U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

28–781 PDF 2018

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 

ACQUISITION OVERSIGHT AND REFORM 

JOINT HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 

AND THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JULY 12, 2017 

Serial No. 115–53 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://oversight.house.gov 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina, Chairman 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Darrell E. Issa, California 

Jim Jordan, Ohio 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Justin Amash, Michigan 

Paul A. Gosar, Arizona 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Blake Farenthold, Texas 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Mark Meadows, North Carolina 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mark Walker, North Carolina 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Will Hurd, Texas 

Gary J. Palmer, Alabama 

James Comer, Kentucky 

Paul Mitchell, Michigan 

Greg Gianforte, Montana 

Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts 

Jim Cooper, Tennessee 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia 

Robin L. Kelly, Illinois 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 

Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands 

Val Butler Demings, Florida 

Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Peter Welch, Vermont 

Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Jimmy Gomez,California 

JONATHAN SKLADANY, Staff Director 

REBECCA EDGAR, Deputy Staff Director 

WILLIAM MCKENNA, General Counsel 

KATIE BAILEY, Subcommittee Staff Director 

TROY STOCK, Subcommittee Staff Director 

JULIE DUNNE, Senior Counsel 

KILEY BIDELMAN,Clerk 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

Mark Meadows, North Carolina, Chairman 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia, Vice Chair 

Jim Jordan, Ohio 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Will Hurd, Texas, Chairman 

Paul Mitchell, Michigan, Vice Chair 

Darrell E. Issa, California 

Justin Amash, Michigan 

Blake Farenthold, Texas 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Robin L. Kelly, Illinois, Ranking Minority 

Member 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Stephen F. Lynch, Masschusetts 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia 

Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on July 12, 2017 ............................................................................... 1 

WITNESSES 

Mr. Alan Thomas, Commissioner, Federal Acquisition Service, General Services Administration 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 7 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 10 

Mr. Rob Cook, Deputy Commissioner and Director of Technology Transformation Services, General Services Administration 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 14 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 16 

APPENDIX 

In-hearing inquiry response from Mr. Alan Thomas to Chairman Meadows ..... 30 

Questions for the Record for Mr. Alan Thomas submitted for the record 

by Chairman Meadows, Ranking Member Connolly, and Mr. Lynch .............. 34 

Questions for the Record for Mr. Rob Cook, submitted by Chairman Hurd ....... 45 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

ACQUISITION OVERSIGHT AND REFORM 

Wednesday, July 12, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, JOINT

WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittees met, pursuant to call, at 2:04 p.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mark Meadows [chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Operations] presiding. 

Present from Subcommittee on Government Operations: Representatives Meadows, Hice, Jordan, Massie, Blum, Connolly, 

Maloney, and Lawrence. 

Present from Subcommittee on Information Technology: Representatives Hurd, Connolly, Kelly, Lynch, and Krishnamoorthi. 

Also Present: Gowdy 

Mr. MEADOWS. The Subcommittee on Government Operations 

and the Subcommittee on Information Technology will come to 

order. And without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 

recess at any time. 

Welcome. I’m pleased to hold this hearing to hear from the acquisition and technology leaders at the General Service Administration, also called GSA. And in June, GSA announced a realignment 

of the Technology Transformation Service within the Federal Acquisition Service that I’d like to really understand a little bit better. 

I’d also like to continue up on our conversation that started in 

March of this year in the hearing on the Federal Acquisition System challenges and reforms. Annually, FAS is responsible for over 

$50 billion in goods and services bought by the Federal Government, while the TTS focuses primarily on the technology modernization. 

So in May of 2016, GSA established the TTS as a stand-alone 

service to consolidate technology-related functions and to assist 

other agencies with technology transformation. 

And just over a year later, GSA has realigned TTS so that it is 

no longer a stand-alone service, and the director of the TTS now 

reports to a FAS commissioner. And so I’d like to hear more about 

that from GSA and about the thinking behind that realignment. 

Second, I’d like to continue the conversation we started in March 

about the Federal acquisition challenges that make it difficult for 

the government to buy goods and services at the best price and in 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

a timely manner. The ever-increasing complexity of the system and 

associated compliance costs have a lot to do with these challenges. 

The Federal Acquisition Regulation, or FAR, as it’s sometimes referred to, has over 2,000 pages, and each agency has associated 

supplements to FAR. Like GSA, which has the general service acquisition regulations, we understand that these complex compliance issues make it very problematic. 

And so I’m looking forward to hear how we overcome those compliance costs. But let me just highlight one area, because there’s 

some indication that the compliance costs alone cost over $4 billion 

annually. 

Now, the cost of this complexability—or complexity is actually 

passed through in terms of higher costs for the customer. In fact, 

GSA’s own IG found that 75 percent of the top selling products on 

the GSA IT schedule actually could be bought 13 percent lower on 

the open market than the lowest price on the schedule. 

Now, you would think if we’re buying in bulk and buying in volume that we would get the best prices, and yet, that’s not what it 

shows. The big $473 billion fiscal year 2016 contracting spending 

question is, what do we do about these challenges? How do we fix 

it? 

So in January, the administration issued an executive order on 

reducing regulation and controlling regulatory cost, which presents 

an opportunity to reduce some of this complexity in Federal acquisitions. And in May, I dropped a bill that would actually codify this 

executive order, which I invite all of my colleagues to join. 

Clearly, this is an issue that both Congress and the administration is focused on. Since GSA is a member of the rulemaking body 

for the FAR council, and as a leader of several large acquisition 

programs, they should seize the opportunity. 

Finally, a word about a specific acquisition reform proposal. Our 

committee has been working with Chairman Thornberry on the online marketplace proposal in the National Defense Authorization 

Act. And we heard from one of the witnesses in the March hearing 

that suggested that we needed to go bold in acquisition reform. 

This proposal actually would meet that requirement. And under 

this proposal, GSA would be directed to establish a program to buy 

commercial products by contracting with several online marketplace providers. These marketplaces would provide a rapid pointand-click transaction dynamic, pricing, and delivery of goods under 

a standard commercial term and condition. 

So in order to inform a continued consideration for this proposal, 

I’d be interested in hearing what the GSA thinks on this particular 

proposal given their significant role in potentially implementing it. 

I’d like to thank each of you for being here today, for the witnesses, and I look forward to hearing your testimony. 

And with that, I’ll recognize my good friend and the ranking 

member from—the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. And thanks 

for calling today’s hearing on the General Service Administration 

recent reorganizations. 

GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service plays an important role in 

Federal procurement policy, procuring government-wide solutions 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

to products such as telecommunications, goods and services, and 

technology. 

In past administrations, both Republican and Democratic, the 

Federal Acquisition Service has been led by career civil servants to 

ensure that political considerations were not involved in the Federal acquisition process. 

It’s important the taxpayers know that when the Federal Government spends money on things from office supplies to information technology, the contract is negotiated on a nonpartisan basis 

in the best interest—hopefully—of the taxpayer. 

GSA also plays an important role in implementing the Federal 

risk and authorization management program, which standardizes 

the way the government is to conduct security authorization for 

cloud products and services. 

Over the past year and a half, after numerous concerns expressed by this committee and by the private sector, I convened a 

FedRAMP stakeholders meeting to discuss FedRAMP’s shortcomings, including costly and delayed certifications. 

Fortunately, those efforts along with the work of the program 

management office, have actually resulted in significant progress 

over the last year and a half. FedRAMP Ready, FedRAMP Connect, 

and FedRAMP Accelerated are helping to streamline and speed up 

the certification process. 

That process had been allowed to stretch out to as much as 2 

years and multimillions of dollars in expenditures for applicants. 

That was not the intent of FedRAMP. We’ve made progress so that 

that’s now down, for most applicants, to 4 months. 

Although, I met with one this week that is on its third year and 

counting. So we still have progress to make, but I do applaud GSA 

for finally taking this issue seriously and making progress. 

GSA recently announced a reorganization effort that included 

changing the commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service from 

a career position to a political appointment for the first time. GSA 

told committee staff in a bipartisan briefing this change came from 

the White House itself. 

This would raise concerns in any administration. But for me, it’s 

downright frightening in this administration. President Trump has 

the ability to fire the FAS commissioner at the same time that he 

has pending business with GSA, existing contracts with other agencies, and continues to receive income from other Federal—Federal 

investments with his business partners. 

This is a recipe for abuse of power and certainly conflict of interest, especially under a President who has no qualms about firing 

lead law enforcement officers investigating his own campaign and 

senior White House officials. 

I want to be clear, Mr. Thomas, and not just because you’re my 

constituent, I’m in no way questioning your personal integrity. This 

is not about you personally. It’s about ensuring that you and any 

commissioner who follows is protected from the political process. 

The GSA reorganization also consolidated the Technology Transformation Service into the Federal Acquisition Service. GSA told 

committee staff that the rationale for this change was to make it 

easier to find GSA’s 18F program using the acquisition service 

fund. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

It was precisely GSA’s use of that revolving fund, however, that 

the Office of Special Council just notified President Trump resulting in, quote, ‘‘gross mismanagement.’’ OSC’s notification followed 

disclosures from former commissioner of FAS Tom Sharpe to GSA’s 

inspector general and OSC regarding mismanagement and violations of law relating to the funding of 18F. 

However, moving TTS into the Federal Acquisition Service does 

very little to address the management challenges facing the Technology Transformation Service and 18F that have been identified 

by the GSA Office of Inspector General. These issues range from 

disregarding GSA IT security policies for operating and obtaining 

information technology to 18F’s mounting financial losses. 

Acting special counsel Adam Miles wrote, in a July 5, 2017, letter 

to President Trump, and I quote, ‘‘Without additional details on improved management controls, the realignment does not address Mr. 

Sharpe’s broader, substantiated concerns about mismanagement 

and his related questions about whether the taxpayers are receiving a solid benefit from this program.’’ 

Unfortunately, my confidence in GSA has eroded further. A series of actions have called the Agency’s judgment and independence 

into question. GSA has resisted oversight and stonewalled members of this committee and other committees in Congress, and I’m 

disappointed that GSA has still not responded to inquiries from 

members of this committee regarding its position of President 

Trump’s lease of the Old Post Office building. 

Prior to President Trump taking office, GSA expressed concern 

about whether his ownership interest would violate a clause in the 

lease that prohibits an elected official explicitly from holding an interest in the lease. GSA urged the President to fully divest his financial interest in the Old Post Office lease at that time. 

After the election, GSA made a complete volte-face, about face, 

and decided that the President was not in violation of the lease and 

provided no rationale for the decision. I think a lot of us, certainly 

on this side of the aisle, are disappointed that GSA refused to take 

appropriate actions to protect against conflicts of interest to protect 

the President as well as the public interest. 

Additionally, just yesterday, GSA decided—God knoweth why— 

to pull the plug on a 10-year effort to consolidate the FBI headquarters into a new location. This decision is a devastating blow to 

the hardworking men and women of the FBI itself who fight every 

day to keep this country safe. 

As reported by the GAO and numerous press accounts, the FBI 

headquarters is in disrepair and the building literally crumbling 

around its employees. This is not only devastating for the FBI, but 

it causes GSA’s credibility to suffer with the private sector, with 

whom it’s been working this last decade. 

A number of private sector entities, as well as local jurisdictions, 

put millions of dollars into the redevelopment and planning in response to the bidding process from GSA. GSA canceled that project 

yesterday. It did not notify the private partners with which it was 

working and barely gave us notice up here. 

This failed procurement harms GSA’s credibility and, I think, is 

going to cast a cloud over the willingness of serious private sector 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

entities to want to partner with GSA in any kind of complicated 

turnkey operation such as that involving the FBI headquarters. 

Finally, political leadership of GSA has used the Agency as a political weapon before, and we don’t want to revisit that. And it’s important that we don’t go down that road again in this administration. 

It was not even 10 years ago that former GSA administrator 

Lurita Doan was forced to resign. During her tenure, Ms. Doan 

sought to use GSA to help Republican lawmakers win reelection 

and approved a $20,000 no-bid procurement order to a firm run by 

a friend, who had served as her public relations consultant in the 

private sector. 

These are the misdeeds that can occur when those at GSA seek 

to curry political favor instead of working in the best interest of the 

taxpayer. Trying to shield GSA from that political influence is the 

first step. 

With that, I yield back. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. 

And before I recognize the chairman of the Subcommittee on Information Technology, I would like to just recognize the congressional liaison team that’s here. We thank you for being here. But 

specifically, our good friend and colleague, Mr. Post, welcome back. 

I would be remiss. And if you haven’t prepped him in the right 

way, you’re going to hear from me. 

But I recognize the chairman of the IT Subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hurd. 

Mr. HURD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s good to be here once 

again in partnership with the Government Operations Subcommittee and Chairman Meadows and Ranking Member Connolly. 

This is our third joint hearing together in this Congress, and I look 

forward to many more. 

Back in March, we held a joint subcommittee hearing to review 

challenges in Federal acquisition of IT. What we heard was alarming. For example, the number of first-time Federal vendors had 

fallen to a 10-year low, down from 24 percent in 2007 to 13 percent 

in 2016. 

