U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

20–816 PDF 2004

HEARING ON EXCELLENCE IN ACTION: GOVERNMENT SUPPORT OF DISABLED VETERAN-OWNED

BUSINESSES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE, EMPOWERMENT 

& GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 15, 2004

Serial No. 108–73

House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Serial No. 108–48

Printed for the use of the Committee on Small Business

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois, Chairman 

ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland, Vice 

Chairman 

SUE KELLY, New York 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

EDWARD SCHROCK, Virginia 

TODD AKIN, Missouri 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

MARILYN MUSGRAVE, Colorado 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire 

BOB BEAUPREZ, Colorado 

CHRIS CHOCOLA, Indiana 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

THADDEUS MCCOTTER, Michigan 

NYDIA VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York 

JUANITA MILLENDER-MCDONALD, 

California 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

ENI FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa 

DONNA CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands 

DANNY DAVIS, Illinois 

GRACE NAPOLITANO, California 

ANI ́BAL ACEVEDO-VILA ́ , Puerto Rico 

ED CASE, Hawaii 

MADELEINE BORDALLO, Guam 

DENISE MAJETTE, Georgia 

JIM MARSHALL, Georgia 

MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine 

LINDA SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina 

[2 VACANCIES]

J. MATTHEW SZYMANSKI, Chief of Staff 

PHIL ESKELAND, Policy Director/Deputy Chief of Staff 

MICHAEL DAY, Minority Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE, EMPOWERMENT AND GOVERNMENT 

PROGRAMS 

TODD AKIN, Missouri, Chairman 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire 

CHRIS CHOCOLA, Indiana 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

THADDEUS MCCOTTER, Michigan 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

DANNY DAVIS, Illinois 

GRACE NAPOLITANO, California 

ED CASE, Hawaii 

MADELEINE BORDALLO, Guam 

[VACANCY]

JOE HARTZ, Professional Staff

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 

TERRY EVERETT, Alabama 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

JACK QUINN, New York 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

RICHARD H. BAKER, Louisiana 

ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire 

BOB BEAUPREZ, Colorado 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida 

RICK RENZI, Arizona 

TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania 

LANE EVANS, Illinois 

BOB FILNER, California 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

DARLENE HOOLEY, Oregon 

TED STRICKLAND, Ohio 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

TIM RYAN, Ohio 

STEPHANIE HERSETH, South Dakota

PATRICK E. RYAN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON BENEFITS 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina, Chairman 

JACK QUINN, New York 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire 

GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

STEPHANIE HERSETH, South Dakota

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

WITNESSES

Page 

McCullough, Ms. Allegra, Associate Deputy Administrator, Government Contracting and Business Development, U.S. Small Business Administration .... 5

Ramos, Mr. Frank, Director, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business, 

Office of the Secretary of Defense ....................................................................... 8

Scott, Mr. Brad, Regional Administrator, Region 6, Heartland Region, U.S. 

General Services Administration ........................................................................ 10

Denniston, Mr. Scott, Director, Office of Small Business and Center for Veterans Enterprise, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ................................... 12

Hatfield, Ms. Nina Rose, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Business Management 

and Wildland Fire, U.S. Department of the Interior ........................................ 14

Lopez, Mr. John, Co-Chairman, Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship ..... 20

Schooner, Professor Steven, Co-Director of the Government Procurement Law 

Program, George Washington University Law School ...................................... 22

Hudson, Mr. James, Marketing Director, Austad Enterprises, Inc. .................... 24

Forney, Mr. Joseph, President, Vetsource, Inc. ..................................................... 26

Weidman, Mr. Rick, Chairman, Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship ..... 28

APPENDIX

Prepared statements: 

McCullough, Ms. Allegra, Associate Deputy Administrator, Government 

Contracting and Business Development, U.S. Small Business Administration ............................................................................................................ 33

Ramos, Mr. Frank, Director, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business, 

Office of the Secretary of Defense ............................................................... 37

Denniston, Mr. Scott, Director, Office of Small Business and Center for 

Veterans Enterprise, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ...................... 49

Hatfield, Ms. Nina Rose, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Business Management and Wildland Fire, U.S. Department of the Interior ....................... 53

Forney, Mr. Joseph, President, Vetsource, Inc. ............................................. 55

Hudson, Mr. James, Marketing Director, Austad Enterprises, Inc. ............ 61

Lopez, Mr. John, Co-Chairman, Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship ................................................................................................................. 66

Weidman, Mr. Rick, Chairman, Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship ................................................................................................................. 66

Submitted for the Record: 

US Department of Agriculture ........................................................................ 86

Speake, Ms. Theresa, Director, Office of Small & Disadvantaged Business 

Utilization, US Department of Energy ....................................................... 91

(IV) 

(1)

HEARING ON EXCELLENCE IN ACTION: GOVERNMENT SUPPORT OF DISABLED VETERAN-OWNED BUSINESSES 

THURSDAY, JULY 15, 2004

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WORKFORCE, EMPOWERMENT AND

GOVERNMENT PROGRAMSJOINT HEARING WITH THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON

BENEFITS

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:05 p.m. in Room 

311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Todd Akin [chairman of 

the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Akin, Brown, Velazquez, Michaud, 

Udall, Herseth, Chocola

Chairman AKIN. This is an interesting Committee hearing in 

that we have essentially two different committees having the same 

hearing at the same time. And that is a fortunate thing, because 

I have got another Committee where I have got to be scooting off, 

so we are going to be turning the hearing over in a couple minutes 

to my colleague. Henry will handle that after we make an opening 

statement and get started. 

I also think we have two panels of witnesses, is that correct? 

Okay. 

Well, let us go ahead with an opening statement then. And also, 

we will be hearing a statement from our Minority Member from the 

Small Business Committee also, Mr. Udall, as well. So that will be 

good. 

Good afternoon, and thank you all for being here today as we examine federal government support of disabled veteran-owned small 

businesses. I would especially like to thank each of our witnesses 

who has agreed to testify before our Committee today. 

Before we begin I would like to welcome my friend and colleague, 

Chairman Henry Brown, of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 

Benefits Subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, welcome, and thank you for 

the opportunity to work together on this issue. 

And over the past three and a half years Chairman Brown has 

worked tirelessly on a multitude of issues, and has been a real 

champion for America’s veterans. I would like to express my gratitude to the good people of the First District of South Carolina for 

2

sending Henry to the House, and also for the peaches that they distributed a couple days ago. 

I am very pleased to be able to co-chair this hearing with him, 

and hope that this is just the first of a long line of veteran small 

business concerns we can work on together. With President Bush, 

this Congress has made it a priority to reach out to all of America’s 

entrepreneurs, especially those who served this nation in our 

armed forces. We must continue this effort to ensure that those 

who sacrificed and served our nation in uniform have access to contracting opportunities with the federal government. 

As many of you know, the Veterans’ Entrepreneurship and Small 

Business Development Act of 1999 set a government-wide goal of 

3 percent of all federal prime contracting dollars, and 3 percent of 

all federal subcontracting dollars, should be awarded to service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. 

However, for the first two fiscal years after enactment, less than 

one-half of 1 percent of such contracts have been awarded to disabled veteran-owned small businesses. 

In order to provide the federal agencies with the necessary tools 

to meet the 3-percent goal, Congress and President Bush enacted 

the Veterans’ Benefit Act of 2003 on December 16, 2002. This law 

allows contracting officers to create sole-source contracts for disabled veteran-owned small businesses. 

The new law also provides contractors the discretionary authority to restrict certain contracts for disabled veteran-owned small 

businesses, if at least two such small businesses are qualified to 

bid on the contract. 

Today we have invited a number of federal agency officials to testify on their progress in implementing the Veterans’ Benefit Act. 

Also with us today are several disabled veteran-owned small business owners. They are here to explain their experiences, both before and after passage of the Veterans’ Benefit Act. 

I am looking forward to hearing the testimony presented today, 

and hope to hear that each of the agencies represented have taken 

appropriate steps to meet the 3-percent goal. 

I hope that this Congress and our colleagues in the Administration can continue to work with the veterans’ community together 

in order to provide our service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses each opportunity to succeed in the federal contracting agenda. 

I now invite my friend and ranking Member, Mr. Udall, to make 

an opening statement. 

Mr. UDALL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate 

you holding this hearing. I think this is an important hearing for 

veterans, and also for the small business community. 

Let me first say that, along with a few other members here 

today, I have the pleasure of serving on both the Small Business 

and the Veterans’ Committees. And it is a pleasure for us to have 

our colleagues on both of the Committees here today. We all recognize the importance of this issue before us, and I hope that this 

hearing will lead to a more effective procurement process for our 

veteran-owned small businesses. 

The Veterans’ Benefit Act is legislation built off the work of the 

Small Business and the Veterans’ Committee during the 105th 

3

Congress. Two Congresses ago we passed the Veterans’ Entrepreneurship and Small Business Act that created several veterans’ 

business development programs. 

Given the sacrifices that our veterans have made and the service 

they have provided to this country, it only makes sense to provide 

our nation’s veterans with assistance to jump-start small businesses. 

A key component for any small business to succeed, not only veteran-owned small businesses, is access to government contracts. 

That is why we must ensure that veteran-owned, minority-owned, 

and all small businesses have a fair shake in the federal marketplace. 

Today, however, we are focusing more specifically in evaluating 

the recent implementation of the new program established under 

the Veterans’ Benefits Act. On May 5, 2004, five months after the 

President signed the legislation into law, the SBA put out the regulations to carry out the procurement program. These provisions 

allow agencies to set aside contracts for service-disabled veterans. 

Unfortunately, in issuing the regulations, the SBA may have 

missed the mark. The regulations omit important safety and 

soundness protections, such as a certification program. 

In addition, I am very concerned that these regulations not only 

fall short of the policy goals, but will also create confusion that will 

result in lost contracting opportunities, not only for service-disabled 

veterans, but for all small businesses. 

The original intent of the bill was to create a fair and just system, to provide entrepreneurial opportunities to those who, for various reasons, have been left behind or left out. In order for this to 

be successful, we must ensure SBA programs can operate in unison. 

Mr. Chairman, we all know how important it is that we provide 

assistance to all sectors of the small business community. After all, 

as is repeated often in the Small Business Committee, small businesses are the engine that drives our nation’s economy. 

