A contractor’s challenge to a contracting officer’s final decision was “improperly directed” when it was sent only to the contracting officer, and did not delay the 90-day period in which the final decision could be appealed to the Civilian Board of Contracting Appeals.
As demonstrated in a recent CBCA decision, when a contractor receives a contracting officer’s final decision, the appeals clock starts ticking–and an “appeal” to the contracting officer doesn’t stop the clock.
We hope that all of our readers had a wonderful and relaxing Thanksgiving. While we are looking forward to seeing what 2016 brings, we continue to bring you our weekly dose of government contracting news and notes for the remainder of the year.
In this week’s edition of SmallGovCon Week In Review, a look at ever-increasing regulatory burdens on contractors, the American Legion endorses a proposal to increase veteran-owned contracting, the Government recovers $3.5 billion in False Claims Act cases, and more.
When the SBA evaluates a size protest, it need not obtain and consider “outside sources” of information–that is, information that is not provided by the protester or the protested business.
A recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals highlights the need for a size protest to include specific, detailed information about why the protested firm is alleged to be “other than small.” If the protester does not include information from outside sources, the SBA is not required to seek out such information on its own.
Ostensible subcontractor affiliation was not created when the small prime contractor proposed to hire its subcontractor’s current employee to serve as the prime contractor’s project manager.
In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that, where the prime contractor would retain supervision and control of contract performance, the prime contractor was not dependent on its subcontractor for contract management.
The VA and Kingdomware Technologies Inc. haven’t agreed on much in recent years, but in briefs filed with the Supreme Court on November 20, 2015, they agree on one thing: the pending Kingdomware Supreme Court case is not moot.
Hopefully, the fact that neither party wants the case dismissed on a technicality will help convince the Court to decide Kingdomware on the merits.
After a busy week of travel to Pittsburgh for the 2015 National Veterans Small Business Engagement, I have returned to the office to get you caught up on this week’s top government contracting news. In this week’s SmallGovCon Week In Review, the House of Representatives adds veterans to the list of disadvantaged companies under the DOT DBE program (but not everyone is happy about it), a look at how a decline in defense spending will impact contractors, the Government starts the process of looking for alternatives to DUNS numbers, and much more.
I am back in Lawrence after two great days at the National Veterans Small Business Engagement in Pittsburgh. I led three Learning Sessions at the NVSBE: the first on SDVOSB joint venturing and teaming, the second on the SBA’s proposed new “universal” mentor-protege program, and the third on the ins and outs of the non-manufacturer rule.
Thank you to all of the veterans, government representatives, and others who attended the sessions–the rooms were packed and the audiences were very engaged. And thank you, as well, to the organizers of this great annual event, who kindly invited me to speak even though the VA and I don’t exactly see eye to eye on the Kingdomware case.
If you weren’t able to attend my sessions at the NVSBE, I am happy to send you a copy of the slides–just contact me.