Meet Linda McMahon SBA Administrator

August 18, 2017

DOI To Call For Comments on Regulatory Reform… File Yours By This Summer

June 21, 2017

Dear Readers of Federal Allies News

Yesterday I attended the U. S. Chamber’s Global Energy Institute “Energy Strong” summit. Many members of the Trump Administration and Congress spoke about the move from energy independence to “energy dominance”.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke spoke enthusiastically about the move to ”energy dominance”.  He said that his agency needs regulatory reform to facilitate energy production.  Tomorrow the U.S. Department of the Interior will call for comments on regulatory reform–seeking ideas for repeal, replace or modifications of rules/policies. The advanced copy for the Federal Register suggests there is no specific deadline for filing comments. I would urge industry to file comments this summer so that the recommendations can align with DOI’s other agency actions.

Sec. Zinke spoke about the need to streamline permitting. Sec. Zinke, a former Navy Seal, cited the need for “joint command” requiring similar reforms as those made by DOD for military in 2002.  He offered the example that, for one stream with two fish species, DOI’s current process might require three separate agency decisions. Sec. Zinke addressed the many flaws in DOI’s use of compensatory mitigation and that this process often functions as “extortion “.

On March 28, 2017 Sec. Zinke eliminated the Obama Administration’s compensatory mitigation policy. See President Trump’s American Energy Independence (“Order 3349”) and  The pre-publication copy of the Federal Register notice is  and it is expected to be published tomorrow.

My firm is following this issue on behalf of electric utilities in several states. They find DOI’s current process delays critical permits for electric transmission lines and hydro plants. Energy production, infrastructure, and mining companies may not be the only industries that are affected by DOI’s bottlenecks. There are documented cases of ground-nesting bees that have delayed construction and transportation projects. A car dealership in Missouri ran into problems with an expansion due to the DOI questions about the North American long-eared bat.

Make sure your organization is well represented on DOI’s reform actions.  My company is available to assist you in filing comments to DOI or monitor this issue for you. Perhaps you would like someone to find allies in other industries for a joint letter a to be filed with DOI. My firm is available for small hourly projects or under a capped retainer for efficient and affordable projects.


Thank you, Theresa Pugh


SBA Administrator Honors Nation’s Top Small Businesses

March 16, 2017

WASHINGTON, March 16, 2017 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Administrator Linda McMahon, the head of the U.S. Small Business Administration, announced today this year’s Small Business Person of the Year winners from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. All of the winners have been invited to attend ceremonies in Washington, D.C on April 30 – May 1 where they will be honored with their individual award along with recognition of the three runners-up and the naming of the 2017 National Small Business Person of the Year.

“It is my honor and distinct pleasure to announce the 54 winners from across the U.S. and its territories,” McMahon said. “These small business owners define entrepreneurial spirit and best represent the 28 million small businesses that are the backbone and economic engine for today’s economy. I look forward to welcoming the winners to Washington next month when they are officially honored for their achievements.”

Each year since 1963, the president has issued a proclamation calling for the celebration of National Small Business Week.  National Small Business Week is set as the first week in May, and this year the dates are April 30 – May 6 with national events planned in Washington, D.C., New York City, Indianapolis, Dallas and Fresno, Calif.

2017 Small Business Person of the Year Winners


Jodie Ray Stanfield
Local Joe’s Trading Post
Rainbow City, AL 35906


David McCarthy
Jason Motyka
Denali Visions 3000
Denali Park, AK 99755


Vickie Herd
Extended Family Disability Services, LLC/Bella Rose
Chandler, AZ 85286


Victoria A. Washington
Vision Information Technology Consultants LLC
Little Rock, AR 72204


Lars Christopher Herman
Herman Construction Group, Inc.
Escondido, CA 92029


Lorena P. Cantarovici
Maria Empanada
Denver, CO 80210


Carla Bartolucci
Euro-USA Trading Co., Inc.
North Stonington, CT 06359


Donna L. Vanderwende
Vanderwende Farm Creamery
Bridgeville, DE 19933


Robert W. Dozier Jr.
President & CEO
RWD Consulting, LLC
Washington, DC 20036


Paul Morrow
South Dave Air Conditioning and
Homestead, FL 33033


Kevin B. Boykin
Path-Tec, LLC
Midland, GA 31820


Derrick Muna Quinata
CEO/Dealer Principal
Monster Auto Corp.
Dba Guam Autospot
Hagatna, Guam 96932


