acquisition policy | The Contracting Education Academy

January 13, 2020 By cs

3 must-read acquisition provisions in the 2020 NDAA

After a long Congressional conference period the 2020 Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was finally signed into law, and with it come some changes to the defense acquisition process.

Federal News Network compiled three provisions that are particularly interesting regarding the procurement of military weapons.

These provisions involve intellectual property, middle-tier acquisition, and the establishment of a Defense Civilian Training Corps, and are summarized here:

The 2020 NDAA gives DoD more leeway in experimenting with that policy by creating a pilot program on intellectual property evaluation.
The middle-tier acquisition method allows for rapid prototyping and fielding within five years, as long as certain criteria are met.
The Defense Civilian Training Corps will train civilians for public service in the Department of Defense.

Read the complete Federal News Network article at: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2019/12/three-must-read-acquisition-provisions-in-the-2020-ndaa/

September 23, 2019 By cs

First wave of acquisition prohibitions take effect

The FAR Council released an Interim Rule in August implementing part of Section 889 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019.

In this briefing, we highlight points where the Interim Rule provides clarity; definitional issues that remain unresolved; and new procedural requirements that government contractors should track.

The Interim Rule covers the portion of Section 889, subsection (a)(1)(A), that prohibits the federal government from acquiring certain telecommunications equipment/services from Huawei, ZTE, and other Chinese companies. Specifically: “The head of an executive agency may not … procure or obtain or extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system.”

Section (a)(1)(A) took effect on August 13, 2019, although a 60-day window remains open for stakeholders to submit comments to be considered in the development of a final rule. Comments on the (a)(1)(A) Interim Rule are due by October 15, 2019.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.insidegovernmentcontracts.com/2019/09/section-889-update-first-wave-of-acquisition-prohibitions-take-effect/

December 17, 2018 By AMK

Bypassing procurement can introduce some unwanted visitors

The federal IT procurement safety net may be developing some holes.

Many federal developers are forgoing traditional software purchasing in favor of going directly to the source and downloading code from tens of millions of open source repositories and libraries. While this can certainly expedite innovation, it also has the potential to expose agencies to security risks if they’re not careful.

This backdoor approach to code procurement can let in some unwanted visitors through that door: unknown and dangerous vulnerabilities that may have gone undetected in the code. Without the checks and balances of procurement, how can they be sure that the code they are downloading does not contain some form of malware or another bad actor? How can they stay agile while keeping their applications and networks safe?

A rigorous procurement process that takes into account security hygiene and quality assurance can help keep the bad stuff from getting into the system. Circumventing that process can create a couple of different challenges.

Keep reading this article at: https://www.nextgov.com/ideas/2018/12/bypassing-procurement-can-introduce-some-unwanted-visitors/153144/

January 19, 2018 By AMK

Congress passes too much acquisition legislation

In 1972, the Commission on Government Procurement wrote that Congress should limit its acquisition legislation to fundamental acquisition matters and let the Executive Branch implement Congress’s policy through specific acquisition regulation.

If Congress had listened, it would be passing less acquisition legislation and the FAR Councils would be performing their regulatory duty to implement Congress’s acquisition policies. Unfortunately, Congress didn’t listen.

Today, Congress doesn’t deal with fundamental acquisition matters, it deals with acquisition minutiae and details–especially when it comes to the Department of Defense (DoD). Someone thinks of an idea and before you know it it’s a legislative requirement. Apparently, no thought is too small for another bit of defense acquisition legislation. For the most part, Congress meddles in the acquisition process through the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. These committees propose acquisition legislation in their annual National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA) with much of it in Title VIII of the NDAAs. Title VIII is usually labeled: Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and Related Matters.

In the past 17 NDAAs, Congress has passed nearly 900 sections of legislation. What is worse, Congress is picking up its legislative pace and passing more legislation than ever. Read about Congress’s junk legislation, zombie legislation, and just plain old excessive and incoherent legislation.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.wifcon.com/analysis.htm

December 29, 2017 By AMK

In government contract management today, less is more

It has been a relatively quiet, yet tumultuous year.

Fiscal 2017 is over and done with, having begun full of anticipation for momentous changes in contracting policy, leadership, budget priorities and overall direction, but disappointingly ending in a relative status quo.

In many ways, acquisition has been on “pause” as the new administration’s perceived priorities and controversy took center stage. In fact, there is no significant administration-expressed public policy concerning acquisition. There have been side comments about the use of time-and-materials contracts and high-visibility program negotiations (such as the F-35 and Air Force One programs), but no new policy.

There have been no new procurement rules, either (excepting two at NASA), which is the longest time between a new administration taking office and publishing changes to procurement rules since the adoption of the FAR. Executive Order 13771 (Jan. 30, 2017) established the so-called “Two for One” rule, whereby for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations should be identified for elimination. While the ultimate effects of this policy have yet to be realized, agencies have thus far appeared to respond by simply not issuing any new acquisition-related regulations (meaning none have been cut, either).

Keep reading this article at: https://www.federaltimes.com/acquisition/2017/11/27/in-government-contract-management-today-less-is-more-commentary/

After a long Congressional conference period the 2020 Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was finally signed into law, and with it come some changes to the defense acquisition process.

The FAR Council released an Interim Rule in August implementing part of Section 889 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019.

The federal IT procurement safety net may be developing some holes.

In 1972, the Commission on Government Procurement wrote that Congress should limit its acquisition legislation to fundamental acquisition matters and let the Executive Branch implement Congress’s policy through specific acquisition regulation.

It has been a relatively quiet, yet tumultuous year.

Search this Website