China Lake/Ridgecrest Chapter
Click Here to access
the Chapter website June 2009
June Lunch Meeting
The China Lake/Ridgecrest Chapter of NCMA is proud to present Mr. Cedric Knight, President/CEO of
New Directions Technologies, Incorporated, as the guest speaker for the June 2009 lunch meeting.
Mr. Knight will discuss, "Project Management from one small business's perspective".
When: Thursday, June 11, 2009
Time: 11:15am - 12:30pm
Where: U.S. Naval Museum
Cost: $11.00 members, $12.00 non-members
RSVP: Mary Jacobs, 939-6043 email@example.com
NOTE: Must RSVP by COB Tuesday (5/9)
Bio: Cedric Knight is President of New Directions Technologies, Inc. (NDTI). NDTI is a Veteran Owned
company launched in 1996 with its corporate office located in Ridgecrest, CA. The U.S. Small Business
Administration certified NDTI as an 8a firm in September 1996 and the company Graduated from the
program in September 2005. NDTI is a fast-growing company specializing in information technology
products/services, other defense related services and infrastructure solutions for customers of the
Department of Defense (Navy/Air Force) and commercial companies.
Operating from its corporate office in Ridgecrest, CA and locations in California, MD Pt Mugu, Port
Hueneme, Twenty Nine Palms and NASA Ames CA, Nellis AFB, NV, Washington DC, and Philadelphia
PA, NDTI supports a customer base that includes Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Weapons
Division, NAVAIR Aircraft Division, Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Port Hueneme Division,
US Air Force, NASA and the Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. Knight started NDTI in 1996. Through his experience and innovation, NDTI has earned a strong
reputation for its excellence in information technology, logistics, configuration management, contract
and financial management, and business and technical work process innovations.
Prior to that, Mr. Knight was a career U.S. Naval Officer with 20 years of distinguished service. During
his 20 years of service, he gained experience in support of surface, underwater, and air operations
through his various tour assignments. He completed his naval career at Naval Air Warfare Center,
Weapons Division, China Lake, CA.
Mr. Knight was presented the Minority Small Business Person of the Year Award, by the U. S. Small
Business Administration, Fresno District in 2002. Additionally, he received recognition as a small
business entrepreneur from the Kern County Board of Supervisors and the California State Assembly
during the "Minority Enterprise Development Week" awards program in September 2002. Mr. Knight
plays an active in civic activities within his local communities, and has served as Director on several
non-profit organization boards. He is a member of the U.S. Navy League, Military Officers Association
and the China Lake Alliance. NDTI is directly involved in community improvement projects and has
donated time and financial support to local charitable agency programs such the Lexington Park
Hospital Scholarship Foundation, Annual Ventura County Veterans Stand down, Black Original Social
Society, NCMA, Indian Wells Valley United Way, Boys and Girls Club American Cancer Society,
Kiwanis Club of Ridgecrest, NAACP, American Association of University Women (AAUW), and the U.S.
Naval Museum of Armament and Technology at China Lake, CA.
July Lunch Meeting
The China Lake/Ridgecrest Chapter of NCMA will be announcing/awarding this years Scholarship
winners at the July lunch. We will also be showing a video of a helicopter tour of NAWCWPNS, China
Lake. It sounds pretty interesting!
When: Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Time: 11:15am - 12:30pm
Where: U.S. Naval Museum
Cost: $11.00 members, $12.00 non-members
RSVP: Mary Jacobs, 939-6043 firstname.lastname@example.org
NOTE: Must RSVP by COB Monday, 7/20/2009
China Lake/Ridgecrest Chapter's 2009 NCMA Scholarship
Four applicants were selected to receive scholarships during our Annual Chapter Scholarship Program.
Applications were solicited from our local schools and ads were placed in both local papers to advertise
this scholarship opportunity. As part of the application process, each of the applicants was asked to
write an essay on the topic “Describe your view of the differences and similarities of Personal ethics vs.