Garrett Marrero
President & CEO
Melanie Oxley
Vice President & COO
Maui Brewing Company
Kihei, HI 96753


Eric L. Browning
CEO, Owner and Manager
Steven J. Browning
CFO, Co-Owner
Blue Spring Partners, LLC
Dba Fin Fun
Idaho Falls, ID 83401


Sonat Birnecker Hart
Robert Birnecker
Koval, Inc.
Dba Koval Distillery, Inc.
Chicago, IL 60613


Joey Rivera, Ph.D.
President & CEO
Rivera Consulting Group
A Highway 311
Sellersburg, IN 47172


Benny Duane Puck
Puck Custom Enterprises, Inc.
Manning, IA 51455


Ken Bellesine
Central Electropolishing Co., Inc.
Anthony, KS 67003


Debra Dudley
Oscarware, Inc.
Bonnieville, KY 42713


Alejandro (Alex) Hernandez
Hernandez Consulting & Construction
New Orleans, LA 70119


Leigh S. Kellis
The Holy Donut
Portland, ME 04101


Kara DiPietro
HMC Incorporated
Columbia, MD 21046


Victoria Bondoc
President & CEO
Gemini Industries, Inc.
Burlington, MA 01803


Jon Lanning
President, Finance
Inontime, LLC
Zeeland, MI 49464


Shirley Joann Wikner
Aviation Charter and Executive Aviation
Eden Prairie, MN 55347


Mary J. Russell
President and Founder
Sugaree’s Bakery
New Albany, MS 38652


Phillip Cohen
Founder and President
Cohen Architectural Woodworking
Saint James, MO 65559


Mark Bretz
CEO and Chairman of the Board
Bretz RV and Marine
Missoula, MT 59808


Cody C. Brooks
Chrystal Brooks
White River Feed, LLC
Chadron, NE 69337


Dr. Eva D. Littman
Littman Medical Services, PC
dba Red Rock Fertility
Sunset Surgery Center, LLC
Las Vegas, NV 89148


Jake Reder
Celdara Medical, LLC
Lebanon, NH 03766


Dr. Lisa Aumiller
Dr. Lisa Aumiller, LLC
Dba HousePaws Mobile Veterinary Service
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054


Mario Burgos
President & CEO
David Burgos
Vice President
Burgos Group LLC
Albuquerque, NM 87114


Pamela Newman
ISS Action
Queens, NY 11434


Michelle Coffino
Queen City Metal Recycling & Salvage, LLC
2800 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28206


Eric Mauch
Carla Dean Schwartzenberger
Razor Consulting Solutions, Inc.
& Razor Tracking, Inc.
Watford City, ND 58854


Robert Chapman Kocian
The Auto Bolt Company
Cleveland, OH 44135


Melinda Stinnett
Managing Director
Stinnett & Associates
Tulsa, OK 74137


Brandon James Vaughn
All-Clean Property Maintenance LLC
Troutdale, OR 97060


Elvin Eugene Stoltzfus
Pik Rite, Inc.
Lewisburg, PA 17837


Victor Miguel Rivera Solanas
Maria Paula Rivera Solanas
Vice President
Atencion Atencion
San Juan, PR 00926


Gary M. Palardy
President and CEO
Blue Moon Industries
Providence, RI 02908


Vickie Wyatt
J.I.T. Manufacturing
Cowpens, SC 29330


Beth Hanna
Building Blocks Childcare and Learning Center, LLC
Brandon, SD 57005


Dan LeVan
SED, Inc.
Dba EnerG3
Chattanooga, TN 37405


Deborah Paris
President and Manager
StraCon Services Group, LLC
Fort Worth, TX 76109


