[Protest of Navy Contract Award for Trainer Upgrades]

A firm protested a Navy contract award for trainer upgrades, contending that the: (1) awardee's product did not comply with several technical requirements; and (2) awardee failed to demonstrate several of the system's major components, as the solicitation required. GAO held that the: (1) record established the reasonableness of the Navy's determination that the protester's system was technically acceptable; (2) protester untimely filed its protest regarding the awardee's proposed display configuration; (3) protester failed to provide evidence that the awardee improperly configured its display system; and (4) awardee demonstrated the system component characteristics using a system incorporating a different type of screen, and the protester did not show that the substitution of one type of screen for the other invalidated the demonstration. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.