- Contact the Committee

Mr. Chairmen, on behalf of the more than 300 participants in the Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship (TFVE), including most of the major veterans service organizations, we thank you for this opportunity to share some observations and views with you and your distinguished colleagues. May we first say thank you to you and all of your predecessors for continuing the much needed work of rigorous congressional oversight of the programs and tools that are supposed to be in place to assist veterans, particularly service disabled veteran business owners (SDVOB), to have at least a level playing field in selling their goods and services to the United States Government. It is worth noting that it was the combined oversight efforts of these two distinguished subcommittees in 1997 which began the process that ultimately led to the enactment of the “Veterans Entrepreneurship & Small Business Act of 1999” or as it more often known, Public Law 106-50. Subsequent to the enactment of Public Law 106-50, it became clear that recalcitrant bureaucracies required more specific tools and direct instruction in order to carry out the clear intent of the 1999 law with regard to ensuring that at least 3% of all prime contracts and 3% of all subcontracts go to service disabled owned businesses. In response to this clear need, you responded by leading the way to enact the provisions of Public Law 108-183 that allow for sole sourcing of contracts to SDVOB and for contracting officers creating competition for certain contracts that would be limited to SDVOB. Again, on behalf of all the participants in the Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship (TFVE) we both thank and salute you for your bold leadership and hard work to assist veteran business owners, particularly service disabled veteran business owners, to earn their piece of the American dream of owning and operating a successful small business.

Unfortunately, in the six (6) years since the enactment of P.L. 106-50 and the six (6) months since enactment of P.L. 108-183, the impact of the legislation has been virtually negligible thus far. For this reason, the fact that you are holding this oversight hearing today is all the more vital to service disabled veteran business owners.

When the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) first reviewed section 502 of P.L. 106-50, in year 2000, they misinterpreted the legislation and declared that there was no separate service disabled veteran owned business procurement goal of 3% for federal government agencies and prime contractors. It required a furious and pointed response from House and Senate Committees to reverse the FAR’s flawed interpretation so that the intent of the U.S. Congress would be realized by federal agencies. Additionally, the Task Force had voted to proceed with seeking injunctive relief, and the brief was prepared for us to seek injunctive relief from the Federal Courts.

Subsequently, agency acquisition and contracting officials have demonstrated an increased interest in the legislative direction to assist service disabled veterans to maintain their rehabilitation thru self-employment as federal prime or subcontractors. As recently as this week we met with the top officials of the General Services Administration. Additionally, the strong commitment of Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Honorable Anthony J. Principi to veteran owned businesses, and especially service disabled veteran owned businesses, is well known and much appreciated by all of us.

The second yearly release of data pertinent to agency small business procurements, the “SUMMARY OF ACTIONS AND DOLLARS REPORTED ON SF279 AND SF281 BY AGENCY” (report), issued by the FEDERAL PROCUREMENT DATA SYSTEM, continues to report the barest of minimal progress toward reaching the minimum of 3% of all contracts and 3% of all subcontracts in each and every agency as the statutorily mandated minimum goal for disabled veteran business owner participation. A telephone sample by one of the Task Force participants, Association of Service Disabled Veterans (ASDV), regarding the method of calculation of that report reveals no increased assurance of accuracy of dollars, actions or appropriate categorization in those reports. Inevitably, the erroneous information misleads the U.S. Congress and subverts the intent of P.L. 106-50 and P.L. 108-183.

TFVE is also grateful to the Chief Counsel of Advocacy for Small Business, the Honorable Thomas Sullivan, for his strong advocacy for veterans, and for all of the work that he has caused to happen to correct some of the data, and point the way for cleaning up the Federal data procurement reporting system by the General Services Administration (GSA) forcing its contractor to take the necessary quality assurance measures. The recent report issued by the Office of Advocacy, “Characteristics of Federal Government Procurement Spending With Veteran-Owned Businesses FY2000 – FY 2003” is an important document that we request be entered into the official record of this hearing, Mr. Chairmen.

