Acquisition Panel Sets Priorities The Office of Federal Procurement Policy’s Acquisition Advisory Panel has set initial priority issues for its review of federal buying practices: Commercial practices and commercial items; Performance-based contracting; Governmentwide contracts and interagency contract vehicles; Small business; and The federal acquisition workforce. The panel was created by Congress in the Services Acquisition Reform Act of 2004 to review all federal acquisition laws, regulations and policies. Its 14 members are equally divided between government and the private sector. (SAA, 2/4) At its Feb. 28 meeting in Washington, Chairperson Marcia Madsen named working groups to focus on each issue. She said other working groups may be added later. Madsen, a Washington lawyer, said she wants to “focus attention on what we believe to be the key issues.” She said the panel’s report, due next January, should present “targeted recommendations” rather than a thick book of proposals that might gather dust. Part of the panel’s mandate is to explore how procurements are handled in the commercial marketplace. To that end, Madsen said the group will invite large private-sector buyers to make presentations about their practices. Panel member Marshall Doke, a Dallas lawyer, said, “We need to hear what the commercial marketplace has to tell us – people that don’t do business with the government.” The Office of Government Ethics urged the panel to consider whether contractors should be subject to the same sort of ethics and conflict of interest rules that apply to federal employees. “Contractor personnel are not subject to a comprehensive set of ethics rules, yet they are often performing some of the government’s most sensitive and critical work,” the office’s acting director, Marilyn Glynn, wrote in a letter to the panel. However, several members indicated they are not inclined to go there. Referring to the procurement scandal involving former Air Force official Darleen Druyun, Frank Anderson Jr., president of the Defense Acquisition University, remarked, “I’m not sure this group can draw conclusions that would prevent the next person from a breach of judgment.” “You’re going to over-regulate if you do that,” added George Washington University law professor Joshua Schwartz. The panel plans to meet about once a month, including one or two sessions outside Washington. The next meeting is scheduled for March 30. The panel plans to establish a website that will be reachable through www.acqnet.gov.