We proved that our client’s competitor violated the ostensible subcontractor rule, resulting in cancellation of that award and award to our client.
The Navy notified our client that it was not selected for award of a contract to provide financial management support to the Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs (“SSP”). The procurement was set aside for participants in the SBA’s 8(a) Business Development program and assigned a size standard of $15 million. We submitted a size protest asserting that the awardee was not a small business for the procurement because it was affiliated with its subcontractor under the ostensible subcontractor rule. The subcontractor had performed the incumbent SSP contract as part of a joint venture with our client and was no longer an 8(a) participant. The SBA Area Office issued a size determination finding that the awardee was affiliated with its subcontractors under the ostensible subcontractor rule.
The awardee appealed the size determination to the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA). We responded to the appeal and filed a sur-reply to the awardee’s reply. OHA affirmed the size determination, holding that the awardee had not established that the size determination was based on a clear error of fact or law.