The U.S. Small Business Administration, charged by legislation with the role of advocacy, has increased the integration of SDVOB into some of the special assistance efforts of that agency. Outreach materials, standard publications and routine announcements now mention support and assistance for SDVEs. This is particularly true at USDVA and some of the organizations that exist under the vast Department of Defense umbrella. However, we have only scratched the surface in regard to fulfilling what we believe is the clear congressional intent of these two important laws.

The lack of concerted and coordinated significant effort and meaningful outreach in 2003 had implied to the procurement community that there was no commitment by the Federal Government to assist service-disabled veterans seeking to maintain their rehabilitation by self-employment as owners and operators of small businesses.

As a “STAKEHOLDER” in the outcome, one of the Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship (TFVE) participants, ASDV has financed and expanded a previous SDV Certified interactive database containing 20,000 SDVE that has been in a certification process started in 1989. (See Attachment B). The Center for Veterans Enterprise (CVE), at the express direction of Secretary of Veterans Affairs Principi has created a database that is becoming an increasingly valuable tool, as well.

However, that perceived lack of commitment has been repeatedly voiced to SDVOB many times by off the record comments of procurement officials, such as: “SDVOB ASSISTANCE IS JUST A GOAL – IF THE CONGRESS HAD BEEN SERIOUS ABOUT HELPING SDVE, THEY WOULD HAVE LEGISLATED MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS, NOT UNACCOUNTABLE GOALS.” We have a copy of a letter where the Department of Agriculture letter, signed by David J. Shea, Chief of the Procurement Policy Division for all of the multi-Billion dollar Department of Agriculture nationwide, says: “I point out that the use of these authorities” (for sole source and competitive reserves limited to SDVOB)”is discretionary, not mandatory.” While all of us who participate in the Task Force for Veterans Entrepreneurship (TFVE) firmly believes that the Congress is serious about SDVEs, the perception advanced by procurement officials contrasts sharply with the legislative intent of P.L. 106-50 and P.L. 108-183.

The commitment of the private sector prime contractors (PRIMES) is even more abysmal. SDVOB requests to participate as subcontractors (SUBS) have been met with negative responses and disinterest. At present there is no coherent or comprehensive way to track and monitor the number or dollar amounts of any subcontracts going to SDVOB. As a result, it appears that little is being done in this regard.

As a routine response to SDVOB requests for procurement participation, PRIMES initially profess ignorance and protest that procurement officials never mention SDVE participation. This is followed by subsequent protestations that they are exempted from participation by variously invoked parsing of regulatory language, special procurement official dispensation or that they are performing contracts that are not subject to regulation.

As an example; multi-billion dollar contracts by PRIMES of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (USDVA) have PRIMES asserting that USDVA exempts them from offering subcontract opportunities because of their position in a sequence of layered procurement actions. The U.S. Department of Defense allows PRIMES to write their own plans for subcontracting, which plans do not require participation by SDVE.

There are NO clear villains in the failure to assist the SDVE of our nation; rather there is a need for more specific direction from the U.S. Congress, even at the risk of cries of “Congressional Micromanagement” by the Federal Bureaucracy.

It is imperative that your committees take the initiative in establishing the legislative actions that will permit our nation’s disabled in service and prisoner of war veterans to participate more fully in the economic system they sacrificed to preserve.

It is respectfully requested THAT THOSE PROVISIONS BE AMENDED AND EXPANDED TO PROVIDE AUTHORIZED, DIRECTED, SPECIFIC AND MANDATORY PARTICIPATION BY SERVICE DISABLED AND PRISONER OF WAR VETERANS IN ALL FEDERAL PROCUREMENTS” whether thru inclusion in the various set aside provisions of the Small Business Act of 1953 as amended, or in newly included Sections of that Act. (See Attachment A)

ONLY THE ACTIVE APPLICATION OF THESE TWO COMMITTEE’S AUTHORITY WILL ENSURE THAT ENTREPRENEURSHIP IS AN AVAILABLE REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE FOR THOSE THAT SACRIFICED FOR THE SECURITY AND PROSPERITY OF OUR NATION.

