Spacesaver Design, Inc., No. 4678 (January 3, 2005)
Docket No. SIZ-2004-10-19-63
                                

                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                  SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
                 OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS
                        WASHINGTON, D.C.

                                ) 
SIZE APPEAL OF:                 ) 
                                ) 
Spacesaver Design, Inc.         )    Docket No. SIZ-2004-10-19-63
                                ) 
     Appellant                  )    Decided:  January 3, 2005
                                )
Solicitation No. F9WGOA41540100 )
Pennsylvania Air National Guard )
171st Air Refueling Wing        )
Coraopolis, Pennsylvania        )
                                )

                                
                   ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL [1]
                                
HOLLEMAN, Administrative Judge:

                         I.  BACKGROUND

                   A.  The Size Determination

      On  July  28,  2004, the 171st Air Refueling  Wing  of  the
Pennsylvania   Air  National  Guard  (171st   Wing),   based   at
Coraopolis,   Pennsylvania,  issued  the  subject   Request   for
Quotations  (RFQ)  for movable shelving systems.  The  RFQ  would
result  in the 171st Wing placing an order against the successful
offeror's Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) Contract. The Contracting
Officer  (CO) designated the procurement as a 100% small business
set  aside, and designated North American Industry Classification
system  (NAICS)  code 337215, Showcase, Partition  Shelving,  and
Locker  Manufacturing  as  the appropriate  NAICS  code  for  the
procurement,  with  a corresponding 500 employee  size  standard.
Quotations were due on August 12, 2004.

      On  September 2, 2004, unsuccessful offerors were  notified
that  Spacesaver  Design, Inc. (Appellant) was  the  awardee.  On
September  9,  2004, Alpha-Omega Shelving, Inc. filed  a  protest
alleging Appellant was not an eligible small business because  it
would  be  providing products produced by a large  business.   On
September  17,  2004,  the  Small Business  Administration  (SBA)
Office  of  Government Contracting - Area  II  (Area  Office)  in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, contacted Appellant, informing it  of
the  protest  and requesting that it submit a response,  together
with a completed SBA Form 355, and certain other information.

       Appellant  informed  the  Area  Office  that  the   actual
manufacturer  of  the  shelving  it  proposed  to   provide   was
Spacesaver  Corporation (Spacesaver) and that the two firms  were
not affiliated. According to a September 8th letter submitted  by
Spacesaver's Vice President for Finance, Spacesaver is owned  by,
and   thus  affiliated  with,  Krueger  International,  a   large
corporation. Appellant argued that the requirements  of  Part  19
(Small  Business Programs) of the Federal Acquisition  Regulation
do  not apply to purchases against FSS contracts. The Area Office
requested  that  Spacesaver submit a SBA  Form  355.   Spacesaver
failed to do so.

       On  October  5,  2004,  the  Area  Office  issued  a  size
determination finding Appellant other than small. The Area Office
found  that  it  was appropriate to perform a size  determination
here,  despite Appellant's objections, relying on Size Appeal  of
Advanced  Management Technology, Inc., SBA No.  SIZ-4638  (2004).
The Area Office concluded, on the basis of Spacesaver's September
8th  letter  and Spacesaver's failure to submit a SBA  Form  355,
which  justified  the  Area Office drawing an  adverse  inference
against  Spacesaver,  that Spacesaver was  a  large  corporation.
Accordingly, Appellant sought to provide the product of  a  large
business,  and was thus not an eligible small business  for  this
procurement.  On  October 13, 2004, Appellant received  the  size
determination.

                         B.  The Appeal

     On October 19, 2004, Appellant filed the instant appeal.
The appeal states:

      I  must  start out by saying that I do not feel  that
      the  size  determination was an error. This  decision
      was  completed properly and without any question from
      Spacesaver   Design,  Inc.  .  However,   the   above
      mentioned  [the size determination's conclusions]  is
      technically true, but the reality is that  Spacesaver
      Corporation  the  manufacturer  could  be   a   small
      business. .
      
      In addition, Spacesaver Design Inc. is also a small
      business .

Appellant  also  attaches a copy of Spacesaver's  September  8th
letter  and  a  letter from the CO, which does not question  the
size  determination, but urges that the award  to  Appellant  be
allowed to move forward.

                         II.  DISCUSSION
                                
      Appellant  filed  the instant appeal  within  15  days  of
receiving  the size determination. Thus, the appeal  is  timely.
13 C.F.R. Section 134.304(a)(1).

      Nevertheless, the Administrative Judge must  dismiss  this
appeal,  because it fails to meet the requirement that it  claim
or  set  forth  specific  reasons why  the  Area  Office's  size
determination  is  erroneous. 13 C.F.R.  Section  134.305(a)(3);
Size  Appeal of Williamson Metal Works, SBA No. SIZ-4353,  at  3
(1999).  Appellant fails to identify any error of fact or law in
the  size  determination.  [2]  Indeed,  it  concedes  that  the
determination  is correct. Appellant offers no reason  why  this
Office should overturn the size determination, other than it  is
a small business and wants the contract. Its mere assertion that
Spacesaver  "could be" small is not an assignment of error,  and
is  contradicted  by Spacesaver's own letter,  which  admits  to
affiliation with a large firm.

                        III.  CONCLUSION

      For  the above reasons, the Administrative Judge DISMISSES
the   instant   appeal  and  AFFIRMS  the  Area  Office's   size
determination.

     This   is   the  final  decision  of  the  Small   Business
Administration.  13 C.F.R. Section 134.316(b).

                                 
                                 CHRISTOPHER HOLLEMAN
                                 Administrative Judge

_________________________

      1   This appeal is decided under the Small Business Act of
1958, 15 U.S.C. Section 631 et seq., and 13 C.F.R. Parts 121 and
134.

      2  Because Appellant does not reassert on appeal its claim
that   the  Area  Office  should  not  have  performed  a   size
determination  in  this  case, it  has  abandoned  it,  and  the
Administrative Judge need not consider it. Size Appeal  of  Apex
Group, Inc., SBA No. SIZ-4300 (1998).

                                            Posted: January, 2005