Tag Archives: SBA size appeals

SBA OHA Explains “Key Employee” for Affiliation Purposes

Posted on by

A contractor successfully challenged an adverse size determination that found affiliation under the newly organized concern rule, by establishing that its president and chief executive officer was not a former key employee of its supposed affiliate.

In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals clarified the definition of “key employee” under the newly organized concern rule, by noting that such a former employee’s title was not conclusive—instead, to be a key employee, that person had to have influence or control over the operations of the business as a whole.

Continue reading →

No Size Appeal If Outside Competitive Range, Says SBA OHA

Posted on by

An unsuccessful offeror lacked the ability to file a valid SBA size appeal involving the size status of a competitor, because the unsuccessful offeror was eliminated from the competitive range–and its elimination had been upheld in a GAO bid protest decision.

In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals confirmed that an offeror that cannot possibly be awarded the contract ordinarily lacks standing to file a size appeal.

Continue reading →

Common Investments Affiliation: Shared Real Estate Can Count

Posted on by

So-called “common investments” affiliation under the SBA’s affiliation rules arises most frequently when individuals own common interests in at least two operating companies.  But common investments affiliation can also be based on common interests in real estate.

In a recent decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that the SBA had performed an inadequate size determination because the SBA Area Office asked the protested company about common investments in companies–but didn’t directly ask about common investments in real estate.

Continue reading →

SBA OHA Reaffirms 70% Threshold For Economic Dependence Affiliation

Posted on by

Under the SBA’s affiliation rules, one of the many ways a small business can be deemed affiliated with another is through the economic dependence rule: where a small business derives 70% or more of its revenues from another entity, the SBA ordinarily considers it to be economically dependent upon—and thus subject to the control of—that other entity.

So it was in a recent decision from the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (“OHA”), which confirmed the so-called “70% rule” for economic dependence.

Continue reading →

SBA Size Protests: File With Contracting Officer, Not OHA

Posted on by

The SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals is an appellate forum and lacks jurisdiction to hear initial size protests.

As explained in a recent SBA OHA decision, size protests must be filed with the relevant Contracting Officer, who then refers the matter to the appropriate SBA Area Office.  Only after the SBA Area Office issues a size determination does OHA have jurisdiction to consider a size appeal.

Continue reading →

Ostensible Subcontractor Affiliation: Beware These “Four Key Factors,” Says SBA OHA

Posted on by

Ostensible subcontractor affiliation can arise for many reasons–but a small business may be in grave danger of affiliation with its subcontractor when four specific factors are present.

In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that a small prime contractor was unusually reliant on its large subcontractor where “four key factors” indicated that the small prime contractor was bringing little to the table but its small business status.

Continue reading →

Busy Employee “Skims” SBA Size Protest Email–What Could Go Wrong?

Posted on by

A contractor’s “frantically busy” employee, who was listed as the firm’s contact in SAM, skimmed through an email from the SBA containing a size protest, and took no action to respond.

In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals held that the SBA had properly issued an adverse size determination against the contractor in question after receiving no reply to the size protest–and the fact that the employee who received it was “frantically busy” was no excuse.

Continue reading →