General Services Administration Officials to be Deposed in Lawsuit Over Contracting Data

Press Release

General Services Administration Officials to be Deposed in Lawsuit Over Contracting Data

June 10, 2010

Petaluma, Calif. – On Wednesday, June 9, United States District Court Judge William Alsup denied the American Small Business League's (ASBL) motion for a preliminary injunction against the General Services Administration (GSA).  The ASBL originally filed the motion in response to GSA actions to remove information from the federal government's contracting database.  Historically, the information has been used to uncover billions of dollars in small business contracts flowing to Fortune 500 firms. (https://www.asbl.com/documents/order_Denying_prelim.pdf)  

Investigations by the Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General (SBA IG), U.S. Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO) and inspector generals from a series of other federal agencies have used the field, "small business flag," to identify large companies masquerading as small businesses to receive federal contracts.

Since 2003, these investigations have uncovered billions of dollars in federal small business contracts actually ending up in the hands of Fortune 500 firms and some of the largest businesses in Europe and Asia.  The most recent data released by the government indicates that the recipients of federal small business contracts have included: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Ssangyong Corporation headquartered in South Korea, and Italian firm Finmeccanica SpA. (https://www.asbl.com/documents/20090825TopSmallBusinessContractors2008.pdf)   

In response to the court's ruling, the ASBL intends to pursue a permanent injunction against the GSA to prevent the destruction of the field on all future and historical data available to the public.

In the court's ruling, Alsup stated, "In the present action, plaintiff has not shown that the deletion of the search fields was a significant revision.  Nevertheless, it should be given opportunity to do so by obtaining discovery on the pedigree of the change." In accordance with Alsup's ruling, the ASBL will subpoena emails and other materials within the GSA.  The ASBL believes the information will show that the destruction of the  "small business flag" was in fact a "significant revision," in that it will make it difficult, if not impossible, for federal investigators to uncover billions in fraud and abuse in small business contracting programs. 

"We are looking forward to deposing senior GSA officials, and issuing subpoenas for their internal documents.  I am confident that we can prove the removal of the small business flag is not in the public interest," ASBL President Lloyd Chapman said. "It is obvious the GSA is attempting to reduce transparency, and hide the fact that the Obama Administration is diverting billions of dollars a week in federal small business funds to corporate giants."

-###-

NASA Sued For Refusing to Release Contracting Data on United Space Alliance

Press Release

NASA Sued For Refusing to Release Contracting Data on United Space Alliance

June 9, 2010

Petaluma, Calif. –  On Tuesday, June 8, the American Small Business League (ASBL) filed suit against the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in Federal District Court, Northern District of California. The case was filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) after NASA repeatedly refused to release subcontracting reports for contracts issued to United Space Alliance, LLC, a joint venture between defense giants Lockheed Martin and Boeing. (https://www.asbl.com/documents/20100608_NASA_USA_Complaint.pdf)
 
The ASBL originally requested information on United Space Alliance's compliance with small business subcontracting goals on NASA contracts awarded to the contractor. During fiscal year (FY) 2009, United Space Alliance was awarded over $1.5 billion in contracts from NASA.
 
Tuesday's suit is the third lawsuit filed by the ASBL against NASA. In February of 2007, the ASBL prevailed in its first suit against NASA, forcing the agency to provide detailed information proving that it falsified its small business contracting statistics by including contracts to a variety of Fortune 500 firms and other large businesses.
 
Since 2003, more than a dozen federal investigations have uncovered billions of dollars a month in federal small business contracts actually flowing into the hands of Fortune 500 corporations and other clearly large businesses. Large recipients of federal small business contracts have included: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Dell Computer, British Aerospace (BAE), Rolls-Royce, French giant Thales Communications, Ssangyong Corporation headquartered in South Korea, and the Italian firm Finmeccanica SpA. (https://www.asbl.com/documents/20090825TopSmallBusinessContractors2008.pdf)     
 
"We believe that NASA is withholding data which shows that the agency is inflating the achievement of its congressionally mandated small business goals by including Fortune 500 corporations and other clearly large businesses. We also believe that NASA is withholding data that will prove that they are allowing major prime contractors to falsify compliance with congressionally mandated small business contracting goals," ASBL President Lloyd Chapman said. "It is disappointing to see that President Obama's promise of increased transparency was just another broken campaign promise." (https://www.asbl.com/documents/20100526_ASBL_AnalysisObamaSB.pdf)  
 
-###-

CNBC Interview on Small Business with ASBL President Lloyd Chapman

Video Library

CNBC Interview on Small Business with ASBL President Lloyd Chapman

"Spotlight on Small Businesses" The NFIB survey for May shows slight increase in small business optimism, with Lloyd Chapman, American Small Business League and Belinda Guadarrama, GC Micro Corp.

