Tag Archives: SDVOSB appeals

SDVOSB Programs: SBA OHA Explains A Critical SBA/VA Difference

Posted on by

Perhaps no single aspect of federal government contracting causes more confusion than the fact that the government currently runs two SDVOSB programs: one under the VA’s rules and the other under the SBA’s.

The current system can lead to inconsistent results, such as a company being a “SDVOSB” for purposes of VA contracts, but not those issued by other agencies (or vice versa).  As SmallGovCon readers know, I am on record as stating that the “two SDVOSB programs” approach is idiotic and ought to be scrapped.  (Okay, maybe I wasn’t on record with the word “idiotic” before.  I guess I am now.)

But while I cross my fingers and hope that Congress will simplify things, SDVOSBs are stuck with the current system.  And, as a recent SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals case demonstrates, SDVOSBs should be aware of the important differences between the two SDVOSB programs.

Continue reading →

SDVOSB Program: VA Must Pay Attorneys’ Fees in Ownership Transfer Case

Posted on by

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has ordered the VA to pay attorneys’ fees to Miles Construction, LLC stemming from the Court’s February decision that the company’s  “right of first refusal” provision did not render it ineligible for the VA’s SDVOSB program.

In ordering the VA to pay attorneys’ fees, the Court held that the VA’s defense of its broad interpretation of “unconditional ownership” was not substantially justified–but also suggested that the Court might not reach the same result under the SBA’s SDVOSB rules.

Continue reading →

Service-Disabled Veteran “Controlled” SDVOSB With 79% Ownership, Says SBA OHA

Posted on by

A service-disabled veteran, who owned 80% of this business and served as its highest officer, “controlled” the company within the meaning of the SBA’s SDVOSB regulations, according to a recent decision of the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals.

SBA OHA’s commonsense decision overturned an earlier SBA determination that the veteran’s majority ownership and officer position did not amount to “control.”

Continue reading →

SDVOSBs: Say Goodbye to the “Center for Veterans Enterprise”

Posted on by

The “Center for Veterans Enterprise” is no more.  Technically speaking, anyway.

Tucked away in today’s interim final rule on SDVOSB protests and appeals is a notation that the VA CVE has renamed itself the “Center for Verification and Evaluation.”  According to the rule, the purpose of the new name is to “more accurately reflect the mission of this office which is to determine the status of SDVOSBs and VOSBs with respect to VA’s SDVOSB/VOSB set-aside acquisition program established by 38 U.S.C. 8127.”

As a practical matter, the name change will have no effect on SDVOSBs and VOSBs.  But perhaps in connection with other positive developments this year–most notably, the pre-determination findings program–the “new” VA CVE will begin to improve its standing with frustrated veterans.

VA SDVOSB Protests: New Rule Allows Appeals

Posted on by

The VA SDVOSB protest process has been criticized by some (including a certain Kansas-based government contracts attorney) for failing to offer a right of appeal.  Under the VA’s rules, if a protested company was found to be ineligible as a SDVOSB, its only option was to sue the VA in federal court–an expensive and time-consuming proposition.

Until now.

Today, the VA published an interim final rule, under which a protested SDVOSB has the right to an appeal within the VA.  The new system isn’t perfect, but it’s a step in the right direction.

Continue reading →

8(a) Program: OHA Judge Slams SBA For Claim It Cannot Play DVDs

Posted on by

The SBA’s claim that it could not access information provided by an 8(a) program applicant in DVD format was “not credible,” according to a recent 8(a) program appeal ruling issued by the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals.

In Sunrise Staffing, SBA No. BDPE-499 (2013), the SBA OHA–in an unusually sharply-worded opinion–rejected the SBA’s excuses for not reviewing relevant information provided by the 8(a) program applicant, and granted the applicant’s 8(a) appeal.

Continue reading →

SDVOSB Joint Ventures: Supermajority Provision Defeats Eligibility, Says SBA OHA

Posted on by

A SDVOSB joint venture was not eligible for award of a SDVOB set-aside contract because its joint venture agreement called for certain decisions to be made by supermajority vote.

As explained by the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals in its decision finding the SDVOSB joint venture ineligible, the supermajority provision undermined the regulatory requirement that a SDVOSB joint venture be managed by an eligible SDVOSB.

Continue reading →