Business ethics.” Each applicant provided a letter of reference from their school and a personal
endorsement. One committee member stated that “Their letters presented glowing reviews of the
applicants and their exciting future endeavors.” When asked what element of the applicant interviews
stood out, it was their extracurricular activities, which included activities at school and community. From
the application and interview process, four excellent candidates emerged. The four scholarship winners
will be attending CSU Channel Islands, CFU Fullerton, Mississippi State University and New Mexico
Our chapter is happy to help these well rounded scholars toward reaching their educational goals. The
scholarships will be awarded at our luncheon on 22 July 2009.
NCMA Announces Contract Management E-Courses
NCMA is proud to announce its new suite of contract management e-courses. This is education at your
fingertips! Contract management is an extraordinarily busy and ever-changing profession, and contract
managers demand learning opportunities that are self-paced, relevant, and have 24/7 availability. NCMA
is dedicated to the delivery of continuous learning opportunities supporting the contract management
workforce NCMA now offers online courses in the following areas:
Competitive and Collaborative Negotiations v2.2
Contract Modifications and Options v2.1
Introduction to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) v2.1
Performance-Based Acquisition v2.1
These Web-based, topic-specific modules of instruction are designed to develop and improve proficiency
in your job. The cost of each course is $50 for members ($65 for nonmembers), and will take about one
hour to complete. E-courses are valued at one continuous professional education (CPE) point.
NCMA on Federal News Radio
NCMA is on the Air! Don't forget to tune in to NCMA's new weekly radio program, Government
Contracting Weekly, Tuesdays at 10:00 a.m. (EST). Hear agency and industry experts discuss topics
relevant to all aspects of contract management, such as planning, conducting, and documenting
successful contract negotiations.
As we all live outside the DC metro area, go to www.federalnewsradio.com and click on "LISTEN LIVE."
If you ever miss a show, you can go to the Federal News Radio Web site at any time to download the
Sen. Mccaskill Plans Hearing On Alaska Native Corp. Contracting
Alaska Native Corporations, a special class of small businesses given preferential treatment
in federal contracting, have received more than their share of federal contracting dollars,
according to Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) — so much more that she plans to hold a
hearing next month.
Federal agencies awarded such companies $5.2 billion in contracts in 2008, compared to
$508.4 million in 2000, according to a preliminary analysis of publicly available data
released by McCaskill's office. On average, ANC contracting has increased 33.6 percent
each year, which is more growth than in any other category of federal contract awards, the
Of the contract dollars ANCs won in 2008, 74 percent were awarded through the Small
Business Administration's 8(a) program, the senator's analysis shows.
The Defense Department is by far the largest user of ANC contracts. It spent $16.9 billion
on such companies from 2000 to 2008, which accounts for more than 70 percent of ANC
spending overall, according to the analysis.
Companies owned by Alaska natives have an edge in federal contracting under SBA rules.
Most notably, they are eligible to be awarded contracts of any size without competition,
while SBA's other set-aside programs put limits on contract size. Also, ANCs can enter into
sole-source contracts of any value. And they can subcontract work to companies that don’t
qualify for SBA’s 8(a) program and enter into joint ventures and partnerships with non-
native companies for sole-source contracts.
McCaskill, chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee’s
Contracting Oversight Subcommittee, said the information shows that ANCs have also
received a disproportionate share of small-business loans.
However, Sarah Lukin, executive director of the Native American Contractors Association,
said small-business set-aside policies don’t overly favor ANCs. In the case of most 8(a)
companies, a set-aside program benefits one owner or family, she said. In the case of
ANCs, whole tribes often have a stake in a business. “Alaska Native Corporations serve
hundreds and oftentimes thousands of disadvantaged individuals in perpetuity.”
Lukin offer a different perspective on McCaskill’s numbers. In 2008, awards to ANCs
constituted 19 percent of 8(a) prime-contract awards, benefiting 130,000 disadvantaged
people. In contrast, all other 8(a) companies combined received 81 percent of prime-
contract awards and served about 10,000 disadvantaged individuals.
