Rules of Practice for Protests and Appeals Regarding Eligibility for Inclusion in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation Database, 13626-13632 [2018-06034]
Download as PDF
13626
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 134
RIN 3245–AG87
Rules of Practice for Protests and
Appeals Regarding Eligibility for
Inclusion in the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs Center for Verification
and Evaluation Database
U.S. Small Business
Administration.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) is amending the
rules of practice of its Office of Hearings
and Appeals (OHA) to implement
procedures for protests of eligibility for
inclusion in the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Center for Verification and
Evaluation (CVE) database, and
procedures for appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE
database. These amendments are issued
in accordance with sections 1832 and
1833 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017
(NDAA 2017).
DATES: This rule is effective on October
1, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kenneth M. Hyde, Administrative
Judge, (202) 401–8200.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sections
1832 and 1833 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017,
Public Law 114–328, 130 Stat. 2000
(Dec. 23, 2016) authorize the SBA’s
OHA to determine protests and appeals
related to inclusion in the CVE database.
In order to implement these sections,
this rule amends OHA’s jurisdiction in
subparts A and B of 13 CFR part 134 to
include protests of eligibility for
inclusion in the CVE database, and
appeals of denials and cancellations of
inclusion in the CVE database. In
addition, this rule creates a new subpart
J in 13 CFR part 134 to set detailed rules
of practice for protests of eligibility for
inclusion in the VA CVE database, and
a new subpart K to set detailed rules of
practice for appeals of denials and
cancellations of verification for
inclusion in the VA CVE database.
On September 28, 2017, SBA
published in the Federal Register (82
FR 45212) a proposed rule to implement
sections 1832 and 1833 of the NDAA
2017 and to amend OHA’s jurisdiction
and procedures in order to
accommodate protests of eligibility for
inclusion in the CVE database and
appeals of denials and cancellations of
inclusion in the CVE database. The
proposed rule allowed for a comment
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Jkt 244001
period ending on October 30, 2017.
During the comment period, SBA
received thirteen comments.
Summary of Comments and SBA’s
Response
A. Subparts A and B
SBA proposed amending § 134.102,
which defines OHA’s jurisdiction, to
add protests of eligibility for inclusion
in the CVE database and appeals of
denials and cancellations of inclusion in
the CVE database as two new types of
proceedings over which OHA would
have jurisdiction. SBA also proposed
adding new paragraphs (8) and (9) to
§ 134.201(b) to identify the location of
the regulations concerning protests of
eligibility for inclusion in the CVE
database and appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE
database. As a result of these new
paragraphs, SBA also proposed to
redesignate existing § 134.201(b)(8) as
§ 134.201(b)(10). There were no
comments on these specific revisions,
and SBA is adopting them exactly as
proposed.
SBA received four comments that
were generally supportive of
transferring the protests and appeals at
issue from VA to OHA for adjudication.
In addition, four other comments
described the commenters’ views and
experiences with existing processes.
SBA is unable to respond to these
comments as they did not address the
proposed regulations at issue here.
B. Subpart J
SBA proposed to add a new subpart
J, consisting of §§ 134.1001 through
134.1013, to establish the rules of
practice before OHA for protests of
eligibility for inclusion in the CVE
database (CVE Protests). The new rules
of practice for CVE Protests mirror
SBA’s existing rules for protests of
service-disabled veteran-owned small
businesses, found in 13 CFR part 125,
subpart D.
SBA received no comments regarding
the proposed new §§ 134.1001 (Scope of
rules), 134.1002 (Who may file a CVE
Protest?), 134.1004 (Commencement of
CVE Protests), 134.1005 (Contents of the
CVE Protest), 134.1006 (Service and
filing requirements), 134.1008
(Discovery), 134.1009 (Oral hearings),
134.1010 (Standard of review and
burden of proof), 134.1011 (Weight of
evidence), 134.1012 (The record), and
134.1013 (Request for reconsideration).
Except for § 134.1001, which SBA is
amending to delete a duplicative
sentence, SBA is adopting these
provisions exactly as proposed. As
discussed below, SBA received
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
comments on proposed §§ 134.1003 and
134.1007.
The penultimate sentence in proposed
§ 134.1001(c) stated that ‘‘All protests
relating to a concern’s status as a SDVO
SBC for a non-VA procurement are
subject to part 125 of this chapter and
must be filed in accordance with that
part.’’ This sentence is duplicative with
language in § 134.1001(d), so SBA is
amending § 134.1001(c) to remove the
sentence. No other changes were made
to § 134.1001.
Proposed § 134.1003 outlined the
grounds for filing a CVE Protest.
Proposed paragraph (c) required the
Judge to determine a protested concern’s
eligibility for inclusion in the CVE
database as of the date the protest was
filed. SBA received one comment on
paragraph (c). The commenter states
that proposed § 134.1003(c) is
inconsistent with VA Acquisition
Regulation (VAAR) clause 852.219–
10(b), VA Notice of Total ServiceDisabled Veteran-Owned Small
Business Set-Aside, which indicates
that offers received that are not from
service-disabled veteran-owned small
businesses will not be considered and
that award must be made to a servicedisabled veteran-owned small business.
The commenter adds that this clause
has been interpreted by CVE to mean
that eligibility is determined both at the
time a bid or initial proposal containing
price has been submitted, and at time of
award. In addition, the commenter
observes that 13 CFR 125.18(a) requires
service-disabled veteran-owned small
business concerns to self-certify their
status at time of initial offer, including
price, and also that similar language is
found at Federal Acquisition Regulation
19.1403(b). The commenter further
maintains that a concern’s status may
change between the date of proposal
submission and the date of award. The
commenter urges SBA to revise
proposed § 134.1003(c) so that eligibility
is determined as of the date the initial
proposal with pricing, or bid, was
submitted.
In response, SBA agrees with the
commenter that, if the CVE Protest
pertains to a procurement, SBA should
examine eligibility at two separate
points: (1) As of the date the concern
submits its bid or initial offer, which
includes price; and (2) as of the date the
CVE Protest was filed. Such an
approach would restrict concerns that
became ineligible after their initial bid
or proposal from being awarded
contracts. However, SBA notes that,
under 38 U.S.C. 8127(f)(8)(B), the
Secretary of the VA or his/her designee
may initiate a CVE Protest that does not
involve a procurement. In this situation,
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
there would be no bid or proposal, so
eligibility can be assessed only as of the
date of the CVE Protest. Accordingly,
the commenter’s recommendation is
accepted in part, and SBA is revising
the language of § 134.1003(c).
Section 134.1007 proposed to
establish the process for CVE Protests as
follows: Paragraph (a) required OHA to
issue a notice and order if the protest is
found to be timely, specific, and based
on protestable allegations; paragraph (b)
required dismissal of a protest if the
Judge determines the protest to be
premature, untimely, nonspecific, or
based on non-protestable allegations;
paragraph (c) required the Director of
the CVE (D/CVE) to send the case file to
OHA by the deadline specified in the
notice and order; paragraph (d)
described the process for requesting a
protective order; paragraph (e) allowed
for supplemental arguments after a
protester reviews the CVE case file;
paragraph (f) allowed for a response to
a protest within 15 days of the date the
protest was filed; and paragraph (g)
required the Judge to base the decision
on the case file and information
provided by the parties or information
requested by the Judge. The proposed
rule also authorized the Judge to
investigate issues beyond those raised
by the parties. Paragraph (h) proposed to
allow a contracting officer to award the
contract after a protest is filed but before
a decision is reached if the contracting
officer determines the public interest
will be protected and notifies the Judge
of his/her decision; paragraph (i)
required OHA to serve all parties with
the decision, which would be a final
agency decision; paragraph (j) set out
the effects of the decision upon the
protested concern and the contract at
issue.
SBA received no public comments on
§ 134.1007. However, VA recommended
that § 134.1007(j)(2) be amended to be
consistent with VA’s existing regulation
in VAAR 819.307(h). Specifically, the
proposed § 134.1007(j)(2) stated that ‘‘A
contracting officer shall not award a
contract to a protested concern that the
Judge has determined is not eligible for
inclusion in the CVE database. If the
contracting officer has already made an
award under paragraph (h), the
contracting officer shall either terminate
the contract or not exercise the next
option.’’ VA recommended that the
provision instead read: ‘‘A contracting
officer shall not award a contract to a
protested concern that the Judge has
determined is not eligible for inclusion
in the CVE database. If the contract has
already been awarded, then the awarded
contract shall be deemed void ab initio
and the contracting officer shall rescind
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Jkt 244001
the contract and award the contract to
the next [eligible concern] in line for the
award.’’ SBA believes this change is
minor because, under the proposed
§ 134.1007(h), a contracting officer
normally would not have made an
award by the time a CVE Protest is
decided. Furthermore, VA’s suggestion
removes a potential inconsistency
between the two agencies’ regulations.
Therefore, SBA is adopting the
comment and revising § 134.1007(j)(2)
to mirror VA’s existing regulation at
VAAR 819.307(h).
C. Subpart K
SBA proposed to add a new subpart
K, consisting of §§ 134.1101 through
134.1112, promulgating the rules of
practice before OHA for appeals of
denials and cancellations of verification
for inclusion in the VA CVE database
(CVE Appeals). SBA received no
comments regarding the proposed
§§ 134.1101 (Scope of rules), 134.1102
(Who may file a CVE Appeal?), 134.1103
(Grounds for filing a CVE Appeal),
134.1105 (The appeal petition),
134.1106 (Service and filing
requirements), 134.1107 (Transmission
of the case file), 134.1108 (Response to
an appeal petition), 134.1109 (Discovery
and oral hearings), and 134.1111
(Standard of review and burden of
proof). Therefore, SBA is adopting these
provisions exactly as proposed. SBA,
however, received comments on
proposed § 134.1104 (Commencement of
CVE Appeals), § 134.1110 (New
evidence), and § 134.1112 (The
decision).
