Partner

Stowell Holcomb

Stowell’s practice is dispute resolution, emphasizing federal construction litigation, bid protests, and SBA eligibility protests and appeals.

About

Stowell joined the firm at its inception and ever since has spent his professional career helping clients to resolve disputes involving government contracts. He has successfully represented clients in litigation at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, including cases against federal agencies involving breach of contract, constructive changes, differing site conditions, and default termination. He has also achieved favorable outcomes for clients in protests at the Government Accountability Office, the Small Business Administration, and federal agencies.

Stowell graduated from the University of Virginia in 2001 with a degree in history. After graduation, he joined the United States Marine Corps and served as an intelligence officer and sniper platoon commander during two deployments to Iraq. Following the Marine Corps, Stowell enrolled at the University of Washington School of Law, where he served as a Notes and Comments Editor for the Washington Law Review. While in law school, he worked at the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office in Seattle. After graduating from law school, he clerked for Justice Gerry Alexander at the Washington Supreme Court. Stowell draws upon this formative experience to provide determined and resourceful advocacy for his clients.

Representative Experience

  • SBA size protestDefended a $2.5 billion SEC IDIQ award for professional acquisition support services on parallel fronts—an OHA size appeal alleging ostensible-subcontractor affiliation and a GAO bid protest challenging the technical evaluation—with the award preserved on both tracks.
  • SBA size Protest Filed a winning size protest for the disappointed offeror on an 8(a) Navy Strategic Systems Programs financial management support procurement; SBA found the apparent awardee non-small under the ostensible-subcontractor rule, the apparent awardee’s OHA appeal was denied, and award went to the client.
  • SBA size protestDefended a Department of Energy Office of Enterprise Assessments small business award against a size appeal alleging affiliation under identity of interest, common management, ostensible subcontractor, and totality of the circumstances theories; appeal denied and size determination affirmed.
  • SBA size protest Defended an Army Corps of Engineers awardee against a size protest alleging affiliation with a subcontractor and, separately, against a HUBZone protest challenging the awardee’s 40-hour residency eligibility; both protests resolved in the awardee’s favor.
  • GAO intervenor defense Defended a $121 million Army base operations and maintenance award at Fort Wainwright, Alaska on a second-round GAO protest following corrective action, with the protest denied and the award preserved.
  • GAO intervenor defense Defended a Navy multi-ship multi-option award for repair, maintenance, and modernization of the USS Russell against a GAO protest challenging dry-dock capacity, manpower, and price realism; protest denied.
  • GAO intervenor defense Defended an 8(a) USACE Vicksburg District award for operation and maintenance of flood-control facilities at four Mississippi-basin lakes against a GAO challenge to the technical evaluation; protest denied.
  • GAO post-award protest Forced corrective action on the USS Murphy DDG-112 Pearl Harbor repair procurement, then intervened to defend the broadened corrective action; client awarded the contract.
  • GAO post-award protest Protested a USACE building and logistics maintenance award (Chenega B&L, B-423979); the Corps terminated the existing award, re-issued the procurement, and the client received the resulting award.
  • GAO post-award protest Protested an Air Force 711th Human Performance Wing IDIQ award (Ajanta, B-419123); the Air Force agreed to reevaluate every offeror, and the client received the award after reevaluation.
  • GAO post-award protest Turned a lost $61 million Navy procurement into a contract award for the client. A planned sequence of protests triggered the CICA stay, forced corrective action, secured revised price proposals, and preserved the client’s competitive advantage, enabling the client to win the contract on reevaluation.
  • GAO Pre-award protest Drafted a GAO pre-award challenging a late-added project-manager certification requirement at Davis-Monthan AFB; the agency withdrew the requirement before close of business.
  • Pre-award protest Filed an agency-level pre-award protest of an AFIMSC environmental services solicitation challenging the exclusion of affiliate past performance as unduly restrictive; the agency amended the solicitation and the client won the resulting contract.
  • GAO pre-award protestFiled a GAO pre-award protest challenging warranty terms; the agency dropped the warranty requirement.
  • ASBCA equitable adjustment Recovered north of $1.8 million on an ASBCA appeal arising from a $20.3 million Air Force / NC Air National Guard firm-fixed-price construction contract for a C-17 Type III hydrant ramp expansion at Charlotte; claims for defective specifications and Type I and Type II differing site conditions.
  • ASBCA equitable adjustment Recovered over $1.8 million on an ASBCA appeal arising from a $20.3 million Air National Guard firm-fixed-price construction contract for a C-17 Type III hydrant ramp expansion at Charlotte; claims for defective specifications and Type I and Type II differing site conditions.
  • ASBCA equitable adjustment Recovered $1.74 million for a federal contractor on an ASBCA appeal arising from a Tinker AFB services contract; published Board decision held the contracting officer’s failure to provide FAR 22.1010 notice of a new collective-bargaining agreement entitled the contractor to a wage and fringe equitable adjustment.
  • EDVa Suits in Admiralty recovery Recovered $1.665 million on a COVID-impact claim for a Navy ship-repair contractor, filing direct-to-district in the Eastern District of Virginia under the CDA’s Suits in Admiralty carve-out.
  • Termination conversionTried, as second chair, a National Guard Bureau firm-fixed-price construction contract terminated for default at Buckley Air Force Base before the Court of Federal Claims; after a bench trial, the court converted the termination for default to a termination for convenience based on misrepresentations by the Contracting Officer’s Representative that the contracting officer relied on.
  • Army Corps claim recovery Recovered $1.8 million on an Army Corps of Engineers construction contract by pairing a constructive-change theory with an economic-waste argument that the government’s demanded remediation exceeded any reasonable benefit to the agency.
  • DHS contract dispute resolution Resolved a DHS protective security officer services dispute over rejected supervisor-hour invoices; DHS authorized direct billing for the life of the contract, with recoveries exceeding $1 million.
  • Contract Advocacy audit defense After SIGAR questioned $8,765,541 of incurred costs and recommended recoupment, proved labor records met FAR 32.201(d) and FAR 52.215-2(b) and that auditors had misapplied post-hardship differential and danger pay rules; resolved the audit at under $200,000.
  • Contract act Advocacy price reduction Defended an Army Alaska snow-removal contractor against an agency demand for a price reduction; marshaled excusable-delay evidence (sub-negative-40 conditions) and contemporaneous performance records to reduce the demand to roughly one-third of the asking amount.

