Protester Alleged Putative Small Business Was Unduly Reliant on Subcontractor. Why Did OHA Reject the Argument?
The protester argued that the awardee was not performing the primary and vital tasks required by the agency’s solicitation and was instead overly reliant on its subcontractor. The Small Business Administration’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) found that the awardee had clarified its responsibilities and division of labor and proven it was not unduly reliant on its subcontractor.
VSBC Protest of Winergy LLC, SBA No. VSBC-445-P
- Background – The agency sought bids for a contract to perform fume hood certification and repairs at the Washington, DC, VA Medical Center. It set the procurement aside entirely for SDVOSBs.
- Awardee’s Burden of Proof – The awardee bore the burden of demonstrating its eligibility as an SDVOSB. OHA ruled that the awardee met this burden by presenting detailed documents clarifying its responsibilities and the division of labor between itself and the subcontractor. OHA emphasized that compliance with the limitations on subcontracting was sufficient to rebut the protester’s claims of undue reliance.
The protester is represented by Paul O. Sauerteig, Esq., of Snow & Sauerteig LLP. The intervenor, Atlantic First Industries Corporation, is represented by Stephanie D. Wilson, Esq., Rachael C. Haley, Esq., and Charles L. Bonani, Esq., of Berenzweig Leonard, LLP. The government is represented by the U.S. Small Business Administration. GAO attorney Christopher Holleman participated in the decision.
[pdf-embedder url=”https://staging.pub-k.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/VSBC-Protest-of-Winergy-LLC-SBA-No.-VSBC-445-P-2025.pdf” title=”VSBC Protest of Winergy LLC, SBA No. VSBC-445-P (2025)”]