Proposed § 134.1104 required CVE
Appeals to be filed within 10 business
days of being notified that the CVE
status has been denied or cancelled.
Paragraph (b) proposed to adopt the
rules for counting days found at
§ 134.202(d). Paragraph (c) proposed to
require OHA to dismiss any untimely
appeal.
SBA received three comments on
§ 134.1104. All three commenters stated
that 10 business days to file a CVE
Appeal is too short a timeframe. The
commenters contend that preparing the
appeals requires gathering a significant
amount of documents and developing
responses to legal issues. The three
commenters recommend a 30 calendar
day time period for filing a CVE Appeal.
In response, SBA notes that CVE
Appeals will be based on the
documentation provided to the VA by
the business concern. In turn, VA will
be responsible for producing this record
to OHA. The commenters’ concern that
a 10 business day timeline is too short
because documents will need to be
provided on appeal is thus
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13627
unwarranted. On appeal, a business
concern will not be required to compile
the record or produce new documents.
SBA is thus adopting § 134.1104 exactly
as proposed.
Proposed § 134.1110 prohibited the
introduction of new evidence in CVE
Appeals, unless good cause is shown.
SBA received one comment on this
section. The commenter stated that the
section should be revised to allow a
denied concern to resubmit its
application, thus restarting the
verification process, if new evidence is
available.
SBA responds that under proposed
§ 134.1112(c), ‘‘Decisions under this
part will be based primarily on the
evidence in the CVE case file, arguments
made on appeal, and any response(s)
thereto.’’ Thus, SBA does not anticipate
that new evidence will typically be
necessary to decide a CVE Appeal.
Nevertheless, a party that can establish
good cause for the introduction of new
evidence may do so under proposed
§ 134.1110. SBA believes that allowing
new evidence to be introduced and
allowing the Judge to consider the
evidence will negate the necessity of
restarting the verification process. The
limitations on the introduction of new
evidence in proposed § 134.1110 are
consistent with OHA’s restrictions on
the use of new evidence in other types
of proceedings. See 13 CFR 134.308
(limitations on the use of new evidence
in size appeals). Therefore, SBA will not
alter § 134.1110 and is adopting it
exactly as proposed.
Under proposed § 134.1112(a) the
Judge would decide a CVE Appeal, if
practicable, within 60 calendar days
after the close of record. SBA received
one comment on this section. The
commenter argues the decisions should
be rendered within 30 calendar days,
because 60 days is too long to wait for
a decision. The commenter further
argues the appeal should be
automatically granted if OHA does not
issue the decision by the deadline.
In response, SBA notes that CVE
Appeals under subpart K are not tied to
a particular procurement. These appeals
are of denials and cancellations of
verification for inclusion in the VA CVE
database, so there is no pending
procurement at stake. Further, the 60
day timeframe is similar to that used by
OHA in deciding 8(a) eligibility cases
(13 CFR 134.409). As a result, SBA does
not agree that a more expedited
timeframe is warranted. In addition,
SBA does not agree that it would be
appropriate to automatically reinstate a
concern in the CVE database due to a
delay in issuing a decision, because
such an approach might enable
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
13628
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
ineligible concerns to bid on VA
contracts. SBA will not alter
§ 134.1112(a) and is adopting it exactly
as proposed.
Proposed § 134.1112(g) allowed any
party that has appeared in the
proceeding, or the Secretary of VA or
his or her designee, to file a petition for
reconsideration. As proposed, the
petition must be filed within twenty
(20) calendar days after service of the
written decision, upon a clear showing
of an error of fact or law material to the
decision. The Judge also may reconsider
a decision on his or her own initiative.
SBA received one comment on this
paragraph. The commenter states that 20
calendar days allowed for filing a
petition for reconsideration is too long,
and suggests changing it to 10 calendar
days.
SBA responds that 20 calendar days is
the standard for other OHA proceedings,
as set forth under OHA’s rules in 13
CFR 134.227(c). Thus, SBA will not
alter its timelines and adopts
§ 134.1112(g) exactly as proposed. There
were no comments on the remaining
paragraphs of § 134.1112 and SBA is
adopting them exactly as proposed.
Compliance With Executive Orders
12866, 12988, 13132, 13771, the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Ch. 35), and the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) Executive Order
12866
OMB has determined that this final
rule does not constitute a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866. This final rule is also not
a major rule under the Congressional
Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 800. This final rule
amends the rules of practice for the
SBA’s OHA in order to implement
procedures for protests of eligibility for
inclusion in the CVE database, and
appeals of denials and cancellations of
inclusion in the CVE database. As such,
the rule has no effect on the amount or
dollar value of any Federal contract
requirements or of any financial
assistance provided through SBA or VA.
Therefore, the rule is not likely to have
an annual economic effect of $100
million or more, result in a major
increase in costs or prices, or have a
significant adverse effect on competition
or the United States economy. In
addition, this rule does not create a
serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency, materially
alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
such recipients, nor raise novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Jkt 244001
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
Executive Order 12988
This action meets applicable
standards set forth in section 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden. The action does not have
retroactive or preemptive effect.
Executive Order 13132
This final rule does not have
Federalism implications as defined in
Executive Order 13132. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in the
Executive Order. As such it does not
warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Assessment.
Executive Order 13771
This final rule is not an Executive
Order 13771 regulatory action because
this final rule is not significant under
Executive Order 12866.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The SBA has determined that this
final rule does not impose additional
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. Chapter 35.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, as amended (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–
612, requires Federal agencies to
consider the effect of their actions on
small entities, small non-profit
businesses, and small local
governments. Pursuant to the RFA,
when an agency issues a final rule, the
agency must prepare a final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA). The FRFA
describes whether the impact of the rule
will have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities, which includes small
businesses, small not-for-profit
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions. However, Section 605 of
the RFA allows an agency to certify a
rule, in lieu of preparing an FRFA, if the
rulemaking is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This final rule revises the regulations
governing cases before SBA’s Office of
Hearings and Appeals, SBA’s
administrative tribunal. These
regulations are procedural by nature.
Specifically, this final rule establishes
rules of practice for the SBA’s OHA in
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
order to implement protests of eligibility
for inclusion in the CVE database and
appeals of denials and cancellations of
inclusion in the CVE database, new
types of administrative litigation
mandated by sections 1832 and 1833 of
the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2017. This legislation
provides a new statutory right to
challenge eligibility for inclusion in the
CVE database, as well as denials and
cancellation of inclusion in the CVE
database. This final rule merely
provides the rules of practice at OHA for
the orderly hearing and disposition of
protests of CVE database inclusion and
appeals of denials and cancellations of
CVE database inclusion. At the
proposed stage, SBA did not anticipate
that this final rule would have a
significant economic impact on any
small businesses (the only small entities
that would be affected by this rule); we
did request comments from any small
business on how and to what degree this
final rule would affect it economically.
No comments were received regarding
RFA issues. Therefore, the
Administrator of SBA certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 134
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Equal access to
justice, Lawyers, Organization and
functions (Government agencies).
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, SBA amends 13 CFR part 134
as follows:
PART 134—RULES OF PROCEDURE
GOVERNING CASES BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS
1. The authority citation for part 134
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 504; 15 U.S.C. 632,
634(b)(6), 634(i), 637(a), 648(l), 656(i), and
687(c); 38 U.S.C. 8127(f); E.O. 12549, 51 FR
6370, 3 CFR, 1986 Comp., p. 189.
Subpart J issued under 38 U.S.C.
8127(f)(8)(B).
Subpart K issued under 38 U.S.C.
8127(f)(8)(A).
2. Amend § 134.102 by removing the
period at the end of paragraph (t) and
adding a semicolon in its place and
adding paragraphs (u) and (v) to read as
follows:
■
§ 134.102
Jurisdiction of OHA.
*
*
*
*
*
(u) Protests of eligibility for inclusion
in the Department of Veterans Affairs
Center for Verification and Evaluation
(CVE) database; and
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(v) Appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE
database.
■ 3. Amend § 134.201 by:
■ a. Revising the section heading;
■ b. Removing the word ‘‘and’’ in
paragraph (b)(7);
■ c. Redesignating paragraph (b)(8) as
paragraph (b)(10); and
■ d. Adding new paragraphs (b)(8) and
(9).
The revision and additions read as
follows:
§ 134.201
subpart.
Scope of the rules in this
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(8) For protests of eligibility for
inclusion in the Center for Verification
and Evaluation (CVE) database, in
subpart J of this part;
(9) For appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE
database, in subpart K of this part; and
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Add subpart J to read as follows:
Subpart J—Rules of Practice for Protests of
Eligibility for Inclusion in the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Center
for Verification and Evaluation (CVE)
Database (CVE Protests)
Sec.
134.1001 Scope of rules.
134.1002 Who may file a CVE Protest?
134.1003 Grounds for filing a CVE Protest.
134.1004 Commencement of CVE Protests.
134.1005 Contents of the CVE Protest.
134.1006 Service and filing requirements.
134.1007 Processing a CVE Protest.
134.1008 Discovery.
134.1009 Oral hearings.
134.1010 Standard of review and burden of
proof.
