OHA Rebukes SBA for “Post Hoc” Justification in 8(a) Suspension Appeal

Short summary

The SBA's Office of Hearings and Appeals remanded an 8(a) suspension case, ruling that the SBA failed to provide a complete administrative record and improperly shifted its legal justification during appeal ('post hoc rationalization'). The decision reinforces that SBA suspensions require adequate evidence (similar to probable cause), not uncorroborated allegations or hearsay. Federal contractors and Tribal 8(a) entities now have stronger procedural protections against arbitrary suspension.

• •SBA must provide complete administrative record for suspension reviews
• •Agencies cannot change their legal justification after initial decision
• •Suspension requires 'adequate evidence' (probable cause standard), not unverified allegations

Generated with AI, which can make mistakes.