Mr. Chairmen, may we again say thank you for your strong leadership on behalf of veteran business owners, and thank you for the opportunity to share some views and thought reflective of the TFVE participants’ thinking on these important issues here today. We would be pleased to answer any questions you or you distinguished colleagues may have.

INDEX TO ATTACHMENTS

A. Comments of “Task Force for Veterans’ Entrepreneurship” ASDV supports

B. Description of “ACDB” database of vetted, certified service disabled veteran owned businesses – initiated at California in 1989

C. PCOR continuous evaluation of Prime Contractor response to SDVE request for procurement participation

“ATTACHMENT A”

TASK FORCE FOR VETERANS’ ENTREPRENEURSHIP
JULY 6, 2004

ASDV CONCURRENCE WITH EXCEPTIONS AND ADDITIONS

On behalf of the National Task Force for Veterans’ Entrepreneurship (TFVE) consisting of Veteran Service Organizations, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses and Veteran Owned Small Businesses, we are writing to comment on the Interim Final Rules regarding Contracting Opportunities for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB).

The TFVE was created prior to Public Law 106-50 and played a support role in its development and passing. This holds true also for Public Law 108-183. Therefore, the analysis and recommendation of Public Law 108-183 comes with an accurate historical recollection.

Overall, the provisions contained in the Interim Final Rules have responded appropriately to concerns expressed by SDVOB. In particular, the TFVE appreciates the attempt by the Small Business Administration (SBA) to commence SDVOSB contracting opportunity by issuing the regulations as Interim Final status, thus allowing SDVOB to compete for federal procurement right away.

Although the TFVE appreciates the speed of the release of the rules unfortunately we discovered a few provisions within the drafted regulations that were not originally intended by Public Law 108-183. After numerous meetings with TFVE members, it is our opinion that the regulations as drafted per Interim Rules are not meeting the intent of the law by spirit or by means. We can all agree that the sacrifices by veterans in preserving our Nation and the Constitution deserves nothing less than unequivocal commitment by government representatives to accurately provide the procurement rights for veterans, as intended by law.

The TFVE will comment in greater detail on several provisions below that are of particular concern.

“May” vs. “Shall”

FAR 19-1305 HUB Zone set aside procedures read “the contracting officer SHALL set aside all acquisition exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold for competition restricted to HUB Zone small business when the requirements of paragraph 19.1305(b) of this section are satisfied. TFVE believes that the law was created to allow SDVOSB to compete in free enterprise with equal footing similar to the other special programs. As you are aware throughout his term, President Bush has promoted his beliefs in the free enterprise system that promotes liberty. He further noted that the “government’s role is not one of handouts or entitlements, instead, government’s role is to ensure that the playing field is level for all involved.” Yet our ability to provide the government with the products they need is being threatened by the very people we serve. The TFVE request that the final rules eliminate the word “may” and replace it with “shall.”

Parity/Self Market

A common misconception is that all 8(a) and HUB Zone set aside goals must be completely satisfied before contracts are set-aside for SDVOB. We have also heard that many contracting officers are fearful that a sole source to a SDVOSB would draw complaints from special interest groups.

Section 308 of the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, Procurement Program for Small Business Concerns Owned and Controlled by Service-Disabled Veterans (P. L. 108-183) states:

“The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended by redesignating section 36 <<NOTE: 15 USC 631 note.>> as section 37 and by inserting after section 35 the following new section:

``SEC. 36. <<NOTE: 15 USC 657f.>> PROCUREMENT PROGRAM FOR SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY SERVICE-DISABLED VETERANS.