Representative Decisions

BAE Sys. San Diego Ship Repair, Inc., B-423271, 2025 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 86 (Apr. 14, 2025).

Lead counsel for Continental Maritime of San Diego, the awardee of a U.S. Navy multi-ship multi-option contract for repair, maintenance, and modernization of the USS Russell. After BAE Systems San Diego Ship Repair protested the award and challenged the agency’s evaluation of dry-dock capacity, manpower, and price realism, GAO denied the protest in full, preserving the award.

Chugach Logistics-Facility Servs. JV, LLC, B-421451.7, 2024 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 346 (Aug. 5, 2024).

Sole counsel for Chenega Base and Logistics Services, the awardee of a U.S. Army hybrid fixed-price/time-and-materials IDIQ contract for base operations and maintenance at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. On the protester’s second-round challenge following GAO-recommended corrective action, GAO denied the protest, rejecting challenges to the agency’s reevaluation under the technical and past performance factors and to the best-value tradeoff.

Logistix Inc., B-421341, 2023 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 93 (Mar. 27, 2023).

Sole counsel for Ajanta Consulting, the 8(a) awardee of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Vicksburg District hybrid cost-plus-fixed-fee/fixed-price contract for operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of flood-control facilities at Arkabutla, Sardis, Enid, and Grenada Lakes. The protest was filed in parallel with a size challenge to obtain the automatic CICA stay of performance, and GAO denied the protest, preserving the award.

C2 Alaska, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-6149, 2022 SBA LEXIS 30 (Apr. 19, 2022).

Lead counsel for C2 Alaska, the awardee of a $2.5 billion U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission IDIQ contract for Integrated Professional Acquisition Support Services 2.0. On a competitor’s protest alleging affiliation with a sister ANC subsidiary under the totality-of-the-circumstances and ostensible-subcontractor rules, OHA granted the appeal, vacated the size determination, and remanded to the Area Office, preserving the award.

Alutiiq Mgmt. Servs., LLC, ASBCA No. 63175-PET, 2022-1 B.C.A. (CCH) ¶ 38,114 (Apr. 13, 2022).