It is of particular importance, however, that we provide assistance to our nation’s service-disabled veteran entrepreneurs. History 

has shown that they, along with other particular segments of the 

population, rely most on the programs and assistance offered 

through SBA. That is why it is so important that as this new and 

important procurement program be implemented, we ensure that it 

is implemented in a manner that truly provides greater access to 

the federal marketplace for veteran-owned small businesses. 

I look forward to hearing the testimony of the witnesses on the 

panels, and thank them for being here today. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you, Mr. Udall. And then also we have 

an opening statement from Mr. Brown. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to also extend a warm welcome to everyone here today, Chairman Akin, our 

Committee Ranking Member, Mr. Udall, for bringing us all together. 

American sons and daughters who serve in our military indeed 

are engaging and resourceful individuals. In few professions do 19- 

and 20-year-olds, for example, maintain multi-billion-dollar airVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:58 Apr 29, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\HEARINGS\20816.TXT MIKEA
4

planes or operate multi-billion-dollar missile systems or nuclearpowered submarines, all in defense of our way of life. 

Those who are disabled in their service to our nation deserve a 

full opportunity to participate in the economic system that their 

service has sustained. 

Indeed, during the Colonial era, the First Continental Congress 

furnished pensions to members of our Continental Army to empower economically after they left the military. In so doing, the 

Continental Congress established one of our young nation’s core 

values. 

Further, during the Homestead Act of 1862, veterans received a 

priority for receiving parcels of land. This goes beyond gratitude 

and respect; it is about using scarce public resources in our private 

economy to empower those who have served. 

Mr. Chairman, fast-forward into today. A five-year profile survey 

of veteran-owned businesses in Massachusetts, conducted in the 

late 1980s and early 1990s, found that a pool of approximately 

2,000 veterans engaged in micro-businesses generating $74 million 

for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. That is just for one state. 

On February 5, 2003, Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing on 

the state of veterans’ employment took testimony from among other 

current entrepreneurs who were disabled by their military service. 

The body of testimony showed these are engaging individuals who 

are strong and well-positioned to participate in the economic system they fought to defend. 

The outgrowth of that 2003 hearing was the bipartisan discretionary set-aside and restricted contract authority for disabled veteran-owned small businesses, established as Public Law 108-183, 

to which I was an original co-sponsor. 

I thank Congressman Renzi for introducing this important bipartisan legislation, of which Chairman Manzullo was the original cosponsor. 

Federal departments and agencies now have additional tools to 

contract with such small businesses. These are tools that were not 

available through the bipartisan enactment of Public Law 106-50, 

authored primarily of former Chairman Talent of this Committee, 

and Mr. Stump and Mr. Evans of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee. 

Mr. Chairman, I would note the White House Conference on 

Small Businesses, convened by President Carter in 1980, recommended set-aside authority in federal contracting for Vietnamera disabled veterans as part of the aid program. 

The 1981 expert report of the Small Business Administration 

Veterans’ Project, written by the Center for Community Economics, 

made the same recommendation. The bipartisan Congressional 

Commission on Service Members and Veterans’ Transition Assistance of 1998 made similar-type recommendations. 

Without objection, Mr. Chairman, I would like to insert into the 

record the appropriate sections of these reports. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would note that in a broad sense, 

these discretionary contracting authorities for disabled veterans we 

are discussing today were some 24 years in the making. 

This is not something Congress went into lightly, so I am very 

pleased we are holding this hearing. 

5

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to hearing today’s witnesses. 

Chairman AKIN. Without objection, in terms of the record. 

Our next opening statement is going to be from Mr. Michaud. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much, Chairman Akin, Chairman 

Brown, and Ranking Member Udall, for working to put this hearing together today. 

I have the privilege of serving both, as Ranking Member of Veterans’ Affairs Benefits Subcommittee, and sitting on the Small 

Business Committee. I am very fortunate, and obviously have 

strong interests in exploring the issues before us today with the 

panels that we have, and the lengthy discussions. 

So with that, Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to 

have my opening remarks submitted for the record. 

Chairman AKIN. Without objection, and thank you. 

We will now proceed to our first panel of witnesses. And I believe 

our first witness is going to be Ms. Allegra McCullough, who is the 

Associate Deputy Administrator for Government Contracting and 

Business Development for the USSBA. 

Allegra, thank you. 

Excuse me, I did not mention you have about five minutes, 

standard format. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF ALLEGRA MCCULLOUGH, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING & BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, US SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Good afternoon, Chairman Akin, Brown, and 

Ranking Members Udall, Michaud, and other distinguished Members of the Committee. 

My name is Allegra McCullough, Associate Deputy Administrator 

for Government Contracting and Business Development at the US 

Small Business Administration. 

Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today to speak 

about our efforts to reach out to service-disabled veteran-owned 

small businesses, and achieve the 3-percent federal procurement 

goal. 

Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, the Veterans’ Entrepreneurship 

and Small Business Development Act of 1999 created a government-wide goal that 3 percent of the total value of all federal prime 

and subcontract dollars be awarded to service-disabled veteranowned small business concerns. 

Unfortunately, the federal government has consistently fallen 

well short of the 3-percent statutory goal. By fiscal year 2003, only 

three agencies met or exceeded the 3-percent goal. The National 

Endowment for the Arts— 

Chairman AKIN. Allegra, if I could interrupt you for a minute 

and just ask you to move your mic a little bit closer. I think we 

will get a little bit better reception. Thank you. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. By fiscal year 2003, only three agencies met 

or exceeded the 3-percent goal: the National Endowment for the 

Arts, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Railroad 

Retirement Board. Of the large agencies, the Department of Housing and Urban Development has been the most successful in making progress toward the 3-percent goal. 

6

On June 10, 2004, SBA’s Office of Advocacy issued a report indicating achievements in this area were low, but also indicating that 

actual agency accomplishment may be under-reported. 

Congress and the President provided federal procurement officials with a valuable tool: The Veterans’ Benefit Act of 2003, 108-

183. That was signed by the President on December 18, 2003, that 

authorized bills of procurement set-asides for SDVOSB, and solesource contracting authority for only one SDVOSB as identified 

that can meet the government’s requirement. 

On May 5, 2004, the SBA and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory 

Council concurrently published interim final rules, implementing 

the procurement provisions of the Veterans’ Benefit Act of 2003, 

while still providing the public with a 60-day comment period. Both 

SBA and the FAR Council worked hard to expedite these regulations. 

The new regulations permit contracting officers to either restrict 

competition in contracts, or issue sole contracts to SDVOSB, but 

then specify dollar thresholds, in accordance with statutory requirements. 

Our regulation also establishes procedures for protecting the status of an SDVOSB. 

There are some common misconceptions out there that hinder 

the government’s ability to reach the statutory 3-percent goal. 

Since these procurements are based on a premise other than socioeconomic status, educating the federal and private sector contracting communities is very important. 

Also, some SBCs are reluctant to identify themselves as servicedisabled just to gain the status designation as an SDV. This 

hinders our outreach efforts, since we are unable to identify our clients. 

So educating SDVOSBs to recognize the value added in securing 

or self-identifying as disabled is very important. 

S.B.A. has not achieved its annual procurement goal for 

SDVOSBs since the inception of the requirement. However, as a result of the recently-enacted legislation and published regulation, 

SBA is designing an integrated effort that includes specific steps to 

be taken among our various program areas to utilize the set-asides 

and sole-source authorities for the purpose of meeting the 3-percent 

goal. 

As a part of SBA’s annual acquisition planning process, the agency will include all socio-economic goals, including SDVOSBs in our 

selection strategy. SBA’s Office of Administration will also work 

closely with our Office of Veteran Business Development to identify 

potential SDVOSBs to meet SBA’s contracting needs. 

Where feasible, contracting opportunities will be posted on our 

home page, as well as highlighted in our vet cassette electronic 

newsletter, which reaches thousands of veterans. 

The SDVOSB procurement goals will be communicated to all program areas, and each area will be encouraged to consider these 

agency goals when developing its procurement strategy for each 

planned acquisition. 

SBA’s outreach goals over the last three years, combined with 

the efforts of others, have contributed to the increase in veteran 

participation between 40 to 100 percent in most SBA programs. We 

7

have and will continue to coordinate these efforts internally and 

with other federal agencies. 

S.B.A. will work with the agencies’ representatives today, and 

with others, to conduct outreach training and other policy program 

initiatives, specifically for SDVOSBs and veteran-owned businesses. This effort will include educating procurement officers of 

the new program, as well as educating service-disabled veteran entrepreneurs on SDV status, size standards, marketing to federal officials, information requirements in the bid of a procurement challenge, and tools for partnering with other SDVOSBs and veteranowned businesses, and other agency procurement program participants. 

Registration and the central contract registration, and the use of 

the dynamic small business search engine contained in the CCR as 

a source of market research, along with other federal databases, 

will be highlighted. 

Further, non-SDVOSB prime contractors should also be made 

aware of subcontracting opportunities and responsibilities for the 

SDVOSB and veteran-owned businesses. To fully accomplish the 

objectives of this legislation, SDVOSBs must be prepared to conduct business in a manner consistent with current federal procurement trends. 

Today, a large portion of the annual federal procurement dollars 

are spent through contracting actions using GSA federal supply 

schedules. While not the only way to provide SDVs with more contracting dollars, the ability of SDVOSBs to be placed on and market their companies on the GSA federal schedule will be a critical 

portion of their success in the federal market. 

Through SBA procurement assistance programs, its business development counselling and training programs, and in partnership 

with other federal agencies like the ones here today, SBA will continue to identify and work with SDVOSBs to ensure that they have 

the necessary tools in place to enhance participation on GSA schedules. 

Additionally, SDVOSBs must be educated on federal procurement trends, including using federal purchase cards to make purchases under $2500 without competitive quotes. These purchases 

amount to approximately $16 billion last fiscal year. 

Mr. Chairman, the SBA will continue to work with the Committee and with other federal agencies in any efforts to promote 

programs and contracting opportunities for our veterans. 

This concludes my testimony. And I would be happy to answer 

your questions. 

[Ms. McCullough’s statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you, Ms. McCullough. 

I will remind the witnesses, I know Ms. McCullough went a little 

bit over the five minutes. And I would caution you, if you would, 

kind of keep your remarks to five minutes. All of your prepared remarks will be entered into the record, but just for the sake of the 

time line to try to work within, if you would just contain your 

statements to five minutes. 