``(a) Sole Source Contracts.--In accordance with this section, a contracting officer may award a sole source contract to any small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans if--
``(1) such concern is determined to be a responsible contractor with respect to performance of such contract opportunity and the contracting officer does not have a reasonable expectation that 2 or more small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans will submit offers for the contracting opportunity;
``(2) the anticipated award price of the contract (including options) will not exceed--
``(A) $5,000,000, in the case of a contract opportunity assigned a standard industrial classification code for manufacturing; or
``(B) $3,000,000, in the case of any other contract opportunity; and
``(3) in the estimation of the contracting officer, the contract award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.

``(b) Restricted Competition.--In accordance with this section, a contracting officer may award contracts on the basis of competition restricted to small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans if the contracting officer has a reasonable expectation that not less than 2 small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans will submit offers and that the award can be made at a fair market price.”

However, FAR Case 2004-002 changed the wording to state:

“The law provides for set-aside and sole source procurement authority for service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB) concerns. This interim rule is published in conjunction with the interim rule proposed by the Small Business Administration.”

FAR Part 19 is modified by the interim rule. That modification states:

19.1405 Service-disabled veteran-owned small business set-aside procedures.
(a) The contracting officer may set-aside acquisitions exceeding the micro-purchase threshold for competition restricted to service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns when the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section can be satisfied. The contracting officer shall consider service-disabled veteran-owned small business set-asides before considering service-disabled veteran-owned small business sole source awards (see 19.1406).
(b) To set aside an acquisition for competition restricted to service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, the contracting officer must have a reasonable expectation that--
(1) Offers will be received from two or more service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns; and
(2) Award will be made at a fair market price.
(c) If the contracting officer receives only one acceptable offer from a service-disabled veteran-owned small business concern in response to a set-aside, the contracting officer should make an award to that concern. If the contracting officer receives no acceptable offers from service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, the service-disabled veteran-owned set-aside shall be withdrawn and the requirement, if still valid, set aside for small business concerns, as appropriate (see Subpart 19.5).”
Congress did not use the words “set-aside.” They did provide for “Restricted Competition” if the contracting officer has a reasonable expectation that not less than 2 small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans will submit offers and that the award can be made at a fair market price.” Congress did not require that a set-aside must first be achieved.

FAR Case 2004-002 requires a SDVOSB set-aside before a sole-source can be awarded. The reason why congress used “Restricted Competition” is because of a belief that service-disable veteran-owned concerns must be at the same level of competition as 8(a) concerns. An 8(a) concern can market federal agencies and, if the 8(a) convinces the federal customer and contracting officer that they can perform the service or obtain the product required, the contracting officer can award a non-competitive (sole source) award without announcing the requirement or using a set-aside for the requirement. In order for a contracting officer to award a contract over $100,000 from a SDVOB, the contracting officer is required to announce the requirement as a SDVOB set-aside. Ten days or more is required for the purchase. If a SDVOB has marketed to the extent that the agency wants to purchase from that SDVOB they must announce a set-aside when the contracting officer knows there will not be another SDVOB capable of meeting the same requirements. This is the advantage of the 8(a) non-competitive sole-source. The new FAR puts the 8(a) at a different level.

It may be the FAR Council’s opinion or belief that sole source procurements should be difficult to obtain, but that was not the intent of Public Law 108-183. Public Law 108-183 wording supports the belief that the contracting officers’ “reasonable expectation” is sufficient.

FAR Part 19.1404 Exclusions go far beyond Public Law 108-183. Public Law 108-183 states:

``(c) Relationship to Other Contracting Preferences.--A procurement may not be made from a source on the basis of a preference provided under subsection (a) or (b) if the procurement would otherwise be made from a different source under section 4124 or 4125 of title 18, United States Code, or the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46 et seq.).”

