Help

SIZE APPEAL OF: CASCADIAN AMERICAN ENTERPRISES, APPELLANT RE: CMEC, INC.

SBA No. SIZ-5697, 20152015 WL 9899812December 3, 2015

SBA No. SIZ-5697, 2015 (S.B.A.), 2015 WL 9899812
Small Business Administration (S.B.A.)
Office of Hearings and Appeals
[Size Appeal]
*1 SIZE APPEAL OF: CASCADIAN AMERICAN ENTERPRISES, APPELLANT
*1 RE: CMEC, INC.
*1 SBA No. SIZ-5697
*1 Appealed from Size Determination No. 06-2016-017
*1 December 3, 2015
 
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL1
  
I. Background
 
*1 On October 28, 2015, Cascadian American Enterprises (Appellant) filed a size protest against CMEC, Inc. (CMEC) in conjunction with a procurement for landscaping services. On October 29, 2015, the procuring agency, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), notified the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Government Contracting — Area VI (Area Office) that neither Appellant nor CMEC had been selected for award. (E-mail from F. Eugenio to E. Sanchez (Oct. 29, 2015).) Rather, the Corps found both Appellant and CMEC to be technically unacceptable, and awarded the contract instead to a third company. (Id.) On November 5, 2015, the Area Office issued Size Determination No. 06-2016-017, dismissing Appellant's size protest.
*1 On November 9, 2015, SBA's Office of Hearings and Appeals received the instant appeal. Appellant reiterates its protest contentions that CMEC is not a small business.
 
II. Discussion
 
*1 SBA regulations do not permit an unsuccessful offeror to bring a size protest against a rival firm that is not the apparent awardee of the underlying procurement. Size Appeal of Southwind Construction Services, LLC, SBA No. SIZ-5610 (2014), recons. denied, SBA No. SIZ-5634 (PFR) (2015) (area office properly dismissed a size protest filed against a firm which had withdrawn its proposal and was no longer competing for award). Here, Appellant attempts to challenge the size of CMEC, but CMEC is not the apparent awardee, and the procuring agency has indicated that CMEC was not even eligible for award of the contract. Under these circumstances, there is no regulatory basis for Appellant to bring a size protest against CMEC in conjunction with this procurement. Further, given that CMEC will not benefit from this procurement, no useful purpose is served by considering whether CMEC might have qualified as a small business for the procurement. As SBA has explained in the Federal Register, it is agency policy not to “impose the burdens of an unnecessary size investigation ... or expend [SBA's] limited resources rendering size determinations that are unlikely to have any practical significance for the procurement question.” 59 Fed. Reg. 39,426, 39,427 (Aug. 3, 1994).
 
III. Conclusion
 
*1 The Area Office properly dismissed Appellant's protest, and Appellant has not shown any valid reason to disturb this decision. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED. 13 C.F.R. § 134.305(e).
*2 This is the final decision of the Small Business Administration. See 13 C.F.R. § 134.316(d).
*2 Kenneth M. Hyde
*2 Administrative Judge

Footnotes

This appeal is decided under the Small Business Act of 1958, 15 U.S.C. § 631 et seq., and 13 C.F.R. parts 121 and 134.
SBA No. SIZ-5697, 2015 (S.B.A.), 2015 WL 9899812
End of Document