The next witness is Mr. Frank Ramos, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business, Office of the Secretary of Defense, US Department of Defense. 

8

Thank you, Mr. Ramos. 

STATEMENT OF FRANK RAMOS, OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF 

DEFENSE, US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Mr. RAMOS. Mr. Chairman, if I would, please, I have four interns 

in the back. And I think there is some significant interest in one 

of them. If they would stand up. 

One is the granddaughter of a US Marine code talker from World 

War II from the Navajo Nation. And I thought it would be appropriate to bring them here to go through this exercise. 

[Applause.]

Chairman AKIN. We had a special ceremony in the Capitol, I 

guess about a month or so ago, honoring the code talkers. And they 

certainly played a major role in our victory in World War II. And 

thank you for bringing her today. Thank you for coming, too. 

Mr. RAMOS. Thank you, sir. Right behind me also, sir, is my Deputy, Lynn Oliver, and a new person who is a special assistant to 

me, a political appointee who is going to be focusing on veterans’ 

affairs for us. He just came on board; he served with the Army Airborne. 

I will move on with my statement here, sir. 

Good afternoon, Chairman Akin and Congressman Udall; good 

afternoon, Chairman Brown and Congressman Michaud. 

My name is Frank Ramos. I am the Director of the Office of 

Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, in the Office of the 

Secretary of Defense. 

I wish to thank you for the opportunity to testify before this joint 

subcommittee hearing concerning the Department of Defense implementation plan to execute public law 108-183. This law has 

helped clarify questions of priority within the competing small 

businesses’ interest. This will help us. 

The Defense implementation plan is our roadmap to meet the 

federal government goal to award 3 percent of all contracts for our 

war fighters who have become disabled in defense of our nation. 

Today I will describe the three arenas of focus to improve our 

service-disabled veteran business statistics. 

Number one. We are developing a strategy to increase servicedisabled veteran supplier pool on increasing contract amounts to 

these businesses. 

After I assumed my office, I began collecting data to determine 

how and what we must do to achieve the goal. In fiscal year 2002, 

the Department of Defense awarded $204.5 million in prime contract awards to service-disabled veterans, but we only reached .13 

percent of that goal. 

In fiscal year 2003, we awarded $341.7 million, an increase of 

$37.2 million. That only raised our goal percentage to .18 percent, 

a 72-percent increase that still fell short of the 3-percent goal. 

The number of DoD service-disabled veteran business contractors 

grew from 408 in fiscal year 2002, to 692 in fiscal year 2003, an 

increase of 70 percent. 

The government-wide centralized contractor register has only 

5,600 active registrants who have identified themselves as serviceVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:58 Apr 29, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\HEARINGS\20816.TXT MIKEA
9

disabled veterans. This compares with around 180,000 registrants 

who identify themselves as small business, as of last week. 

Accretion of contract size is a challenge. Right now there are only five firms who have contract awards in excess of $11 million. The 

balance of contract awards are in the lower ranges, most frequently 

under $100,000. Those larger Department of Defense awards are in 

research and development, engineering services, commercial institutional and construction, security, and boat-building. 

Our primary tasks are twofold. To grow the number of servicedisabled veteran firms that will be able to compete, and to increase 

the dollar value of our contracts with them, while buying goods and 

services that the war fighter needs. 

The second area of focus is training. In late 2002 I recognized 

that small business-related training courses were not part of the 

Defense Acquisition University curriculum. The Undersecretary of 

Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the President of the Defense Acquisition University were quick to support 

our small business initiative, to consolidate courses that military 

services had partially developed for themselves. 

We now have our first comprehensive Department of Defense 

small business training course contracts 260 that will be initiated 

at the end of August. The course is required for all defense small 

business specialists, and is encouraged for all acquisition professionals, which will include the service-disabled veteran topics. 

Another initiative is to have an electronic continuous learning 

module. We expect that within 45 days of our pilot course, the electronic course will be available to anyone over the Internet. 

We are expanding our defense community practice repository to 

provide a central electronic location where all acquisition professionals can share information relating to service-disabled veteranowned small businesses. 

Third. In 2003 I raised the service-disabled veterans as a heightened priority within the Department of Defense. For emphasis, we 

invited two Congressional Medal of Honor recipients—the Honorable Harvey ‘‘Barney’’ Barnum, the Assistant Secretary of the 

Navy, and Rodolfo Hernandez—to address our mentor/protege conference. The Honorable Everett Alvarez was another keynote 

speaker. He is the longest-captive prisoner of war decorated service-disabled veteran, and a successful small business owner. 

I also had the Honorable Albert Zapanta, Chairman of the Reserve Policy Forces Board, a recipient of the Silver Star and Purple 

Heart, and small business owner, who addressed the veterans’ 

issues. 

That level attention by the distinguished heroes has never been 

done before at that conference. 

I am also proud to state that my support contractor is a very 

competent service-disabled veteran business. And I guess what I 

am saying is I practice what I preach. 

We have identified our challenges, and we developed a roadmap. 

We are working hard to achieve our goal. 

I would like to close by expressing my appreciation for your interest, and the collaborative effort by our sister federal agencies, to 

strive toward this patriotic goal of supporting our former war fighters. It is the right thing to do. 

10

I hope you can discern from my testimony that I have a real passion to meet this challenge. Thank you, sir. 

[Mr. Ramos’ statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Ramos. I know there 

is a lot of work left to do, and I thank you for your effort in trying 

to reach that 3-percent goal. 

Our next panel member is Mr. Brad Scott, Regional Administrator, Region Six, Heartland Region, US General Services Administration. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF BRAD SCOTT, US GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Udall, 

Ranking Member Michaud. 

I am pleased to report on behalf of Administrator Steve Perry on 

GSA’s continuing efforts to preserve the spirit of the two respective 

laws enacted to promote government contracting with service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. 

It has been my personal privilege to play a part in developing 

and implementing programs designed to, first, leverage our relationships within the federal community, to promote achievement of 

socio-economic goals by our client agencies. 

Second, to help service-disabled veterans identify opportunities to 

do business with the government. 

And finally, to enhance GSA’s ability to achieve its own goal. 

I would like to thank the Congress and the President for providing this tool that I believe will prove to be a meaningful enhancement in creating opportunities for service-disabled veteranowned small businesses. 

When public law 108-183 took effect last December, Administrator Perry challenged the GSA management team to forge an initiative to meet the demands of this new law. In response to this, 

we initiated a program that is entitled ‘‘Operation Fast Break.’’ 

Operation Fast Break is a two-pronged approach aimed at creating and improving GSA’s external and internal offerings to our 

federal customers, and to service-disabled veteran-owned small 

businesses. 

The broad goals of Operation Fast Break are first to identify, recruit, train, and assist service-disabled veteran-owned small business owners to get on GSA’s multiple-award schedule program. 

And second, it is to inform client agencies of the new law and the 

opportunity contained therein to streamline the ability to access 

service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. 

G.S.A. has worked very closely with the Department of Veterans’ 

Affairs, DoD, the Small Business Administration, and the Defense 

Logistics Agency to identify ways to expand contracting opportunities to service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. This partnership has opened lines of communication between the agencies, 

and enabled the involved partners to embark on joint conferences 

and joint initiatives to the benefit of all involved. 

I would like to hold up for distinction the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, and Scott Denniston, who will testify next. GSA is 

hosting conferences to put service-disabled veterans in touch with 

federal agencies and prime vendors. Conferences have been held in 

11

Washington, D.C. and New York already. Today there is one being 

held in Denver, Colorado, and we have one being planned for the 

Pacific Rim Region, Region 11 in California, and we have one 

scheduled in my region for October 20. 

G.S.A. has utilized the power of the world-wide web to improve 

offerings to service-disabled veterans through cross-agency coordination and links. In addition, under Operation Fast Break, GSA 

created a website solely dedicated to service-disabled veterans. 

During our internal review, GSA uncovered several dead links 

from other agencies to GSA. In addition, we found erroneous and 

outdated information contained on our own sites, as well as others. 

All of them have been fixed. 

Additionally, veterans were frustrated that they were having difficulty talking with live bodies who could provide meaningful information. Not only have we listed points of contact on our website, 

we created a 1-800 number for veterans. When a service-disabled 

veteran contacts the hotline, he or she is directed to his or her local 

GSA Office of Small Business Utilization for more information on 

how to become a GSA contract holder. 

G.S.A. is working with the Association of Procurement Technical 

Assistance Centers, and has established a memorandum of understanding to create an avenue for service-disabled veterans to receive intensive assistance that we cannot always provide. 

G.S.A. has held internal conferences with its Office of Small 

Business Utilization to coordinate efforts, create a common customer experience, and enhance our offerings to not only our client 

agencies, but to veterans. 

G.S.A. maintains a permanent liaison with the Task Force for 

Veteran Entrepreneurship. 

While still too early to judge the impact of our initiative, we can 

identify some progress. For instance, at the end of 2003, GSA had 

167 schedule-holders designated as service-disabled veterans. In 

March of this year, after GSA conducted an in-house review and 

contacted the businesses on schedule to inform them of the passage 

of the law, that number doubled to 332 businesses. As of June 30, 

we reached 351 businesses listed on schedule. 

Once on schedule, GSA maintains and regularly updates the list 

of service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. This list of 

businesses can be obtained from GSA service-disabled veteranowned small business website. 

In addition to asking for more service-disabled veterans on 

schedules, federal agencies have asked for a more user-friendly 

method of identifying service-disabled veterans. We are working to 

provide that, as well as to expand the pool. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, my time is about up, and I would 

like to end within the five minutes. We thank you for the honor 

and privilege of testifying before this august body. 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Scott. 

Our next panel member is Mr. Scott Denniston, Director, Office 

of Small Business and Center for Veterans’ Enterprise, US Department of Veterans’ Affairs. 

Welcome. 

12

STATEMENT OF SCOTT F. DENNISTON, OFFICE OF SMALL 

BUSINESS & CENTER FOR VETERANS ENTERPRISE 

Mr. DENNISTON. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and distinguished 

Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 

on behalf of Secretary Anthony Principi on what VA has done to 

implement the programs envisioned by public law 106-50 and 108-

183. 

In 2001, the Department created the Center for Veterans’ Enterprise. The Center’s principal mission is to promote business ownership and expansion for veterans and service-connected disabled veterans. 