The Federal Government is supposed to buy commercial, but 

with 34 different definitions of a commercial item in Federal regulation and 138 potentially applicable clauses for such transactions, 

it’s hardly a situation conducive to commercial viability. 

One of our witnesses at the March hearing, Dee Lee, chaired the 

section 809 panel, urged Congress to go bold. Another witness stated that the time was ripe to change the way the Federal Government acquired IT. 

I look forward to hearing today how the reorganization of TTS 

will help GSA fulfill its mission. I’m also interested in hearing an 

update on how the FedRAMP program—and ways that we can help 

streamline this cumbersome but important process. 

Lastly, I want to applaud Chairman Thornberry’s efforts to 

streamline acquisition within the Department of Defense and 

across the Federal Government. In an era when the click of a button can deliver nearly every imaginable consumer good, there’s no 

reason why the U.S. Government should be jumping through expensive hoops to buy a pack of pencils. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

This is not an easy issue to reform. We have great challenges in 

front of us. But we also have an opportunity to significantly 

streamline our Nation’s outdated acquisition process. 

Thank you, all, for being here, and I look forward to hearing 

from our witnesses today. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the chairman. 

The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman, who is truly a definition—when you look up that in the dictionary, it should have your 

picture. And so the gentleman recognizes Ms. Kelly for her opening 

statement. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you so much. My chair doesn’t say that about 

me. 

Mr. HURD. I was thinking it. 

Ms. KELLY. Chairman Meadows and Hurd and my colleague, 

Ranking Member Connolly, thank you for calling today’s hearing. 

And thank you to our witnesses for being here today. 

There has been a series of major changes within the GSA. These 

changes deserve greater attention from Congress, and I’m glad that 

we have this opportunity to learn more about these decisions that 

directly impact GSA’s ability to complete its mission. 

In May 2016, GSA launched the Technology Transformation 

Service, or TTS, which combined the Office of Citizens’ Services 

and Innovative Technologies, the Presidential Innovation Fellows, 

and 18F to create a one-stop shop to build, buy, and share technology solutions. This consolidation makes sense but does raise 

some important questions, and I look forward to hearing your answers. 

Last month, GSA announced that TTS would be housed within 

the Federal Acquisition Service or FAS. I look forward to better understanding the details of this merger and how it will affect the 

work of FAS and TTS. This reorganizing was also accompanied by 

an announcement that the head of FAS would become a political 

appointee. 

For more than a decade, the FAS commissioner has been a career GSA employee which carries real benefits. I have some serious 

concerns about politicization—excuse me. I’m not feeling well—of 

FAS commissioner position, especially given the recent decision to 

expand FAS responsibilities to include TTS. 

With more and more at stake in this critical office, we need an 

FAS commissioner who can rise above the political volatility of our 

current moment and remain completely and totally independent. 

Furthermore, I’m concerned about the utter lack of transparency 

from GSA in this new administration. 

In December, following the 2016 presidential election, members 

of the Oversight Committee sent a request pursuant to the sevenmember rule to GSA. For those unfamiliar with the seven-member 

rule, it requires an executive branch agency to provide any requested information by any seven members of the Oversight Committee. 

GSA provided the documents responsive to the requests within 

2 weeks, and we thank you. This year, members of the Oversight 

Committee sent GSA another request pursuant to the seven member rule. To date, GSA has not responded to either request. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 

This cannot be the status quo. GSA plays a critical role in our 

government, and the American people deserve answers and transparency, especially when those Americans are members of this 

committee. 

In the coming months and years, our committee will be working 

with GSA to continue improving and streamlining IT acquisition efforts, reform FedRAMP, and implement the MGTA. We need a 

GSA that is responsive, transparent, and most important, accountable to Congress. 

I look forward to hearing from the witnesses today. Thank you, 

and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank you. 

We’ll hold the record open for 5 legislative days for any member 

who would like to submit a written statement. 

We’ll now recognize our panel of witnesses. They have just called 

votes, and so what we’re going to do is we’re going to do our best 

to get both of you to do your opening testimony where you can get 

that out of the way and then we’ll take a recess for the question 

and answer portion. 

I’m pleased to welcome Mr. Alan Thomas, commissioner of the 

Federal Acquisition Service for the GSA; and Mr. Rob Cook, deputy 

commissioner and director of Technology Transformation Services 

at GSA. We welcome you, both. 

Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify, so if you’ll please rise and raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you’re about 

to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? 

All right. Thank you. Please be seated. And let the record reflect 

that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

Again, in order to allow time for questions and answers and 

hopefully to get us back through this, if you’ll limit your oral testimony to 5 minutes, but we will provide your entire written statement in the record. 

So, Mr. Thomas, you’re now recognized. 

WITNESS STATEMENTS 

STATEMENT OF ALAN THOMAS 

Mr. THOMAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good afternoon, Chairman Meadows and Chairman Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly and members of the Government 

Operations and Information Technology Subcommittees. Thank you 

for the opportunity to come before you today and discuss the U.S. 

General Services Administration’s Federal Acquisition Service. 

I’m honored to be here today for the first time as commissioner 

of the Federal Acquisition Service, or FAS, as we call it, as today 

marks my 12th day on the job. Considering my new tenure at the 

helm of FAS, I will start by giving you a brief overview of who I 

am and the perspective I will bring to the role of commissioner. 

I come to GSA as an outsider but with a perspective informed 

through multiple interactions with the Agency through different 

roles throughout my career. For example, I’ve led a technology 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
8 

startup in accessing the Federal marketplace using IT schedule 70 

and built a $7 million business line using that access. 

I’ve participated as a consultant in the merging of the Federal 

supply service and the Federal technology service. I’ve served as a 

Federal employee and used the GSA managed multiple award 

schedule contract to acquire professional services in support of an 

R&D program in my portfolio. 

Finally, I’ve managed a rapidly growing business unit for one of 

the most successful alliance small business prime contract holders. 

These roles have shown me GSA from the viewpoint of a startup 

company and established small business and that of a Federal employee. 

As commissioner, I aim to keep all these perspectives in mind, 

as GSA’s impact on Federal acquisition is wide and deep. My philosophy and approach for combining the mission and resources of 

TTS and FAS is to, first, listen intently, starting with the internal 

GSA team and our customers, then widening to encompass our industry partners and external stakeholders. 

I want to ensure that we are providing the best possible products 

and services to our customers and delivering value for the American taxpayer. Observing FAS from my vantage point as an outsider will provide valuable insight into how we achieve our goals. 

When meeting with programs, I’ve been asking three simple 

questions: What’s most important to keep? What’s most important 

to change? And what are the obstacles to change? 

Second, I’m going to utilize key members of the existing team, including my colleague and partner Rob Cook, the Technology Transformation Services deputy commissioner, whom you’ll be hearing 

from shortly, and the rest of our senior team at GSA to better understand the organization’s culture. The only expectation I bring is 

that our culture is compatible with my core values of honesty, courage, and graciousness. 

Third, I’m going to strive to be a leader without presumption, 

who’s transparent in my interactions with staff, customers, industry, and stakeholders. I’ve played or coached team sports all my 

life, and I know the only way we’re going to accomplish ambitious 

goals is if we all understand and play our roles, trust each other 

to find common ground, and build an organization with shared purpose. 

President Truman said it best when he stated, ‘‘It’s amazing 

what you can accomplish when you don’t care who gets the credit.’’ 

So as I delve deeper into my role in FAS over the next few months, 

my focus is going to be on execution and performance. I’m confident 

that we’ll build a high-performing team that executes on our objectives and delivers results to the American people. 

Before I close, I want to tell you that in my short time at GSA, 

I’m excited about what I see and I’m optimistic about what we can 

accomplish because we have great people. I look forward to working 

in partnership with this committee to execute an ambitious government reform agenda laid out by the administration and implement 

innovative legislation, such as the Modernizing Government Technology Act, the value-based procurement bill, and the National Defense Authorization Act. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
9 

There is still a lot more work that needs to be done, but I’m confident that together we’re going to make a lasting impact delivering 

value for the American taxpayer. Thank you for the opportunity to 

come here today, and I look forward to answering your questions 

about how best to encourage innovation and reform. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Thomas follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
10 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 28781.001

Introduction: 

Statement of Alan Thomas 

Commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service 

Before the Subcommittees on Government 

Operations and Information Technology of the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

Wednesday, July 12, 2017 

2154 Rayburn House Office Building 

U.S. General Services Administration 

Acquisition Oversight and Reform Hearing 

Good afternoon, Chairman Meadows and Chairman Hurd, ranking members Connolly 

and Kelly, and members of the Government Operations and Information Technology 

subcommittees. Thank you for the opportunity to come before you today to discuss the 

U.S. General Services Administration's (GSA) Federal Acquisition Service (FAS). I am 

honored to be here today for the first time as the Commissioner of the Federal 

Acquisition Service, as today marks my twelfth day on the job. Considering my new 

tenure at the helm of FAS, I will start by giving you a brief overview of who I am and the 

perspective I bring to the role of Commissioner. 

I come to GSA as an outsider, but with a perspective informed through multiple 

interactions with the agency from different roles throughout my career. For example, I 

have led a technology startup in accessing the government marketplace for the first time 

through IT Schedule 70 and built a $7 million business line using that access. 

Additionally, I have participated as a consultant in the merging of the Federal Supply 

Service and the Federal Technology Service. I have also served as a Federal employee 

and used a GSA-managed Multiple Award Schedule contract called Mission Oriented 

Business Integrated Services (MOBIS) to acquire professional services in support of an 

R&D program in my portfolio. Finally, I have managed a rapidly growing business unit 

for one of the most successful Government-Wide Acquisition Contract (GWAC) Alliant 

Small Business prime contract holders. 

Leadership approach: 

These roles have shown me GSA from the viewpoint of a startup company, an 

established small business, and that of a Federal employee. As Commissioner, I aim to 

keep all these perspectives in mind, as GSA's impact is wide and deep. 

My philosophy and approach for combining the mission and resources of TTS and FAS 

is to first, listen intently, starting with the internal GSA team and our customers, then 
11 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 28781.002

2 

widening to encompass our industry partners and external stakeholders. I want to 

ensure that we are providing the best possible products and services to our partners in 

government and delivering value for American taxpayers. 

Observing our organization's ecosystem from my vantage point as an outsider will 

provide valuable insight into how we achieve our goals. When meeting with program 

offices, I'm going to be asking three questions: what is most important to keep, what do 

you most look forward to changing, and what will make that change difficult? The only 

expectation I bring is that our culture is compatible with my core values of honesty, 

courage, and graciousness. 

Second, I'll utilize key members of our existing team, including Rob Cook, the 

Technology Transformation Services Deputy Commissioner-whom you will be hearing 

from shortly this afternoon-and the rest of the FAS team to better understand our 

organization's culture. 

Third, I'm going to be a leader without presumption who is transparent in my 

interactions with staff, customers, industry, and stakeholders. I've played or coached 

team sports all my life. The only way we will accomplish ambitious goals is if we all 

understand and play our roles, trust each other to find common ground, and build an 

organization with shared purpose. President Truman said it best when he stated, "It is 

amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit." 

So as I delve deeper into FAS over the next few months, my focus will be on execution 

and performance. I'm confident that we will build a high-performing team that executes 

our objectives and delivers results for the American people. 

FAS Overview: 

Just as the Public Buildings Service is the government's landlord, FAS is the 

government's premier provider of acquisition and technology transformation solutions. 

FAS provides these solutions to partner agencies throughout the entire acquisition cycle 

and reflects a commitment to delivering service, innovation, and value through efficient 

operations, market expertise, and proactive partnerships with both customer agencies 

and private sector vendors. FAS provides Federal agencies over 11 million different 

products and services, and delivers over $55 billion worth annually. 

FAS' portfolios have a shared mission of promoting smarter buying, the efficient use of 

technology, and reduced administrative costs across the Government. With that goal in 

mind, FAS has introduced category management principles and has also launched the 

Common Acquisition Platform (CAP) to improve its level of service through innovative 
12 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 28781.003

3 

tools that enhance agency acquisitions. FAS is also investing in the development of the 

Acquisition Gateway, a platform and set of digital services to bring information, data, 

and category management knowledge to the Government acquisition workforce. These 

initiatives are aligned with the FAS and the Government-wide implementation of 

category management principles and are designed to save the Government money 

through reduced contract duplication, improved engagement with industry, and the 

incorporation of strategic sourcing principles into the category acquisitions. 

FAS Programs: 

Overall, FAS programs are focused on four key areas: 

1) Establish acquisition vehicles for goods and services 

The Office of General Supplies and Services (GSS) provides agencies with 

general products such as furniture, office supplies, and hardware products. GSS 

centralizes acquisitions on behalf of the Government to strategically procure 

goods and services at reduced costs, while ensuring regulatory compliance for 

partner agency procurements. The Office of Information Technology Category 

(lTC) provides agencies with information technology (IT) and telecommunications 

products and services. lTC provides access to IT services, hardware, software, 

telecommunications, and IT security services through multiple channels, 

including the Network Services Program, IT Schedule 70, and Government-wide 

Acquisition Contracts (GWACs). Establishing and maintaining these acquisition 

vehicles is aligned with the FAS and the Government-wide implementation of 

category management principles and is designed to save the Government money 

through reduced contract duplication, improved engagement with industry, and 

the incorporation of strategic sourcing principles into the category acquisitions. 

