Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


Root Admin
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About bob7947

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

49,913 profile views
  1. One of the conference report sections mentioned the 809 panel and then shrugged it off. It is a long blurb that I looked for last night. I didn't find it because I was tired of looking at all the sections.
  2. Atta-Ibn! I have one more annual update and then I go back to writing for Wifcon.com.
  3. Ibn: Your wrote I've just counted the reading statistics for the articles posted on Wifcon.com's Articles page for 2019. Articles written nearly 2 decades ago and posted here are still being read thousands of times each year--including in 2019.
  4. I've added a fifth answer to the poll--other. In case I missed something, like working on a pole.
  5. When work is mentioned, I think productivity--the amount of your work you have done. Have you met your organization's goals? Have you met your goals? In answering the following simple poll, imagine that you have the available technology to speak with, see, and work with your colleagues anywhere on earth. The data you need and work with is seamlessly delivered to you and you can send it anywhere for collaboration or review. In your environment, you have access to anything and everything dealing with your work.
  6. Retread: That pamphlet deals only with GAO's relationship with its meal-provider, Congress. It was first written in 2000 after GAO received its 1/3 cut in personnel. During that time, GAO was being jerked to attention by Congress. That pamphlet is one clear example of GAO trying to make amends with Congress and setting down on paper how it handled requests. What is in there deals only with Congress and GAO, no-one else.
  7. Joel: You added: The directed study and report were in lieu of the legislative prosion not adopted. GAO hates to see mandates that are required by law because they take priority over everything else. The more work required by law, the fewer people can be assigned to anything else. There aren't enough GAO'ers to go around for all requests that arrive. GAO published an item called GAO’s Congressional Protocols. In part, that is published for Congress to explain to individual members why their request will never get done. On p. 8 of the pamphlet, GAO explains its priorities. I quote it below. An NDAA Conference report has precedence over senior congressional leaders. Conference reports, as in the NDAA of 2020, may include mandates beyond what is included in the actual law. They theoretically take priority over something requested by the senior congressional leaders. Take a look at who they are. Let's go back to the 1990s for a moment. In that decade GAO's staff was cut by one-third because one political party took over the Congress from another political party and the winning political party was angry beause it thought that the previous controlling party was getting too much attention from GAO. The current Comptroller General remembers that because he was there. In reality, GAO walks a political tightrope. OK, back to your issue. I don't know how GAO would deal theoretically with a request that appears in a section of a conference report that explains a section of a bill that was defeated in conference. However, to find out, I would send you before the Chairman and Vice Chairman of a powerful committee to explain why you are doing a request that never made it's way out of conference instead of their request which they both believe is of the utmost importance. After you wash their spit and the heat of their breath off your face, you would probably have an answer.
  8. That is one of the legislative provisions not adopted (LPNAs). I noticed there was a lot of verbage about a report. However, it is not associated with a part of the law. The LPNA also requires GAO to report within 6 months. It takes GAO longer than 6 months to get started. There are other late sections of the law that request GAO to report on labor laws.
  9. I thought I remembered one section requiring intellectual property--of some sort--as an evaluation factor. I did a quick scan of the sections and the LPNAs and could not find it. Maybe I was having a nightmare. If you find something like that, please point it out. That seemed an especially bad idea to me. If I find it in the next few days when I do a 100% review, I'll point it out. I do have the wrong title of the Law on one of the pages.
  10. I've added the draft 19th annual Wifcon.com analysis of the National Defense Authorization Act to the Home Page. It is draft because I haven't proofed all the textual mistakes and haven't finished the LPNAs, etc. Also, I haven't checked other parts of the law to see if there are other contracting perfections in the other titles of this wonderful piece of legislation. It's about 80 congressial perfections to defense contracting. Some perfections have perfected other annual perfections, etc. There is something for everone to love in it, I'm sure. Look at the bright side, there are over 30 more near-perfections that didn't make the cut. See the unfinished LPNAs.
  11. I would not download the FAR or any supplement at all due to the contant changes in the regulations. I would use the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR) You will see in red "current as of December 31, 2019." Let's check a recent change to an agency supplement to see if the e-CFR updates. Go the the Home Page of Wifcon.com in the left column about half-way down. You will notce this change published in the Federal Register: You now know the GSAR has been changed. The hard copy you downloaded a couple of weeks ago, is outdated. If you look at the 12/19/2019 FR, you will see that GSAR Part 536 has been changed. Is the e-CFR current? Let's check. Go back to the e-CFR. Look for GSA. Ah, it is in chaper 5 of the FAR System. Click it. We're looking for Part 536. First mentally bracket Part [5]36 like this. That's to remember we are dealing with the FAR System. Scroll down to Subpart 536.1 and click it. Notice 536.102 xxx. You will see notification of the 12/19/2019 change as a link. Click the link. It shows you the change where it is supposed to be in the GSAR which is part of the FAR System and tells you when it is effective. The DFARS was modified on 12/31/2019 as the Wifcon.com Home Page shows. I am not aware of any more recent change to the FAR System. That is probably why the e-CFR says current as of 12/31/2019. An added advantage of the e-CFR is that it shows latest FR change in brackets at ends of sections. Over the past 2 decades, I've seen the FARsite and acquisition.gov grow to their current forms. I've also seen agencies, who once published their own supplement on their contracting pages, link to the e-CFR as I do. I am quite sure that the e-CFR has a direct link to the FR so it can update immediately. This is the electronic age (and my terminology for this age may be outdated too) and the e-CFR is the best that I've seen on the internet. Nothing compares to it. Everything is at your fingertips according to the FAR system. It's always there with you. You can check it on your desktop, your laptop, your note pad, your phone.
  • Create New...