The Center, which started with four employees, now has 11 employees in three functional areas: communications, business development, and business expansion. 

The mission of the Communications Unit is to ensure awareness 

of the Federal Veterans’ Entrepreneurship Program and the assistance offered by our resource partners: the Association of Small 

Business Development Centers, the Association of Procurement 

and Technical Assistance Centers, the Veterans’ Corporation, the 

Veterans’ Business Outreach Centers, the Small Business Administration Development Officers, and the Service Corps of Retired Executives. 

A principal tool of the Communications Unit is the Center’s web 

portal, vetbiz.gov. The web portal was recognized in the 2004 Edition of the 100 Best Resources for Small Business. 

The mission of CVE’s Business Development Unit is to efficiently 

connect veterans with community-based support, and to assess the 

responsiveness and effectiveness of local services. This unit was established in July of 2003. 

A newly-developed tool of the Business Development Unit is the 

VetBiz Assistance Program, which will allow providers of business 

assistance services to post their program information for veterans 

to easily locate. This new program will be unveiled on August 17, 

2004, on the fifth anniversary of public law 106-50. 

The mission of CVE’s Business Expansion Unit is to directly assist veterans who are seeking federal marketplace opportunities, 

and to minimize access barriers, and to maximize where possible. 

The principal tool of this unit is the VetBiz Vendor Information 

pages. 

In April, the Administrator of the US Small Business Administration and the Acting Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy jointly issued a memorandum to all federal agencies encouraging the use of the VetBiz VIP database. 

The database accepts information from external sources where 

veteran-owned businesses may be located, including Department of 

Defense’s central contact registry. For a business to be posted on 

this Internet offering, the company must answer questions regarding small business size status, and affirm that the company is truly 

51-percent owned and controlled by veterans or service-disabled 

veteran-owned businesses. 

In the past 12 months, more than 59,000 calls and faxes from 

veterans have been handled by the Center. The web portal established to provide 24/7 access to veterans has received more than 

700,000 hits in the first six months of this year. 

13

VA’s CVE has joined forces with federal agencies and prime contractors to create a corps of government and corporate advocates 

for veterans’ enterprise, volunteers who stand ready and able to 

answer questions from entrepreneurial veterans on how to access 

requirements of their organizations. 

I am proud to report that the Center and the Department have 

been actively sought out by federal agencies and corporations to 

partner in their outreach efforts. VA has co-sponsored outreach 

programs with the Air Force, Defense Logistics Agency, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Housing and 

Urban Development, Department of Interior, Department of Transportation, General Services Administration, Small Business Administration, General Dynamics and SAIC, to name a few. 

Additionally, we have ongoing relationships with the DoD Regional Small Business Councils, the DoD Procurement Technical 

Assistance Centers, and the Small Business Development Centers. 

The CVE has also been invited to address employees of many 

other federal agencies as part of their acquisition education program. 

Last spring, Secretary Principi issued a comprehensive report on 

recommendations to improve the performance of veteran-owned 

small businesses. This report contains many important changes. 

Perhaps the most startling and truly sweeping is the requirement 

now to include performance with veterans and service-disabled veterans in executives’ performance plans within the Department of 

Veterans’ Affairs. This report, coupled with the new set-aside authority which Congress has passed, should result in significantly 

higher improved achievements for both veterans and service-disabled veterans. This report is posted on the VetBiz web portal for 

anyone who is interested in using it. 

Shortly before President Bush signed the Veterans’ Benefit Act 

of 2003 on December 16, we began receiving enthusiastic calls from 

service-disabled veterans who had been closely monitoring the legislation. The callers wanted to know how long before the legislation 

would be implemented within VA and other federal departments 

and agencies. Obviously, they urged immediate implementation. 

Secretary Principi, in consultation with VA’s General Counsel, 

determined that implementing regulations were not necessary to 

implement the provisions of the law. On February 24, the VA’s Office of Acquisition and Material Management issued an information 

letter which implemented the set-aside provisions of the law for VA 

immediately. 

Thanks to the tremendous efforts and collaboration of the Small 

Business Administration and the Federal Acquisition Council, both 

SBA regulations and the Federal Acquisition regulations were revised, effective May 5, to implement the public law. As a result, we 

rescinded our informational letter. 

What is interesting to note is that, since the time that the implementing of regulations went into effect, there have been 86 opportunities advertised in FedBizOps for service-disabled veteran setasides. And we are pleased that more than half of those, or 48, 

came from the Department of Veterans’ Affairs. 

We have been very active in developing and supporting veteranowned businesses. We think that we have put the tools in place 

14

that will, in the near future, show the results that Congress expects through the set-aside authority. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I would be happy 

to answer any questions. 

[Mr. Denniston’s statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you, Mr. Denniston. 

Our next member is Ms. Nina Rose Hatfield, Deputy Assistant 

Secretary for Business Management and Wildland Fire, US Department of the Interior. 

Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF NINA ROSE HATFIELD, BUSINESS MANAGEMENT AND WILDLAND FIRE, US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Ms. HATFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of both Committees, I appreciate 

the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the Department of the 

Interior in support of the strategies that will increase small business procurement opportunities with service-disabled veterans on 

businesses. 

Fifty percent of the $4 billion spent by our bureaus and offices 

in fiscal year 2003 were awarded to small businesses. We have consistently been among the leaders of the government in contracting 

with small and minority businesses. Nonetheless, we recognize the 

need for continued progress with service-disabled veteran-owned 

businesses. 

Our small business theme is know your neighbor, because we 

have offices located across the nation, with responsibilities where 

our veterans reside and are business owners. We understand that 

we need to do a good job of providing information for those veterans about how they can contract with Interior. And we believe 

that public law 108-183 will open more doors for those veterans. 

Within Interior, many positive steps have occurred in the past 

two years, but more remains to be accomplished. Prior to the recent 

passage of the Veterans’ Benefit Act, Interior increased SDV procurements from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2003 by about 65 

percent. We rank in the upper third of all federal agencies in SDV 

contracting accomplishments for fiscal year 2003, and we are confident that we can meet our share of the 3-percent governmentwide goal for fiscal year 2005, with the additional benefits of the 

set-asides and sole source authorities that are provided in public 

law 108-183. 

The Interior Department has adopted a model, which has been 

very successful for us in other areas, to reach this 3-percent goal 

based on our partnerships, our advocacies, and targeted information for service-disabled veterans. At every forum or Chamber of 

Commerce opportunity, our small business leaders continue to address our commitment to increase SDV opportunities. 

With over 14 national Small Business Associations as our business partners, we are constantly looking for new ways that we can 

work to involve SDV business owners as mentors and team players. 

We are also looking for innovative ways to reach our SDV business owners through partnering with minority-serving institutions 

business schools across the nations and our territories. 

15

Today, in Denver, Colorado, we are participating with the GSA 

and the Small Business Administration in the Regional Procurement Fair for service-disabled veterans. We also have participated 

in other key outreach programs in Albuquerque and Washington as 

a part of the larger federal commitment to open opportunities. 

Internally, we have developed and disseminated DOI guidance 

within two weeks of the interim rule, for all of the Department. We 

also have a detailed staff person as a primary point of contact. We 

are working now with bureaus to identify contracts. And we, too, 

have modified our website to provide better and more information 

about getting on the Central Contract Register, and how you do 

business with the Department. 

Building on these efforts, we are very confident that Interior can 

indeed achieve its 3-percent target of business with SDV small 

businesses. 

And with that, that concludes my testimony. And I will be glad 

to try to answer questions. Thank you. 

[Ms. Hatfield’s statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you very much, Ms. Hatfield. 

At this time we will entertain questions from the panel. Mr. 

Udall, do you have a question? 

Mr. UDALL. Sure, Mr. Chairman, thank you. I would like to ask 

Allegra McCullough about an issue here. 

The SBA moved very quickly on the regulations to implement 

public law 108-138. Could you talk about some of the reasons why 

you moved so fast on this? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Absolutely. Being able to give back to those 

who have sacrificed so much for this country, which is certainly a 

priority with this Administration. And so we tried to, as quickly as 

we could, pull together our top legal and policy people to make this 

a number-one priority. 

Mr. UDALL. Now, in the process of moving forward, you waived 

the notice and comment requirements for the interim rule. Was 

there a reason for doing that? I mean, do you think it might have 

been a more effective rule if you had gone through the notice and 

comment requirement? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. We did go through a comment requirement. 

But we wanted to also make certain that very little time passed before SDVs were able to take advantage of the benefits of the rule. 

Mr. UDALL. Do we have any idea how many businesses fit the 

category that we are talking about here? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. No, we do not. And to be perfectly honest, we 

must work with all of our agencies, making certain that we are 

using every possible instrument and outreach effort to identify our 

service-disabled veterans. 

Mr. UDALL. Is there anybody else on the panel that has an idea 

of how many service-disabled veteran-owned businesses there are? 

I mean, wouldn’t it be helpful to have that kind of information to 

target what we are trying to do here? Any comments? 

Mr. DENNISTON. Mr. Udall, the best numbers that we have on 

the number of service-disabled veteran-owned businesses come 

from some statistical samples that have been done by the Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census. And they range anywhere 

16

from about 350,000 to 500,000. That is about the best number that 

we have been able to come up with. 

Mr. UDALL. Three hundred and fifty to 500 thousand. Okay. I 

think that is good for me here, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, and I 

yield back. 

Chairman AKIN. Thank you, Mr. Udall. 

Do you have a question? Welcome to the panel. 

Ms. HERSETH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank 

you for your testimony here today. 

Just maybe a little bit of a follow-up on Congressman Udall’s 

question there. It seems that maybe there has been some trouble 

in identifying and reaching these businesses that meet the eligibility requirements for those veterans that have service-connected 

disabilities. 

So it leads me to question, under the new tool that we have here, 

the authority to sole-source or restrict certain contracts, your ability to use those new tools may be somewhat limited until we make 

more effort or make sure you have the resources, not just financial 

resources, but information network resources, to best identify the 

businesses that qualify. Right? I get the sense that there might be 

a consensus just in some nodding of the heads here. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. If I may speak, yes and no. Yes, there has 

been difficulty identifying. And I think I speak for everyone that 

we are determined to make an all-out effort to use every tool necessary to identify and to outreach to every segment of America to 

make certain that we are articulating this rule, that we are letting 

service-disabled veterans know about the goals that the federal 

agencies would like to achieve, educating them on how to contract 

with the federal government. 