2) Provide support for agency operations 

FAS's Professional Services & Human Capital Categories provides Federal 

agencies with professional and human capital services contract solutions, 

including payment solutions through the GSA SmartPay® program. Our Travel, 

Transportation, and Logistics Categories provides partner agencies with a broad 

scope of services, which includes travel, transportation, and relocation services; 

motor vehicle acquisition; and motor vehicle fleet leasing services. 

3) Assist in agency procurements 

The Office of Assisted Acquisition Services (AAS) helps agencies in making 

informed procurement decisions and serves as a center of acquisition excellence 

for the Federal community. The Office of Systems Management standardizes, 

integrates, and streamlines the Federal awarding process through electronic 
13 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 28781.004

4 

means, while increasing transparency and ensuring compliance with all 

applicable Federal acquisition regulations. The portfolio also repurposes existing 

FAS IT systems and develops new systems in support of Government-wide 

acquisition shared services. The newly developed systems provide Federal 

agencies with access to acquisition support data (e.g., prices paid) that allows for 

informed purchases. 

4) Transform Government Efficiency and Service Delivery Through Better Use of 

Technology 

The Technology Transformation Services (TIS) team helps agencies build, buy, 

and share technology through Government-wide platforms, promotes the use of 

modern development practices that are agile and user-centered, and assists 

government buyers in the acquisition of technology. 

Finally, providing acquisition tools to help agencies buy smarter and establishing 

procurement vehicles to leverage the government's buying power are not enough. To 

truly minimize the administrative costs associated with acquisitions, we need to examine 

the procurement process and how we can improve that structure. GSA has a number of 

projects underway, such as the Making It Easier Initiative, to reduce the complexity of 

doing business with the government and we look forward to working with the committee 

on proposed solutions, such as the e-commerce platform aimed at streamlining the 

procurement processes to speed delivery of products and services to agencies. 

Conclusion: 

You will hear shortly from Rob Cook, who will talk about the newest member of the FAS 

family, the Technology Transformation Services team, but before I close, I want to tell 

you that in my short time at FAS, I am excited at what I am seeing and optimistic about 

what FAS can accomplish. I look forward to building upon the existing foundation and 

working in partnership with this committee to execute an ambitious government reform 

agenda laid out by the administration. There is still a lot more work that needs to be 

done, but I'm confident that together, we are going to make a lasting impact by 

delivering value for American taxpayers. 

Thank you for the opportunity to come here today and I look forward to answering your 

questions. 
14 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. You actually get an A 

for your opening statement on 12 days. Anybody who comes in 

under 5 minutes certainly gets an A from everybody up here on our 

committee. The second part is a Truman quote, it’s my favorite 

quote of all time, so you get an A plus. 

Mr. THOMAS. Shorter is better, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Yeah, amen. 

Mr. Cook, you’ve got a high bar to accomplish here. You’re recognized. 

STATEMENT OF ROB COOK 

Mr. COOK. I’m nervous. 

Thank you, Chairman Meadows, Chairman Hurd, Ranking Members Connolly and Kelly. I really appreciate the opportunity to 

come here and talk to you about technology. I like doing that. 

And everyone here is familiar with the problems that are facing 

Federal IT: You know, we have too many legacy systems; systems 

are insecure. They’re expensive to maintain; and our technology 

projects are frequently over budget, behind schedule, and don’t 

really deliver even at that on what they promised. 

So there seems to be a broad agreement on the problem. The 

question is what do we do about it. Fortunately, there have been 

also been a number of government successes in technology recently, 

and we now know what works inside government to approach this. 

And it’s a combination of three factors: It’s getting the right talent; it’s the partners; and process. So let me talk about each of 

those. First on talent, we’ll never solve the problem unless we’ve 

got great, top tech talent inside government. 

We’ve learned that some great people in technology will come to 

government as career Feds, but a lot more have private sector careers. And they don’t necessarily want a lifetime career in government, but they’re happy to come serve for a tour of duty. This gives 

us a bigger pool of applicants, and it gives a constant refresh of talent from the front lines because technology is constantly changing. 

And let me note that having tech talent inside the government 

does not change the fact that most of the work is going to be done 

in the private sector. What this does is to give government the 

savvy it needs to be a good partner with the private sector, so to 

plan well, to make the decisions, to manage projects, to be a better 

buyer. 

So the second factor, after talent, is partners. The talent that’s 

been missing is a key ingredient but it’s just an ingredient. We 

cannot move the needle in government without people and partners 

inside government who know government well, and that includes 

in the agencies, in GSA, in OMB. 

And the third is the process. This old, so-called waterfall approach was to plan everything out in advance, but technology has 

just gotten too complex for that, and that process just doesn’t work 

anymore. 

What’s needed instead is an iterative planning approach, so you 

build a bit, get feedback from people who are actually going to use 

it, and course correct, and build a bit more. The center of the procVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:20 Mar 29, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\28781.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
15 

ess has to be the user, and you have to be agile so you can change 

in response to their feedback. 

So we know this combination of talent, partners, and process 

works. An example is the implementation of the DATA Act. 18F 

partnered with Treasury and we took an iterative user-centric agile 

approach. 

Vendors did most of the work, but we were clear about what we 

needed them to build, we managed the process well, and we were 

good partners. The result was a successful project that was delivered on time and under budget. That, I hear, is not the norm in 

government, but it should be. 

So government technology has its challenges, but we know how 

to address them. The chance to help in this cause is the reason people come to TTS. It’s why I came here last fall after a long career 

in the private sector. 

It won’t be easy, but this is a moment in time when we can actually do it. And there’s several reasons that I say that, and I’m 

hopeful: First, there are these recent successes that we have that 

show us how to do it; second, for TTS, our recent merger with the 

Federal Acquisition Service gives us flexibilities and structural support we need to do the part that we’re intended to play; third, 

FITARA has given CIOs authority and encouraged this incremental 

development practices; and fourth, the Modernizing Government 

Technology Act provides vital financial support, and it addresses 

the single-year funding limitation, which has been such a barrier 

to fixing the IT problem. This act is a strong and practical indication that we’re serious about this. 

And, finally, the strong bipartisan support we’ve seen for this endeavor is crucial. I found it very moving and encouraging. It reinforces the fact that this work is just plain good for the country. 

This country of ours has largely led the technology revolution 

that’s changing almost every aspect of our economy and society. 

This government of ours should not be lagging behind. It should be 

leading the way in using technology to provide better service, more 

efficiency, and more transparency for taxpayers. 

So we, at TTS, are excited by the opportunity before us and 

grateful to be part of the effort, and we’re looking forward to working with agencies, with industry, and with Congress in this undertaking. Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Cook follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
16 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 28781.005

Statement of Rob Cook 

Deputy Commissioner and Director of Technology Transformation Services 

Before the Subcommittees on Government Operations and Information 

Technology ofthe 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

Wednesday, July 12, 2017, at 2:00p.m. 

2154 Rayburn House Office Building 

Hearing Title: 

U.S. General Services Administration-Acquisition Oversight and Reform 

Introduction 

Good afternoon, Chairmen Meadows and Hurd, ranking members Connolly and Kelly, 

and members of the committees. Thank you for the opportunity to come before you to 

discuss the U.S. General Services Administration's Technology Transformation 

Services or TTS, a component of the Federal Acquisition Service. I am honored to be 

here sitting next to Alan Thomas, the new Commissioner of FAS. 

Background 

Members of this Committee are very familiar with the problems that plague Federal IT. 

This fiscal year, the Federal Government will spend almost $85 billion dollars on IT 

projects. However, too much of this money is spent on maintaining legacy systems and 

networks. Even more is spent on projects that are over budget or behind schedule. 

There are many root causes to these problems. Too many systems have been designed 

for stakeholders instead of users. Funding streams are not well aligned to the IT refresh 

cycle and generally don't provide enough flexibility. Furthermore, we see minimal 

adoption of agile development practices across the Federal landscape and a significant 

reluctance to implement modular procurement practices. 

However, the path to a successful IT future is possible and within our grasp. Such a 

transformation, though, will require changes to both culture and policy. It will require 

hard work and sustained attention from many people, including high-level executives, 

program managers, and also Congress. 

By improving how we buy and employ IT, by shifting away from legacy systems, and by 

continuing the push towards transparency and open data, I am confident that we can 

significantly improve Federal IT and, ultimately, how agencies serve the American 

people. 
17 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 28781.006

2 

GSA has a significant role to play in these efforts. Historically, GSA has played a 

central role in supporting and assisting Federal agencies. As Alan pointed out in his 

testimony, one of the primary ways in which GSA has served the broader Federal IT 

community is by helping agencies buy and build technology and related services. We 

help by assisting agencies in accessing and purchasing from technology companies, 

informing and building out agency technology services, and building new governmentwide platforms and products at scale. 

Technology Transformation Services 

In addition to the traditional work that GSA performs through the Federal Acquisition 

Service, the agency has recognized that there is a need across the Federal community 

for services that will help agencies think differently about how they are buying and 

managing information technology. TTS was created to meet this need. 

The mission of TTS is simple-to improve the public's experience with the government 

by helping agencies build, buy, and share technology that allows them to better serve 

the public. 

To accomplish this, TTS applies modern methodologies and technologies in helping 

agencies make their services more accessible, efficient, and effective. TTS also creates 

government-wide products that exemplify these values. We employ modern software 

design, product development, and outcome measurement as we build and share 

technology applications and platforms with Federal agencies, all with the goal of 

improving the public's experience with government. 

TTS is currently made up of four main offices. 

First, the 18F program was created to help improve how agencies interact with their 

customers and the American public and to also improve how agencies buy and manage 

information technology. Built in the spirit of America's top tech startups, 18F consults 

with agencies to help them rapidly deploy technology tools to create great services for 

the public. 18F hires via a "tour of duty" model and brings in talented people for short 

stints in the Federal Government. 18F staff are hired for two-year terms, with the ability 

to extend for a second two-year term. 
18 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 28781.007

3 

18F seeks to provide Federal agencies with user-centric customer solutions that 

address a client's unique challenges. For example, 18F helped Treasury implement the 

OAT A Act, which provides data on how the Federal Government spends money through 

an easy-to-use, searchable web tool. To accomplish this work, 18F assisted Treasury 

with agile development, public engagement, procurement strategy, and training. 

Treasury credits 18F's approach as a key success factor in the implementation of the 

DATA Act. 18F also created the U.S. Web Design Standards to guarantee readability 

and accessibility of government websites while saving duplicative design and 

development costs. The Web Design Standards are currently used by hundreds of 

government websites registering millions of page views every month. In addition, 18F 

develops high-demand products and platforms to scale and institutionalize across 

government. For example, 18F is currently offering a cloud platform, through a pilot 

program, to agencies that need such services. 

Office of Products and Programs 

TTS also operates the Office of Products and Programs (OPP), which helps deliver 

information and services to the public. OPP's origins began in GSA's Office of Citizen 

Services and Innovative Technologies (OCSIT). For decades, GSA has been a leader 

in connecting citizens with government information through traditional media such as 

publications and call centers or websites such as USA.gov or gobiernoUSA.gov. Prior to 

the creation of TTS, these programs were run out of OCSIT. Now OPP continues to 

deliver key government information to the public by working closely with Federal 

agencies and developing innovative products and services to the public. 

For example, OPP operates data.gov, which is the Federal Government's portal for 

agency data sets. They also encourage agency use of challenge.gov, the official hub for 

technology challenge competitions that ask the public's help in improving information 

delivery. In addition, the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program or 

Fed RAMP was created in 2012 to help standardize and improve security for cloud 

products and services that help provide information to the public. OPP has five primary 

portfolio areas, which include Secure Cloud, Public Experience, Data Services, 

Innovation Portfolio, and Smarter IT Delivery. 

Presidential Innovation Fellows 

Next we have the Presidential Innovation Fellows program, or PIF program. The 

Presidential Innovation Fellows program brings the principles, values, and practices of 

the innovation economy into government. This highly competitive program pairs 

talented, diverse technologists and innovators with top civil servants and change 
19 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 28781.008

4 

leaders to tackle some of government's biggest challenges. These teams address 

complex issues that involve people, processes, products, and policy to identify and 

implement solutions that achieve lasting impact. 

Presidential Innovation Fellows serve for 12 months, during which they work on one or 

several initiatives. Fellows operate with wide latitude to allow for individual initiative in 

working with agencies to tackle difficult problems. They also spend a portion of their 

time co-working and collaborating with other Fellows. Throughout the program, Fellows 

receive support from partners and change agents in the White House and across 

various Federal agencies. 