134.1011 Weight of evidence.
134.1012 The record.
134.1013 Request for reconsideration.
Subpart J—Rules of Practice for
Protests of Eligibility for Inclusion in
the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Center for Verification and
Evaluation (CVE) Database (CVE
Protests)
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
§ 134.1001
Scope of rules.
(a) The rules of practice in this
subpart apply to Department of Veterans
Affairs’ (VA) Center for Verification and
Evaluation protests (CVE Protests).
(b) Except where inconsistent with
this subpart, the provisions of subparts
A and B of this part apply to protests
listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) The protest procedures described
in this subpart are separate from those
governing protests and appeals of a
concern’s size or status as a ServiceDisabled Veteran-Owned Small
Business Concern (SDVO SBC) for a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Jkt 244001
non-Department of Veterans Affairs
(non-VA) procurement. All protests
relating to whether a veteran-owned
concern is a ‘‘small’’ business for
purposes of any Federal program are
subject to part 121 of this chapter and
must be filed in accordance with that
part. If a protester protests both the size
of the concern and the concern’s
eligibility for the CVE database, SBA
will process each protest concurrently.
SBA does not review issues concerning
contract administration.
(d) Protests of a concern’s eligibility
for a non-VA procurement as a SDVO
SBC are governed by 13 CFR part 125,
subpart D.
(e) Appeals relating to determinations
made by SBA’s Director, Office of
Government Contracting, regarding
SDVO SBC status are governed by
subpart E of this part.
(f) Appeals of denials and
cancellations of verification for
inclusion in the CVE database are
governed by subpart K of this part.
§ 134.1002
Who may file a CVE Protest?
A CVE Protest may be filed by:
(a) The Secretary of the VA, or his/her
designee; or
(b) In the case of a small business that
is awarded a contract for a VA
procurement, the contracting officer or
an offeror.
§ 134.1003
Protest.
Grounds for filing a CVE
(a) Status. In cases where the protest
is based on service-connected disability,
permanent and severe disability, or
veteran status, the Judge will only
consider a protest that presents specific
allegations supporting the contention
that the owner(s) cannot provide
documentation from the VA,
Department of Defense, or the U.S.
National Archives and Records
Administration to show that they meet
the definition of veteran, servicedisabled veteran, or service-disabled
veteran with a permanent and severe
disability.
(b) Ownership and control. In cases
where the protest is based on ownership
and control, the Judge will consider a
protest only if the protester presents
credible evidence that the concern is not
51% owned and controlled by one or
more veterans or service-disabled
veterans.
(c) Date for determining eligibility. (1)
If the CVE Protest pertains to a
procurement, the Judge will determine a
protested concern’s eligibility for
inclusion in the CVE database as of the
date of bid or initial offer, including
price, and as of the date the CVE Protest
was filed.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13629
(2) If the CVE Protest does not pertain
to a procurement, the Judge will
determine a protested concern’s
eligibility for inclusion in the CVE
database as of the date the CVE Protest
was filed.
§ 134.1004
Protests.
Commencement of CVE
(a) Timeliness. (1) The Secretary of
the VA, or his/her designee, may file a
CVE Protest at any time.
(2) Where the CVE Protest is in
connection with a VA procurement:
(i) An offeror must file a CVE Protest
within five business days of notification
of the apparent awardee’s identity.
(ii) A contracting officer may file a
CVE Protest at any time during the life
of the VA contract.
(3) The rule for counting days is in
§ 134.202(d).
(4) An untimely protest will be
dismissed.
(b) Filing—(1) Private parties.
Interested parties, other than the
contracting officer or Secretary of the
VA or his/her designee, must deliver
their CVE Protests in person, by email,
by facsimile, by express delivery
service, or by U.S. mail (postmarked
within the applicable time period) to the
contracting officer.
(2) Referral to OHA. The contracting
officer must forward to OHA any nonpremature CVE Protest received,
notwithstanding whether he/she
believes it is sufficiently specific or
timely. The contracting officer must
send all CVE Protests, along with a
referral letter, directly to OHA,
addressed to Office of Hearings and
Appeals, U.S. Small Business
Administration, 409 Third Street SW,
Washington, DC 20416, by email at
OHAfilings@sba.gov, or by facsimile to
(202) 205–7059, marked Attn: CVE
Protest. The referral letter must include
information pertaining to the
solicitation that may be necessary for
OHA to determine timeliness and
standing, including:
(i) The solicitation number;
(ii) The name, address, telephone
number, email address, and facsimile
number of the contracting officer;
(iii) Whether the contract was sole
source or set-aside;
(iv) Whether the protester submitted
an offer;
(v) Whether the protested concern
was the apparent successful offeror;
(vi) Whether the procurement was
conducted using sealed bid or
negotiated procedures;
(vii) The bid opening date, if
applicable;
(viii) When the protest was submitted
to the contracting officer;
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
13630
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(ix) When the protester received
notification about the apparent
successful offeror, if applicable; and
(x) Whether a contract has been
awarded.
(3) Protests filed by Secretary of the
VA. The Secretary of VA or his/her
designee must submit his/her CVE
Protest directly to OHA in accordance
with the procedures in § 134.204.
(4) Protests filed by a contracting
officer. The contracting officer must
submit his/her CVE Protest directly to
OHA in accordance with the procedures
in § 134.204. The protest should include
in the referral letter the information set
forth in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
§ 134.1005
Contents of the CVE Protest.
(a) CVE Protests must be in writing.
There is no required format for a CVE
Protest, but it must include the
following:
(1) The solicitation or contract
number, if applicable;
(2) Specific allegations supported by
credible evidence that the concern does
not meet the eligibility requirements for
inclusion in the CVE database, listed in
§ 134.1003;
(3) Any other pertinent information
the Judge should consider; and
(4) The name, address, telephone
number, and email address or facsimile
number, if available, and signature of
the protester or its attorney.
(b) If the protester intends to seek
access to the CVE case file under
§ 134.205, the protester should include
in its protest a request for a protective
order. Unless good cause is shown, a
protester must request a protective order
within five days of filing the protest.
§ 134.1006 Service and filing
requirements.
The provisions of § 134.204 apply to
the service and filing of all pleadings
and other submissions permitted under
this subpart.
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
§ 134.1007
Processing a CVE Protest.
(a) Notice and order. If the Judge
determines that the protest is timely,
sufficiently specific, and based upon
protestable allegations, the Judge will
issue a notice and order, notifying the
protester, the protested concern, the
Director, CVE (D/CVE), VA Counsel,
and, if applicable, the contracting officer
of the date OHA received the protest,
and order a due date for responses.
(b) Dismissal of protest. If the Judge
determines that the protest is premature,
untimely, nonspecific, or is based on
non-protestable allegations, the Judge
will dismiss the protest and will send
the contracting officer, D/CVE, and the
protester a notice of dismissal, citing the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Jkt 244001
reason(s) for the dismissal. The
dismissal is a final agency action.
(c) Transmission of the case file.
Upon receipt of a notice and order, the
D/CVE must deliver to OHA the entire
case file relating to the protested
concern’s inclusion in the CVE
database. The notice and order will
establish the timetable for transmitting
the case file to OHA. The D/CVE must
certify and authenticate that the case
file, to the best of his/her knowledge, is
a true and correct copy of the case file.
(d) Protective order. A protester
seeking access to the CVE case file must
file a timely request for a protective
order under § 134.205. Except for good
cause shown, a protester must request a
protective order within five days of
filing the protest. Even after issuance of
a protective order, OHA will not
disclose income tax returns or
privileged information.
(e) Supplemental allegations. If, after
viewing documents in the CVE case file
for the first time under a protective
order, a protester wishes to supplement
its protest with additional argument, the
protester may do so. Any such
supplement is due at OHA no later than
15 days from the date the protester
receives or reviews the CVE case file.
(f) Response—(1) Timing. The
protested concern, the D/CVE, the
contracting officer, and any other
interested party may respond to the
protest and supplemental protest, if one
is filed. The response is due no later
than 15 days from the date the protest
or supplemental protest was filed with
OHA. The record closes the date the
final response is due.
(2) Service. The respondent must
serve its response upon the protester or
its counsel and upon each of the
persons identified in the certificate of
service attached to the notice and order
or, if a protective order is issued, in
accordance with the terms of the
protective order.
(3) Reply to a response. No reply to
a response will be permitted unless the
Judge directs otherwise.
(g) Basis for decision. The decision
will be based primarily on the case file
and information provided by the
protester, the protested concern, and
any other parties. However, the Judge
may investigate issues beyond those
raised in the protest and may use other
information or make requests for
additional information to the protester,
the protested concern, or VA.
(h) Award of contract. The contracting
officer may award a contract during the
period between the date he/she receives
a protest and the date the Judge issues
a decision only if the contracting officer
determines that an award must be made
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
to protect the public interest and
notifies the Judge in writing of any such
determination. Notwithstanding such a
determination, the provisions of
paragraph (j) of this section shall apply
to the procurement in question.
(i) The decision. OHA will serve a
copy of the written decision on each
party, or, if represented by counsel, on
its counsel. The decision is considered
the final agency action, and it becomes
effective upon issuance.
(j) Effect of decision. (1) A contracting
officer may award a contract to a
protested concern after the Judge has
determined either that the protested
concern is eligible for inclusion in the
CVE database or has dismissed all
protests against it.
(2) A contracting officer shall not
award a contract to a protested concern
that the Judge has determined is not
eligible for inclusion in the CVE
database. If the contract has already
been awarded, then the awarded
contract shall be deemed void ab initio
(invalid from the outset), and the
contracting officer shall rescind the
contract and award the contract to the
next eligible concern in line for the
award.