Stefanie Bevans
Joshua Bevans
Design To Print, Inc.
St. George, UT 84770


Michael Lawrence Rainville
Maple Landmark, Inc.
Middlebury, VT 05753


Corliss Udoema
President & CEO
Contract Solutions, Inc.
Manassas, VA 20109


Kevin Joseph Schnell
Maya Alissa Matthews-Sterling
Caribbean Solar Company LLC
St. John, VI 00830


Rozanne Garman
RHD Enterprises, Inc.
Lacey, WA 98503


Matthew Paul Knott
President & CEO
River Riders, Inc. and Clarion Inn Harpers Ferry
Harpers Ferry, WV 25425


Kristina Pence-Dunow
President & CEO
Double K, Inc.,
Dba Hometown Trolley, Inc.
Crandon, WI 54520


Janie Celeste Wait
Intermountain Record Center, Inc.
3765 Airport Parkway
Casper, WY 82604

About the Small Business Administration
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) was created in 1953 and since January 13, 2012 has served as a Cabinet-level agency of the federal government to aid, counsel, assist and protect the interests of small business concerns, to preserve free competitive enterprise and to maintain and strengthen the overall economy of our nation.  The SBA helps Americans start, build and grow businesses.  Through an extensive network of field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations, the SBA delivers its services to people throughout the United States, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam.

Release Number: 17-12

Contact:  Terry Sutherland 202-205-6919
Internet Address:
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook

To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:

SOURCE U.S. Small Business Administration


February 27, 2017

President Donald J. Trump Delivers on Campaign Promises at First Joint Session of Congress

Washington, D.C. (February 27, 2017) On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 President Trump is to deliver his first address to a joint session of Congress to outline his budgetary and economic priorities.

Released today, the skinny budget, and not yet the full-blown budget, are the President’s policies, as reflected in topline discretionary spending.  “To that end, it is a true America-first budget.  It will show the President is keeping his promises and doing exactly what he said he was going to do when he ran for office.  It prioritizes rebuilding the military, including restoring our nuclear capabilities; protecting the nation and securing the border; enforcing the laws currently on the books; taking care of Vets; and increasing school choice.  And it does all of that without adding to the currently projected FY 2018 deficit,” said Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney at The White House Press Briefing.

“The top line defense discretionary number is $603 billion.  That’s a $54-billion increase — it’s one of the largest increases in history.  It’s also the number that allows the President to keep his promise to undo the military sequester.  The topline nondefense number will be $462 billion.  That’s a $54-billion savings.  It’s the largest-proposed reduction since the early years of the Reagan administration.

“The reductions in nondefense spending follow the same model — it’s the President keeping his promises and doing exactly what he said he was going to do.  It reduces money that we give to other nations, it reduces duplicative programs, and it eliminates programs that simply don’t work.

“The bottom line is this:  The President is going to protect the country and do so in exactly the same way that every American family has had to do over the last couple years, and that’s prioritize spending,” said Mulvaney.

A skinny budget makes no reference to mandatory spending, entitlement reforms, tax policies, revenue projections, or the infrastructure plan.  The full-blown budget is due in May.

“We anticipate the full-blown budget to follow most recommendations of The Heritage Foundation Blue Print for Reform: A Comprehensive Policy Agenda for a New Administration in 2017 to reduce and streamline the federal government by 20%, said David T. Boddie, Executive Director, Federal Allies Institute.

“We are pleased with these goals because Federal Allies Institute’s first policy decision was to advocate the association’s full-support behind Simpson Bowles and I believe we have been the sole federal contractor-comprised association in full-support of not selling to the federal government what it does not need and cannot afford,” said Boddie.

“We have always been America First and we look forward to hearing the President’s remarks and working with the administration for a streamlined federal government,” said Boddie.


About Federal Allies Institute

Federal Allies Institute is a national nonpartisan trade association dedicated to federal acquisition best practices. Federal Allies Institute is an IRC 501(c) (6) tax-exempt association and organized as a non-stock corporation (non-profit) in the Commonwealth of Virginia.