Ms. HERSETH. I just want maybe to point out, as you go forward, 

that while we want to move forward to the 3-percent goal as best 

possible, and now have some authority that has been granted to 

help us achieve that goal, I do not want any businesses for veterans who have the service-connected disabilities to be at a disadvantage when someone is making a determination that they can 

sole-source if there is no reasonable expectation that bids are going 

to be offered. But yet if there are businesses out there that would 

be in a position to offer, but they are just not as familiar with this 

program because they have not been identified, we have not effectively reached out to them. 

I am just pointing out maybe this inherent tension a little bit, 

and to be cognizant of that moving forward, that we do not start 

putting certain businesses at a disadvantage because we have not 

done enough at the outset to identify them. 

Mr. DENNISTON. I think there are two issues here. Number one, 

going back to Congressman Udall’s question about how many service-disabled veterans are there in the United States. And if we look 

at the number that are participating in federal contracting, it is a 

very small percentage. So I think that is issue number one, how 

do we get more businesses involved in the federal procurement 

process. 

I think Mr. Ramos hit the other nail on the head. The fact that 

those we have identified have been working in the small contract 

17

area, and what this authority will allow us to do will be to grow 

those businesses that we have identified now as part of the process. 

Ms. HERSETH. Thank you. And the last question I will pose is, 

from your testimony I do not get the sense from any of you that 

you feel the 3-percent goal is unattainable. 

Ms. HATFIELD. I think we agree that we can reach the goal. I 

would agree, though, with the rest of the panel members and the 

issues that you have raised. It is very important in terms of doing 

the outreach to the veterans so they are aware of what those opportunities are, and help us in terms of identifying who may be available to do business. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much. And I know that we must 

have a benchmark to work towards, and maybe we might not reach 

that 3 percent. But if we keep working together, maybe we will 

find some folks that they will be interested and we can help along 

the way. 

We are very privileged today to have joined with us the Ranking 

Member of the Small Business Committee, Ms. Velazquez. Any 

questions? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I do. 

Mr. BROWN. I have some questions myself, but I am going to submit those in writing to you later, just for the sake of time. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am really 

happy that you are conducting this joint hearing. 

I think this provides for the Committee and Subcommittee to fulfill its duty of oversight. And conducting these types of hearings 

will help us fix some of the problems that we are having with the 

legislation that we passed. 

My personal opinion is that we made some mistakes, and this is 

an opportunity now to fix out the mistakes that were made. 

Ms. Allegra McCullough, I am curious about your interpretation 

of the statute in the promulgation of the implementing regulations, 

allowing agency contracting officers to choose whether to use the 

8(a) program or the Hub Zone program or the new SDV program. 

In light of the mandatory language contained in both the 8(a) program and the Hub Zone, why has the SBA chosen to allow the permissive language, the so-called ‘‘may’’ language, to take a priority? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. That is the language that was actually passed 

in the statute. We did not really have the discretion to change that 

language. 

However, we would be happy to revisit that language. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Can you speak up, please? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. You were talking about the use of the word 

‘‘may’’ rather than ‘‘shall,’’ in terms of sole-sourcing? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. No. I am talking about you, the agency allowing 

contracting officers giving parity, when we have the statutory language that says that the 8(a) program or the Hub Zone program, 

that they have priority over the SDV program. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Well, the language, I mean, there is parity 

between the 8(a) and the other programs. But the language in the 

statute indicates ‘‘shall,’’ which clearly indicates a mandate. 

In the statutes for the SDV, it indicates ‘‘may,’’ which indicates 

that it is up to the discretion of that federal contracting officer. 

18

This is certainly language that, if Congress wishes to revisit, we 

would be more than happy to revisit that issue with you. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. The service-disabled veteran on business procurement programs has discretionary language. A contracting officer may use the program. 

Under the SBA implementing regulation for PL 108-183, I see 

that it allows the SBA to release a requirement under the 8(a) program. 

Would you please describe in what circumstances the SBA will 

agree to such a release? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Releasing the contracting officer from solesourcing? Is that what you are asking? I am not quite sure that I 

understand your question. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. It would allow for releasing the requirement of 

the 8(a) program, specifically the 8(a) program. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. If I am understanding you correctly, what it 

articulates is that there would have to be, if they cannot find more 

than one 8(a) participant, then they could sole-source it. But that 

is something that they must consider. 

I hope I am answering your question. If not, I would be more 

than happy to answer it for you at a later time, when I am sure 

about— 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I will allow you to answer me at another time. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Okay, I will be happy to. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. You will be able to send a written submission 

to the Committee? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. I would love to. Thank you. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Ms. McCullough, on May 24 the SBA published 

a final rule to the Hub Zone program. In this regulation, the SBA 

proposal to provide parity for the 8(a) and the Hub Zone program 

was not finalized. Am I correct? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. On parity with the 8(a) program, that it was 

not finalized? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Yes. On May 24? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Yes. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay. In fact, the SBA said it will further examine issues raised, and will not amend the rule at that time. Is that 

correct? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. That is correct. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. But on May 5, the SBA seems to imply, with the 

regulations for the service-disabled veteran-owned business procurement program, that, except for existing 8(a) contracts, contracting officers can pick and choose whether they will use either 

the 8(a) program, the Hub Zone program, or the newest program. 

My question to you is, what is the priority among these programs, in light of the fact that 13 CFR 126.607 has not been modified? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. We are making certain that we articulate to 

our federal partners that it is extremely important that they consider meeting the goals of all of these programs, as best as they 

can. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. The problem that I have is that you are not allowed to pick and choose, in terms of the regulation. You cannot 

19

pick over one or the other, unless you modify the regulation. Did 

you modify the regulation? 

You answered to me that on May 24, when I asked you, that the 

regulation was not finalized. You said that I am correct. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. That is correct. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Yes. But then on May 5, the SBA seems to 

imply, with the regulation that you issued, that for the service-disabled veteran-owned business procurement program, that except 

for existing 8(a) contracts, contracting officers can pick and choose 

whether they will use either the 8(a) program, the Hub Zone, or 

the newest program. But you did not finalize the rule, the regulation. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. We really wanted to make certain that very 

little time passed before SDVs were able to take advantage of the 

rule. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Based on the May 5, can you tell me which of 

the programs has the priority? When a contracting officer is going 

to decide how they are going to do it. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. SBA does not have the discretion to actually 

make that rule. And it is something that we would certainly like 

to revisit with Congress on. But we do not have that discretion. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay, you do not have it. So tell me, who created this priority? The current priority listing for 8(a) and Hub 

Zone companies, located at 13 CFR 126.607(e), 8(a) companies located in a Hub Zone; two, 8(a) company; third, Hub Zone competitive procedures; and fourth, Hub Zone sole-source procedures. 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. You are saying who established that? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Yes. Do you have the legal counsel from SBA? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. We will have to get back to you on that. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Who issued this regulation? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. Excuse me? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Who issued? Who issued this regulation that established this order? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. The original issuer? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. The one that I just read. Was it SBA? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. SBA issued that rule. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Ms. McCullough, in the fourth pages of your testimony, you say not one word regarding how the SBA is going to 

police this new procurement program. These are the parameters for 

a joint venture program in the new rule that is different than for 

any other SBA program. The ownership requirements for this program are different than for any other SBA program. The percentage of work requirements are different than for any other SBA program. 

And yet, you have not said one word in your testimony about 

how the SBA is going to ensure this program is not abused. Can 

you please comment on this? 

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. I will be happy to. With all due respect, SBA 

has and never has had the power to police any procurement program offered throughout the federal government. 

We do, however, intend to, through our relationships with our 

federal partners and combined outreach and marketing efforts. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. So how are you going to make sure that the program is not abused? 

20

Ms. MCCULLOUGH. We will certainly have to make certain that 

this is articulated to our federal partners, that, by all means necessary, the integrity of this program must be obtained. 

But again, we do not have the authority to police any of our programs throughout the federal agencies. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. With all due respect, you are wrong. You are totally wrong. And legal counsel is there behind you, and they can 

tell you that you are wrong. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman AKIN. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Velazquez. 

Members of the panel, thank you very much for coming and enlighten us on these regulations. And we will now proceed to the 

second panel. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman AKIN. Let me extend a warm welcome to our second 

panel. And we are pleased to have you come and testify on such 

an important issue. 

Our first two members, participating members, one will testify 

and the other will not. Is that correct, Mr. Lopez? As Co-Chairman 

of the Task Force on Veterans’ Entrepreneurship, and Mr. Rick 

Weidman is the Chairman of the Task Force on Veterans’ Entrepreneurship. So which will testify? 

Mr. WEIDMAN. Mr. Lopez. We decided to give the kid his shot at 

it, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman AKIN. Okay. Welcome, Mr. Lopez. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN K. LOPEZ, TASK FORCE FOR VETERANS 

ENTREPRENEURSHIP 

Mr. LOPEZ. Good afternoon, gentlepersons. I believe there is a 

lady remaining. 

Thank you for your kind invitation to testify before the distinguished Committees regarding government support of service-disabled veteran-owned businesses. 

My name is John Lopez. I am Chairman of the Association for 

Service-Disabled Veterans, and I am Co-Chairman of the Task 

Force for Veterans’ Entrepreneurship. I am here with my colleague, 

Rick Weidman, who is the Chairman of the Task Force, as well as 

the Director of Government Relations for the Vietnam Veterans of 

America. 

Without objection, I would ask to submit our testimony for the 

record, and summarize our observations for the Members, in respect for your time and indulgence. No objections. 

On behalf of the nation’s over 60-million-person veteran community, and especially the disabled-in-military-service and prisoner-ofwar veteran businesses, I would like to express the appreciation of 

the veterans’ community for the exemplary accomplishments of 

your committees, on behalf of America’s service-disabled and prisoner-of-war veterans. 

The Members have demonstrated the highest level of commitment, concern, and service to our nation’s veterans. It is a privilege 

to address the Members of these two Committees. 

In the four years since the enactment of public law 106-50, and 

the year since the enactment of public law 108-183, the impact of 

the legislation has been negligible. Since March, 2003 few agency 

21

acquisition and contracting officials have demonstrated an increased interest in the legislative direction to assist service-disabled veterans to maintain their rehabilitation through self-employment, as federal prime and subcontractors. 

