[Protest of DOE Contract Award for Modeling and Forecasting Support Services]

A firm protested a Department of Energy (DOE) cost-plus-fixed-fee contract award for modelling and forecasting support services, contending that: (1) the awardee falsely certified its corporate status; (2) the awardee intentionally misrepresented its labor rates; and (3) DOE applied different evaluation criteria and requested different levels of supporting documentation from different bidders. GAO held that: (1) DOE reasonably concluded that the awardee did not intentionally misrepresent its corporate status; (2) the awardee's labor rates were consistent with the terms of the consulting agreement; and (3) there was no disparate treatment of bidders. Accordingly, the protest was dismissed in part and denied in part.