[Protest of Navy Contract Award for Technical Instructor Services]

A firm protested a Navy contract award for technical instructor services, contending that: (1) the Navy improperly emphasized proposed costs without adequate notice; (2) the Navy should have solicited sealed bids instead of competitive proposals; and (3) as the incumbent, it was at a disadvantage because it was committed to its existing staff and salary structure. GAO found that: (1) the Navy advised the protester that the procurement was competitive and that it could change its proposed costs in its best and final offer; (2) the protest concerning the nature of the solicitation was untimely filed because it was based on an alleged impropriety which was apparent prior to bid opening and was not filed until after the award was made; (3) the Navy was not required to equalize competition by considering disadvantages resulting from a firm's incumbency if the disadvantages did not result from preferential or unfair government action; and (4) the Navy properly based its award on cost where it found the protester's and the awardee's technical proposals to be equal. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.