June 8, 2010


Transparency in contracting remains opaque

News

Transparency in contracting remains opaque

Administration officials are asking how they can make acquisitions more open to the public without compromising proprietary data

By Matthew Weigelt
Federal Computer Week
June 3, 2010

Transparency is all the rage in government circles these days, but there might be a limit to its usefulness to the public and its ability to facilitate greater accountability in key government services, such as federal contracting.

The contracting community is wrestling with transparency, especially the proposition of posting contracting documents, such as bid proposals, online for the public to read and comment on. The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and Defense Acquisition Regulations Council are seeking to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation and have asked for help in preparing for transparency.

In an advance notice of proposed rule-making, the councils phrased their most pressing question as: How can the government be transparent enough “to enable public posting of contract actions…without compromising contractors’ proprietary and confidential commercial or financial information?”

The councils cited five memos from the Obama administration to prove that transparency is coming to contracting. The primary goal is to promote efficiency, accountability and transparency — three buzzwords in recent years. They also want to simplify public access to contracting information.

At the same time, the councils realize they must also conform to statutory and regulatory prohibitions against disclosing protected information. With that in mind, regulators want to identify methods for protecting information that agencies should not post or release to the public.

Transparency has its advocates. Michael Carleton, chief information officer at the Health and Human Services Department, said the quality of federal data that is made public will improve only when people who use the information demand it.

Others say public data can help agencies compare their prices for products or services to other departments — and perhaps even help end fraud and abuse in the contracting world. It might also diminish the power of big companies. “There needs to be complete transparency, total transparency,” said Lloyd Chapman, president of the American Small Business League.

However, it's not that easy.

Putting all that proprietary data online does greater harm than, say, an inadvertent mistake on a Freedom of Information Act request, said Larry Allen, president of the Coalition for Government Procurement, which has more than 350 member companies. Although FOIA requests are often used to obtain competitive information, that information usually goes to the one person or organization that submitted the request. A searchable database, on the other hand, would be open to the public.

By putting more contracting information online, regulators will need to confront whether they're harming a company’s success and the country’s security, experts say.

The administration wants agencies to be open and justify why a piece of information should stay off the Web. But Allen said that for contracting data, agencies should have to argue why it should go onto the Internet. “You don’t want to make it easier to harm the country with a searchable database,” he said.

After a transparency policy is in place, the federal acquisition workforce would need to make many decisions about what should be public. But already overburdened employees do not need more pressure added to their already stressful work, Allen and others say.

Furthermore, the new regulations should strive to protect contracting officers from the condemnation that comes with a procurement mistake, said Mary Davie, assistant commissioner for assisted acquisition services at the General Services Administration.

On the contractor side, Stephen Charles, co-founder and executive vice president of immixGroup, a consulting firm, said companies should know upfront what information from a transaction could go public. Each solicitation should include it as part of a fair-notice process. That would give contractors the choice of not bidding if, in their opinion, the information strayed too far into proprietary territory, Charles said.

“So it would be a two-step process, and there would be agreement along the way with all contractors being treated equally,” he said.

Overall, agencies need to make sure they have iron-clad firewalls so that nothing sneaks out without them knowing it, Allen said. He suggests waiting until the technology is mature enough.

But is such patience likely in today’s environment? Warns Allen: “Political pressure tends to drive things in an artificially fast time frame.”

Source:  http://fcw.com/Articles/2010/06/07/HOMEPAGE-Acquisition-Corner-disclosing-contract-data.aspx?p=1

Man launches Bowling Green business at time of manifest change

News

Man launches Bowling Green business at time of manifest change

By Brent Engel
Hannibal Courier-Post
June 3, 2010

Source: http://www.hannibal.net/business/x265581848/Man-launches-Bowling-Green-business-at-time-of-manifest-change