NAICS APPEAL OF: GERARDO & EHRLICH, PLLC, APPELLANT

*1 On September 11, 2017, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) received the above-captioned appeal of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code designated for Solicitation No. DE-SOL-0010812. In its appeal, Gerardo & Ehrlich, PLLC (Appellant) asserted that the Contracting Officer (CO) likely erred in assigning NAICS code 541110, Offices of Lawyers, because the awardees are not law firms and their owners lack the requisite law licenses. (Appeal at 1.) Appellant further stated that its appeal was filed within 10 days after Appellant learned of the sole source awards, which occurred on September 1, 2017. (Id.)

*1 On September 13, 2017, OHA ordered Appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as moot or for lack of standing. OHA noted that, under OHA precedent, once a procurement has been awarded, any further dispute over the NAICS code is moot. OHA also questioned whether Appellant had standing to bring the appeal, given that Appellant did not claim to have been an offeror on the procurement. Appellant did not respond to OHA's order.

*1 I find that this appeal is moot. OHA has consistently held that, after a contract has been awarded, “OHA will not entertain arguments as to which NAICS code should have been assigned to the procurement.” NAICS Appeal of AeroSage, LLC, SBA No. NAICS-5554, at 1 (2014); see also NAICS Appeal of Pacific Propeller Int'l LLC, SBA No. NAICS-5754 (2016); NAICS Appeal of Kalotech, SBA No. NAICS-5665 (2015). Even if OHA were to agree with Appellant that the CO selected an erroneous NAICS code, OHA lacks authority to compel the CO to rescind the award. NAICS Appeal of KAES Enterprises, LLC, SBA No. NAICS-5731, at 1 (2016). Therefore, the instant appeal is moot.

*1 Appellant also lacks standing to bring this appeal. According to SBA regulations, a party “adversely affected” by a NAICS code designation may appeal that designation, except that “with respect to a particular sole source 8(a) contract, only the Director, Office of Business Development may appeal a NAICS designation.” 13 C.F.R. § 134.302(b); see also 13 C.F.R. § 121.1103(a)(1). Here, the CO has informed OHA that the awards in question were made on a sole source basis through the 8(a) program. (E-mail from R. Rodwell Bisiriyu to D. Kane (Sept. 26, 2017).) Appellant was not, and could not have been, an offeror on this procurement, and lacks standing to challenge an 8(a) sole source award.

*2 For the above reasons, I DISMISS the appeal as moot and for lack of standing. 13 C.F.R. 134.316(c). This is the final decision of the U.S. Small Business Administration. 13 C.F.R. § 134.316(d).