EPA’s Construction Industry Rule Has Liability Implications

February 21, 2017

By Theresa Pugh, Theresa Pugh Consulting, LLC

theresa-pugh-of-theresa-pugh-consulting-llcEPA and Construction Industry’s Jan. 19th, Construction General Permit Rule Needs Correction:

Last summer I wrote about EPA’s proposed rule on Construction General Permit (CGP) and the ridiculous requirements about testing for PCBs from caulk in all demolition debris.  The EPA had, perhaps with good intention, over-reached, because PCB in demolition debris is really quite rare. The CGP is a rule designed to address stormwater protection. EPA has legitimate authority and duty to address stormwater.

I commend EPA staff for correcting that misstep in the final regulation by fixing the PCB in demolition debris language. Their correction did no harm to the rule. They have focused the attention where it should be focused. However, there is still a serious flaw with the rule. The flaw has nothing to do with EPA’s environmental standard—which I don’t question. We need to regulate industries responsibly to protect streams.

The problem with the EPA’s Jan. 19, 2017 rule (literally the last day of the Obama Administration) is that it now applies joint and several liability to those in the industry for those engaged in virtually all earth moving activities. This EPA final rule is a big change from the 2008 and 2012 permit language that limits each operator’s liability to that portion of the site over which he/she had control. I think EPA went way too far in placing joint and several liability into the construction industry that often has many dozens of contractors and businesses in development projects. With joint and several liability, who would want to be the “last in” in the construction industry to build a home or building in a project that is adjacent to other construction projects. A construction company, doing no harm and following the new stormwater protection regulations perfectly, could possibly be liable for another company’s errors (intentional or unintentional) for up to $52,500 per day. It could also ruin a home builder’s reputation if he/she had to pay fines for someone else’s bad judgment. Joint and several liability will surely send a chill through the construction industry—at the very time we need more jobs. Most home builders are small businesses. Imagine the problems for many small businesses trying to get financing if joint and several liability applied to the company.

Just think of the comparable impacts if this was a remodeling regulation in your own community on homeowners. Would you want to be financially responsible for remodeling your own home if you were also held responsible for a neighbor’s home remodel if that neighbor didn’t follow all appropriate code? You don’t have the right to enter that neighbor’s home before you decide to remodel your house. You’d have no clue what they did or didn’t do in their home remodel. I think the comparison fits for development projects with many adjacent separate companies engaged in earth moving and building.

The Trump Administration presumably has an opportunity to further refine the stormwater regulation or CGP rule. I hope they will do so very soon. The new CGP permit took effect last week—on Feb. 16, 2017.  It is my hope that they will apply the Priebus Memo, take a look at the CGP, and fix the joint and several liability portion of the CGP rule. Unfortunately, for now, the rule is not listed on the Priebus Memo for the delay.

There is a commonsense solution that limits liability to bad actors and encourages construction projects to continue. We need both—more jobs and continued stormwater protection by EPA. Reasonable steps by EPA can ensure both.

Eversheds merges with Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP to form Eversheds Sutherland

February 3, 2017

Federal Allies Institute is pleased to inform its small business members London-headquartered Eversheds and U.S.-based Sutherland Asbill & Brennan have merged, creating a new global law firm known as Eversheds Sutherland.

The combined entity, which now boasts of more than 2,300 lawyers in 61 offices across 29 countries, will be led by joint CEOs as part of a six-strong global management team.

Eversheds Sutherland (International) managing partner and CEO-elect Lee Ranson and Eversheds Sutherland (US) managing partner Mark Wasserman have been appointed as joint CEOs.

According to a media statement, no significant internal structural changes are expected within either firm, and respective practice group heads will work together to co-lead client initiatives.

The move comes months after merger plans were announced in December 2016.  “During the past two years under its new name Eversheds Sutherland has become a top supporter of Federal Allies Institute providing great assistance to our national Federal Allies Summits and Washington Days Conference and we very much look forward to continuing this alliance, said David T. Boddie, Founder & Executive Director, Federal Allies Institute.