Office of Acquisitions 

Finally, the Office of Acquisitions exists to help make government a better buyer of 

technology. The Office seeks to improve the acquisition process for TTS product leads, 

agency customers, and industry partners. They ensure that informed buyers are 

confident they are purchasing the right products and services to meet their need, and 

they make the acquisition process easier and more accessible. The Office seeks to 

design and promote acquisition approaches that are aligned with current technologyindustry development practices to ensure government technology purchases have a 

high degree of success and meet the needs of agencies and the people they serve. 

The Acquisition Office's projects include partnering with GSA's Federal Acquisition 

Service to create the Agile Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), in which vendors 

qualify for Schedule 70 by submitting actual code, or proof of expertise, rather than 

large amounts of documentation. The Agile BPA helps to attract vendors who excel in 

user-centered design and agile software development. In addition, the Acquisition 

Office helped HHS and California achieve significant savings by redesigning the 

procurement of California's new federally funded Child Welfare System. TIS's 

continued engagement led to California launching its own agile vendor pool. Through 

these and other efforts, the Office of Acquisition is helping agencies implement modular 

procurement practices and be better buyers of technology. 

Conclusion: What the Future Holds 

The rapid transformation of information technology and how Americans interact with 

private-sector companies and financial institutions has radically changed the online 

experience for the public. 
20 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 28781.009

5 

The sea change in the digital marketplace has left Americans expecting more from their 

government. Meanwhile government agencies are experiencing outdated technology 

and lengthy IT projects that don't deliver as intended. This results in frustrating and 

lengthy paperwork exercises to engage with Federal agencies that are not acceptable to 

the general public. 

Federal agencies must continue to adapt to the modern, digital world in ways that are 

easy and secure for the American people. We are at a crossroads-opportunities 

abound to better use technology to help agencies perform their missions and serve the 

public, and so do challenges and outside threats. The next decade will bring 

increasingly complex challenges, and TTS, with our ability to implement crossgovernment solutions, is uniquely positioned to help agencies address them. 

The Committee's Modernizing Government Technology Act is a positive step to help 

agencies make this transition and overcome funding challenges. Providing agencies 

with more flexibility through individual working capital funds and a centralized 

Technology Modernization Fund (TMF) will help them better align agency funding to the 

IT refresh cycle. In particular, the centralized nature of the TMF will strengthen the 

ability of the Federal Government to strategically prioritize investments across 

government as well as inside agencies. 

I speak for everyone in TTS when I tell you that we are excited to help agencies make 

this transition and to work with this Committee to make that happen. 

Thank you for your time. I look forward to your questions. 
21 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Cook. 

And we will go ahead, at this point, just from a planning standpoint, we’re going to declare a recess but no more than 15 minutes 

before we probably call back in. So you can go wherever you want 

to go for 15 minutes. 

So the subcommittee stands in recess subject to the call of the 

chair. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. The subcommittees will come back to 

order. Thank you for your graciousness, for your time. Obviously, 

15 minutes in Congress is a lot longer than 15 minutes. My apologies. 

And I am going to go ahead and recognize myself for a series of 

questions, and then, as we get into this and some of the others 

come back—typically, when this happens, we lose a whole lot of energy. So my apologies. Do not take that as less than a—of a priority, just more as a conflict of; schedules. We have 20 half meetings a day, and so hopefully this is a full hearing as we go forward. 

So, Mr. Thomas, let me come to you. We have got an issue when 

it comes to this whole procurement side of things. And what I mentioned in my opening comments was the fact that I can go on Amazon and buy things cheaper than you can buy as a government contractor. How do we fix that? 

So just pure and simple, I know give 12 days in—give me 12 

days of wisdom and years of experience, if you could. How do we 

fix that, and are you all committed to getting it fixed where the 

American taxpayer quits reading about the purchase of $500 hammers. 

Mr. THOMAS. So let me first start off by saying, yes, I’m committed to fixing it. I mean, it’s one of the reasons, when I was 

asked to serve, that I decided to come back, right, to streamline 

and simplify the procurement process. 

I mean, I think—you know, I think you raise a valid issue, that 

that definitely needs to be addressed. We’re—we are pretty excited 

about the Thornberry bill and the ability of the commercial marketplaces and GSA’s role to sort of sponsor and broker those and help 

those make—help make those work within the construct of the 

Federal procurement system. We think that’s a real step in the 

right direction. 

And, you know, from our standpoint, I think we’re supportive. 

We’ve enjoyed working with the committee on that—with the Congress on that particular bill and helping—you know, helping youall shape that legislation. So, you know, I think that—that’s a step 

in the right direction. 

There are other things we’re doing to try and make it simpler for 

vendors to get on schedule. So there’s the making-it-easier initiative we have within GSA which aims to cut the amount of time and 

effort it takes, particularly for small and innovative businesses, to 

get on the schedules, the information technology schedule. We’ve 

seen some success there in terms of reducing the amount of time 

and effort that it does take. 

So we are committed to it. We are taking steps. It’s definitely a 

priority for me. And as you said, 12 days in, I’m listening, learning 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
22 

about what we’re doing and then also trying to come up with 

thoughtful recommendations for how to get better. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So let me be a little bit more blunt. 

Mr. THOMAS. Sure. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So you’ve got all kinds of pages, over 

2,000 pages, across agencies on what they need to do. Most of that 

is not read. It’s essentially a big dust collector that is out there, 

that gets referred to if it says that we need to keep things the way 

they’ve always been. They refer to that 2,000 page document that 

most of them have never read. 

So how do we change the culture? Because there—I found that 

there’s not a whole lot of risk takers out there. And the minute 

that you do it—and I’m one that believes that we should be taking 

some risk and knowing that we will make mistakes, that if we do 

this, there will be times when we’ve made a purchase that is not 

appropriate. 

At the same time, under what the GSA IG found, every purchase 

is a problem, because if we’re there, we certainly can do better than 

the status quo. So how do we—and maybe this is a question for 

both of you. How do we create a—truly a condition where they’re 

willing to take some risk and willing to get 2,000 pages down to 

50 pages and not use it as their leverage to not change? 

Mr. THOMAS. Sure. So maybe I’ll start, Rob, and then if you want 

to jump in. So I think a couple areas to help address your question. 

So one would be—in terms of encouraging people to take risk, 

there’s a, kind of, leadership aspect to it, and then there’s a, you 

know, statutory-regulatory reform aspect to it. 

So from a leadership standpoint, I think, from the top of the procurement organization, we’ve got to, as you said, encourage people 

to go out, think about taking risk, and not necessarily punish them 

when they make a mistake. If you’re—if you’re drilling for oil, it’s 

okay to drill a few dry holes. Right? We’re not necessarily going to 

fire you for that as long as you’re doing your best and making an 

effort to comply with the rules. 

I think from a statutory and regulatory standpoint, you know, 

there’s an effort underway. The Section 809 panel actually had a 

chance to talk with Dee Lee, who is leading that panel. And I know 

she’s testified before this committee—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Right. 

Mr. THOMAS. —a couple of times about some of the initiatives 

that they are planning to undertake there and some of their interim findings. And I—you know, I told her I’m really excited about 

what they’re doing. Obviously it applies to DOD, but I think there’s 

a great chance to take some of that and apply what they’re doing 

to the civilian side of procurement as well. So I think there’s opportunity there. So leadership and also, then, real concrete statutory 

and regulatory reform. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. Mr. Cook. 

Mr. COOK. Yes, I think you’re right about the—you’re right about 

the risk of risk culture. That’s a big factor. I think technology can 

help a lot in this. Technology’s changed so many aspects of our 

economy. People are shopping online. Why isn’t that possible in the 

Federal Government? It is an area that’s really ripe for change, 

and technology can be a big part of that—of that change. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
23 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. Thank you both. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. 

Lynch. 

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank the 

witnesses. 

Let’s follow up -up on the chairman’s question. So he’s talking 

about his ability to go on Amazon. And they will—if he’s looking 

for a certain item, they will list 10, 20, 30 vendors, and they’ll all 

have different prices. Some with shipping; some with not. But 

you’ve got an open marketplace there and creates competition and 

drives prices down, as Mr. Cook was saying. 

So I have a terrible problem in my area, in Eastern Massachusetts, in my district, where we got some big government construction projects going on, and I’ve got some good-sized companies, 

very, very skilled. These are not mom-and-pop outfits. These are 5- 

, 600 employees. And those contractors cannot bid on the work 

that’s going on in their area. 

There’s a secret handshake thing going on with the DOD. We 

cannot figure out how the hell the—excuse me—how to get into 

that bidding process and open it up to competition. It is just shot 

down. It’s a good ol’ boy network. And, look, I’ve been a Member 

of Congress for a while. And we can’t seem to penetrate that 

whole—you know, that whole operation. 

You got retired generals that are sort of worked in there. And I 

know we’re not getting the best price. We’re not getting the best 

price. They’re—you know, they’re driving it up because there’s no 

competition. So let’s go back to the chairman’s initial question. 

How do we wire a system that, on the straight procurement basis, 

we can use that competition that Amazon uses to just put the 

prices out there, say, ‘‘This is what we need. Give us your best 

price’’? It would seem to be a fairly simple proposal. And it’s working, you know, famously in private industry. Why can’t we do that? 

Mr. THOMAS. So Congressman Lynch, thanks for your question. 

I think we can. It’s a short answer. I mean, I share some of your 

concern and frustration. As I mentioned, it’s—you know, it’s one of 

the things I’d like to focus on in my service at GSA. I think the 

bill—the NDAA bill goes some ways towards addressing that. 

There are, as you know, some specific regulatory and policy concerns that the Federal Government has that those of us who just 

buy as private citizens through Amazon don’t necessarily have to 

take into account. 

So we want to make sure that those are accounted for in the appropriate way. But I do think introducing commercial marketplaces 

like that into the government buying process should yield some 

savings and some speed and offer some simplification. 

Mr. LYNCH. When are we going to see that happen? Do we need 

to legislate that, or do you have the ability to do that already? 

Mr. THOMAS. Well, we’re supportive of the legislation that’s before the Congress now, and we’re hopeful that it will pass. And 

we—you know, as I said earlier, we’d like to try and fully implement it. We think there—we think there are benefits there. So, yes, 

legislation would be helpful. 

Mr. LYNCH. All right. Mr. Cook, you got anything on this? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
24 

Mr. COOK. Yes, you’re right. The hurdles are—make—make the 

Federal marketplace less competitive. It disadvantages small businesses. As you were saying 5- 

or 600 people, which is small, I guess. But it disadvantages companies of that size and smaller. And it makes things more expensive, because—for the Federal Government because there are fewer 

bidders. 

So we are working on the technology side to try to use the power 

of technology to open things up by doing things like making it possible to have people buy things online in the same way they do at 

home. That’s the goal, and so that’s what we’re working toward. 

That’s the way it should be. 

Mr. LYNCH. Yeah. I see. You know—so Raytheon is a big player 

in the defense industry, and I see them. They have these small bidder conferences where they’re inviting all these small and midsized companies in to bid on parts of their contract. So, you know, 

if they can do it, I mean, we should be able to do the exact same 

thing. 

Mr. COOK. We should. 

Mr. LYNCH. Yeah. All right. I yield back. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman Cook. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. So let me do a follow up 

with that, because the gentleman and I agree on this. 

So here’s what I would ask is—and I think you’re referring to the 

language that’s in the NDAA that you’re hopeful that it gets signed 

into law. Is that correct, Mr. Thomas? 

Mr. THOMAS. Section 801, yes. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. So if, indeed, that gets signed into law, 

that’s one good area. But here’s what I would ask you give this 

committee in the next 30 days is a list of both legislative and administrative things that could be done to accomplish what Mr. 

Lynch and I both agree needs to be done. 

And if you can report back to this committee with a list of suggestions on where the—you could have an administrative fix and 

where you could have a legislative fix to accomplish that task. 

Is that fine with the gentleman? 

Mr. LYNCH. That’s perfect. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. All right. 

The chair recognizes recollection the gentlewoman from Michigan. 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the 

witnesses for being here today to discuss reforms—welcome—happening at GSA. Earlier this year, I repeatedly petitioned the former 

chairman Chaffetz to address the, some people will say conflict of 

interest, or some will say the appearance, or some will say the concern, of our President’s, Trump, organization lease with GSA. 

During our organization meeting, I offered up an amendment 

that requires the committee to investigate what I feel is a blatant 

conflict of interest regarding the Trump Hotel. It is our committee’s 

responsibility to conduct oversight of the Federal Government. 

Hence, my concern about a political appointment. 

While my amendment was defeated at that time, I hope the committee’s new leadership will reexamine these concerns. This is not 

a Democrat or Republican issue. The purpose of oversight comVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:20 Mar 29, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\28781.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
25 

mittee, as I understand and took my oath to serve here in Congress, is that we, as a government, ensure that there are tax dollars that are being used in our relationships and lease and all of 

those acquisition and allocation of funds for purchases are done 

without any disrespect of the taxpayer who is—has an expectation 

of government. 

And even though the Trump—our President has moved his interests to a trust, placing his sons in charge is still deeply concerning. 

While the GSA has cleared the President of any contract violation, it’s not hard to imagine how any future dispute could quickly 

go off the rails if there’s any issue with the lease. Hence, a political 

appointment. So where is the—not where. I would say my concern, 

deep concern, is that you coming in—and I hear the turn—looking 

at this as upstart or a new company. And although the vision and 

experience that you’ve had when you look at a company that’s coming in and starting and how you can use innovation and all the 

things that you’re bringing, which we so need in government. I appreciate it. 

