However OTAs are designed with National security and Operational Security in mind.
Which allows a plethora of waste fraud and abuse to creep into some of our nations most significant energy contracts. They allow for more relaxed standards on the contractor due to the "inherent inability" to define delivery and quantity standards above a minimum. Which is why things like the DOEs IDIQ (indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity) exist. Mostly because of the fact that other Departments do not have access to this vehicle. This is a very polarizing topic in many Departments outside of DOD DHS, etc.
Why does the Federal Government get a pass and then blame the system instead of looking in the mirror? Or did I not catch everything in the article? Wouldn’t a simple solution be that in order to use OT each agency would have a Compliance Officer or Compliance “someone” assigned to each contract? Containerize the situation at minimum cost and avoid the obstacles altogether? There are plenty of Private Sector regulations where the companies need someone dedicated to Compliance. One of the “solutions” was more training. My curiosity is were there any Compliance Officers assigned to each OT? I know if it were my company someone would be responsible for overseeing the day to day on a project of that size. I am no expert but we have a Director of Risk Management as a Private Sector company. Justin Freeh reading this article it seems to me that certain “people” took advantage of the OTA to fast track contracts they otherwise would have used the SAMS award system.
0 kommentar(er)