The senator’s subcommittee is investigating ANCs and will hold a hearing July 16 to discuss
McCaskill based her analysis on information Eagle Eye Publishers, a government
contracting research company, compiled from the Federal Procurement Data System.
The subcommittee is also studying information provided by ANCs. In May, McCaskill sent
letters to executives at 20 companies, asking for their total revenue and operating
expenses, salaries, and how much money they had received from federal contracts and
subcontracts in each of the past eight years.
In the federal information technology market, six ANCs ranked on Washington
Technology’s 2009 Top 100 list of IT contractors, with one being in the top 50. NANA
Regional Corp., at No. 47, nearly doubled its contracting dollars, from $214.8 million in
2007 to $427.6 million in 2008. Also on the list:
• Arctic Slope Regional Corp. was No. 58, with $319.1 million in 2008.
• Chenega Corp. was No. 61, with $305.5 million.
• Eyak Technology LLC was No. 65, with $281.5 million.
• Chugach Alaska Corp. was No. 74, with $218.6 million.
• Alutiiq LLC was No. 91, with $171.1 million.
Stimulus Law Web Site In Flux
A week of online discussions about improving the Recovery.gov Web site functioned like a
traditional request for information and in some ways was better than an RFI, according to
the National Academy of Public Administration.
In an after-action report, NAPA officials concluded that the online Recovery Dialogue for
Information Technology Solutions, held from April 27 to May 3, allowed the "surveying of
more potential solutions more quickly than is possible with a traditional RFI process" and
resulted in "a more critical, informed assessment."
The dialogue's purpose was to find ideas for improving Recovery.gov, which is the Web site
for reporting on federal spending under the $787 billion economic stimulus law. More than
22,000 people participated.
“The dialogue functioned analogously to an RFI process, allowing for the collection of
information about, and comparison between, the capabilities offered by different solutions,”
NAPA officials wrote in the report. The organization was a co-sponsor of the dialogue, along
with the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board.
Despite NAPA’s conclusions, a public dialogue with more than 22,000 participants — many
of whom are not vendors with detailed knowledge of the topic — might not always be
preferable to an RFI, said Kenneth Weckstein, a government contracts attorney at Brown
"An online dialogue is different, not better, than an RFI," Weckstein said. Although it might
be a more democratic process, an online dialogue accomplishes different things, he added.
Meanwhile, the oversight board is seeking to hire a vendor through the General Services
Administration’s Alliant contract to design, launch and host a new iteration of
In a presolicitation notice posted June 11 on the Federal Business Opportunities Web site,
the board said it is seeking “an innovative, award-winning, Web design and implementation
firm with expertise in user-focused, data-driven Web designs to perform complete
redesign, implementation and operation of the Recovery.gov Version 2.0 Web site.”
Services include visual design, user interface design, information architecture, design
engineering, project management, interactive data visualization and Web application-level
Charles Rumbaugh’s Regulatory/Contractual Update
• On June23,2009, DoD Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Shay Assad issued a
memorandum that “supplements” GAO Report No.GAO-08379, dated March14, 2008, on termination
guidance across DoD. Within 60 days of such memo, all Defense agencies and field activities “will verify all
termination guidance within their organizations adequately address conditions under which it is appropriate
to end programs or contracts.”
Similarly, on June23rd the Director issued a memorandum that noticed “proposed FAR revisions” on
termination guidance has been submitted to the DAR Council “for consideration.” Subsequently, DoD may
issue any required “guidance on termination.”
• On June 1, 2009, OMB issued updated “Operational Guidelines” on “reporting requirements necessary to
comply with both the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act and the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act.” Additional information is posted at www.usaspending.gov and www.Recovery.gov. And,
additional transparency is expected according to an OMB press release dated June 22, 2009.