My question to you: How does GSA plan on approaching future 

negotiations with the children of the President of the United 

States, and how do we take this beyond this current administration? Where is the future for anyone coming into the presidential 

office when it comes to leases with our government properties 

where it says no elected official shall enter into a lease. 

And giving that this clause is standard practice to include on all 

leases, how can GSA do—what can you do to enforce compliance 

with this contract? 

Thank you. 

Mr. THOMAS. Thanks for your question, Congresswoman Lawrence. As you know, I’m the commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service. There’s a sister service within GSA, if you will, the 

Public Building Service, that has an acting commissioner right 

now. So the question of leases and how we handle leases is really 

outside of my purview. I’m happy to take the question back to my 

colleagues and follow up -up with them with a written response to 

you, if that’s okay. 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. So if it’s outside, who has respond—who does 

that person report to? 

Mr. THOMAS. The commissioner of the Public Building Service 

and myself, and commissioner and the Acquisition Service—Federal Acquisition Service, we both report to the administrator. In 

this case, it’s an active administrator, Mr. Tim Horne. 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. Thank you. 

Mr. THOMAS. You’re your welcome. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Does the gentlewoman yield back? 

Mrs. LAWRENCE. I yield back, sir. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman 

from Illinois. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Thomas, I want to address GSA’s lack of cooperation with 

Congress. The Trump administration released an opinion issued by 

the Office of Legal Counsel on May 1st, 2017, arguing that agencies 

and departments could ignore requests for documents and other inVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:20 Mar 29, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\28781.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
26 

formation from members of Congress other than Republican committee chairmen. 

On June 7, 2017, Senator Chuck Grassley wrote a letter—wrote 

a scathing letter to President Trump urging him to reject the OLC 

opinion. He said, and I quote, ‘‘every Member of Congress is a constitutional officer duly elected to represent and cast votes in the interest of their constituents.’’ Do you both agree with Senator Grassley? 

Mr. THOMAS. Congresswoman Kelly, we certainly take the committee and the Congress’s oversight role seriously. I believe it’s an 

essential part of the system. The agency evaluates every oversight 

request on an individual basis, and I’m happy to take that concern 

back and get it addressed for you. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you. Mr. Cook. 

Mr. COOK. This is just way outside my area of expertise, and so 

I’ll just leave it to—— 

Ms. KELLY. Okay. 

Mr. COOK. —with what Alan. 

Ms. KELLY. Every Member of Congress has a constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight of the Executive branch in order 

to inform our legislative actions. Since President Trump took office, 

however, GSA has adopted a new policy. This morning, GSA administrator Tim Horne testified before the House Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure that GSA will only respond to 

oversight inquiries from committee chairs. 

Have either of you received any guidance, written or oral, on how 

you should respond to requests for information from Members of 

Congress and their staff? And who communicated this policy? And 

how was it communicated? 

Mr. COOK. I have not. 

Mr. THOMAS. I have not either. 

Ms. KELLY. Okay. The new policy appears to directly contradict 

the existing GSA policy on communications with Congress. On February 20th, 2015, then-GSA administrator Dan Tangherlini issued 

an order to GSA employees setting a policy for responding to inquiries from Congress. That order applies the same procedures for 

responding to all Members of Congress and their staff regardless 

of political party. 

Has Administrator Horne issued a new order to overturn that 

2015 order? Are any of you aware of that? 

Mr. COOK. I don’t know one way or the other. 

Mr. THOMAS. Yeah, I’m area aware. Again, I’ve only been there 

12 days. So, I mean—— 

Ms. KELLY. Right. 

Mr. THOMAS. But I’m not aware of it. 

Ms. KELLY. Okay. In the absence of a new order, that 2015 order 

is still in effect. So if you or anyone in your offices instructing GSA 

employees to follow a different policy for responding to Congress, 

you are telling them to violate a standing GSA order. 

The Whistleblower Protection Act requires that every executive 

branch policy on communications with Congress include language 

explicitly noting that the police does not affect any employee’s legal 

right to communicate with Congress. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
27 

Has GSA included the language required by the Whistleblower 

Protection Act in communications to agency staff about the new 

policy on responding to Congress? 

Mr. THOMAS. Congresswoman Kelly, I don’t know. I’m happy— 

I’m happy to come back to you with an answer on that, but I don’t 

know. I’m sorry. 

Mr. COOK. Same here. 

Ms. KELLY. Okay. Will you commit today to respond to requests, 

like you said you would, from Members of Congress regardless of 

whether they are Republicans or Democrats or whether they are in 

the majority or the minority of Congress? 

Mr. COOK. One thing that we are in the Technology Transformation Service is very nonpartisan. We don’t care where that request comes from. 

Ms. KELLY. I appreciate that. 

In order to adequately address the significant issues that currently face GSA, it’s going to require cooperation and a willingness 

to be held accountable in order for you to restore faith in the agency. And as you—I can see, just from sitting here, that all of us can 

work very well together, the two chairs and the two ranking members, to try to get things done in this space. So we appreciate all 

the cooperation we can get. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. JORDAN. [Presiding]. I thank the gentlelady for her questioning and for yielding back. 

And we want to thank our witnesses and the support staff who 

are here today for you taking the time and filling us in. 

And with that, we are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:35 p.m., the subcommittees were adjourned.] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(29) 

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
30 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 28781.010

Response to Congressman Meadows 

from Alan Thomas 

In-hearing inquiry regarding legislative and administrative solutions: Provide a list of legislative and 

administrative ideas to fix stymied competition and encourage better pricing. 

The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) is committed to streamlining and simplifying the 

acquisition processes, including modernizing the underlying acquisition systems and examining ways to 

decrease burden on the acquisition community to enhance competition and enable cost-savings in the 

Federal acquisition system. To this end, GSA is focusing on two initiatives: 

GSA is reviewing internal legacy systems used to manage acquisitions that support missions 

across Government, in order to modernize business processes and technology that enable 

acquisition processes. 

GSA is examining opportunities to simplify and streamline access to the Federal marketplace, 

including consolidating the existing 24 Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) solicitations in the 

Schedules program. 

These efforts will: 

• Reduce burden and cost to contractors seeking to do business with the Federal 

Government; 

• Simplify the marketplace for Federal acquisition professionals by reducing 

duplication of contract vehicles and solutions; 

• Ensure Federal customers have access to superior solutions and contractors at 

fair and reasonable prices that meet their value proposition; 

• Ease the ordering-process burden on the Federal acquisition workforce; 

• Reduce overall program costs to GSA in managing the FSS program; and 

• Employ innovative technologies, such as Artificial Intelligence, in the FSS program 

to create efficiencies. 

GSA Proposed Legislative Ideas: GSA supports the following legislative proposals to: 

• Create an exception for Cost and Price Analysis in establishing Civilian Indefinite-DeliveryIndefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts ·This proposal would create parity with the Department of 

Defense's (DoD) authority by creating an exception to the requirement to evaluate price on 

civilian IDIQs, including GSA FSS contracts for services, priced at an hourly rate. This proposal 

presents an opportunity to streamline the procurement process and reduce the administrative 

cost to award Civilian IDIQ contracts and FSS services contracts. The proposed change would 

reduce the cost for vendors accessing the Federal marketplace through programs such as the 

FSS and would allow industry to redirect bid and proposal funds to concentrate instead on 

competing for order awards. 

• Remove Best Interest Determination to Use Interagency Contracts - This proposal would 

eliminate the requirement for a Contracting Officer to make a best interest determination to place 
31 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 28781.011

a FSS order valued at over $550,000 or place an order against a Government-wide contract 

vehicle regardless of the dollar value. Currently, this statutory requirement encourages agencies 

to write duplicative contract vehicles, which creates barriers to contractor access to the Federal 

marketplace, and forces industry to incur unnecessary bid and proposal costs to gain access to 

the marketplace rather than using their scarce bid and proposal budget toward competing for 

order awards. 

• Raise Micro-purchase Threshold - Raising the micro-purchase threshold Government-wide 

from $3,500 to $10,000 would create parity between Defense and Civilian agencies. This 

proposal would allow agencies to reduce the administrative cost of purchasing goods and 

services by expanding utilization of streamlined procedures enabled through the purchase card 

program. Under micro-purchase procedures, especially through the use of the purchase card, a 

Government purchaser is able to buy from any commercial vendor, thereby vastly increasing the 

number of vendors from which the Government can purchase goods and services. 

• Standardize Task and Delivery Order Protest Dollar Threshold -This proposal would 

standardize the task and delivery order protest threshold Government-wide to $25 million and 

would create parity for Civilian agencies with DoD's current task and delivery order threshold of 

$25 million. When procurement processes differ between the Defense and Civilian agencies, 

increased costs are incurred by contractors because multiple acquisition methods and systems 

must be maintained to conduct business with the Federal Government. 

• Extend Direct Hire Authority to Federal Acquisition Positions - This provision extends the 

direct hire authority where there is a shortage of acquisition employees. When the Government 

has a shortage of acquisition professionals, processes slow creating an environment where the 

Government is a less attractive business partner to industry, thereby decreasing competition and 

creating a distorted marketplace where the Government misses out on opportunities to buy from 

innovative companies. 

• Eliminate Certain Statutory Reporting Requirements: Below are a series of reporting 

requirements that serve as a disincentive for industry to compete for Federal work and which 

GSA would like to see eliminated: 

o Executive Compensation Reporting- This proposal would reduce burdens on Federal 

contractors reporting executive compensation costs. 

Removal of Recovered Material Certification Requirements - This proposal would 

eliminate the requirement that Federal contractors certify to recovered materials. 

o Amendments Related to Service Contract Inventory - This provision would reduce 

burdens to agencies and contractors by raising the reporting threshold to contracts with a 

value greater than $3 million. 

GSA Administrative Ideas: GSA is working on a series of administrative initiatives, through regulatory 

changes or improvements to the acquisition programs GSA manages, in order to decrease burden, 

streamline acquisition processes, and enhance competition in the Federal marketplace. These efforts 

include: 

2 
32 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 28781.012

• Evaluation of Existing Acquisition Regulations and Internal Policies- In accordance with 

Executive Order 13777, "Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda," GSA is seeking input on 

acquisition, property management and disposal regulations, policies, standards, business 

practices, and guidance issued by GSA that may be appropriate for regulatory reform. GSA 

issued a Federal Register Notice inviting public comment on May 30, 2017 with comments due 

July 30,2017. Based upon public comments received, GSA will develop a regulatory reform plan 

that will contain regulatory and internal policy changes to enhance competition in the Federal 

marketplace. 

• General Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) Case 2016-G506 Order 

Level Materials GSA is progressing toward issuing a Final Rule to provide for the ability to 

acquire incidental materials at the order level under the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) program. 

The inability to acquire materials at the order level has served as a barrier to greater use of the 

FSS program. This effort will enhance competition for orders under the FSS program and reduce 

the need for agencies to write duplicative contracts. 

• GSAR Case 2015-G512 Unenforceable Commercial Supplier Agreement Terms- GSA is 

progressing toward issuing a Final Rule that eliminates the need for contracting officers and 

industry to negotiate terms and conditions in commercial supplier agreements that conflict with 

Federal law. This case would streamline the process of awarding GSA contracts that contain 

these agreements and make it easier for industry to do business with GSA. 

• Making it Easier (MIE) to do business with the Federal Government through the FSS 

Program. Below are some of the foundation steps GSA has already taken in the MIE effort: 

o GSA has enhanced competition in the Federal IT marketplace through initiatives such as 

the 'Startup Springboard' which focuses on making the latest innovative technologies 

available to Federal agencies faster by enabling emerging technology companies to gain 

streamlined access to IT Schedule 70, the Government's largest IT contract vehicle. 

o GSA has promoted competition in the IT market by ensuring our Government customer 

agencies have quicker access to emerging technologies and innovative suppliers by 

decreasing the processing times for prospective vendors to obtain an IT Schedule 70 

contract through the Fast Lane Program. Contract modifications are processed in less 

than 48 hours, and new offers are awarded in as quickly as 45 days. 

o In order to increase operational efficiency and to make vendors' services more easily 

available to Federal buyers, GSA consolidated eight professional-services Schedules 

(contracts) into a single Professional Services Schedule. 

• Reducing "Vendor Lock In" on IT Procurements • The Office of Technology Transformation 

Services, the Office of Information Technology Category, and the Office of Assisted Acquisition 

Services in the Federal Acquisition Service all continue to play a key role in modernizing 

Government technology by moving agencies away from the traditional waterfall IT procurement 

approach to utilizing cloud and open source based solutions. Under a traditional waterfall 

approach, agencies are often locked into a particular proprietary technology for years while cloud 

and open source based solutions allow for periodic competition of new technology and allow 

agencies to benefit from new entrants to the marketplace. 