Counsel for Alutiiq Management Services on Navy IDIQ Contract No. N00189-02-D-0042. Filed a Rule 1(a)(5) petition seeking an order directing the contracting officer to issue decisions on approximately 250 claims previously submitted on the contract. The Board ordered the government to process and decide at least twenty claims per quarter until all remaining claims were resolved, with quarterly status reports.

CBF Partners JV, LLC, B-419846.2, B-419846.3, B-419846.4, 2021 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 377 (Dec. 14, 2021).

Lead counsel for C2 Alaska, the awardee of the $2.5 billion U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission iPASS 2.0 IDIQ contract. After CBF Partners JV protested the award and challenged the technical acceptability of C2 Alaska’s minimum-experience response, its subcontracting plan, and the agency’s evaluation of competing proposals, GAO denied the protest, preserving the award. Companion matter to the OHA size appeal at SBA No. SIZ-6149.

PacArctic, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-6105, 2021 SBA LEXIS 60 (June 16, 2021).

Lead counsel for Ajanta Consulting, LLC, a disappointed offeror on a U.S. Navy Strategic Systems Programs financial management support contract under an 8(a) set-aside. Filed the size protest that caused the Area Office to find the apparent awardee, PacArctic, non-small under the ostensible-subcontractor rule, then defended the size determination against PacArctic’s appeal; OHA denied the appeal, which resulted in award to the client, closing the circle.

Kaiyuh Services, LLC, B-419293, B-419293.2, 2021 U.S. Comp. Gen. LEXIS 5 (Jan. 4, 2021).

Lead counsel for Chenega Tri-Services, the awardee of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers fixed-price contract for preventative and corrective building maintenance services in the Minneapolis region. On Kaiyuh Services’ challenge to the technical evaluation, GAO dismissed the protest, preserving the award.

SC&A, Inc., SBA No. SIZ-6059, 2020 SBA LEXIS 61 (June 18, 2020).

Sole counsel for Unwin Company, the awardee of a U.S. Department of Energy Office of Enterprise Assessments contract for specialized technical and administrative support services under a $15 million annual-receipts small business set-aside. On a competitor’s protest alleging affiliation with two related firms under identity-of-interest, common-management, ostensible-subcontractor, and totality-of-the-circumstances theories, OHA denied the appeal and affirmed the size determination, preserving the award.

Alutiiq Commercial Enters., LLC, ASBCA No. 61503, 2020-1 B.C.A. (CCH) ¶ 37,506 (Jan. 9, 2020).

Co-counsel for the contractor in a published Board decision granting the contractor’s motion for summary judgment on a $1,744,330.37 claim for increased costs incurred during the first option period of a Tinker Air Force Base civil-engineering services contract after a revised collective bargaining agreement took effect. The Board held that the Air Force’s failure to give the FAR 22.1010 notice to the union, more than thirty days before the option exercise date, entitled the contractor to an equitable adjustment for the resulting wage and fringe-benefit increases.

Alutiiq Mfg. Contrs., LLC v. United States, 143 Fed. Cl. 689 (2019), appeal dismissed, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 40908 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 15, 2019).

Second chair, including examination of trial witnesses, for Alutiiq Manufacturing Contractors in a trial before Senior Judge Loren A. Smith at the United States Court of Federal Claims on a firm-fixed-price construction contract for repair of the Main Apron Access and Alert Pavements at Buckley Air Force Base. Following a post-trial opinion, the court granted judgment for the contractor and converted the termination for default to a termination for convenience.

Avant Assessment, LLC, ASBCA No. 58897.

Obtained an order granting summary judgment converting the termination of a commercial item contract for cause into a termination for convenience.

Appeals of Bodell Construction Co., ASBCA Nos. 63517-ADR, 63850-ADR.

Counsel of record for pass-through claims resolved together through Board ADR with a Board judge as mediator.

Professional history

  • Partner, Jackson Holcomb LLP, Seattle.
  • Law Clerk, Justice Gerry Alexander, Washington Supreme Court, Olympia.
  • United States Marine Corps. Ground intelligence officer and sniper platoon commander.

Presentations

  • “What To Do If The Worst Happens: Dealing with Default Terminations,” National 8(a) Association 2025 Alaska Regional Conference, Anchorage, AK (June 10, 2025).
  • “Special Rules Applicable to ANCs,” National 8(a) Association (June 2023).
  • “Avoiding Affiliation: Lessons from the Last Year,” National 8(a) Association (October 2021).