The United States Small Business Administration has minimally 

increased the integration of service-disabled veterans into some of 

the special assistance effort of that agency. Outreach materials, 

standard publications, and routine announcements now mention 

support and assistance for service-disabled-veteran enterprises. 

The level of effort and outreach in early 2003 had implied to the 

procurement community that there is no commitment by the federal government to assist service-disabled veterans. 

To urge government outreach, and as a stakeholder in the outcome, the Association for Service-Disabled Veterans, a member of 

the Task Force for Veterans’ Entrepreneurship has financed and 

expanded a previous certified disabled veteran interactive database, containing more than 20,000 service-disabled-veteran enterprises that is a follow-on of a certification process started in 1989. 

The intent was if they were unable to find service-disabled veterans, there was a database that had been developed since 1982, 

starting in California, which has over 20,000 vetted by the legislative directive of the California Legislature service-disabled veterans. 

The second year, the yearly release of data pertinent to agency 

small business procurements, the summary, what is called the 

Summary of Actions and Dollars Reported on SF279 and SF281 by 

Agency, continues to report minimal progress to the 3-percent legislative goal for disabled-veteran participation. 

A telephone sample by ASDV of that method of calculation of 

that report, of the method of calculation of the data in those reports, reveals no increased accuracy of dollars, action, or appropriate categorization in those reports. Inevitably, the erroneous information misleads the US Congress, and subverts the intent of 

public law 106-50 and public law 108-183. 

Sadly, a perceived lack of commitment has also been repeatedly 

voiced to service-disabled-veteran enterprises by off-the-record comments of procurement officials. Such as, service-disabled veteran 

assistance is just a goal. If the Congress had been serious about 

helping service-disabled veterans, they would have legislated mandatory requirements, not unaccountable goals. 

While the Task Force firmly believes that the Congress is serious 

about service-disabled veterans, the perception advanced by procurement officials contrasts sharply with the legislative intent of 

public law 106-50 and public law 108-183. 

The commitment of the private sector prime contractor is even 

more abysmal. Service-disabled-veteran enterprise requests to participate as subcontractors has been met with negative responses 

and disinterest. 

As a routine response to service-disabled-veteran enterprise requests for procurement participation, prime contractors initially 

profess ignorance, and protest that government procurement officials never mentioned service-disabled-veteran enterprises. This is 

followed by subsequent protestation that prime contractors are exempted from participation by variously-invoked parsing of the regVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:58 Apr 29, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\HEARINGS\20816.TXT MIKEA
22

ulatory language, special procurement official dispensation, or that 

they are not performing contracts that are subject to regulation. 

There are no clear villains in the failure to assist the service-disabled veterans of our nation. Rather, there is a need for more specific direction from the United States Congress, even at the risk of 

cries of Congressional micro-management by the federal bureaucracy. 

It is imperative that your Committee takes initiative in establishing the legislative requirements that will permit our nation’s 

disabled-in-service and prisoner-of-war veterans to participate more 

fully in the economic system they sacrificed to preserve. 

It is respectfully requested that public law 106-50 and public law 

108-183 be amended and expanded to provide authorized, directed, 

specific, and mandatory participation by service-disabled veterans 

and prisoner-of-war veterans, in all federal procurement, whether 

through inclusion in the various set-aside provisions of the Small 

Business Act, as amended, or in the newly-included sections of that 

Act. 

Only the active application of this Committee’s authority will ensure that entrepreneurship is an available rehabilitation alternative to those that sacrificed for the security and prosperity of our 

nation. 

Thank you. I would be pleased to respond to any questions, as 

would my colleague, Mr. Weidman. 

[Mr. Lopez’s statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Mr. BROWN. [presiding] Thank you very much, Mr. Lopez. And 

we will have questions at the very end. 

Next is Professor Steven L. Schooner, Co-Director of the Government Procurement Law Program, George Washington University 

Law School. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF PROFESSOR STEVEN L. SCHOONER, GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT LAW PROGRAM, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL 

Mr. SCHOONER. Chairman Brown, Congressman Michaud, Chairman Akin, Congressman Udall, and members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you. I appreciate this opportunity. 

Let me begin by joining the chorus of those who recognize that 

service-disabled veterans deserve our respect and attention for 

their lasting sacrifices. Having spent my entire life affiliated with 

the United States Army, these issues strike particularly close to 

home. 

While this program was intended to benefit a deserving class of 

businesspeople, however, I fear that the rush to implement the program risks inefficiency in the procurement system, and at worst, 

potential abuse. 

My primary concerns are, first, empirically it is unclear that the 

program is the most efficient tool to achieve the desired end. 

Second, rather than creating new business opportunities, the program merely escalates infighting within the small business community. 

Third, certain aspects of the program raise troubling issues of accountability and oversight. 

23

And fourth, the program further burdens an already-thin federal 

acquisition work force. 

For example, the initial regulatory flexibility analysis and SBA’s 

analysis makes clear we do not know how many and what type of 

service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses exist. A survey or 

study, possibly a joint effort of the SBA, the VA, and the Commerce 

Department, might be immensely valuable. 

If, for example, a significant percentage of these firms fall into 

the comp demo categories, the set-aside provisions would be 

deemed ineffective. As this Committee well understands, the small 

business competitiveness demonstration program bars agencies 

from setting aside contracts for small businesses in certain industries where small businesses historically have proven themselves 

competitive. 

A better understanding of the SDVOSB market and its capabilities, the industries in which the capacity exists, the extent to which 

the capacity is utilized by the federal government will permit a 

much more targeted and effective outreach, and hopefully business 

development, program. 

Further, the program creates no new opportunities for small 

business; it merely redistributes opportunities. The program further subdivides the existing small business piece of the government’s procurement pie by pitting small businesses against each 

other. 

Similarly, government-wide goals may not be the most effective 

tools if your purpose is to broadly distribute contract opportunities 

to emerging firms. 

Experience suggests that once an aggressive goal is in place, it 

favors the most successful or strongest existing firms. Because the 

goal focuses upon the percentage of dollars in contract awards, contracting officers have an incentive to award the largest possible 

contract to the smallest number of eligible firms. So the chief beneficiary tends to be robust small- to mid-sized firms, many of which 

strategically avoid formal growth by subcontracting or outsourcing 

tasks. 

In addition, the system will be very difficult to police. First, selfcertification opens the door for abuse. That is why both the SDV 

and the Hub Zone programs require certification, and I think that 

is appropriate here. 

In addition, sole-source contracting contradicts one of the fundamental premises upon which our system is based: competition. And 

we are all familiar with the Competition in Contracting Act, and 

why it is in place. 

In addition, sole-source contracting presents significant risks to 

emerging veteran-owned firms. Small firms that may not fully understand the contractual obligations are all too eager to assume 

their appropriate risks. When those firms fail, it disrupts the government operations. But in addition, because the government increasingly relies on past performance evaluations, this can prove 

potentially fatal, a professional death knell, to an emerging small 

business in the government marketplace. 

Finally, further proliferation of set-asides in small business programs adds complexity and inefficiency in the procurement system, 

24

and that is problematic because throughout the 1990s, Congress 

mandated acquisition work force reductions. 

There is an insufficient number of qualified federal acquisition 

professionals left to conduct appropriate market research, plan acquisitions, maximize competition, comply with Congressionally-imposed social policies, administer contracts to assure quality control 

and compliance, resolve protests and disputes, and close out contracts. 

I remain disappointed by Congressional unwillingness to intervene on behalf of the acquisition work force, particularly in light 

of the recent experience in Iraq, where, for example, our Program 

Management Office outsourced its management of its contractors. 

The acquisition work force crisis is exacerbated by the Administration’s emphasis on competitive sourcing, and it will get worse before it gets better. So asking this work force, without additional resources, to cater to special interest groups is unrealistic, and arguably fiscally irresponsible. 

The bottom line is in attempting to balance these competing concerns, providing good opportunity to veterans and small businesses, 

while obtaining supplies in an economically-efficient manner, patience seems to be an appropriate response. 

That concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity, 

and I would be pleased to answer any questions. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much, Mr. Schooner. 

Gentlemen, I am going to skip over you and go to Mr. Hudson, 

if that is in order. And Mr. James Hudson is the Marketing Director of Austad Enterprise, Inc. 

And thank you, Mr. Hudson. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES C. HUDSON, AUSTAD ENTERPRISES, 

INC. 

Mr. HUDSON. Good afternoon, Chairman Brown, Chairman Akin, 

other distinguished members of the subcommittees, dedicated 

members of the respective staff, my colleagues both in and out of 

the government today. 

I am a service-disabled Vietnam veteran. My wife Fran, also a 

service-disabled veteran, and I work together in a corporation 

which publishes the Veterans’ Business Newswire, an e-newsletter 

disseminated to more than 25,000 service-disabled and other veterans in small business. 

We also publish a directory for small business owners, called 

‘‘Purchasing Contacts in Major US Corporations.’’ And we own a 

video and audio conferencing company, whose customers include 

federal agencies. 

I have worked in the field of veterans’ affairs and disability 

rights since my discharge from the Army in 1970. My testimony 

today is based largely on my own experience, but also on the experience of our readers, and their emails to us and their phone calls. 

Also, we have published a brochure immediately after the passage 

of public law 108-183. Joseph Forney, myself, and my wife made 

that a downloadable Microsoft Publisher and .pdf file. And we have 

had more than 500 downloads since February, when that was made 

available to service-disabled veterans in small business. And so we 

have gotten feedback from them, as well. 

25

And I can tell you that we have also had efforts over the last 

three years to market to federal agencies and prime contractors, 

and that is the basis of my testimony today. 

We have attended conferences in Colorado, New Mexico, Washington, D.C., other states, at the urging of small business officials. 

We have traveled to other states to meet with federal buyers. As 

a result of those efforts, we have had sales of $10,000 in the last, 

with federal agencies. 

We have corresponded and spoken with literally 1500 veterans, 

and most of them non-service-connected, but I would say approximately three or four hundred service-disabled veterans in the last 

several years. We personally know just a few who describe themselves as being successful in the federal arena. 

I would urge the Committees to study the issue of how many 

new service-disabled veterans are contracting with federal agencies. The Federal Procurement Data Center can pull that information from their data. 

