Legislation | The Contracting Education Academy

June 5, 2019 By AMK

A Pentagon contractor’s 9,400% profit on a half-inch metal pin is challenged

As the Pentagon weighs whether to recommend legislation to require more disclosure by contractors, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform will review the audit and TransDigm’s pricing policies in a hearing on Wednesday.

The inspector general’s report “exposes how a company entrusted with supporting our military men and women took advantage of American taxpayers by overcharging the government more than $16 million” in parts sales sold between 2015 and 2017, Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings said in a statement. The hearing will “investigate whether these pricing issues are more widespread, and demand answers,” he said.

From 2013 through 2015, according to the audit, the contractor increased the price of a valve that opens and closes to change the pressure of fuel moving through an engine to $9,801 from $543. In those years, TransDigm also charged $1,443 each for a “non-vehicular clutch disk” that cost $32 to make.

Planes, Copters

The Pentagon’s inspector general first raised pricing concerns over TransDigm in a 2006 report, followed by the one this year that was released in redacted form in February.

TransDigm manufactures spare parts for airplanes and helicopters including the AH-64 Apache, C-17 Globemaster III, F-16 Fighting Falcon and the CH-47 Chinook. From April 2012 through January 2017, DOD issued 4,942 contracts valued at $471 million to TransDigm.

Liza Sabol, a spokeswoman for the Cleveland-based company, said in an email “that we are not providing comments on specific questions related to the IG report.”

Keep reading article at: http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2019/05/14/transdigm-pentagon-costs

January 19, 2018 By cs

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

September 8, 2016 By cs

The import of federal SBIR and STTR programs and why Congress should act quickly to reauthorize them

Despite bipartisan efforts, the future is uncertain for the by all accounts highly successful Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs.

Print Authorization for the current programs expires September 30, 2017. Reauthorization efforts are underway, but it is not clear at this time when the House and Senate will consider the pending legislation necessary to ensure no lapse in the programs.

Congress’s failure to reauthorize these programs would be an unfortunate mistake.

SBIR STTR Legislation 2016 The SBIR program provides $2.5 billion a year in seed funding to companies with emerging technologies. Since program inception, more than 150,000 SBIR awards worth over $42 billion have been made. The companies receiving these funds may not yet have a prototype or the proof of concept required to receive other private sources of funding, making government support all the more important. The STTR program supports, among other things, innovative advances in health care, with the NIH providing about one-third of the annual STTR funding, which currently is approximately $220 million.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=522216

October 18, 2013 By cs

Bill puts contract spending on the hook if Pentagon misses audit deadline

New legislation introduced by Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) aims to push the Pentagon toward being ready for a full financial audit by restricting spending on major weapons programs if DoD fails to get its books in order.

Coburn, who has introduced similar legislation in the past, said a full financial audit will help DoD better prioritize funding.

“This summer the Pentagon canceled important training and furloughed thousands of civilian personnel while it continued to waste billions on non-defense spending that had nothing to do with its core mission,” he said in a statement. “A full and complete audit is the only way the department will be able to make better decisions about how it uses valuable taxpayer dollars.”

Under the Audit the Pentagon Act of 2013, if DoD fails to obtain a clean audit opinion by 2018, the military services would be barred from spending money to fund new major acquisition programs beyond what’s known as “milestone B” — in essence, the actual engineering and manufacturing of new systems.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.federalnewsradio.com/394/3456488/Bill-puts-contract-spending-on-the-hook-if-Pentagon-misses-audit-deadline

March 12, 2012 By cs

Small Business panel advances six pro-contractor bills

A package of six bills designed to steer more federal contract opportunities toward small businesses cleared the House Small Business Committee last Wednesday (3/7/2012), amid bipartisan frustration at the Obama administration’s approach to helping what all parties see as a key sector for creating jobs.

The marked-up bills would raise the percentage of federal contracts that should go to small businesses, elevate agency Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization offices, crack down on large firms hiding behind small business fronts to win contracts, and require agencies that insource previously contracted work to publish their rationale online and give contractors more of an opportunity to protest.