(3) The contracting officer must
update the Federal Procurement Data
System and other procurement reporting
databases to reflect the Judge’s decision.
(4) If the Judge finds the protested
concern ineligible for inclusion in the
CVE database, D/CVE must immediately
remove the protested concern from the
CVE database.
(5) A concern found to be ineligible
may not submit an offer on a future VA
procurement until the protested concern
reapplies to the Vendor Information
Pages Verification Program and has been
reentered into the CVE database.
§ 134.1008
Discovery.
Discovery will not be permitted in
CVE Protest proceedings.
§ 134.1009
Oral hearings.
Oral hearings will be held in CVE
Protest proceedings only upon a finding
by the Judge of extraordinary
circumstances. If such an oral hearing is
ordered, the proceeding shall be
conducted in accordance with those
rules of subpart B of this part as the
Judge deems appropriate.
§ 134.1010
of proof.
Standard of review and burden
The protested concern has the burden
of proving its eligibility, by a
preponderance of the evidence.
§ 134.1011
Weight of evidence.
The Judge will give greater weight to
specific, signed, factual evidence than to
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
general, unsupported allegations or
opinions. In the case of refusal or failure
to furnish requested information within
a required time period, the Judge may
assume that disclosure would be
contrary to the interests of the party
failing to make disclosure.
§ 134.1012
The record.
Where relevant, the provisions of
§ 134.225 apply. In a protest under this
subpart, the contents of the record also
include the case file or solicitation
submitted to OHA in accordance with
§ 134.1007.
§ 134.1013
Request for reconsideration.
The decision on a CVE Protest may
not be appealed. However:
(a) The Judge may reconsider a CVE
Protest decision. Any party that has
appeared in the proceeding, or the
Secretary of VA or his/her designee,
may request reconsideration by filing
with OHA and serving a petition for
reconsideration on all the parties to the
CVE Protest within twenty (20) calendar
days after service of the written
decision. The request for
reconsideration must clearly show an
error of fact or law material to the
decision. The Judge may also reconsider
a decision on his or her own initiative.
(b) If the Judge reverses his or her
initial decision on reconsideration, the
contracting officer must follow
§ 134.1007(j) in applying the new
decision’s results.
■ 5. Add subpart K to read as follows:
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
Subpart K—Rules of Practice for Appeals of
Denials and Cancellations of Verification for
Inclusion in the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Center for Verification
and Evaluation (CVE) Database (CVE
Appeals)
Sec.
134.1101 Scope of rules.
134.1102 Who may file a CVE Appeal?
134.1103 Grounds for filing a CVE Appeal.
134.1104 Commencement of CVE Appeals.
134.1105 The appeal petition.
134.1106 Service and filing requirements.
134.1107 Transmission of the case file.
134.1108 Response to an appeal petition.
134.1109 Discovery and oral hearings.
134.1110 New evidence.
134.1111 Standard of review and burden of
proof.
134.1112 The decision.
Subpart K—Rules of Practice for
Appeals of Denials and Cancellations
of Verification for Inclusion in the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Center for Verification and Evaluation
(CVE) Database (CVE Appeals)
§ 134.1101
Scope of rules.
(a) The rules of practice in this
subpart apply to appeals of denials and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Jkt 244001
cancellations of verification for
inclusion in the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs Center for Verification
and Evaluation Database (CVE Appeals).
(b) Except where inconsistent with
this subpart, the provisions of subparts
A and B of this part apply to appeals
listed in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Appeals relating to determinations
made by SBA’s Director, Office of
Government Contracting regarding
Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small
Business Concern (SDVO SBC) status
are governed by subpart E of this part.
(d) Protests of a concern’s eligibility
for inclusion in the VA CVE database
are governed by subpart J of this part.
§ 134.1102
Who may file a CVE Appeal?
A concern that has been denied
verification of its CVE status or has had
its CVE status cancelled may appeal the
denial or cancellation to OHA.
§ 134.1103
Appeal.
Grounds for filing a CVE
Denials and cancellations of
verification of CVE status may be
appealed to OHA, so long as the denial
or cancellation is not based on the
failure to meet any veteran or servicedisabled veteran eligibility criteria.
Such denials and cancellations are final
VA decisions and not subject to appeal
to OHA.
§ 134.1104
Appeals.
Commencement of CVE
(a) A concern whose application for
CVE verification has been denied or
whose CVE status has been cancelled
must file its appeal within 10 business
days of receipt of the denial or
cancellation.
(b) The rule for counting days is in
§ 134.202(d).
(c) OHA will dismiss an untimely
appeal.
§ 134.1105
The appeal petition.
(a) Format. CVE Appeals must be in
writing. There is no required format for
an appeal petition; however, it must
include the following:
(1) A copy of the denial or
cancellation and the date the appellant
received it;
(2) A statement of why the
cancellation or denial is in error;
(3) Any other pertinent information
the Judge should consider; and
(4) The name, address, telephone
number, and email address or facsimile
number, if available, and signature of
the appellant or its attorney.
(b) Service. The appellant must serve
copies of the entire appeal petition upon
the Director, Center for Verification and
Evaluation (D/CVE) and VA Counsel at
CVEAppealsService@va.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13631
(c) Certificate of service. The
appellant must attach to the appeal
petition a signed certificate of service
meeting the requirements of
§ 134.204(d).
(d) Dismissal. An appeal petition that
does not meet all the requirements of
this section may be dismissed by the
Judge at his/her own initiative or upon
motion of a respondent.
§ 134.1106 Service and filing
requirements.
The provisions of § 134.204 apply to
the service and filing of all pleadings
and other submissions permitted under
this subpart.
§ 134.1107
Transmission of the case file.
Once a CVE Appeal is filed, the D/
CVE must deliver to OHA the entire
case file relating to the denial or
cancellation. The Judge will issue a
notice and order establishing the
timetable for transmitting the case file to
OHA. The D/CVE must certify and
authenticate that the case file, to the
best of his/her knowledge, is a true and
correct copy of the case file.
§ 134.1108
Response to an appeal petition.
(a) Who may respond. The D/CVE or
his/her designee or counsel for VA may
respond to the CVE Appeal. The
response should present arguments to
the issues presented on appeal.
(b) Time limits. The notice and order
will inform the parties of the filing of
the appeal petition, establish the close
of record as 15 days after service of the
notice and order, and inform the parties
that OHA must receive any responses to
the appeal petition no later than the
close of record.
(c) Service. The respondent must
serve its response upon the appellant
and upon each of the persons identified
in the certificate of service attached to
the appeal petition pursuant to
§ 134.1105.
(d) Reply to a response. No reply to
a response will be permitted unless the
Judge directs otherwise.
§ 134.1109
Discovery and oral hearings.
Discovery will not be permitted and
oral hearings will not be held.
§ 134.1110
New evidence.
Except for good cause shown,
evidence beyond the case file will not
be admitted.
§ 134.1111
of proof.
Standard of review and burden
The standard of review is whether the
D/CVE denial or cancellation was based
on clear error of fact or law. The
appellant has the burden of proof, by a
preponderance of the evidence.
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
13632
§ 134.1112
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
The decision.
(a) Timing. The Judge shall decide a
CVE Appeal, insofar as practicable,
within 60 calendar days after close of
the record.
(b) Contents. Following closure of the
record, the Judge will issue a decision
containing findings of fact and
conclusions of law, reasons for such
findings and conclusions, and any relief
ordered.
(c) Basis for decision. Decisions under
this subpart will be based primarily on
the evidence in the CVE case file,
arguments made on appeal, and any
response(s) thereto. However, the Judge,
in his/her sole discretion, may consider
issues beyond those raised in the
pleadings and the denial or cancellation
letter.
(d) Finality. The decision is the final
agency decision and becomes effective
upon issuance. Where OHA dismisses
an appeal of a D/CVE denial or
cancellation, the D/CVE determination
remains in effect.
(e) Service. OHA will serve a copy of
all written decisions on each party, or,
if represented by counsel, on its
counsel.
(f) Effect. If the Judge grants the
appeal and finds the appellant eligible
for inclusion in the CVE database, the
D/CVE must immediately reinstate or
include the appellant, as the case may
be, in the CVE database.
(g) Reconsideration. A decision of the
Judge may be reconsidered. Any party
that has appeared in the proceeding, or
the Secretary of VA or his or her
designee, may request reconsideration
by filing with OHA and serving a
petition for reconsideration on all
parties to the CVE Appeal within twenty
(20) calendar days after service of the
written decision, upon a clear showing
of an error of fact or law material to the
decision. The Judge also may reconsider
a decision on his or her own initiative.
Dated: March 14, 2018.
Linda E. McMahon,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018–06034 Filed 3–29–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 510, 520, 522, 524, 556,
and 558
[Docket No. FDA–2017–N–0002]
New Animal Drugs; Approval of New
Animal Drug Applications; Withdrawal
of Approval of New Animal Drug
Applications; Changes of
Sponsorship; Change of a Sponsor’s
Name and Address
AGENCY:
This rule is effective March 30,
2018, except for amendatory
instructions 3 to 21 CFR 510.600, 9 to
21 CFR 522.300, 10 to 21 CFR 522.540,
and 11 to 21 CFR 522.1081, which are
effective April 9, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George K. Haibel, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV–6), Food and Drug
Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240–402–5689,
george.haibel@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Final rule; technical
amendments.
