New Rules Will Target Misuse of GSA Schedules, GWACs The Office of Federal Procurement Policy is preparing new regulations aimed at combating misuse of GSA schedules and other multiple-award contracts. Some of the abuses were highlighted by recent revelations about contractors working in Iraq, but the acting OFPP administrator, Robert Burton, said the office has long been concerned about how the schedules were being used. Among the regulations being drawn up, according to OFPP officials: •An agency would be required to provide an explanation anytime it restricted competition on purchases through GSA schedules; •Contracting officers would have to get approval from higher-ups before they award a sole-source contract; •The agency that operates a governmentwide acquisition contract would be responsible for making sure the work falls within the scope of the GWAC. OFPP policy analyst Matthew Blum discussed the proposed rules June 2 at the e-Government Solutions Forum in Washington, Government Computer News reported. After reports of abuse of prisoners in Iraq, CACI International revealed that GSA was investigating its contract to provide interrogators at the Abu Ghraib prison. The contract for interrogators was awarded through GSA’s information technology schedule. The company promised to cooperate in the investigation. CEO J.P. London said in a statement, “If, however, CACI has used the GSA schedule inappropriately, we will take immediate action to rectify the situation.” The lines of responsibility for the CACI contract are particularly tangled: the company was working for the Army under a blanket purchase agreement administered by the Interior Department’s National Business Center through GSA Schedule 70. The Defense Department inspector general found that Military Professional Resources Inc. was providing translators in Iraq under a contract category designed for the hiring of education and training analysts, not linguists, The Washington Post reported. Although the contractors were working for the military, the Defense IG said, “Noncompliance of a GSA schedule is an issue between the GSA and the contractor.” In addition, GSA has uncovered widespread use of IT schedules to procure construction and other non-IT services. (SAA, 4/30) Without commenting on any specific case, OFPP’s Burton said, “There is no question that task orders under the schedules have been used beyond the scope.” He spoke June 2 at the Federal Acquisition Conference and Expo in Crystal City, VA. OFPP officials have also spoken in the past about the need for increased competition for GSA schedule task orders. In 2002 Congress directed the Defense Department to get competitive bids on all schedule purchases. A rule implementing the law requires DOD to seek at least three bids. OFPP’s Blum said another proposed rule in the works would require agencies to provide an explanation whenever they award a time-and-materials contract instead of a firm fixed-price contract. OFPP has opposed the use of time-and-materials and labor-hour contracts, saying they give a contractor no incentive to cut costs. OFPP has also moved against bundling contracts under GSA schedules. The anti-bundling rules released last fall require contracting officers to justify bundling on schedule task orders. Burton described that as one of the most important provisions of the anti-bundling strategy.