whole, clearly contemplated performance of the service contract to which the wage determination applied; (2) the solicitation was not defective, since it specified that patrol vehicles were not required in connection with contract performance; (3) the protester unreasonably interpreted the clause concerning the annual adjustments of the contractor's pricing; and (4) the protester was not entitled to reimbursement for its protest costs, since the Air Force's corrective action was related to the amendment of a different solicitation provision. Accordingly, the protest and claim for costs were denied.