200th Anniversary U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee

December 6, 2016

December 10, 1816
Senate Creates Permanent Committees

Photo of Foreign Relations Committee in Session

For its first quarter-century, the Senate tried to operate without permanent legislative committees.  From 1789 until December 1816, the Senate relied on three-to-five-member temporary—or “select”—committees to sift and refine legislative proposals.  A late eighteenth-century guidebook to “how a bill becomes a law” would have explained the process in three steps.  First, the full Senate met to discuss the broad objectives of a proposed bill.  Next, members elected a temporary committee to convert the general ideas expressed during that floor discussion into specific bill text.  The senator who received the most votes automatically became chairman.  This system ensured that committees would consist only of those who basically supported the proposed legislation and that activist members would have more committee assignments than those who were less engaged in the legislative process.  In the third step, after the committee sent its recommendations to the full Senate, it went out of existence.

In 1806, concerned over the increasing amounts of time consumed in electing dozens of temporary committees each session, the Senate began to send new legislation to previously appointed select committees that had dealt with similar topics.  Soon, the Senate also began dividing the president’s annual State of the Union message into sections by subject matter and referring each section to a different select committee.

The emergency conditions of the War of 1812 accelerated the transition from temporary to permanent committees by highlighting the importance of legislative continuity and expertise.  In December 1815, at the start of a new Congress and with the war ended, the Senate appointed the usual select committees to consider the president’s annual message, but, when those panels completed that task, the presiding officer assigned them bills on related subjects, thereby keeping them in operation.  During that session, however, the Senate also appointed nearly 100 additional temporary committees.  Once again the upper house was spending excessive amounts of time voting on committee members.

On December 10, 1816, the Senate took the final step and formally converted 11 major select panels into permanent “standing” committees.  This action ensured that those committees, each with five members, would be available not only to handle immediate legislative proposals, but also to deal with ongoing problems and to provide oversight of executive branch operations.

(Photo:  Members of the Foreign Relations Committee meet, ca. 1970. Senate Historical Office)

Reference Items:

U.S. Congress. Senate. The Senate, 1789-1989, Vol. 2, by Robert C. Byrd. 100th Cong., 1st sess., 1991. S. Doc.100-20.

The Intelligence Science and Technology Partnership

May 19, 2016

Leveraging the national security science & technology enterprise to meet IC needs.

In-STeP is a program managed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence Director of Science and Technology.

Strong, if often quiet, partnerships between the U.S. private and public-sectors remain the cornerstone of ensuring an overwhelming intelligence advantage for our nation’s decision makers and warfighters.  In-STeP is designed to empower the IC science and technology (S&T) enterprise and its partners to properly inform investment decisions by ensuring additional synergy in intelligence-related research efforts.

In-STeP Vision:

To better align public and private sector S&T efforts in support of intelligence needs.

In-STeP Mission:

Enable senior IC leadership to effectively manage risk by anticipating mission needs, informing stakeholders of S&T- related developments, shaping S&T investments and efforts, strengthening integration, and leveraging partners and resources outside of the National Intelligence Program to solve problems of interest.

Adoption and implementation of In-STeP will remain critical for aligning the IC S&T enterprise and partners’ pursuits with future intelligence and broader national security needs.

In-STeP One-on-One Meetings:

In-STeP One-on-One Meetings provide the opportunity to present your S&T projects to IC stakeholders.  To be successful, technical presentations should be focused on how proprietary S&T efforts align to the IC S&T Needs contained in the FY2015-2019 IC S&T Investment Landscape, and provide detailed and practical presentation materials.  After the meeting, materials may be provided to a closed, proprietary-cleared, government stakeholder group.

In-STeP One-on-One Meetings can be scheduled via S& or S& (JWICS).

Unclassified Website:    R-Space: (JWICS)

The In-STeP team is available to address questions about the meetings and schedule the presentation date.  To ensure broad IC participation, contact the In-STeP team at least one month in advance of the desired presentation date.

In-STeP and the One-on-One meetings provide the rational, traceable, and defensible foundation for aligning the IC S&T enterprise and partners’ activities against IC Needs.  Furthering this mission are the DS&T’s Intelligence Ventures in Exploratory Science and Technology (In-VEST) and Intelligence Formulation of Risk Management (In-FoRM) activities.