For example, the Veterans’ Administration in fiscal year 2002 

was contracting with, on average, three to four new service-disabled veterans per month. Those are companies that did not have 

previous contracts with that agency, or any other federal agency, 

prior to those months. That gives you a better picture of how public 

law 106-50 has been implemented. 

This fiscal year, fiscal year 2003, service-disabled veterans should have earned a gross revenue of $7.5 billion. Instead, they 

brought in $549 million, two-tenths of 1 percent of the procurement 

budget, instead of the 3-percent goal that was set. And that total 

is actually $5 million less than the $554 million that was targeted, 

or that was actually earned two years earlier, in fiscal year 2001. 

This is especially hurtful to our nation’s service-disabled veterans 

in small business, to know that more than half of all federal agencies, more than half of the 60 federal agencies spent zero percent 

of their budgets with service-disabled veterans. That includes the 

Office of the White House, the Executive Office of the President, 

the Small Business Administration, the Department of Labor; 

agencies that you would expect to lead, not bring up the rear in 

procurement spending. SBA, for three years straight, has spent 

zero dollars with service-disabled veterans. 

It was, as you recall, Angela Styles, the top federal procurement 

official, that came to this Committee last year and said that the 

federal government was doing an abysmal job in procurement 

spending for service-disabled and other veterans. And that helped 

to spur the Committee to take the action with respect to public law 

108-183. And we appreciate that effort very much. This gives new 

hope to service-disabled veterans. 

But I have to say that we would be mistaken if we thought that 

thousands of service-disabled veterans have not dropped out of the 

system. In talking to them, we have learned that many veterans 

just are not going to come back one more time. 

Over the last 20, 30 years since the Vietnam War ended, the 

treatment that they received by the SBA and other resource partners of the government has been poor, and they are just not going 

to come back and try one more time. And these zeroes that have 

been piling up in the federal agencies over the last five years, you 

26

cannot knock on those doors over and over again and not, in some 

cases, drop out. So we have lost many service-disabled veterans 

from the system. That is just a reality. 

We were encouraged with the brochure download, so we know 

some are still in the fight. And the outreach efforts of the government have brought in new service-disabled veterans. So we have to 

respond to their needs, and I know the Committees are willing to 

do that and are making their effort. 

The focus of your Committee today is to talk about outreach efforts, and whether they are making a difference since the passage 

of this new law. I wish I could say it has been more positive. Joseph and I have been out knocking on doors, and you will learn 

from Joseph his response. But I can tell you that my own has not 

been positive. 

I will tell you that—is the time almost expired? I am sorry. 

Mr. BROWN. You are 1:18 over already, so—and I am just waiting 

on Joseph, so go ahead. 

Mr. HUDSON. I am waiting on him, too. Let me just wrap up by 

saying that though the outreach efforts have not been positive, I 

believe that one of the actions that the Committees may take that 

would be beneficial would be to accept the fact that we are not 

going to see much positive action by the federal agencies until they 

have a program in place that will give more of a case-managed approach to service-disabled veterans. Especially veterans with more 

severe disabilities. They need more follow-along, they need more intensive service. And the idea of handing them a brochure referring 

them to an SBA or a small business development center is not 

going to be sufficient. They need follow-along perhaps for years. 

The 8(a) program for some businesses has been successful, but 

they do not need to be referred to the 8(a) program, God forbid. But 

they do need that kind of intensive, sustained effort. 

[Mr. Hudson’s statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Hudson. And now we have got the 

wrap-up member of the panel, Mr. Joseph Forney, President of 

VetSource, Inc. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH K. FORNEY, VETSOURCE, INC. 

Mr. FORNEY. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee who 

have stayed, I appreciate the opportunity to testify in front of you. 

I was hoping that Chairman Akin would stay. I am from his home 

state of Missouri. And what we say in Missouri, show me. 

Mr. BROWN. Well, you know, he cannot be in two places at one 

time. And I guess he is on the Armed Services Committee, and the 

mark-up over there has taken priority. But all of this will be recorded, and he will have access to those minutes. 

Mr. FORNEY. I just wanted to hear him say ‘‘show me.’’ Because 

that is what I am telling you is I ain’t seen much yet. And my eyes 

are wide open, sir. We have been out in the field, as Jim mentioned, trying to sell our goods and services. And to hear over and 

over again that this is just a goal. 

I have a signed letter from Department of Agriculture where 

they stated, from their Office of Procurement Policy, that it is discretionary, and not mandatory. And so therefore, they are not going 

to participate. 

27

I was a little bit leery sitting behind the young lady from SBA 

after the way that Ms. Velazquez took to her. But as Jim mentioned, their participation is zero. 

Department of Defense was up here. The Army is at .02, two onehundredths of 1 percent. At this rate—I am sorry, and I do not 

want to confuse you with facts and figures and fancy ciphering—

.04. At this rate it would take them 300 years to get to the 3-percent goal. 

Now, I do not know about me, but I do not think Mr. Lopez is 

going to make it. 

The reasons that they claim, there are not enough of us, we are 

not capable, is ludicrous. I sell air conditioning filters along with 

the food items that I sell to states, prisons, school districts back in 

California. I sell them to utility companies; namely, Semper Utility, 

which is San Diego Gas and Electric and Southern California Gas. 

I have proven myself in the public sector. 

Just for a little drill, I checked the GSA schedule. Their best 

price for the standard air conditioning filter was $1.73. I would 

have trouble sleeping at night if I sold them to you for a dollar. 

That is just one example of how we can provide goods and services. 

We have all been trained. We have the experience, the time, the 

knowledge within the private sector. Yet when I tried to sell these 

same air conditioning filters to the VA, I could not even get a call 

back. 

I have been to two different VISNs, VISN 22, my local one, VISN 

19 up in Denver. And I have been there numerous times. All I 

wanted them to do was find out how they buy air conditioning filters. I could not even get a response. I had to go to the VA 

mothership over here and get the Head of Acquisitions, Mr. Derr, 

and he is going to check into it. But not everyone is going to have 

the capability to come to Washington to go to VA headquarters to 

find out how they buy air conditioning filters. Because what if it 

is something more complicated, like pencils? 

I am glad to see the Ranking Member come back. I love that, 

with the SBA, because while you were gone, we pointed out that 

their participation was zero. So at this rate, it would take never? 

I will submit my testimony. If I can answer any questions, I 

would be glad to. 

[Mr. Forney’s statement may be found in the appendix.] 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much, Mr. Forney. 

This has been a real eye-opener. We pass regulations and laws; 

we do not know how they are being perceived or implemented 

through the process. This was real eye-opening for me. 

I have some questions; I will submit them for a written response. 

But do we have any questions from the panel? Mr. Udall? 

Mr. UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Lopez, in your testimony you talk about the integration of 

service-disabled veteran-owned businesses and the SBA’s efforts. 

And also about the SBA’s inclusion of SDVBs in the agencies’ publications and outreach materials. And yet you also express a concern about ‘‘the lack of effort and outreach in 2003.’’ 

What kind of outreach have you been expecting to see? 

28

Mr. LOPEZ. I make that distinction because they have a policy of 

using all of their old materials first in respect to government efficiency. 

If you read their old materials, including some that were recently 

printed, you will find out they do not even mention service-disabled 

veterans. It is only their new literature that is just coming out 

now, after the effort of these Committees, that they begin to talk 

about service-disabled veterans. 

What I expect, I expect activity on the part of the staff. I expect 

seminars in training their personnel, so the personnel knows what 

a veteran is. I expect them to be very cognizant of the fact that you 

have a peculiar type of population here. You do not have the normal population. They have limited energy. They have a great deal 

of cerebral capacity. But you have to be able to get to them, not 

wait for them to come to Washington, D.C., or any of the other regional offices. 

Mr. UDALL. Go ahead, please. 

Mr. WEIDMAN. If I may, please, Mr. Udall. There was a question 

today about how many veteran entrepreneurs there are. 

In the first session of the 105th Congress, the Congress mandated that there be a study done of how many people are there. 

That was 1997. 

That report was finished—it was delayed because of OMB delays, 

and because of SBA—but it was finally completed and accepted in 

1999, just before Veterans’ Day. No, excuse me, 1998. 

It has still not been officially delivered to the Congress. 

I know that Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Lane Evans 

wrote to Mr. Pereto over a year ago, about a year and a half ago. 

It still has not been received. 

May I suggest, if at all possible, with the Chairman, that that 

be included somehow in this record? Or at least some kind of reference to a website when it is posted. 

But I think the key thing is this. What you seem to be suggesting, sir, is that the SBA is heavily weighted towards doing this 

outreach for veterans. No other agency, as long as SBA has zero, 

zero contracts with service-disabled veterans, is likely to pay them 

a whit of attention. 

Similarly, how many service-disabled veteran business owners do 

you think are going to trust an agency that, even by accident, 

ought to have a few contracts with service-disabled veterans, but 

which has none, sir? 

Mr. UDALL. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Lopez, for your expectations. At least for me, I believe we should be pushing on this 

front. 

Professor Schooner, in your testimony you speak of the need for 

a study or survey to gain a better understanding of the SDVB market and its capabilities. Can you talk a little bit more about what 

impact proceeding without knowledge of the market can have? 

Mr. SCHOONER. Well, if you do not mind, let me— 

Mr. UDALL. And go ahead, if you want to elaborate a little bit. 

Mr. SCHOONER. Let me speak to the importance of a study. At 

a minimum, whether you begin with the process that was already 

done and get that completed and updated, until we know how 

many potential businesspeople there are, and much more imporVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:58 Apr 29, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\HEARINGS\20816.TXT MIKEA
29

tantly, in what industries they pursue government business or 

want government business, we are shooting in the dark. It is the 

most inefficient way in the world to proceed by shotgunning out in 

the world. 

Let us find out where the strengths are, and target those businesses directly. It is exactly what you have heard the others say. 

Information here is power. And without information, what we are 

doing is we are putting a burden on everyone that is not going to 

get you a return on investment. 

The best precedential example I can give you on this was after 

Aderand, when we went through the promulgation of the rules for 

the revised SDV program, the Department of Commerce, in conjunction with the Justice Department, and later the Council on 

Economic Advisors, spent years working with the SMOBY and the 

SWOBY data, trying to get this data. It is very, very difficult to 

find out which industries are important. And we may or may not 

come back to comp demo. But it is tremendously important to know 

where you are going, and where you are going to get return on investment. 

