[Protest of Air Force Solicitation for Scanner Maintenance]

A firm protested an Air Force solicitation for scanner maintenance, contending that the: (1) Air Force unnecessarily required a list of parts suppliers, since such a list would not provide evidence of parts availability; (2) Air Force unreasonably required a single maintenance contractor; and (3) solicitation was defective. GAO held that the: (1) protester should have, but failed to, raise its allegations regarding the parts suppliers list in its initial protest; (2) Air Force reasonably required a single maintenance contractor; and (3) allegations regarding a defective specification were academic, since the Air Force corrected those deficiencies after the initial protest. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.