ACTION:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
amending the animal drug regulations to
reflect application-related actions for
new animal drug applications (NADAs)
and abbreviated new animal drug
applications (ANADAs) during July,
August, and September 2017. FDA is
informing the public of the availability
of summaries of the basis of approval
and of environmental review
documents, where applicable. The
animal drug regulations are also being
amended to reflect the withdrawal of
approval of applications, changes of
sponsorship of applications, and a
change of a sponsor’s name and address,
and to make technical amendments to
improve the accuracy of the regulations.
SUMMARY:
I. Approval Actions
FDA is amending the animal drug
regulations to reflect approval actions
for NADAs and ANADAs during July,
August, and September 2017, as listed
in table 1. In addition, FDA is informing
the public of the availability, where
applicable, of documentation of
environmental review required under
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and, for actions requiring
review of safety or effectiveness data,
summaries of the basis of approval (FOI
Summaries) under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA). These public
documents may be seen in the Dockets
Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday. Persons with access to
the internet may obtain these
documents at the CVM FOIA Electronic
Reading Room: https://www.fda.gov/
AboutFDA/CentersOffices/
OfficeofFoods/CVM/
CVMFOIAElectronicReadingRoom/
default.htm. Marketing exclusivity and
patent information may be accessed in
FDA’s publication, Approved Animal
Drug Products Online (Green Book) at:
https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/
Products/ApprovedAnimal
DrugProducts/default.htm.
TABLE 1—ORIGINAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL NADAS AND ANADAS APPROVED DURING JULY, AUGUST, AND SEPTEMBER
2017
Approval date
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
July 21, 2017 ....
VerDate Sep<11>2014
File No.
141–450
18:02 Mar 29, 2018
Sponsor
Intervet, Inc., 2
Giralda Farms,
Madison, NJ
07940.
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Product name
Species
Effect of the action
Public
documents
BANAMINE
Transdermal
(flunixin
transdermal
solution) Solution.
Cattle ...........
Original approval for the control of
pyrexia associated with bovine respiratory disease and the control of
pain associated with foot rot in
steers, beef heifers, beef cows, beef
bulls intended for slaughter, and replacement dairy heifers under 20
months of age.
FOI Summary;
EA/FONSI.1
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MRR1.SGM
30MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 62 (Friday, March 30, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13626-13632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06034]
[[Page 13626]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Part 134
RIN 3245-AG87
Rules of Practice for Protests and Appeals Regarding Eligibility
for Inclusion in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Center for
Verification and Evaluation Database
AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is amending the
rules of practice of its Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) to
implement procedures for protests of eligibility for inclusion in the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Center for Verification and
Evaluation (CVE) database, and procedures for appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE database. These amendments are
issued in accordance with sections 1832 and 1833 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (NDAA 2017).
DATES: This rule is effective on October 1, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth M. Hyde, Administrative Judge,
(202) 401-8200.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sections 1832 and 1833 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Public Law 114-328, 130
Stat. 2000 (Dec. 23, 2016) authorize the SBA's OHA to determine
protests and appeals related to inclusion in the CVE database. In order
to implement these sections, this rule amends OHA's jurisdiction in
subparts A and B of 13 CFR part 134 to include protests of eligibility
for inclusion in the CVE database, and appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE database. In addition, this rule
creates a new subpart J in 13 CFR part 134 to set detailed rules of
practice for protests of eligibility for inclusion in the VA CVE
database, and a new subpart K to set detailed rules of practice for
appeals of denials and cancellations of verification for inclusion in
the VA CVE database.
On September 28, 2017, SBA published in the Federal Register (82 FR
45212) a proposed rule to implement sections 1832 and 1833 of the NDAA
2017 and to amend OHA's jurisdiction and procedures in order to
accommodate protests of eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database
and appeals of denials and cancellations of inclusion in the CVE
database. The proposed rule allowed for a comment period ending on
October 30, 2017. During the comment period, SBA received thirteen
comments.
Summary of Comments and SBA's Response
A. Subparts A and B
SBA proposed amending Sec. 134.102, which defines OHA's
jurisdiction, to add protests of eligibility for inclusion in the CVE
database and appeals of denials and cancellations of inclusion in the
CVE database as two new types of proceedings over which OHA would have
jurisdiction. SBA also proposed adding new paragraphs (8) and (9) to
Sec. 134.201(b) to identify the location of the regulations concerning
protests of eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database and appeals
of denials and cancellations of inclusion in the CVE database. As a
result of these new paragraphs, SBA also proposed to redesignate
existing Sec. 134.201(b)(8) as Sec. 134.201(b)(10). There were no
comments on these specific revisions, and SBA is adopting them exactly
as proposed.
SBA received four comments that were generally supportive of
transferring the protests and appeals at issue from VA to OHA for
adjudication. In addition, four other comments described the
commenters' views and experiences with existing processes. SBA is
unable to respond to these comments as they did not address the
proposed regulations at issue here.
B. Subpart J
SBA proposed to add a new subpart J, consisting of Sec. Sec.
134.1001 through 134.1013, to establish the rules of practice before
OHA for protests of eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database (CVE
Protests). The new rules of practice for CVE Protests mirror SBA's
existing rules for protests of service-disabled veteran-owned small
businesses, found in 13 CFR part 125, subpart D.
SBA received no comments regarding the proposed new Sec. Sec.
134.1001 (Scope of rules), 134.1002 (Who may file a CVE Protest?),
134.1004 (Commencement of CVE Protests), 134.1005 (Contents of the CVE
Protest), 134.1006 (Service and filing requirements), 134.1008
(Discovery), 134.1009 (Oral hearings), 134.1010 (Standard of review and
burden of proof), 134.1011 (Weight of evidence), 134.1012 (The record),
and 134.1013 (Request for reconsideration). Except for Sec. 134.1001,
which SBA is amending to delete a duplicative sentence, SBA is adopting
these provisions exactly as proposed. As discussed below, SBA received
comments on proposed Sec. Sec. 134.1003 and 134.1007.
The penultimate sentence in proposed Sec. 134.1001(c) stated that
``All protests relating to a concern's status as a SDVO SBC for a non-
VA procurement are subject to part 125 of this chapter and must be
filed in accordance with that part.'' This sentence is duplicative with
language in Sec. 134.1001(d), so SBA is amending Sec. 134.1001(c) to
remove the sentence. No other changes were made to Sec. 134.1001.
Proposed Sec. 134.1003 outlined the grounds for filing a CVE
Protest. Proposed paragraph (c) required the Judge to determine a
protested concern's eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database as of
the date the protest was filed. SBA received one comment on paragraph
(c). The commenter states that proposed Sec. 134.1003(c) is
inconsistent with VA Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) clause 852.219-
10(b), VA Notice of Total Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business
Set-Aside, which indicates that offers received that are not from
service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses will not be considered
and that award must be made to a service-disabled veteran-owned small
business. The commenter adds that this clause has been interpreted by
CVE to mean that eligibility is determined both at the time a bid or
initial proposal containing price has been submitted, and at time of
award. In addition, the commenter observes that 13 CFR 125.18(a)
requires service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns to
self-certify their status at time of initial offer, including price,
and also that similar language is found at Federal Acquisition
Regulation 19.1403(b). The commenter further maintains that a concern's
status may change between the date of proposal submission and the date
of award. The commenter urges SBA to revise proposed Sec. 134.1003(c)
so that eligibility is determined as of the date the initial proposal
with pricing, or bid, was submitted.
In response, SBA agrees with the commenter that, if the CVE Protest
pertains to a procurement, SBA should examine eligibility at two
separate points: (1) As of the date the concern submits its bid or
initial offer, which includes price; and (2) as of the date the CVE
Protest was filed. Such an approach would restrict concerns that became
ineligible after their initial bid or proposal from being awarded
contracts. However, SBA notes that, under 38 U.S.C. 8127(f)(8)(B), the
Secretary of the VA or his/her designee may initiate a CVE Protest that
does not involve a procurement. In this situation,
[[Page 13627]]
there would be no bid or proposal, so eligibility can be assessed only
as of the date of the CVE Protest. Accordingly, the commenter's
recommendation is accepted in part, and SBA is revising the language of
Sec. 134.1003(c).
Section 134.1007 proposed to establish the process for CVE Protests
as follows: Paragraph (a) required OHA to issue a notice and order if
the protest is found to be timely, specific, and based on protestable
allegations; paragraph (b) required dismissal of a protest if the Judge
determines the protest to be premature, untimely, nonspecific, or based
on non-protestable allegations; paragraph (c) required the Director of
the CVE (D/CVE) to send the case file to OHA by the deadline specified
in the notice and order; paragraph (d) described the process for
requesting a protective order; paragraph (e) allowed for supplemental
arguments after a protester reviews the CVE case file; paragraph (f)
allowed for a response to a protest within 15 days of the date the
protest was filed; and paragraph (g) required the Judge to base the
decision on the case file and information provided by the parties or
information requested by the Judge. The proposed rule also authorized
the Judge to investigate issues beyond those raised by the parties.
Paragraph (h) proposed to allow a contracting officer to award the
contract after a protest is filed but before a decision is reached if
the contracting officer determines the public interest will be
protected and notifies the Judge of his/her decision; paragraph (i)
required OHA to serve all parties with the decision, which would be a
final agency decision; paragraph (j) set out the effects of the
decision upon the protested concern and the contract at issue.