3 
33 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 28781.013

• Enhancing Competition through Use of Acquisition Data Analytics - GSA has been a 

pioneer in utilizing data analytics to enhance competition in the acquisitions GSA conducts. For 

the past three years, GSA has utilized a competition dashboard to target re-compete of 

acquisitions which only received one proposal. Since 2014, when this effort started, GSA's 

procurement events that have just one vendor competing have dropped 2.2% based upon Fiscal 

Year 2016 results. This is significant given that GSA obligates approximately $9 billion annually 

through the acquisitions this agency conducts. The Federal Acquisition Service is standing up an 

analytics as a service (AaaS) offering to help other agencies benefit from acquisition analytics to 

promote competition and other important goals in agency acquisition programs. 

• Preference in Utilizing Existing Government-wide Acquisition Vehicles • In the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-17-22, "Comprehensive Plan for Reforming the 

Federal Government and Reducing the Federal Civilian Workforce," the Administration outlined 

policy preference to leverage existing Government-wide acquisition contracting solutions such as 

Federal Supply Schedules, Government-wide Acquisition Contracts, and Multi-agency contracts 

rather than create new Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contracts. The Federal Acquisition 

Service partners with OMB in this policy and continues working with customer agencies to take 

advantage of existing acquisition vehicles. 

4 
34 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 28781.014

Questions for The Honorable Alan Thomas 

Commissioner 

General Services Administration, Federal Acquisition Service 

Questions for the Record from Chairman Mark Meadows Subcommittee on Government 

Operations 

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

July 12,2017, Hearing: "General Services Administration -Acquisition Oversight and Reform" 

I. What do you see as GSA's best opportunity to streamline federal acquisition? 

As part of the Agency Reform Plan that was recently sent to the Office of Management and Budget, GSA 

is exploring ways to streamline and reduce duplication in the GSA Schedules program and offer agencies 

expertise, improved supplier relationship management and modernized etools and purchasing platforms. 

Although it may ultimately require a multi-year process, streamlining and consolidating Schedules could 

offer significant end-to-end benefits to federal agencies, industry, and the taxpayer. 

As illustrated below, there is a tremendous opportunity to significantly reduce contract duplication across 

government, which will result in substantial savings to agencies, industry and ultimately the American 

taxpayer. 

FY 201610 Government-wide Spend Categories- Industrial Base by Spend and Contracts 

Current! Mana ed 

2. How does GSA ensure the federal acquisition process reflects commercial best practices 

including reasonable pricing in acquisition vehicles, such as GSA schedule contracting? 
35 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 28781.015

The Multiple Award Schedules process for awarding a contract follows the Federal Acquisition 

Regulations (FAR) for "best value". The factors considered in the process of identifying the best value for 

commercial products includes: warranty, delivery, price, and volume. MAS CO's are required to stay 

current with their education and certification of their warrants and training includes updates and best 

practices as experienced across the program and made to regulation. It is the goal ofF AS to provide GSA 

Contracting Officers and customer agencies with the latest and most accurate pricing intelligence to 

ensure procurements are made in the best interest of the Federal Government. 

3. How many Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and General Services Acquisition 

Regulation (GSAR) clauses apply for the acquisition of commercial goods and services? Please 

provide a list with title and cite for the clause. 

While the actual number varies depending on requirements, up to 120 FAR and 70 GSAR clauses and 

provisions could apply to the acquisition of commercial items. Attached is a spreadsheet with FAR and 

GSAR Clauses/Provisions applicable to the acquisition of commercial items on the Multiple Award 

Schedule (MAS) (see attached document: FINAL MAS FAR and GSAR Clauses/Provisions Applicable 

to the Acq. of Commercial Items (tab l) and FAR and GSAR- MAS clauses and provisions (tab 2)). 

4. How will you use GSA's membership on the FAR Council to assess the current FAR and 

reduce the regulatory/compliance costs for federal contractors? 

In accordance with Executive Order 13777, GSA's regulatory reform task force is in the process of 

reviewing the regulations issued by GSA, including the GSA Acquisition Regulations, to identify 

opportunities to streamline acquisition and eliminate compliance costs for federal contractors. GSA 

solicited public comment through the Federal Register on May 30, 2017 for acquisition regulations 

reform ideas. As a member of the FAR Council, GSA will share the regulatory reform ideas with the 

other members of the FAR Council. 

5. Currently, what services/tools does FAS provide to other agencies to assist with IT 

modernization and acquisition? 

GSA provides a number of direct services, platforms and tools which assist Federal agencies in 

modernizing their IT and acquiring IT products and services. 

For example, the Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) manages several large government-wide IT 

acquisition contracts through which agencies purchase more than $20 billion in IT products and services 

each year. IT Schedule 70 features more than 4700 highly qualified vendors, including Original 

Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and Value-added Resellers (VARs). Alliant, Alliant Small Business, 

VETS and 8(a) STARS are IT services government-wide acquisition contracts (GW ACs) providing pools 

of highly qualified vendors, including small businesses. Additionally, GSA recently awarded the 

Enterprise Infrastructure Solutions (EIS) contract to replace the expiring Networx contract, ushering in 

the next generation of telecommunications and related products and services and providing these services 

to agencies at significant savings. 

Also, the Technology Transformation Services (TTS/18F), built in the spirit of tech startups, acts as a 

consultancy for government, enabling agencies to rapidly deploy tools and services to create services for 

the public. Along with inter-governmental consultant services, TTS' Office of Products and Programs 

(OPP), provides platforms and products agencies can utilize to more rapidly deploy IT capabilities into 

their enterprise. One example is Cloud.gov, a product built and maintained by TIS that provides mature 
36 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 28781.016

cloud hosting services to agencies. 

Additionally, GSA's Office ofGovernmentwide Policy (OGP) works directly with the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) on the Data Center Optimization Initiative (DCOI). The DCOI directly 

supports the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) of2014 and provides 

agencies with support as they modernize and optimize their Data Centers. 

These are just a few examples of the robust portfolio of IT services that GSA can bring to bear to assist 

agencies in modernizing their IT portfolio. 

6. On July 6, 2017, GSA settled a whistleblower case brought by former Commissioner of the 

Federal Acquisition Service (FAS). The following questions relate to this case. 

a. In Acting Administrator Tim Horne's response to the Office of Special Counsel 

concerning allegations raised by a whistleblower that were later substantiated, Horne 

noted that he instructed GSA's Senior Procurement Executive to review the existing 

delegations of procurement authority to TTS and determine whether any should be 

rescinded based on the reorganization. 

i. What is the current status? 

As a part of the "Joining Forces" efforts GSA has examined multiple facets of integrating TTS into FAS, 

including a working group examining TTS acquisition activities. This working group is focused on the 

development, implementation and maturation ofTTS acquisition internal controls through FY18 and 

beyond. GSA is taking a risk-based approach to procurement delegations under the direction of the 

Senior Procurement Executive which limits the number and type of procurement actions TTS can 

perform. F AS intends to leverage best practices as well as use enterprise-wide procurement processes, 

controls and systems in procurement as a baseline while allowing TTS to mature their procurement 

practices. 

ii. Have any delegations been rescinded? If so, which ones? 

No delegations have been rescinded, however GSA reissued a new delegation to TTS in accordance with 

the plan outlined above on October. 18, 2017. 

b. The Inspector General investigation examined possible violation of the Anti--

Deficiency Act that, ultimately, was determined an Economy Act violation. The IG 

reviewed allegations that l8F improperly managed Interagency Agreements by 

backdating agreements in violation of the Economy Act and found I 0 I of 18Fs 202 

project agreements predated the execution of the an Interagency Agreement. 

i. How can such a large volume of agreements inappropriately be 

backdated? 

l8F began work on several engagements prior to signatures being executed due to lapses in internal 

controls and the desire to deliver services to agencies who needed work done quickly. This issue was 
37 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 28781.017

resolved through enhancing internal controls for teams beginning work for agencies. For example, 18F 

no longer begins work in advance of agreement signatures as a matter of both policy and practice per the 

controls mentioned in the response to question ii below. 

ii. What controls has GSA implemented to catch this type of 

systemic failure in the future? 

GSA has documented and implemented a series of financial and management internal controls around the 

acceptance of Inter-Agency Agreements preventing the backdating of agreements. Below are a few of the 

specific internal controls now employed: 

l. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) is now inserted into the 

agreement acceptance process. The last signature in the acceptance process of the 

agreement is made by the GSA OCFO. Additionally, a review and validation of 

the period of performance is done and that time. 

2. System controls have been added to ensure all projects are linked to an 

appropriate funding source and billable work occurs only during the specified 

period of performance. 

3. Monthly reconciliation processes have been instituted to ensure charges are 

properly allocated within the agreement period of performance, and that funds 

are available for billing/accrual purposes. 

c. Have you personally reviewed the Inspector General's Investigative report on the recent GSA 

whistleblower reprisal case, specifically as it relates to TTS funding issues? Are you aware of 

any Anti-deficiency Act violations? 

Yes, I have reviewed the report. No, lam not aware of Anti-deficiency Act violations. 

d. Acting Special Counsel Adam Miles stated in his July 5, 2017 letter to the 

President and Congress that the reorganization ofTTS may address concerns 

raised by the whistleblower case, but that "without additional details on 

improved management controls, the realignment does not address [the 

whistleblower's] substantiated concerns about mismanagement." 

i. What is FAS' specific plan for improving internal controls to 

ensure TTS has accurate revenue projections? What are the 

financial controls in place? 

The Inspector General's evaluation of !SF's business operations was conducted from December 2015 

through September 2016. Since then, TTS (!SF's parent organization) has developed a corrective action 

plan in response to the IG report issued in October 2016 that addressed a number of financial and 

operating controls. They issued TTS-wide policy documents outlining these controls and communicated 

the changes to all employees. 
38 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 28781.018

GSA has implemented significant changes in the management approach for 18F to improve the operations 

of individual business units and TTS as a whole. In addition, TIS has implemented all the IG 

recommendations. We implemented all seven recommendations from "Evaluation of !SF." 1 In addition, 

we implemented all six recommendations from "Evaluation of !SF's Information Technology Security 

Compliance,"' including additional internal controls around hiring, revenue reconciliation and risk 

mitigation. 

The program is monitoring the pipeline of actual and potential work orders to ensure that expenses are 

managed and workforce is utilized. Additional resources are only added ifthere is assurance of future 

work and capacity needs. Orders, pipeline, utilization and expenses are all closely monitored on a weekly 

and monthly basis. This process is a basis for the current plan to achieve full cost recovery. 

As part of responding to the IG recommendations, TTS established new technical and procedural controls, 

including those related to when to begin billable project work and identifying funding sources at the 

beginning of engagements. TIS Policy for GSA Information FITARA Review requires GSA-CIO review 

and approval for all internal TTS contracts or agreements, as well as review and approval for external 

TTS contracts or agreements that leverage GSA IT platforms, security or infrastructure and conforms to 

GSA Policy 2101.1 CIO GSA Enterprise Information Technology Management (lTM) Policy. GSA has 

also developed extensive documentation of the TTS revenue generation, accrual, and reconciliation 

processes. 

ii. What is FAS' specific plan for improving internal controls to ensure 

TTS has sufficient and not inflated staffing levels? 

Please see response directly above to 6( d)(i). 

1 JE17-001, Evaluation of 18F, issued 10/24/16. 2 JE17-002, Evaluation of 18F'slnformation Technology Security Compliance, issued 2/21/17. 
39 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 28781.019

Question for The Honorable Alan Thomas 

Commissioner 

General Services Administration, Federal Acquisition Service 

Questions for the Record from Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, Ranking Member Subcommittee on 

Government Operations 

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

July 12,2017, Hearing: "General Services Administration- Acquisition Oversight and Reform" 

I. Are there currently any existing or pending government contracts between the government and 

the Trump Organization? 

There are no active acquisition contracts with any entity associated with the Trump Organization above 

the micro-purchase threshold reported to Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) in accordance with 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 4.6 Contract Reporting. 

2. Has the General Services Administration (GSA) taken any steps to protect against a conflict of 

interest that could arise from government contracts with businesses owned by the President of 

the United States, his family members, or his business partners? If so, please describe those 

steps. 

GSA's responsibility is to ensure that the government receives the best value for the taxpayer and to 

ensure that all procurements adhere to the FAR and other relevant rules, regulations and statutes, 

including those that address conflict of interest. 

3. Could the Acquisition Services Fund be used to purchase goods or services from a business in 

which President Trump has financial interests? 

Every procurement action undertaken by GSA must be in compliance with the FAR and other relevant 

rules, regulations and statutes. 

4. Has GSA delisted Kaspersky Labs from its approved vendor's list for information technology 

services and digital photographic equipment? Does this prevent agencies from using Kaspersky 

Labs' products or will they still be able to purchase these products through other means? 

Kaspersky Lab (KL) was neither a Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) vendor, nor a contract holder, with 

the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA); therefore, there was never any contract or other 

agreement with KL for GSA to terminate. As you know, GSA recently became aware that KL products 

were available on the product lists of three MAS vendors-- A&T Marketing Inc., Federal Merchants 

Corp., and Bahfed Corp.; however, KL products were not included as part of A&T Marketing's 2015 or 

Federal Merchants' 2012 Schedule 70 contract awards, or Bahfed's 2013 Schedule 67 contract award. 