• On June 4, 2009, DCMA noticed in an “OnPoint” memo that DCMA will move forward with a “geographic
organization construct that aligns Contract Management Office in a regional manner.” Further, it is noted
therein that DCMA “resources are being increased by more than 25%” and that its oversight activities “are
force multipliers and support DoD’s mandate to reinvigorate its acquisition business.”
• On June 15, 2009, the Federal Register noticed FAC2005-33 dealing with trade agreements— Buy
America Act for Costa Rica, Oman, and Peru as well as finalizing a proposed rule from April 8, 2009, “with
minor change” on Contractor's Request for Progress Payments (FARCase2005-032).
• Employment Eligibility Verification (E-Verify) implementation has been further delayed to September 8,
• Several requests in connection with extending FAR “information collection” requirements have been
posted in the Federal Register including information on professional employee compensation plans, Contract
Funding—Limitation of Costs/Funds, advance payments, Anti-kickback procedures, Prompt Payment Act, etc.
• OMB posted a request for public comments in furtherance of the March 4, 2009, Presidential
Memorandum on Government Contracting (also see March Update) on (1) Maximizing the use of competition;
(2) improving practices for selecting contract types; (3) strengthening the acquisition workforce; and (4)
clarifying when functions should be performed by federal employees and when contractors may be
appropriately considered.” AIA submitted a detailed reply on the inappropriate use of fixed price contracts for
Comments on items that may be of potential interest in contract negotiation and contract
• The International Association for Contract and Commercial Management (IAACM), www.iaccm.com,
recently completed its 8th annual survey of “most frequently negotiated terms and conditions.” According to
IAACM this study “attracted a record input…from over 4000 (worldwide) participants” from “almost 1,000
The study results are most revealing and suggest to some…are negotiators focusing on the “right” things? Are
they insuring against risk or serving the ultimate user and/or enhancing the contracting relationship? The
“top” terms and conditions are Limitation of Liability, then Indemnification, Price, etal. Acceptance is seventh
on the list of Top 30 with Warranty coming in at eleven. You may want to review the list and see where your
priorities are in relationship to this study.
• On June 2, 2009, the U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled in McDonnell Douglas Corp. & General
Dynamics Corp.v. U.S., No.07-5111, in “an action involving the government's default termination of a Navy
contract to develop a carrier-based stealth aircraft, (the) Court of Federal Claims judgment in favor of
defendant is affirmed where: 1) the government satisfied its burden of proving that it was justified in
terminating the contract for default as it was justifiably insecure about the contract's timely completion and
plaintiff's do not argue that their failure to make progress could be excused; and 2) the default termination of
the contract was justified despite the failure of the contracting officer to conduct a Lisbon analysis before the
termination, as the government is not required to establish that a contracting officer conducted the analysis
necessary to sustain a default under the alternative theory, and a Lisbon analysis cannot be strictly applied
where contract did not have a fixed completion date.” (emphasis added)
• A major contractor recently sent a memorandum to some/all of its suppliers “requesting a 10% price
reduction on (specified) purchase orders” as well as another memorandum calling for an immediate change in
payment terms, i.e. moving time for payment out under existing purchase orders. No deficiency in supplier
performance was noted in those memoranda. Who has the cash flow problem? What does this indicate about
the potential need of adequate assurances from the buyer? Finally, what kind of future price increase is
expected from suppliers in response to these types of practices? Ultimately, what would the buyer’s
ACO/PCOs think of all this and any TINA/estimating system disclosure obligations? What do you think? Talk
Social Networking Poses Risk To Operational Security
In an earlier era, “loose lips sink ships” was the military’s warning not to let even small
details about military movements and operations slip in casual conversation. In contrast,
social media Web sites today thrive on loose lips, making it even tougher to maintain
The problem is not so much people twittering away secrets as letting slip many smaller
pieces of information that an adversary can piece together.