SBA received no public comments on Sec. 134.1007. However, VA
recommended that Sec. 134.1007(j)(2) be amended to be consistent with
VA's existing regulation in VAAR 819.307(h). Specifically, the proposed
Sec. 134.1007(j)(2) stated that ``A contracting officer shall not
award a contract to a protested concern that the Judge has determined
is not eligible for inclusion in the CVE database. If the contracting
officer has already made an award under paragraph (h), the contracting
officer shall either terminate the contract or not exercise the next
option.'' VA recommended that the provision instead read: ``A
contracting officer shall not award a contract to a protested concern
that the Judge has determined is not eligible for inclusion in the CVE
database. If the contract has already been awarded, then the awarded
contract shall be deemed void ab initio and the contracting officer
shall rescind the contract and award the contract to the next [eligible
concern] in line for the award.'' SBA believes this change is minor
because, under the proposed Sec. 134.1007(h), a contracting officer
normally would not have made an award by the time a CVE Protest is
decided. Furthermore, VA's suggestion removes a potential inconsistency
between the two agencies' regulations. Therefore, SBA is adopting the
comment and revising Sec. 134.1007(j)(2) to mirror VA's existing
regulation at VAAR 819.307(h).
C. Subpart K
SBA proposed to add a new subpart K, consisting of Sec. Sec.
134.1101 through 134.1112, promulgating the rules of practice before
OHA for appeals of denials and cancellations of verification for
inclusion in the VA CVE database (CVE Appeals). SBA received no
comments regarding the proposed Sec. Sec. 134.1101 (Scope of rules),
134.1102 (Who may file a CVE Appeal?), 134.1103 (Grounds for filing a
CVE Appeal), 134.1105 (The appeal petition), 134.1106 (Service and
filing requirements), 134.1107 (Transmission of the case file),
134.1108 (Response to an appeal petition), 134.1109 (Discovery and oral
hearings), and 134.1111 (Standard of review and burden of proof).
Therefore, SBA is adopting these provisions exactly as proposed. SBA,
however, received comments on proposed Sec. 134.1104 (Commencement of
CVE Appeals), Sec. 134.1110 (New evidence), and Sec. 134.1112 (The
decision).
Proposed Sec. 134.1104 required CVE Appeals to be filed within 10
business days of being notified that the CVE status has been denied or
cancelled. Paragraph (b) proposed to adopt the rules for counting days
found at Sec. 134.202(d). Paragraph (c) proposed to require OHA to
dismiss any untimely appeal.
SBA received three comments on Sec. 134.1104. All three commenters
stated that 10 business days to file a CVE Appeal is too short a
timeframe. The commenters contend that preparing the appeals requires
gathering a significant amount of documents and developing responses to
legal issues. The three commenters recommend a 30 calendar day time
period for filing a CVE Appeal.
In response, SBA notes that CVE Appeals will be based on the
documentation provided to the VA by the business concern. In turn, VA
will be responsible for producing this record to OHA. The commenters'
concern that a 10 business day timeline is too short because documents
will need to be provided on appeal is thus unwarranted. On appeal, a
business concern will not be required to compile the record or produce
new documents. SBA is thus adopting Sec. 134.1104 exactly as proposed.
Proposed Sec. 134.1110 prohibited the introduction of new evidence
in CVE Appeals, unless good cause is shown. SBA received one comment on
this section. The commenter stated that the section should be revised
to allow a denied concern to resubmit its application, thus restarting
the verification process, if new evidence is available.
SBA responds that under proposed Sec. 134.1112(c), ``Decisions
under this part will be based primarily on the evidence in the CVE case
file, arguments made on appeal, and any response(s) thereto.'' Thus,
SBA does not anticipate that new evidence will typically be necessary
to decide a CVE Appeal. Nevertheless, a party that can establish good
cause for the introduction of new evidence may do so under proposed
Sec. 134.1110. SBA believes that allowing new evidence to be
introduced and allowing the Judge to consider the evidence will negate
the necessity of restarting the verification process. The limitations
on the introduction of new evidence in proposed Sec. 134.1110 are
consistent with OHA's restrictions on the use of new evidence in other
types of proceedings. See 13 CFR 134.308 (limitations on the use of new
evidence in size appeals). Therefore, SBA will not alter Sec. 134.1110
and is adopting it exactly as proposed.
Under proposed Sec. 134.1112(a) the Judge would decide a CVE
Appeal, if practicable, within 60 calendar days after the close of
record. SBA received one comment on this section. The commenter argues
the decisions should be rendered within 30 calendar days, because 60
days is too long to wait for a decision. The commenter further argues
the appeal should be automatically granted if OHA does not issue the
decision by the deadline.
In response, SBA notes that CVE Appeals under subpart K are not
tied to a particular procurement. These appeals are of denials and
cancellations of verification for inclusion in the VA CVE database, so
there is no pending procurement at stake. Further, the 60 day timeframe
is similar to that used by OHA in deciding 8(a) eligibility cases (13
CFR 134.409). As a result, SBA does not agree that a more expedited
timeframe is warranted. In addition, SBA does not agree that it would
be appropriate to automatically reinstate a concern in the CVE database
due to a delay in issuing a decision, because such an approach might
enable
[[Page 13628]]
ineligible concerns to bid on VA contracts. SBA will not alter Sec.
134.1112(a) and is adopting it exactly as proposed.
Proposed Sec. 134.1112(g) allowed any party that has appeared in
the proceeding, or the Secretary of VA or his or her designee, to file
a petition for reconsideration. As proposed, the petition must be filed
within twenty (20) calendar days after service of the written decision,
upon a clear showing of an error of fact or law material to the
decision. The Judge also may reconsider a decision on his or her own
initiative.
SBA received one comment on this paragraph. The commenter states
that 20 calendar days allowed for filing a petition for reconsideration
is too long, and suggests changing it to 10 calendar days.
SBA responds that 20 calendar days is the standard for other OHA
proceedings, as set forth under OHA's rules in 13 CFR 134.227(c). Thus,
SBA will not alter its timelines and adopts Sec. 134.1112(g) exactly
as proposed. There were no comments on the remaining paragraphs of
Sec. 134.1112 and SBA is adopting them exactly as proposed.
Compliance With Executive Orders 12866, 12988, 13132, 13771, the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 35), and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) Executive Order 12866
OMB has determined that this final rule does not constitute a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866. This
final rule is also not a major rule under the Congressional Review Act,
5 U.S.C. 800. This final rule amends the rules of practice for the
SBA's OHA in order to implement procedures for protests of eligibility
for inclusion in the CVE database, and appeals of denials and
cancellations of inclusion in the CVE database. As such, the rule has
no effect on the amount or dollar value of any Federal contract
requirements or of any financial assistance provided through SBA or VA.
Therefore, the rule is not likely to have an annual economic effect of
$100 million or more, result in a major increase in costs or prices, or
have a significant adverse effect on competition or the United States
economy. In addition, this rule does not create a serious inconsistency
or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another
agency, materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs or the rights and obligations of such
recipients, nor raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Executive Order 12988
This action meets applicable standards set forth in section 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. The action does not
have retroactive or preemptive effect.
Executive Order 13132
This final rule does not have Federalism implications as defined in
Executive Order 13132. It will not have substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in the Executive Order. As
such it does not warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 13771
This final rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this final rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The SBA has determined that this final rule does not impose
additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), 5 U.S.C.
601-612, requires Federal agencies to consider the effect of their
actions on small entities, small non-profit businesses, and small local
governments. Pursuant to the RFA, when an agency issues a final rule,
the agency must prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA).
The FRFA describes whether the impact of the rule will have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
which includes small businesses, small not-for-profit organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions. However, Section 605 of the RFA
allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an FRFA, if
the rulemaking is not expected to have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule revises the regulations governing cases before
SBA's Office of Hearings and Appeals, SBA's administrative tribunal.
These regulations are procedural by nature. Specifically, this final
rule establishes rules of practice for the SBA's OHA in order to
implement protests of eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database and
appeals of denials and cancellations of inclusion in the CVE database,
new types of administrative litigation mandated by sections 1832 and
1833 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.
This legislation provides a new statutory right to challenge
eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database, as well as denials and
cancellation of inclusion in the CVE database. This final rule merely
provides the rules of practice at OHA for the orderly hearing and
disposition of protests of CVE database inclusion and appeals of
denials and cancellations of CVE database inclusion. At the proposed
stage, SBA did not anticipate that this final rule would have a
significant economic impact on any small businesses (the only small
entities that would be affected by this rule); we did request comments
from any small business on how and to what degree this final rule would
affect it economically. No comments were received regarding RFA issues.
Therefore, the Administrator of SBA certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b)
that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 13 CFR Part 134
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Equal access to
justice, Lawyers, Organization and functions (Government agencies).
For the reasons stated in the preamble, SBA amends 13 CFR part 134
as follows:
PART 134--RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING CASES BEFORE THE OFFICE OF
HEARINGS AND APPEALS
0
1. The authority citation for part 134 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 504; 15 U.S.C. 632, 634(b)(6), 634(i),
637(a), 648(l), 656(i), and 687(c); 38 U.S.C. 8127(f); E.O. 12549,
51 FR 6370, 3 CFR, 1986 Comp., p. 189.
Subpart J issued under 38 U.S.C. 8127(f)(8)(B).
Subpart K issued under 38 U.S.C. 8127(f)(8)(A).
0
2. Amend Sec. 134.102 by removing the period at the end of paragraph
(t) and adding a semicolon in its place and adding paragraphs (u) and
(v) to read as follows:
Sec. 134.102 Jurisdiction of OHA.
