[Protest of EPA Contract Award Alleging Proposal Improperly Evaluated]

A firm protested a contract award to another firm under an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) solicitation for training services, contending that: (1) its proposal was improperly evaluated as technically inferior; (2) its bid price was lower than the awardee's; and (3) the awardee lacked the capability to perform the required services. GAO held that: (1) EPA reasonably determined that the awardee's offer was technically superior based on the bids and on negotiations with both the awardee and the protester; (2) EPA was not required to make award to the low bidder because the procurement was negotiated rather than advertised; and (3) the matter of whether the awardee could fulfill the contract was one of responsibility, which GAO will not consider absent circumstances not relevant to the instant protest. Accordingly, the protest was denied in part and dismissed in part.