“There’s a tendency to think that if information is not classified, it’s OK to share,” said Jack
Kiesler, chief of cyber counter intelligence at the Defense Intelligence Agency, in a
presentation last month in Orlando, Fla., at the DODIIS Worldwide Conference for
intelligence information systems professionals.
Kiesler and colleague Nick Jensen, an operational security analyst at DIA, gave a
presentation titled “How Adversaries Exploit Poor Operational Security."
Operational security refers to the process of denying information to potential adversaries
about capabilities or intentions of individuals or organizations by identifying and protecting
generally unclassified information on the planning and execution of sensitive activities.
An adversary trying to uncover secrets will start by chipping away at operational security
indicators that point them toward a target, Kiesler said. A foreign agent seeking to steal
stealth technology might start by trying to identify individuals who are working on the
technology, figuring out whom they associate with, following their movements, looking for
clues on new research areas and so on.
Much of that information might be available through a professional profile on LinkedIn, for
example. Furthermore, participation in online discussion groups or blogs might help foreign
intelligence services single out disgruntled military or intelligence agency employees who
could be recruited or blackmailed, Kiesler said. Not only are younger employees immersed
in the social media culture, but older ones often become participants without
understanding their limited control over the information they post online, he added.
Although operational security is supposed to be a standard component of military
operations, Kiesler seeks to pursue it in a more disciplined way, with proactive tests of an
organization’s operational security. Rather than embarrassing the organizations and
individuals who flunk the test, the goal is to educate them, he said.
Jensen presented a fictional scenario that he said was based on those kinds of tests, in
which a foreign agent named Jane starts by exploring the membership of a LinkedIn group
called Intelligence Professionals.
In Jensen’s scenario, LinkedIn provides a target DIA employee’s basic résumé with a link to
his blog. The blog, in turn, has links to other social media sites the person participates in,
so the adversary can browse Flickr photos and Twitter messages, continuing to round out
the picture. The DIA employee uses the same handle on many Web sites, allowing Jane to
search for posts he has made elsewhere. On Slashdot, he mentions something about the
Starbucks near his house.
That allows Jane to bump into her target at Starbucks, hack the wireless session he
initiates from his iPhone and eventually capture information, including his online banking
password. From there, she has many options to monitor his every move, drain his bank
account or blackmail him.
Of course, the pull of the online world is not so easily countered. There really is an
Intelligence Professionals group on LinkedIn, and Kiesler and Jensen found 163 LinkedIn
members who listed DIA as their current employer, including at least one information
security analyst based in Washington, D.C.
But Kiesler and Jensen said people can learn to be more circumspect and take precautions
such as varying their online signatures rather than using the same user name on multiple
"Quotes are nothing but inspiration for the uninspired."
-- Richard Kemph
“"Recognition is the greatest motivator."
-- Gerard C. Eakedale
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.”
- Albert Einstein
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
Your chapter’s officers and chairpersons are interested to hear from YOU. If you have anything you
wish to put in the newsletter, feel free to e-mail a copy to Derrick Hu.
President Liz Aldridge email@example.com 760-939-2799
Secretary: Eva Woloszynski firstname.lastname@example.org 760-939-2616
Treasurer: Marla LeFevre email@example.com 760-939-3401
VP Membership Vacant
VP Education/Certification: Mary Jacobs firstname.lastname@example.org 760-939-6043
VP Programs: Debbie Winfield email@example.com 760-939-9661
Hospitality Chair: Kim Matsunaga firstname.lastname@example.org 760-939-7084
Newsletter/Employment Chair: Derrick Hu email@example.com 760-939-0240
Publicity Chair: Peggy Griset firstname.lastname@example.org 760-446-9220
Scholarship Chair: Kim Thatcher email@example.com 760-446-1801
Awards Chair: Lisa Pelzl firstname.lastname@example.org 760-939-5607
Graalman Chair: Laurel Fletcher email@example.com 760-939-8484
Fellows Chair: Andre Long firstname.lastname@example.org 760-939-0678
Elections Chair: Vacant