* * * * *
(u) Protests of eligibility for inclusion in the Department of
Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) database;
and
[[Page 13629]]
(v) Appeals of denials and cancellations of inclusion in the CVE
database.
0
3. Amend Sec. 134.201 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading;
0
b. Removing the word ``and'' in paragraph (b)(7);
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (b)(8) as paragraph (b)(10); and
0
d. Adding new paragraphs (b)(8) and (9).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 134.201 Scope of the rules in this subpart.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(8) For protests of eligibility for inclusion in the Center for
Verification and Evaluation (CVE) database, in subpart J of this part;
(9) For appeals of denials and cancellations of inclusion in the
CVE database, in subpart K of this part; and
* * * * *
0
4. Add subpart J to read as follows:
Subpart J--Rules of Practice for Protests of Eligibility for Inclusion
in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Center for Verification
and Evaluation (CVE) Database (CVE Protests)
Sec.
134.1001 Scope of rules.
134.1002 Who may file a CVE Protest?
134.1003 Grounds for filing a CVE Protest.
134.1004 Commencement of CVE Protests.
134.1005 Contents of the CVE Protest.
134.1006 Service and filing requirements.
134.1007 Processing a CVE Protest.
134.1008 Discovery.
134.1009 Oral hearings.
134.1010 Standard of review and burden of proof.
134.1011 Weight of evidence.
134.1012 The record.
134.1013 Request for reconsideration.
Subpart J--Rules of Practice for Protests of Eligibility for
Inclusion in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Center
for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) Database (CVE Protests)
Sec. 134.1001 Scope of rules.
(a) The rules of practice in this subpart apply to Department of
Veterans Affairs' (VA) Center for Verification and Evaluation protests
(CVE Protests).
(b) Except where inconsistent with this subpart, the provisions of
subparts A and B of this part apply to protests listed in paragraph (a)
of this section.
(c) The protest procedures described in this subpart are separate
from those governing protests and appeals of a concern's size or status
as a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Concern (SDVO SBC)
for a non-Department of Veterans Affairs (non-VA) procurement. All
protests relating to whether a veteran-owned concern is a ``small''
business for purposes of any Federal program are subject to part 121 of
this chapter and must be filed in accordance with that part. If a
protester protests both the size of the concern and the concern's
eligibility for the CVE database, SBA will process each protest
concurrently. SBA does not review issues concerning contract
administration.
(d) Protests of a concern's eligibility for a non-VA procurement as
a SDVO SBC are governed by 13 CFR part 125, subpart D.
(e) Appeals relating to determinations made by SBA's Director,
Office of Government Contracting, regarding SDVO SBC status are
governed by subpart E of this part.
(f) Appeals of denials and cancellations of verification for
inclusion in the CVE database are governed by subpart K of this part.
Sec. 134.1002 Who may file a CVE Protest?
A CVE Protest may be filed by:
(a) The Secretary of the VA, or his/her designee; or
(b) In the case of a small business that is awarded a contract for
a VA procurement, the contracting officer or an offeror.
Sec. 134.1003 Grounds for filing a CVE Protest.
(a) Status. In cases where the protest is based on service-
connected disability, permanent and severe disability, or veteran
status, the Judge will only consider a protest that presents specific
allegations supporting the contention that the owner(s) cannot provide
documentation from the VA, Department of Defense, or the U.S. National
Archives and Records Administration to show that they meet the
definition of veteran, service-disabled veteran, or service-disabled
veteran with a permanent and severe disability.
(b) Ownership and control. In cases where the protest is based on
ownership and control, the Judge will consider a protest only if the
protester presents credible evidence that the concern is not 51% owned
and controlled by one or more veterans or service-disabled veterans.
(c) Date for determining eligibility. (1) If the CVE Protest
pertains to a procurement, the Judge will determine a protested
concern's eligibility for inclusion in the CVE database as of the date
of bid or initial offer, including price, and as of the date the CVE
Protest was filed.
(2) If the CVE Protest does not pertain to a procurement, the Judge
will determine a protested concern's eligibility for inclusion in the
CVE database as of the date the CVE Protest was filed.
Sec. 134.1004 Commencement of CVE Protests.
(a) Timeliness. (1) The Secretary of the VA, or his/her designee,
may file a CVE Protest at any time.
(2) Where the CVE Protest is in connection with a VA procurement:
(i) An offeror must file a CVE Protest within five business days of
notification of the apparent awardee's identity.
(ii) A contracting officer may file a CVE Protest at any time
during the life of the VA contract.
(3) The rule for counting days is in Sec. 134.202(d).
(4) An untimely protest will be dismissed.
(b) Filing--(1) Private parties. Interested parties, other than the
contracting officer or Secretary of the VA or his/her designee, must
deliver their CVE Protests in person, by email, by facsimile, by
express delivery service, or by U.S. mail (postmarked within the
applicable time period) to the contracting officer.
(2) Referral to OHA. The contracting officer must forward to OHA
any non-premature CVE Protest received, notwithstanding whether he/she
believes it is sufficiently specific or timely. The contracting officer
must send all CVE Protests, along with a referral letter, directly to
OHA, addressed to Office of Hearings and Appeals, U.S. Small Business
Administration, 409 Third Street SW, Washington, DC 20416, by email at
[email protected], or by facsimile to (202) 205-7059, marked Attn: CVE
Protest. The referral letter must include information pertaining to the
solicitation that may be necessary for OHA to determine timeliness and
standing, including:
(i) The solicitation number;
(ii) The name, address, telephone number, email address, and
facsimile number of the contracting officer;
(iii) Whether the contract was sole source or set-aside;
(iv) Whether the protester submitted an offer;
(v) Whether the protested concern was the apparent successful
offeror;
(vi) Whether the procurement was conducted using sealed bid or
negotiated procedures;
(vii) The bid opening date, if applicable;
(viii) When the protest was submitted to the contracting officer;
[[Page 13630]]
(ix) When the protester received notification about the apparent
successful offeror, if applicable; and
(x) Whether a contract has been awarded.
(3) Protests filed by Secretary of the VA. The Secretary of VA or
his/her designee must submit his/her CVE Protest directly to OHA in
accordance with the procedures in Sec. 134.204.
(4) Protests filed by a contracting officer. The contracting
officer must submit his/her CVE Protest directly to OHA in accordance
with the procedures in Sec. 134.204. The protest should include in the
referral letter the information set forth in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section.
Sec. 134.1005 Contents of the CVE Protest.
(a) CVE Protests must be in writing. There is no required format
for a CVE Protest, but it must include the following:
(1) The solicitation or contract number, if applicable;
(2) Specific allegations supported by credible evidence that the
concern does not meet the eligibility requirements for inclusion in the
CVE database, listed in Sec. 134.1003;
(3) Any other pertinent information the Judge should consider; and
(4) The name, address, telephone number, and email address or
facsimile number, if available, and signature of the protester or its
attorney.
(b) If the protester intends to seek access to the CVE case file
under Sec. 134.205, the protester should include in its protest a
request for a protective order. Unless good cause is shown, a protester
must request a protective order within five days of filing the protest.
Sec. 134.1006 Service and filing requirements.
The provisions of Sec. 134.204 apply to the service and filing of
all pleadings and other submissions permitted under this subpart.
Sec. 134.1007 Processing a CVE Protest.
(a) Notice and order. If the Judge determines that the protest is
timely, sufficiently specific, and based upon protestable allegations,
the Judge will issue a notice and order, notifying the protester, the
protested concern, the Director, CVE (D/CVE), VA Counsel, and, if
applicable, the contracting officer of the date OHA received the
protest, and order a due date for responses.
(b) Dismissal of protest. If the Judge determines that the protest
is premature, untimely, nonspecific, or is based on non-protestable
allegations, the Judge will dismiss the protest and will send the
contracting officer, D/CVE, and the protester a notice of dismissal,
citing the reason(s) for the dismissal. The dismissal is a final agency
action.
(c) Transmission of the case file. Upon receipt of a notice and
order, the D/CVE must deliver to OHA the entire case file relating to
the protested concern's inclusion in the CVE database. The notice and
order will establish the timetable for transmitting the case file to
OHA. The D/CVE must certify and authenticate that the case file, to the
best of his/her knowledge, is a true and correct copy of the case file.
(d) Protective order. A protester seeking access to the CVE case
file must file a timely request for a protective order under Sec.
134.205. Except for good cause shown, a protester must request a
protective order within five days of filing the protest. Even after
issuance of a protective order, OHA will not disclose income tax
returns or privileged information.
(e) Supplemental allegations. If, after viewing documents in the
CVE case file for the first time under a protective order, a protester
wishes to supplement its protest with additional argument, the
protester may do so. Any such supplement is due at OHA no later than 15
days from the date the protester receives or reviews the CVE case file.
(f) Response--(1) Timing. The protested concern, the D/CVE, the
contracting officer, and any other interested party may respond to the
protest and supplemental protest, if one is filed. The response is due
no later than 15 days from the date the protest or supplemental protest
was filed with OHA. The record closes the date the final response is
due.
(2) Service. The respondent must serve its response upon the
protester or its counsel and upon each of the persons identified in the
certificate of service attached to the notice and order or, if a
protective order is issued, in accordance with the terms of the
protective order.
(3) Reply to a response. No reply to a response will be permitted
unless the Judge directs otherwise.
(g) Basis for decision. The decision will be based primarily on the
case file and information provided by the protester, the protested
concern, and any other parties. However, the Judge may investigate
issues beyond those raised in the protest and may use other information
or make requests for additional information to the protester, the
protested concern, or VA.