Again, the KL products were not added via required contract modification requests, but rather were 

improperly added via the Schedule Input Program (SIP), a proprietary software provided by GSA, that 

allows contractors to update commercial catalogs electronically on GSA Advantage'®. 

On July 11, 2017, GSA directed all three vendors to remove KL products from their product lists, which 

all three vendors subsequently did. GSA is complying with the Binding Operational Directive, issued by 

the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on September 13, 2017, in regards to KL products. 
40 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 28781.020

5. lfKaspersky Labs has been delisted, will agencies that already use Kaspersky software be able to 

continue to use that software following GSA's action? 

Currently, agencies' use ofKaspersky products is governed by DHS BOD 17-01, which has directed 

agencies to identify their use of Kaspersky products within 90 days and then begin to remove identified 

products from agencies systems. 

6. lfKaspersky Labs has been de!isted, is GSA continuing further actions against 

Kaspersky Labs? 

GSA did not have a contractual relationship with Kaspersky Lab and no further action 

is planned by GSA. 

7. Section 4 of Executive Order 13-360 in 2004 directed GSA to establish a Government Wide 

Acquisition Contract (GWAC) at the agency. The purpose was to help Federal agencies meet their 

3% goal of contracting with Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small businesses. This became 

known as the Veterans Technology Services (VETS) GWAC, or the VETS GWAC. On February 2, 

2007, the VETS GW AC was awarded to forty-three ( 43) SDVOSBs and administered by the GSA 

Heartland Region 6 in Kansas City, MO with a base period of five years, expiring on February 1, 

2012. On February 2, 2012, the first and only five-year option period was then awarded to qualified 

contract holders i.e. those initial contract holders that!.) produced adequate revenue and 2.) had not 

grown revenue to exceed the $27.5 million NA ICS Code 541512 threshold . This contract expired 

with the end of the option period on February 1, 2017. On Apri121, 2016, the GSA issued a 

solicitation for a replacement to the VETS GWAC contract, with a short name ofVETS2 GWAC. 

Bids were submitted on June 18,2016 and as of today, there have been no contracts awarded to 

replace the original contracts. 

When does GSA intend to execute the replacement contract? Why has the replacement contract 

been so delayed? What is the timeline for an expected award of the replacement contract? Since the 

option period ended February I, 2017 and the replacement contract has not been put into place, does 

that mean that all FY2017 opportunities have been are lost? If so, what is the dollar figure for lost 

SDVOSB opportunities since GSA did not have a replacement contract in place between June 2016 

and February 2017 and what is the dollar figure for lost opportunities in FY2018? 

GSA regrets not awarding VETS 2 contracts before the VETS GW AC expired. However, by taking the 

time to obtain industry and customer input, GSA believes that it has developed an improved VETS 

GWAC that will provide increased access to SDVOSBs. GSA understands the importance of the VETS 2 

GWAC to the Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) community and is expediting 

its evaluation of proposals. The Solicitation was issued on April21, 2016 and closed on June 20,2016. 

GSA received over 175 proposals to review and evaluate. 

On August 22,2017 GSA published the required pre-award notice for small business programs in 

FedBizOpps, announcing that evaluations were complete and listing the apparent successful offerors. On 

October 26,2017, GSA announced the award of the VETS 2 contracts to 70 SDVOSB firms. 

Lost business volume for the next fiscal year is projected to be very low as there are several alternative 

contract vehicles available including GSA Schedule 70, NASA SEWP and VA's T4 Next Generation 
41 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 28781.021

(T4NG) contract. In addition, agencies can conduct set aside acquisitions using Alliant Small Business 

and STARS 2 and GSA offers assistance to agencies in using alternative solutions. Obligated dollars 

through IT Schedule 70 to SDVOSBs over the previous fiscal years is $687. 7M in FY 15, $740.3M in FY 

16 and $795.3M in FYI7. 

8. FedRAMP has made significant progress over the past year and a half. Cloud service providers 

are more prepared to go through the Authorization to Operate (A TO) process and the ATO 

process timeline has been reduced from 18-24 months down to an average of four months. What 

steps does GSA plan to take to continue to improve the FEdRAMP program? How does 

stakeholder engagement fit into GSA's plans to improve FedRAMP? 

First, GSA will continue to ensure that all JAB authorization decisions occur in less than 6 months so that 

no authorization effort will take longer than 6 months. This commitment to time line was a direct output of 

the FedRAMP Accelerated initiative that began in FY16. 

Second, GSA released a FedRAMP Tailored Baseline requirements for Low Impact Software as a 

Service. The requirements for this baseline are reduced from 126 down to 36 and has a reduced set of 

documentation requirements as well. It's expected that authorizations under this process could happen in 

as quickly as 4-6 weeks. The Tailored Baseline requirements are designed for low risk cloud solutions 

that many digital service teams and agencies either currently use or have a need to use -tools that focus 

on collaboration, project management, and open source development and public engagement. 

Similar to the redesi!,'11 efforts that FedRAMP undertook to reduce the authorization timelines via 

FedRAMP Accelerated and FedRAMP Tailored, FedRAMP is doing the same thing for the ongoing 

efforts associated with Continuous Monitoring once systems get authorized. Although much attention is 

given to the initial assessment, the Continuous Monitoring by FedRAMP of Cloud Service Providers is 

significant, with monthly reviews of vulnerabilities and yearly assessments, as well as reviewing changes 

to systems after authorization. FedRAMP just finished the research phase of this effort by working with a 

broad range of vendors and agencies to understand capabilities and needs, The design and implementation 

phase is just getting underway and is expected to be completed by the end of FY18. FedRAMP believes 

that this effort can help reduce the level of effort for government and vendors by anywhere ti·om 25%-

50%. 

GSA is also looking at ways to automate portions of FedRAMP- from process and business tlow, to 

creating machine-readable formats for all of the templates and so that agencies can use whatever tools 

they have in place currently to help them automate the authorization process. This includes partnering 

with industry tool vendors on how to best promote interoperability, with over 40 respondents to a recent 

request for information. 

The voice of the customer and stakeholder engagement is at the heart of all ofthe major initiatives that 

FedRAMP undertakes. FedRAMP completes post authorization surveys with every vendor, and has 

regular check-ins with vendors on how FedRAMP can improve. GSA also releases an annual survey 

where, in the most recent version, 82% of respondents had a favorable rating of the program, and all 

major changes to the policy or requirements go through two rounds of public comment before being 

finalized to ensure we bear from all stakeholders on the impact and feasibility of any changes. 

9. What is GSA doing to help agencies improve their FIT ARA Scorecard performance on data 
42 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 28781.022

center consolidation? 

GSA's Data Center Optimization Initiative Program Management Office (PMO) serves as a resource to 

help agencies implement DCOI optimization plans by facilitating participation in interagency data center 

shared services; sharing best practices and information about tools for improving data center efficiency; 

and supporting agencies reporting on progress toward FIT ARA goals. The Data Center PMO mission and 

goals reflect its role in carrying out DCOI policy by establishing a customer-centric approach to 

empowering agencies to meet optimization and efficiency goals. The Data Center PMO's mission is to 

define, design, implement, and monitor a set of government-wide IT infrastructure solutions which 

leverage data center community input. 

I 0. How is GSA currently evaluating any supply chain concerns, including foreign ownership and 

influence, or foreign investment, in contractors seeking to get onto federal government contract 

vehicles? 

GSA has implemented numerous supply chain risk management strategies and GSA continues to further 

explore additional opportunities, particularly through interagency groups and partnerships with other 

agencies. Some specific examples of GSA efforts include: 

• Contractors are required to make representations and certifications through FAR Clause 

52.212-3 when completing the award process on GSA contract vehicles. Through this 

clause contractors represent whether they are a foreign entity, whether they are an 

inverted domestic corporation, the place of manufacturer, compliance with Trade 

Agreements Act and Buy American Act as applicable. GSA Contracting Officers rely on 

these representations and certifications in making responsibility determinations prior to 

award of contract. 

• During contract administration, GSA engages in a number of supply chain risk 

management activities such as utilizing data analytics to identifY product authenticity and 

utilizes Industrial Operational Analysts to review contractor compliance with 

requirements such as providing Trade Agreement Act compliant products through the 

Multiple A ward Schedules (MAS) program. When GSA Contracting Officers are 

informed through data, Industrial Operations Analysts or other sources on potential noncompliance they take appropriate contract action to address compliance with contractual 

requirements. 
43 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 28781.023

Question for The Honorable Alan Thomas 

Commissioner 

General Services Administration, F edcral Acquisition Service 

Questions for the Record from Rep. Stephen F. Lynch Subcommittee on Government 

Operations 

House Committee ou Oversight and Government Reform 

July 12,2017, Hearing: "General Services Administration- Acquisition Oversight and Reform" 

I. A provision of the National Defense Authori:z.ation Act for fiscal year 2018 would require the 

Administrator of GSA to establish a program for the procurement of commercial goods through 

online marketplaces. 

One section of the online marketplace provision states that the award of a contract to the marketplace 

provider or providers -the entities establishing the online purchasing sites- "may be made without the usc 

of full and open competition." 

Full and open competition, with certain limited exemptions, has been the gold standard in federal 

procurement since passage of the Competition in Contracting Act in 1984. 

Competition helps to ensure that the government receives the best value for the American taxpayer. 

a. If this provision were to become law, would GSA use full and open competition to award 

the online marketplace provider contracts? If not, how would you ensure that taxpayers 

receive the best value? 

Competition is a guiding principle in our procurement system as stated in the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation. GSA intends to use competition in the selection of platform providers, unless an enumerated 

statutory exception to competition is justified. Based on its current understanding of the market, GSA 

believes competition it is the ideal avenue to achieve best value for the Government and the taxpayer and 

does not envision a specific scenario where an exception would be invoked. 

2. The federal government has invested considerable resources into existing online ordering programs, 

like the Federal Supply Schedules and Defense Department's FedMall. The online marketplace 

provision established by the NOAA would seem to be in direct competition with those existing 

programs. Please answer the following : 

a. What impact do you think the provision would have on the existing programs? 

GSA is looking at opportunities to streamline access to the federal market for vendors and simplify 

procurement for agencies, mirroring how taxpayers purchase in the commercial world. As a part of this 

implementation, GSA would implement a commercial platform in a considered and phased roll-out. 

GSA intends to implement the enacted provision (section 846 of the FY 18 NOAA), in concert with 

ongoing initiatives, to ensure the best use of taxpayer dollars and efficient technology tools. 
44 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 28781.024

b. The NDAA proposal would allow for decentralized purchasing. How would this align with 

current federal purchasing programs like Strategic Sourcing and Category Management? 

The Section 846 language aligns well with the fundamental principles of strategic sourcing and 

category management. In particular, section 846 anticipates that platforms which are part of the 

program would capture data on the purchases to provide visibility into those purchases and allow 

agencies to evaluate and compare results (e.g., pricing, small business participation, other 

considerations) from different acquisition strategies, including decentralized purchasing vs. 

coordinated purchases through category management. This discretion is reinforced by section 

846(b ), which makes clear that use of the authority is discretionary and not intended to displace 

other authorities (which would include buying strategies) whose use would be more appropriate. 

and Section 846(c)(2)(C), which requires GSA and OMB to conduct an assessment of the products 

or product categories that are suitable for purchase on the commercial e-commerce portals as part 

of the phase II report that is due to Congress in March 2019. 

c. How does GSA propose to reconcile the NDAA's proposed language, which would prohibit 

modification of the online marketplace's terms and conditions, with the existing unique 

government requirements for purchasing? 

GSA is meeting with key stakeholders regarding the implementation ofNDAA section 846 including 

vendors of e-commerce platforms, industry providers to the federal government, customer agencies as 

well as the oversight community to determine the best way forward. The first listening session was held 

on January 9, 20 I 8. GSA is now reconciling comments from that feedback session. In particular, GSA 

recognizes that there are some differences between online marketplace terms and conditions and existing 

government requirements. Through ongoing active agency and industry outreach, GSA will gain a deep 

understanding of government agency requirements and of portal providers' terms and conditions. This 

knowledge will help inform the phase Il report, due to Congress in March 20 19. 
45 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 28781.025

Questions for The Honorable Rob Cook 

Deputy Commissioner (Director, Technology Transformation Services) 

Federal Acquisition Service 

Questions for the Record from Chairman Will Hurd Subcommittee 

on Information Technology 

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

July 12,2017, Hearing: "General Services Administration -Acquisition 

Oversight and Reform" 

I. In August 2016, a GAO report (GA0-16-602) made two recommendations to GSA related to 

I SF. Has 18F implemented GAO's recommendations? 

TTS has developed outcome oriented program goals and associated performance measures tor 

18F to include cost recovery metrics. The FAS Commissioner, the Chief Financial Officer 

and the TTS Director review l8F performance measures and cost recovery on a regular basis. 

a. If not, when do you expect to implement these recommendations? N/ A 

2. What percentage of !SF employees have been hired via Schedule A authority? 

Currently, 89% of 18F staff were hired via the Schedule A Authority. 

