Here’s “a” transcript of the Panel 1 portion of the Hearing. This is not an official transcript and although it appears quite accurate I have not checked it for accuracy. If you find any errors let me know.
As someone with a bit of knowledge a couple of things should be pointed out. First, the fellow sitting immediately to Mr. Shay’s left is a former Deputy Director of DCAA. i would like to know how he influenced the committee. Second, the underlying error made by the committee is an acceptance of the competence of the DCAA audits. Anyone with any knowledge recognizes there is no consistency between DCAA auditors, offices, or Regions. One auditor can look at a system and conclude it is adequate. The next auditor may conclude it is not adequate. System adequacy is truly a subjective determination. DCMA has the difficult task of evaluating the competence of any DCAA audit. One must remember, DCAA answers to no one!
Ms Sparky’s Response:
I’m sure Mr. Thibault, the DCAA Deputy Director 1973-2005 does carry a lot of weight when it comes to matters of auditing and the down falls of the DCAA and Government contracting. But it is my personal impression that Christopher Shay and Charles Tiefer will not be “influenced” to say, do or believe anything they do not believe to be factual.
I do believe the DCAA answers to the Comptroller and Congress. I wouldn’t say that is no one! I believe the DCMA should NOT be evaluating the “competence” of any DCAA audits. I would suspect DCAA audit findings highlight the shortcomings of the DCMA and Army Sustainment Command. It’s the same thing as KBR inspecting their own electrical. Doesn’t make sense. There is no independent oversight and verification.
As far as subjective inconsistencies within the DCAA. I would suspect so. They are a Government agency. But I have to say I feel at least April Stephensen is trying to do the right thing. It appears to me that for the most part the DCMA and ACC/ACO/PCO are more into CYA!
Thursday, August 13th 2009 at 7:49 pm |
Here’s “a” transcript of the Panel 1 portion of the Hearing. This is not an official transcript and although it appears quite accurate I have not checked it for accuracy. If you find any errors let me know.
http://mssparky.com/documents/Transcript.pdf
Thursday, August 20th 2009 at 8:50 am |
As someone with a bit of knowledge a couple of things should be pointed out. First, the fellow sitting immediately to Mr. Shay’s left is a former Deputy Director of DCAA. i would like to know how he influenced the committee. Second, the underlying error made by the committee is an acceptance of the competence of the DCAA audits. Anyone with any knowledge recognizes there is no consistency between DCAA auditors, offices, or Regions. One auditor can look at a system and conclude it is adequate. The next auditor may conclude it is not adequate. System adequacy is truly a subjective determination. DCMA has the difficult task of evaluating the competence of any DCAA audit. One must remember, DCAA answers to no one!
Ms Sparky’s Response:
I’m sure Mr. Thibault, the DCAA Deputy Director 1973-2005 does carry a lot of weight when it comes to matters of auditing and the down falls of the DCAA and Government contracting. But it is my personal impression that Christopher Shay and Charles Tiefer will not be “influenced” to say, do or believe anything they do not believe to be factual.
I do believe the DCAA answers to the Comptroller and Congress. I wouldn’t say that is no one! I believe the DCMA should NOT be evaluating the “competence” of any DCAA audits. I would suspect DCAA audit findings highlight the shortcomings of the DCMA and Army Sustainment Command. It’s the same thing as KBR inspecting their own electrical. Doesn’t make sense. There is no independent oversight and verification.
As far as subjective inconsistencies within the DCAA. I would suspect so. They are a Government agency. But I have to say I feel at least April Stephensen is trying to do the right thing. It appears to me that for the most part the DCMA and ACC/ACO/PCO are more into CYA!