(h) Award of contract. The contracting officer may award a contract
during the period between the date he/she receives a protest and the
date the Judge issues a decision only if the contracting officer
determines that an award must be made to protect the public interest
and notifies the Judge in writing of any such determination.
Notwithstanding such a determination, the provisions of paragraph (j)
of this section shall apply to the procurement in question.
(i) The decision. OHA will serve a copy of the written decision on
each party, or, if represented by counsel, on its counsel. The decision
is considered the final agency action, and it becomes effective upon
issuance.
(j) Effect of decision. (1) A contracting officer may award a
contract to a protested concern after the Judge has determined either
that the protested concern is eligible for inclusion in the CVE
database or has dismissed all protests against it.
(2) A contracting officer shall not award a contract to a protested
concern that the Judge has determined is not eligible for inclusion in
the CVE database. If the contract has already been awarded, then the
awarded contract shall be deemed void ab initio (invalid from the
outset), and the contracting officer shall rescind the contract and
award the contract to the next eligible concern in line for the award.
(3) The contracting officer must update the Federal Procurement
Data System and other procurement reporting databases to reflect the
Judge's decision.
(4) If the Judge finds the protested concern ineligible for
inclusion in the CVE database, D/CVE must immediately remove the
protested concern from the CVE database.
(5) A concern found to be ineligible may not submit an offer on a
future VA procurement until the protested concern reapplies to the
Vendor Information Pages Verification Program and has been reentered
into the CVE database.
Sec. 134.1008 Discovery.
Discovery will not be permitted in CVE Protest proceedings.
Sec. 134.1009 Oral hearings.
Oral hearings will be held in CVE Protest proceedings only upon a
finding by the Judge of extraordinary circumstances. If such an oral
hearing is ordered, the proceeding shall be conducted in accordance
with those rules of subpart B of this part as the Judge deems
appropriate.
Sec. 134.1010 Standard of review and burden of proof.
The protested concern has the burden of proving its eligibility, by
a preponderance of the evidence.
Sec. 134.1011 Weight of evidence.
The Judge will give greater weight to specific, signed, factual
evidence than to
[[Page 13631]]
general, unsupported allegations or opinions. In the case of refusal or
failure to furnish requested information within a required time period,
the Judge may assume that disclosure would be contrary to the interests
of the party failing to make disclosure.
Sec. 134.1012 The record.
Where relevant, the provisions of Sec. 134.225 apply. In a protest
under this subpart, the contents of the record also include the case
file or solicitation submitted to OHA in accordance with Sec.
134.1007.
Sec. 134.1013 Request for reconsideration.
The decision on a CVE Protest may not be appealed. However:
(a) The Judge may reconsider a CVE Protest decision. Any party that
has appeared in the proceeding, or the Secretary of VA or his/her
designee, may request reconsideration by filing with OHA and serving a
petition for reconsideration on all the parties to the CVE Protest
within twenty (20) calendar days after service of the written decision.
The request for reconsideration must clearly show an error of fact or
law material to the decision. The Judge may also reconsider a decision
on his or her own initiative.
(b) If the Judge reverses his or her initial decision on
reconsideration, the contracting officer must follow Sec. 134.1007(j)
in applying the new decision's results.
0
5. Add subpart K to read as follows:
Subpart K--Rules of Practice for Appeals of Denials and Cancellations
of Verification for Inclusion in the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) Database (CVE
Appeals)
Sec.
134.1101 Scope of rules.
134.1102 Who may file a CVE Appeal?
134.1103 Grounds for filing a CVE Appeal.
134.1104 Commencement of CVE Appeals.
134.1105 The appeal petition.
134.1106 Service and filing requirements.
134.1107 Transmission of the case file.
134.1108 Response to an appeal petition.
134.1109 Discovery and oral hearings.
134.1110 New evidence.
134.1111 Standard of review and burden of proof.
134.1112 The decision.
Subpart K--Rules of Practice for Appeals of Denials and
Cancellations of Verification for Inclusion in the U.S. Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA) Center for Verification and Evaluation
(CVE) Database (CVE Appeals)
Sec. 134.1101 Scope of rules.
(a) The rules of practice in this subpart apply to appeals of
denials and cancellations of verification for inclusion in the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs Center for Verification and Evaluation
Database (CVE Appeals).
(b) Except where inconsistent with this subpart, the provisions of
subparts A and B of this part apply to appeals listed in paragraph (a)
of this section.
(c) Appeals relating to determinations made by SBA's Director,
Office of Government Contracting regarding Service-Disabled Veteran-
Owned Small Business Concern (SDVO SBC) status are governed by subpart
E of this part.
(d) Protests of a concern's eligibility for inclusion in the VA CVE
database are governed by subpart J of this part.
Sec. 134.1102 Who may file a CVE Appeal?
A concern that has been denied verification of its CVE status or
has had its CVE status cancelled may appeal the denial or cancellation
to OHA.
Sec. 134.1103 Grounds for filing a CVE Appeal.
Denials and cancellations of verification of CVE status may be
appealed to OHA, so long as the denial or cancellation is not based on
the failure to meet any veteran or service-disabled veteran eligibility
criteria. Such denials and cancellations are final VA decisions and not
subject to appeal to OHA.
Sec. 134.1104 Commencement of CVE Appeals.
(a) A concern whose application for CVE verification has been
denied or whose CVE status has been cancelled must file its appeal
within 10 business days of receipt of the denial or cancellation.
(b) The rule for counting days is in Sec. 134.202(d).
(c) OHA will dismiss an untimely appeal.
Sec. 134.1105 The appeal petition.
(a) Format. CVE Appeals must be in writing. There is no required
format for an appeal petition; however, it must include the following:
(1) A copy of the denial or cancellation and the date the appellant
received it;
(2) A statement of why the cancellation or denial is in error;
(3) Any other pertinent information the Judge should consider; and
(4) The name, address, telephone number, and email address or
facsimile number, if available, and signature of the appellant or its
attorney.
(b) Service. The appellant must serve copies of the entire appeal
petition upon the Director, Center for Verification and Evaluation (D/
CVE) and VA Counsel at [email protected].
(c) Certificate of service. The appellant must attach to the appeal
petition a signed certificate of service meeting the requirements of
Sec. 134.204(d).
(d) Dismissal. An appeal petition that does not meet all the
requirements of this section may be dismissed by the Judge at his/her
own initiative or upon motion of a respondent.
Sec. 134.1106 Service and filing requirements.
The provisions of Sec. 134.204 apply to the service and filing of
all pleadings and other submissions permitted under this subpart.
Sec. 134.1107 Transmission of the case file.
Once a CVE Appeal is filed, the D/CVE must deliver to OHA the
entire case file relating to the denial or cancellation. The Judge will
issue a notice and order establishing the timetable for transmitting
the case file to OHA. The D/CVE must certify and authenticate that the
case file, to the best of his/her knowledge, is a true and correct copy
of the case file.
Sec. 134.1108 Response to an appeal petition.
(a) Who may respond. The D/CVE or his/her designee or counsel for
VA may respond to the CVE Appeal. The response should present arguments
to the issues presented on appeal.
(b) Time limits. The notice and order will inform the parties of
the filing of the appeal petition, establish the close of record as 15
days after service of the notice and order, and inform the parties that
OHA must receive any responses to the appeal petition no later than the
close of record.
(c) Service. The respondent must serve its response upon the
appellant and upon each of the persons identified in the certificate of
service attached to the appeal petition pursuant to Sec. 134.1105.
(d) Reply to a response. No reply to a response will be permitted
unless the Judge directs otherwise.
Sec. 134.1109 Discovery and oral hearings.
Discovery will not be permitted and oral hearings will not be held.
Sec. 134.1110 New evidence.
Except for good cause shown, evidence beyond the case file will not
be admitted.
Sec. 134.1111 Standard of review and burden of proof.
The standard of review is whether the D/CVE denial or cancellation
was based on clear error of fact or law. The appellant has the burden
of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence.
[[Page 13632]]
Sec. 134.1112 The decision.
(a) Timing. The Judge shall decide a CVE Appeal, insofar as
practicable, within 60 calendar days after close of the record.
(b) Contents. Following closure of the record, the Judge will issue
a decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of law, reasons
for such findings and conclusions, and any relief ordered.
(c) Basis for decision. Decisions under this subpart will be based
primarily on the evidence in the CVE case file, arguments made on
appeal, and any response(s) thereto. However, the Judge, in his/her
sole discretion, may consider issues beyond those raised in the
pleadings and the denial or cancellation letter.
(d) Finality. The decision is the final agency decision and becomes
effective upon issuance. Where OHA dismisses an appeal of a D/CVE
denial or cancellation, the D/CVE determination remains in effect.
(e) Service. OHA will serve a copy of all written decisions on each
party, or, if represented by counsel, on its counsel.
(f) Effect. If the Judge grants the appeal and finds the appellant
eligible for inclusion in the CVE database, the D/CVE must immediately
reinstate or include the appellant, as the case may be, in the CVE
database.
(g) Reconsideration. A decision of the Judge may be reconsidered.
Any party that has appeared in the proceeding, or the Secretary of VA
or his or her designee, may request reconsideration by filing with OHA
and serving a petition for reconsideration on all parties to the CVE
Appeal within twenty (20) calendar days after service of the written
decision, upon a clear showing of an error of fact or law material to
the decision. The Judge also may reconsider a decision on his or her
own initiative.
Dated: March 14, 2018.
Linda E. McMahon,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-06034 Filed 3-29-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P