[Protest of VA Contract Award for Computerized Axial Tomography Equipment Services]

A firm protested any Veterans Administration (VA) award for computerized axial tomography equipment and services, contending that: (1) VA should have set aside the solicitation for small businesses; (2) the incumbent contractor and the original equipment manufacturer had an unfair advantage; (3) VA improperly required brand-name replacement parts and x-ray tubes; and (4) the awardee did not have sufficient numbers of x-ray tubes. GAO held that: (1) VA reasonably decided not to restrict the procurement; (2) VA was not required to equalize the competitive advantage; (3) VA reasonably determined that the brand-name requirement was necessary; and (4) it would not consider the awardee's supply of x-ray tubes, since that concerned the awardee's responsibility. Accordingly, the protest was denied.