Mr. UDALL. Thank you. Thank you. And Mr. Forney, given your 

recognition as a veterans’ advocate, have you been approached by 

a federal agency to assist agencies in identifying qualified veteranowned companies? And I can submit that one for the record. 

Mr. BROWN. Mr. Udall, if you would. I would just like to make 

an announcement, as we just got an email that we might have 

votes within the next 10 minutes. 

And so, just to give the other members of the panel a chance to— 

Mr. UDALL. Okay. I will submit that one for the record, and let 

the other members of the panel question. 

Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much. 

Ms. HERSETH. If Mr. Udall is going to submit that in written 

form, I would like that same question, if you would provide an answer there. Because my concern—not a concern, but a hope—is 

that you, as a veterans’ advocate, other organizations that serve as 

advocates for veterans, are involved. You are being asked by federal agencies. Because it is sort of information both ways that we 

are lacking. It is information of the qualified businesses having the 

information of what the program is, but it is also a lack of information for the agencies of the implementation of the program.

Mr. FORNEY. Exactly. And in Los Angeles we have the LA Area 

Service-Disabled Veteran Business Network that we started, just 

as an ad hoc group. We try to outreach through public service announcements for veterans who are either in business or starting a 

business. 

I know Mr. Weidman and myself have gone over to Walter Reid. 

And one of the most important questions these young men and 

women returning home wounded and forever changed is, will I still 

be able to go to school? And what if school is not the best approach 

for their rehabilitation? What if it is entrepreneurship, because 

they are unemployable? This is something that we try to outreach 

as much as possible. 

To get to both questions, there is a state program, as Mr. Lopez 

mentioned, in California. There is over 1,000 identified state-cerVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:58 Apr 29, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\HEARINGS\20816.TXT MIKEA
30

tified service-disabled veteran-owned firms. And the state estimates that there is over 10,000. 

But with such hollow promises, why should we bring them out? 

A lot of people are reluctant to participate. 

Ms. HERSETH. The only other thing I want to add, just so that 

it is a comment reflect in the record, based on the study, Mr. 

Weidman, that you said was authorized, we think was completed 

but has not yet been delivered. And then—go ahead. 

Mr. WEIDMAN. We have a copy, and I have it on cd/rom, Madame. And I will have it to your office before tomorrow morning. 

Ms. HERSETH. Okay. The only comment I want to add, though, 

is that I do think it needs to be updated. Because in South Dakota 

we have a significant number of National Guard reservists that are 

currently serving, that are going to be coming back, that are concerned, because they are small business owners, about the effect 

that that has had on their small business during a deployment of 

12 to 18 months. And I think that we should see that, but also recognize the need for an update of that study. 

Mr. WEIDMAN. The Task Force on Veterans’ Entrepreneurship is 

engaged in preparing now a report to the nation that will be delivered this coming October. 

The principal investigator is the same gentleman, Dr. Paul R. 

Comacho from the William Joyner Center for War, the study of war 

and its social consequences, at the University of Massachusetts at 

Boston. The steering committee is chaired by Major General Chuck 

Henry, and co-chaired by Wayne Gatewood, who is a successful 

business entrepreneur, and a small businessperson veterans’ advocate of the year last year for the District of Columbia. 

We will be glad to brief you, and we would welcome any academic input from George Washington Law or anyone else, as we 

prepare this report and essentially update that material, ma’am. 

Mr. BROWN. That is the vote, but we still have got a few minutes. 

Ms. Velazquez, did you have any questions? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I would like for 

the record to reflect the fact that in the House-passed version of 

the bill that established this program, Democrats from the Small 

Business Committee insisted on such a study. 

But I would like to ask Professor Schooner, you questioned the 

credibility of this 3-percent goal. What do you think a reasonable 

goal should be? 

Mr. SCHOONER. In any situation like this, the most reasonable 

goal is what the empirical evidence suggests is feasible. But we 

also have precedent for better ways of approaching this. 

For example, the Hub Zone program was a classic example, 

where you ended up with a very similar goal, but at least you staggered the goal. 

All I am saying is, if you are already in a situation where you 

know you need the information, do not set the goal until you have 

the information. If the information suggests that you could have a 

5- or 10-percent goal, so be it. But do not set the goal arbitrarily. 

I think that is a pretty simple point. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Professor, you appeared to indicate that there 

are structural problems with the underlying statute. The Housepassed version of the bill that established this program initially 

31

had a number of provisions pushed by the Small Business Committee Democrats. These provisions were intended to process the 

program, and to ensure the safety and soundness of the program. 

The House-passed version included, first, a certification program 

administered by the SBA. The final bill did not include that. A 

study to identify how many service-disabled veterans own businesses; and of those, what is the primary industry of the businesses. The final underlying statute does not contain this. 

And third, an order of precedence, so that contracting officers can 

identify clearly what the priorities of Congress are. The final statute does not have this. 

All three of these provisions were kept out of the final product. 

My question to you is, what is your view of the underlying statute 

missing these? 

Mr. SCHOONER. Well, I think we are all in agreement that the 

study would be a good thing, and we have already spoken about 

that. 

I cannot argue strongly enough for a certification in a program 

like this. We saw in the SDV program, we saw in the Hub Zone 

program, how important it is to inject credibility into the system. 

And I am assuming that the gentleman sitting at the table with 

me fully recognizes the worst thing that can happen in a program 

like this is if individuals fraudulently represent themselves and get 

these contracts. So they should have no concern whatsoever with 

an open and credible certification system. 

As for the order of precedence, I think it is pretty clear, based 

on the questions you asked earlier, that we have now created in 

the regulations a conflict between the 8(a) program, the Hub Zone 

program, and the others. And this type of confusion serves no one. 

It will not help veterans, but it impacts the entire procurement 

process. And I think an order of precedence would be a step in the 

right direction. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Professor. Mr. Lopez, in your comments on the interim rule implementing PL 108-183, you suggest 

that contracting officers should be allowed to use service-disabled 

veteran-owned businesses for requirements that are currently 

being performed by 8(a) companies. Why do you believe that contracts that are currently performed should be taken away from 

8(a)? 

Mr. LOPEZ. Do I say that, or is it in our task force report? I did 

not make any such comment. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. In the task force, yes. 

Mr. LOPEZ. Ah, okay. Then you have to direct that to the task 

force in writing. I did not make that comment. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. But do you agree with that assessment? 

Mr. LOPEZ. I beg your pardon? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Do you agree with that? 

Mr. LOPEZ. No. I do not even address that. I do not think that 

is an issue. 

But if I may, with permission, Congresswoman, I would like to 

address something that Mr. Schooner has said, and I take a great 

deal of objection to. 

And that is that academic inertia is not an option. This is a 

unique population. The intent of Congress is to assist service-disVerDate 0ct 09 2002 17:58 Apr 29, 2005 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\HEARINGS\20816.TXT MIKEA
32

abled veterans, not lighten the workload of government officials, 

nor create information for government archives. 

We have already cheated the world’s greatest population, the 

World War II veterans. They are not participants in this program 

because they were never given assistance. We will not go through 

that again for our Vietnam veterans, our Bosnia veterans, our Gulf 

veterans, or our Iraq veterans. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I do not think that that is what the professor— 

Mr. LOPEZ. That is the intent and direction of these recommendations. And that is to further delay. And we will not have 

further delay. 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I do not know what you are talking about, but 

let me tell you this. 

We will do everything possible to help disabled veterans. 

Mr. LOPEZ. Madame— 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Excuse me, sir, I am talking here. We will do 

everything that we can. 

But the pie is too small. We cannot rob Peter to pay Paul. And 

what we need to do is to expand the program and the resources so 

that we could allow disabled veterans to participate, but it cannot 

be at the expense of the 8(a) program. 

Mr. LOPEZ. May I respond to that? 

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. No, you do not have to respond. I am not asking 

you a question, I am making a statement. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. LOPEZ. May I make a statement? Mr. Chairman, may I make 

a statement? 

Mr. BROWN. You have got 30 seconds. 

Mr. LOPEZ. I agree with you. I agree with you. But first of all, 

your first premise is wrong; there is no size to the pie. That is an 

imaginary creation of dominant corporations restricting the size of 

the contracts available to those disadvantaged populations. There 

is no size to the pie. 

Let me add, if I may, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. BROWN. Okay. 

Mr. LOPEZ. Our comrades are dying at the rate of 1100 a day. 

We do not have time for these machinations, academic machinations. The world is passing us by. We have a closing window of opportunity, not an opening window of opportunity. We must move 

quickly, or we will be passed. 

Mr. BROWN. Let me see. I do not think there is any misunderstanding in this panel that we want to be absolutely sure that we 

address the problem that will allow more input, more involvement 

in the procurement process. 

We do not want to get tied up with the mire of all the red tape. 

We want to try to solve that. That is the purpose of this hearing. 

And I appreciate you all coming, but we must go vote. Thank you 

very much. 

[Whereupon, at 3:52 p.m., the Subcommittee meeting was adjourned.]

33


20816.001
34


20816.002
35


20816.003
36


20816.004
37


20816.005
38


20816.006
39


20816.007
40


20816.008
41


20816.009
42


20816.010
43


20816.011
44


20816.012
45


20816.013
46


20816.014
47


20816.015
48


20816.016
49


20816.017
50


20816.018
51


20816.019
52


20816.020
53


20816.021
54


20816.022
55


20816.023
56


20816.024
57


20816.025
58


20816.026
59


20816.027
60


20816.028
61


20816.029
62


20816.030
63


20816.031
64


20816.032
65


20816.033
66


20816.034
67


20816.035
68


20816.036
69


20816.037
70


20816.038
71


20816.039
72


20816.040
73


20816.041
74


20816.042
75


20816.043
76


20816.044
77


20816.045
78


20816.046
79


20816.047
80


20816.048
81


20816.049
82


20816.050
83


20816.051
84


20816.052
85


20816.053
86


20816.054
87


20816.055
88


20816.056
89


20816.057
90


20816.058
91


20816.059
92


20816.060
93


20816.061
94


20816.062
95


20816.063
96


20816.064
97


20816.065
98


20816.066
99


20816.067
100


20816.068
101


20816.069
102


20816.070
103


20816.071
104


20816.072
105


20816.073
106


20816.074
107


20816.075
108

Æ


20816.076