Other bills would clarify the eligibility of small businesses for multiple award contracts, bring in small businesses at an earlier stage of the bidding process, give priority to small firms in areas with high unemployment, open up more General Services Administration contracts for commercial purchases to small businesses, and provide more training for Small Business Administration-based procurement center representatives.

Noting that the government spends $500 billion annually in contracting, committee Chairman Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., said, “improving small business opportunities is a triple play — small businesses win more contracts; workers win as the small businesses create jobs; and taxpayers win because small businesses bring competition, innovation and lower prices to save the government money.”

Perhaps the most far-reaching bill is the chairman’s own (H.R. 3850), the Government Efficiency Through Small Business Contracting Act, which would raise the governmentwide small business contracting goal from 23 percent to 25 percent. Graves estimated it would provide $11 billion in new work for small business. It also would raise the current goal of giving 35.9 percent of subcontracting to small businesses to 40 percent. The other bills are the Small Business Advocate Act (H.R. 3851), Subcontracting Transparency and Reliability Act (H.R. 3893), Small Business Opportunity Act (H.R. 3980), Early Stage Small Business Contracting Act (H.R. 4121) and Small Business Procurement Improvement Act (H.R. 4118).

Though most of the markup action appeared bipartisan, some Democrats were uneasy with the insourcing transparency requirement. Rep. Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y., the panel’s ranking member, said it might encourage costly litigation and clog the Government Accountability Office with protests instead of creating jobs. Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., said businesses that lose contracts already have resources to challenge the decisions and noted insourcing of inherently governmental activities has been codified twice in Defense authorization acts.

There also was disagreement over set-asides for economically and socially disadvantaged businesses. An amendment Rep. Gary Peters, D-Mich., offered would have raised the set-aside from 5 percent of the total value of a prime contract to 7.5 percent. It was withdrawn pending further negotiations before floor action.

“I’ve tried not to favor one group of small businesses over another — I don’t want to pick winners and losers, I want to help all small businesses compete,” Graves said. “Right now, we have one small business goal, and four subcategory goals — women, service-disabled veterans, [Historically Underutilized Business Zone] firms and small disadvantaged businesses. Each of the subcategories of small businesses can compete for small business contracts, so they all win when we increase the overall small business goal,” he added. “However, when we increase the small disadvantaged business goal, only about 9,200 firms benefit, instead of the 350,000 small businesses currently seeking to do business with the government.”

The hearing began with approval of the committee’s comments on President Obama’s fiscal 2013 budget request for SBA. No one from the administration appeared to discuss it. Members of both parties complained the budget avoids tough choices, fails to cut duplicative programs and funds pilot projects not authorized by Congress.

A spokeswoman said SBA worked hard with the committee to lock down a hearing date on short notice, but could not make it on the one day that worked for the panel. Agency officials have, however, briefed congressional staff members and made an effort to answer all their questions about the fiscal 2013 budget, she said.

SBA declined to comment on the contractor legislation. The committee is scheduled to consider more contracting bills in the coming weeks.

Before the markup, the Professional Services Council, a contractors trade group, sent a letter backing most of the bills, but opposing some provisions. “We’re particularly pleased to see legislation that would protect small businesses from improper insourcing activities, ensure that no small business is deemed ineligible for small business programs because of SBA’s improper approach to calculating industry category size standards, and elevate the role of small business advocates in the contracting process,” President and Chief Executive Officer Stan Soloway said.

But he added, “Congress should not raise the small business prime contracting or subcontracting goals until it has accurate data about total small business participation in the federal marketplace at both the prime and subcontract levels.”

— by Charles S. Clark, Government Executive, March 8, 2012 at http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2012/03/small-business-panel-advances-six-pro-contractor-bills/41414

As the Pentagon weighs whether to recommend legislation to require more disclosure by contractors, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform will review the audit and TransDigm’s pricing policies in a hearing on Wednesday.

Planes, Copters

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.

Despite bipartisan efforts, the future is uncertain for the by all accounts highly successful Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs.

Search this Website