In-VEST: Provides the DNI with substantiated research investment guidance to resolve In-STeP-identified challenges.

In-FoRM: Leverages In-STeP-derived solutions to inform acquisition decisions and further integrate and align the IC.


IC S&T Investment Landscape

  1. Collects the S&T Needs of the National Intelligence Managers, the combatant commands, and other IC stakeholders.
  2. Provides an auditable, rational structure linking S&T investments to customer Needs.
  3. Creates a common basis for leveraging government, industry, and academic efforts.

IC S&T Investment Landscape- Partner Responses

  1. Provides a high-level matching of public- and private-sector partners’ existing programs to the IC-wide Needs captured in the Landscape.
  2. Provides IC developers with unprecedented insight into the commercial solution marketplace.
  3. Offers a resource for industry and government S&T planning as well as procurement and acquisition insight.

IC S&T Strategic Plan

  1. The charter document guiding the IC’s S&T activities.
  2. Advances the IC’s ability to manage risk across the National Intelligence Program.
  3. Incorporates insights from the Landscape Needs-driven, industry-led, S&T roadmap activites.


Comments Sought: Proposed Rule To Establish Government-Wide Mentor-Protégé Program

February 11, 2015

By Sean Milani-Nia

On February 5, 2015, the Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a new proposed rule that would establish a Government-wide mentor-protégé program for all small businesses.

Under the current framework, entities that enter into joint venture agreements to perform federal contracts are, in most instances, considered “affiliates.”  In determining a company’s eligibility to compete for set-aside procurements, the SBA combines the offeror’s size with the size of its affiliated entities. Thus, an otherwise eligible small business may be deemed large due to its affiliation with another entity.

An exception to this general rule exists for participants in the SBA’s 8(a) mentor-protégé program.  Under the 8(a) mentor-protégé program, an 8(a) protégé can joint venture with an approved large business mentor without being deemed affiliated.

The SBA’s proposed rule seeks to extend the mentor-protégé program to all small businesses. The intent is to create parallel program for non-8(a) small businesses, including participants in the HUBZone, Women-Owned Small Business, and Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business programs, that is identical to the 8(a) mentor-protégé program. Under the proposed rule, any small business would be able to enter into an SBA approved mentor-protégé relationship and joint venture with its approved mentor without being considered affiliated.

Expanded Protégé Definition

Note that the proposed rule would allow more businesses to qualify as protégés under both the 8(a) mentor-protégé program and the proposed small business mentor-protégé program. Currently, in order to qualify as a protégé under the current 8(a) mentor-protégé program, an 8(a) contractor must (1) have a size that is less than half the size standard corresponding to its primary NAICS code; (2) be in the developmental stage of its 8(a) program participation; or (3) have not received an 8(a) contract.

The proposed rule provides that any firm that qualifies as a small business for the size standard corresponding to its primary NAICS code would qualify as a protégé under either the small business mentor-protégé program or the 8(a) mentor protégé program. SBA proposes to remove the requirement that the small business protégé have a size less than half the size standard corresponding to its primary NAICS code.

Ownership Interest

Similar to the 8(a) mentor-protégé program, the proposed rule provides that a mentor may own an equity interest of up to 40% in the protégé. This could be a significant opportunity for small businesses that are looking to increase working capital.

If finalized in the current form, the proposed rule would create significant opportunities for the participants in the new mentor-protégé program, but could place those small contractors that do not participate at a competitive disadvantage. Contractors who are interested in participating should begin evaluating potential partners and even structuring their agreements. The SBA has recognized that once the proposed rule is finalized, the number of firms seeking SBA approval of their mentor protégé agreements may become “unwieldy.” SBA states that it may institute certain open and closed periods for receipt of mentor-protégé applications. SBA would only accept mentor-protégé applications in open periods. Contractors should be prepared to submit their applications as soon as possible to avoid missing the first open period.

Comments on the proposed rule are due on April 6, 2015.  Send your comments prior to April 6 to Federal Allies Institute 571-217-0823.

Transforming DoD’s Core Business Processes for Revolutionary Change

January 23, 2015