RiverNorth, Inc. (B-423274.2; B-423274.3)

You should not care.

Category: Page formatting, compliance, Multiple Award Schedule

Date: 18 April 2025

URL: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-423274.2

RiverNorth, Inc., protested its elimination from competition under USDA’s RFQ No. 12SAD225Q0001, issued under GSA Schedule procedures for program support services. RiverNorth challenged the USDA’s rejection of its quote over the use of sub-12-point font in footers, claiming the agency acted unreasonably, failed to interpret the RFQ clearly, treated vendors unequally, and violated SBA referral rules.

Strict formatting rules upheld: The RFQ mandated Times New Roman, 12-point font throughout—including in footers—and warned that any deviation would render a quote deficient and ineligible. RiverNorth’s quote used smaller font in one volume’s page footers. GAO found the solicitation unambiguous and the agency’s enforcement of the font rule reasonable and consistent with the RFQ’s emphasis on detail orientation.

No unequal treatment in vendor outreach: RiverNorth argued that another vendor was permitted to “argue its way back in” after being eliminated. GAO found that the other vendor simply corrected a misinterpretation by the agency and did not revise its submission—hence no discussions occurred, and no unequal treatment was established.

No referral to SBA required: RiverNorth also claimed USDA had to refer its case to the Small Business Administration for a certificate of competency. GAO rejected this, holding that failure to follow formatting instructions is not a matter of responsibility and thus no referral was needed.

The protest was denied. GAO reaffirmed agencies may enforce formatting rules as material when clearly defined, and are not required to engage in discussions or SBA referrals where the issue is procedural noncompliance.

Digest

1. Protest challenging the agency’s rejection of the protester’s quotation is denied where the agency reasonably eliminated the protester’s quotation in accordance with the solicitation requirements.
2. Protest alleging unequal treatment because the agency engaged in discussions with only one vendor is denied where the record shows that the agency did not engage in discussions.
3. Protest alleging that the agency was required to refer the firm’s eligibility for award to the Small Business Administration for a certificate of competency determination is denied where the agency’s elimination of the protester’s quotation for failure to comply with solicitation instructions did not constitute a responsibility determination.