3. Do you see 18F continuing to grow in size or staying where it is now? 

!SF began FY 2017 with a staff of 169, and has decreased in size during the year, finishing 

FY 2017 with a staff of 123. During FY 2018, we are planning steady staffing of 

approximately !50. !SF has adjusted its management approach to ensure that staff size 

correlates to demand and is working closely with the GSA CFO to ensure that growth does 

not outpace business volume. 

a. Will the percentage of Schedule A positions increase, decrease, or stay the same? 

We continue to seek the best mix of Schedule A and competitively hired permanent 

employees to attain the strongest mix of technical skills to continue helping the federal 

government modernize its information technology. 

4. When do you project 18F will achieve full cost recoverability? 

In response to the corrective action plan issued as a result of the Inspector General reports, 

TTS is moving as quickly as possible in the direction of full cost recovery and expects to 
46 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 28781.026

achieve full cost recovery in fiscal year 2019For instance, in conjunction with F AS 

leadership, 18F is making operational adjustments, such as increasing staff utilization rates, 

to achieve cost recovery. 

5. Are there controls in place to measure and ensure that the work 18F is performing is targeted 

to recover its costs? 

Yes. 18F takes cost recovery seriously. We have made operational improvements and 

developed controls to manage financial success. 18F analyzes its cost recovery and sales 

pipeline weekly. TTS, 18F's home organization, works closely with the CFO's office to 

reconcile billing monthly and conducts monthly financial reviews with the CFO and TTS 

leadership. 

6. The Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FEDRAMP) is a GSA led 

government-wide program to certify the cybersecurity of cloud products and services. This 

Committee would like to ensure that administrative hurdles to widespread adoption of cloud 

solutions are minimal and security of such solutions is sufficient. Certain stakeholders and 

media reports have indicated that the GSA's FedRAMP process takes too long and is too 

costly. 1 

a. What is the average time it takes a cloud services provider to clear the FedRAMP 

process? 

The FedRAMP Program Management Office at GSA has worked over the last 18 months to 

drastically reduce the time it takes to achieve an authorization through the Joint 

Authorization Board. Through that work the timing was reduced by 75% to approximately 

12-16 weeks for an Authority to Operate (ATO) decision, down from an average of 18 

months. 

b. Typically, what are the causes of delays in obtaining FED RAMP certification? 

The typical causes for a delay center around the vendor not having all the correct technical 

security controls fully implemented, in particular: multi-factor authentication, Federal 

Information Processing Standard (FIPS) and NIST validated encryption, and configuration 

management and vulnerability management (e.g. resolving vulnerabilities in a timely 

manner). Industry reports that FIPS assessments, which are mandated by law (e.g., not 

FedRAMP program) can often take upwards of 16-24 months. 

To help clarity these expectations, FedRAMP released a rapid FedRAMP Readiness process 

for vendors to work with industry auditors and third party assessors to ensure that they have 

all of the key technical pieces in place before beginning a FedRAMP assessment. To date, 

over 30 vendors have actively participated in this readiness process as they build out their 

service to ensure they have the key technical pieces in place to achieve a FedRAMP 

authorization. 
47 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 28781.027

c. How much does it cost for a cloud service provider to go through the FEDRAMP 

process? Please provide the high and low range of such costs and any information 

indicating how these costs have changed over time. 

One company (Coal fire Federal) recently completed research3 around the costs associated 

with obtaining a FedRAMP authorization and found them to be between $350,000 and 

$865,000 depending on a cloud provider's readiness, overall complexity, and pre-assessment 

activities. Clearly, large vendors providing government-wide platforms can require more 

investment, but we're continuing to drive this cost down by redesigning processes and 

leveraging the potential for automation. 

The Coalfire study found that the costs associated with achieving a FedRAMP authorization 

was comparable to other compliance regimes such as Service Organization Control (SOC) II, 

Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PC! DSS), and International Standards 

Organization (ISO) 27000 I. 

d. How many agencies currently use FEDRAMP certified products and services? 

There are over 120 agencies working with FedRAMP- this includes agencies in all three 

branches of government- Executive, Judicial, and Legislative 

e. How can the FEDRAMP process be improved? 

We're continually looking for ways to improve the process, and some of our most recent 

work has been partnering with industry to identify ways to streamline the continuous 

monitoring aspect of FedRAMP. Most people consider the up front assessment, and don't 

realize that we conduct monthly reviews with each provider to ensure they maintain high 

levels of security standards, such as patching high-security vulnerabilities within 30 days. 

This means that the government makes a long-term commitment in promoting the security of 

critical internet-based companies, often benefiting commercial institutions that leverage 

these same providers. As a small organization, we continue to re-evaluate how we allocate 

costs and work with our industry partners to streamline the security review and oversight 

processes. 

Additionally, GSA released a FedRAMP Tailored Baseline requirements for Low Impact 

Software as a Service. The requirements tor this baseline are reduced from 126 down to 36 

and has a reduced set of documentation requirements as well. It's expected that 

authorizations under this process could happen in as quickly as 4-6 weeks. The Tailored 

Baseline requirements are designed for low risk cloud solutions that many digital service 

teams and agencies either currently use or have a need to use -tools that focus on 

3 https:/ /www .coalfire.comffhe-Coal fire-B log/May-20 ]7,/Mceting-F edRAMP-Standards-Report 
48 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 28781.028

collaboration, project management, and open source development and public engagement. 

f. Are there potential improvements that may be realized through legislation? 

We believe that improvements to the security processes that secure and safeguard our 

Federal infrastructure are strongly tied to IT modernization activities. We appreciate the 

committee's oversight of this subject, and we believe continued dialogue around the topic is 

critical. For FedRAMP specifically, it's largely a voluntary requirement for agencies, and a 

recent study by Deltek- plus positive media impressions' showed that vendors continue to 

recognize the value ofFedRAMP certification and the improvements to the program. 

Continued legislative attention on IT modernization and security, in partnership with other 

key Federal stakeholders, can help the program increase value over time. 

7. On May 17,2017, the House passed the Modernizing Government Technology Act (H.R. 

2227). This legislation is designed to incentivize federal agencies and C!Os to transition 

from legacy systems to modern, more secure systems, inc! uding cloud solutions. The bill 

also assigns a significant role to GSA related to the centralized Technology Modernization 

Fund. 

a. What expertise will GSA bring to fulfill the MGT Act objective of modernizing 

federal government IT? 

GSA will bring a range of expertise and resources to help achieve the goals of the Act. For 

example, within the Federal Acquisition Service, TTS has in-house technical and product 

experts, who can help ensure that investments through the Technology Modernization Fund 

are focused on delivery. Within FAS more broadly, GSA has significant procurement 

expertise to help ensure that agencies receive the best-in-class from industry and service 

providers. Finally, as a centralized shared-service provider within the federal government, 

GSA is uniquely positioned to offer shared services and platfonns to enable agencies to 

reduce the number of duplicative legacy systems. 

b. What work is GSA and specifically TTS currently doing to modernize federal IT 

government-wide? Please provide a sampling of such projects and cost savings 

realized. 

TTS has a number of mature offerings within the Office of Products and Programs (OPP), 

such as FedRAMP, api.data.gov, the Digital Analytics Program, and the USAGov Contact 

Center, that collectively save an estimated $100 million annually. Additionally, !SF has 

saved agencies millions of dollars through its consulting work and its main production 

product offering, cloud.gov. For example, the Federal Election Commission has reported that 

4 Positive press samples: https://goo.gl/s29U4D, https://goo.gi/DkvOit, https://goo.gl/wp6HmC 
49 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 28781.029

it will be able to reinvest $1.2 million annually by using cloud.gov. Finally, through 

authorities granted by the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act, the TIS Office of Acquisition 

has helped multiple federal and state agencies modernize legacy systems, with substantial 

cost avoidance and savings, and faster delivery cycles. 

8. The Committee is concerned that the Government may be developing products that compete with 

the private sector, and waste government resources when a commercial alternative is available. 

a. For example, why did !SF build cloud.gov? 

Current infrastructure and platform solutions available to government do not have built-in 

compliance and security measures that address federal guidelines. As 18F was building IT 

solutions for agencies, we did not have a way to quickly access infrastructure without building 

costly and time consuming custom solutions on top of it. We saw a deep need for modem 

infrastructure that would reduce the time to delivery, especially reducing the effort associated 

with developing solutions within government regulations and security considerations. 

b. Does cloud.gov compete with private sector providers? 

c. When cloud.gov first launched, GSA's intent was to assist federal agencies in delivering 

citizen-facing services in a faster, more user-centered way. As GSA has worked with its 

industry partners and customers to better understand cloud hosting needs, the cloud.gov 

model has matured and evolved to better recognize the changes and advancements made by 

the private sector in this space. It remains GSA's intent that, to the greatest extent possible, 

cloud.gov should not compete with private sector providers when solutions that adequately 

address government-specific needs are available. To help ensure this, it is GSA's plan 

moving forward to use cloud.gov as a way to deploy prototypes and create appropriate 

templates and standards for open source federal hosting, similar to a sandbox. GSA will 

work closely with its customers, when ready for full production, to source and procure the 

appropriate cloud hosting environment from among commercially available options. What 

procedures are in place to ensure GSA is selecting commercially available IT solutions (Buy 

vs Make) in compliance with the Clinger Cohen Act, FITARA and OMB Al30 reporting? 

GSA firmly believes that govenunent should build solutions only when a private sector solution 

is unable to meet government demands. In carrying out that principle, GSA ensures all IT 

acquisitions are in compliance with federal policies, regulations and statutes. There are controls 

in place at GSA to ensure IT acquisitions follow long-established acquisition procedures. All IT 

purchases for systems operated by GSA are reviewed and approved by the GSA ClO as required 

by FITARA and OMB policy. The cloud.gov platform, in particular, is underpinned by a variety 

of products and services purchased from the commercial marketplace. For instance, TIS 

currently purchases A WS infrastructure from a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small 

Business (SDVOSB) reseller and the platform uses many other private sector Software-as-aService tools, such as PagerDuty. 
50 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 28781.030

9. In your testimony, you mentioned 18F's role in assisting Treasury with implementing the DATA 

Act, but didn't mention !SF's role helping OMB implement the DATA Act's procurement pilot for 

recipient reporting. 

a. Please describe 18F's past/current role in the procurement pilot? 

The 18F team focused on prototyping potential solutions for reducing contractor burden and 

evaluating their viability through user research and testing. The learnings generated by 

prototyping were presented to GSA's Office of Governmentwide Policy to inform the 

development of a production model that may be piloted. 

b. Who was primarily responsible for implementing the procurement pilot? 

The Office of Management and Budget's Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) was 

responsible for the strategic direction and management of the pilot with GSA managing the 

design, development, and delivery of the technology solution. 

c. When was GSA first approached to work with OMB on the pilot? 

18F was first approached in March 2015. 

d. How many contractors participate in the pilot? 

One contractor, NuAxis, built the pilot system. 

e. The procurement pilot focuses on Davis-Bacon reporting (on payment of prevailing 

wages. How was Davis-Bacon reporting selected? Why made this decision? 

The initial reporting requirement for the tool is the method by which contractors 

certiJY their proper payment of prevailing wages as required by the Department of 

Labor's regulations implementing the Davis-Bacon Act (See 29 CFR 3.3, 5.5(a)(3)). 

The recently released OMB report on the pilot outlines in detail how OMB selected 

these areas. The idea was to prototype a tool to simplifY the reporting process to 

enable contractors to remain in compliance with these regulations while reducing 

reporting burden. 

I 0. The Committee understands 18F may have done projects for state governments. The 

Committee is concerned that this effort and associated resources could be better spent 

addressing IT challenges within the federal government. 

a. Please describe the work 18F may be doing for state governments, by project, cost and 

dates. 
51 

Æ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 28781.031

18F is working with state governments via the authority provided in the Intergovernmental 

Cooperation Act (IGCA). Like many federal agencies, state and local governments face 

enormous IT challenges and every year receive billions of dollars in federal grant funds to 

modernize and improve their IT systems. 

When work is linked to federal projectsfunding, the 18F Acquisition team collaborates 

with both federal and state/local partners to help states responsibly spend federal grant 

money by providing acquisition and technical consulting for improving state IT systems. 

Active projects are: 

• State of California 

Medicare and Medicaid enrollment and eligibility (not to exceed 

$350,000 through 6/30/20 18) 

Child welfare systems (not to exceed $575,000.00 through 6/30/2018) 

• State of Alaska: 

Medicare and Medicaid enrollment and eligibility (not to exceed 

$1,770,000 through 6/30/20 18) 

Child welfare systems (not to exceed $300,000 through 6/30/18) 

• State of Vermont 

Medicare and Medicaid enrollment and eligibility (not to exceed 

$1,000,000 through 6/30/2018) 

b. Does 18F plan to continue work for state and/or local governments? 

When linked to federal projects/funding, 18F will work with state and local governments in 

order to help states responsibly spend federal grant money dedicated to IT modernization. 

We will only undertake those projects on a fully-reimbursable basis and in compliance with 

all applicable statutes and regulations.