The U.S. Military Academy’s director of contracting updated USMA Directorate of Logistics employees March 28 about the source selection authority’s decision to select a tribally owned business to compete for the academy’s logistics functions. The USMA source selection authority is Brig. Gen. Daniel Kaufman, dean of academics.

The term "tribally owned" means ownership by any Indian tribe, band, nation or other organized group of Indians including Alaskan native corporations.

"The contractor we choose will be a firm with procurement preference under the 8(a) program of the small disadvantaged business concerns," said Lt. Col. Bruce Cogossi, director of USMA contracting.

"Once an 8(a) tribally owned company notifies the academy they can perform the service, we review their qualifications," he said. "If selected, that company becomes the only contractor entitled to submit a proposal."

Cogossi explained that Congress annually mandates small business goals for all defense department buying authorities.

"For years it has been the policy of the government to provide as many procurement opportunities as possible to small, disadvantaged businesses," he said. "West Point consistently tries to comply with that requirement."

Although tribally owned companies have procurement preference, Cogossi said, they still must meet some eligibility requirements.

"The company must be 51 percent owned by an Indian tribe and meet the size standard applicable to the particular type of work," he said.

There is another requirement an 8(a) firm has to meet, Cogossi said, and that has to do with sub-contracting.

"The tribally owned firm must do at least 50 percent of the work for service contracts," he explained. "They can only subcontract up to 50 percent of the work required by contract."

The contracting director explained that although the law gives the academy the right to direct convert to a tribally owned 8(a) company, USMA command officials wanted to make sure the government employees have a fair chance to compete.

"The command made it clear that they want the employees to have a chance to compete whenever possible," Cogossi said.

That’s reassuring to DOL workers, who feel they have a good chance of winning the competition.

"I’m so glad the command chose to give us a chance to compete for our jobs," said Elaine Sanner, a records and production clerk in DOL and treasurer of USMA Chapter 162 of the Federal Managers Association. "I think it’s important for all employees to be given a chance to compete, and I’m sure we can give any contractor a run for their money."

Kathy Cunningham, a resource-management specialist in the academy’s Strategic Sourcing Office, said although the DOL study is proceeding smoothly, they did have to revamp the timelines to accommodate a new study contractor. Using a Section 8(a) firm to compete will help the academy meet the deadline for completion of the study, she explained.

"Cutting down on the amount of time contracting will need to review proposals allowed us to add time to crucial steps in the process such as collecting data and compiling the PWS," Cunningham explained. "A complete and accurate PWS is the best way to ensure a fair competition."

Cunningham said the timelines needed to accommodate a single-source selection gives them some breathing room to make the study milestones.

"The timelines call for the initial decision to be made by July 31, 2002," she explained. "That’s four months before the Congressionally mandated ‘drop-dead’ date of Dec. 6, 2002."

Cogossi said along with streamlining the evaluation process, there are many other advantages to choosing an 8(a) tribally owned sole-source.

"Having a sole-source contractor reduces the risk of protest, allows for more open discussions of the PWS and provides the contractor with a clearer understanding of the PWS requirements," he explained.