FAR Part 19.1404 Exclusions, states:

“This subpart does not apply to--
(a) Requirements that can be satisfied through award to--
(1) Federal Prison Industries, Inc. (see Subpart 8.6);
(2) Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act participating non-profit agencies for the blind or severely disabled (see Subpart 8.7);
(b) Orders under indefinite delivery contracts (see Subpart 16.5);
(c) Orders against Federal Supply Schedules (see Subpart 8.4);
(d) Requirements currently being performed by an 8(a) participant or requirements SBA has accepted for performance under the authority of the 8(a) Program, unless SBA has consented to release the requirements from the 8(a) Program; or
(e) Requirements for commissary or exchange resale items.”
The interim rule should not include the additional exclusions in subparagraphs (b), (c), (d) and (e) of FAR Part 19.1404.

Self-Certification

The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established certification processes for the Small Disadvantage Businesses and 8(a) small business programs. Public Laws 106-50 and 108-183 permit self-certification for SDVOB’s. However, there have already been business concerns claiming to be SDVOB qualified but are not. The TFVE is concerned that without an entity certifying a SDVOSB, the doors will be open for fraud and abuse.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is the only authorized to grant service-connected disability status to veterans. Thus it would be quite natural for these agencies to issue a letter indicating a veterans’ disability status. The DVA currently has a similar program where it issues a letter to a veteran certifying Civil Service Preference in seeking government employment.

Additionally, there is a small business requirement that to be qualified as a small business, the certified owner must be “at least 51% owner of the business” and “active in the day to day management of the business.”

Absence an official certifying process, we are afraid that the system that is currently in place where a contract awardees’ claim of SDVOSB can be challenged, invites misrepresentation, is time consuming and an unnecessary burden.

Sub Contracting SDVOSB Goals

As government contracts become larger, many SDVOB find that working as a subcontractor is their only chance of getting a piece of the federal pie. Unfortunately, many prime contractors have not been following through with their plans for subcontracting to SDVOB, and the federal government is doing little about it.
While SBA’s reviews of contractor-reported data look at a range of important factors, such as management support and controls and actual performance, SBA’s approach does not ensure that the highest risk contractors are adequately covered or that the officials responsible for monitoring contractor performance are aware of the results of reviews. Moreover, assessing the validity of SDVOSB subcontracting data government wide is difficult because SBA does not readily summarize the results of their reviews in terms that would allow government wide assessments and enforcement of contractor performance or lack thereof.
Therefore the TFVE makes the following recommendations to improve compliance with SDVOSB subcontracting plans:

• Base SBA contractor reviews on compliance risks, such as size of the contract, date of the last review, and previous ratings. This will ensure that the larger or previous violators are aware that their plans will be closely monitored.

• Send the results of the reviews to contracting officers, especially when the ratings are marginal. With a plan of enforcement, this will ensure that the government official responsible for the contract is kept abreast of compliance.

• To promote government wide oversight, the SBA should produce an annual list of prime contractors who meet their small business plans by category. The primes who fail to meet their plans for two consecutive years should be barred from federal contracting until a suitable corrective action plan is received and approved. Or, if this is not feasible, enforce FAR 52.219-16 – “Liquidated Damages -- Subcontracting Plan.”

• Those prime contractors who consistently meet their subcontracting plans should be rewarded by receiving priority in future contracts. FAR 52.219-10 -- Incentive Subcontracting Program should be vigorously used where applicable.
Thank you for your consideration of these issues. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Eddie Gleason at 301/585-4000 ext. 147

Rick Weidman John Lopez

Chairman Co Chairman

“ATTACHMENT B”
ASDV Certified Database (ACDB)

The Association for Service Disabled Veterans (ASDV) is the non-profit organization that pioneered the concept of establishing "ENTREPRENEURSHIP" as a valid goal in the rehabilitation of disabled in service and prisoner of war military veterans (SDV). In 1982, ASDV sponsored "pioneering" legislation that requires that 3% of the total procurement of State of California Government Agencies, and their prime contractors, be directed to service disabled veteran enterprises (SDVE).
That legislated policy was subsequently endorsed by a state constitutional referendum and approved by the State of California Supreme Court.
ASDV subsequently initiated and sponsored similar federal legislation.
Public Law 106-50 legislated a federal goal that 3% of all federal agency procurement, and that of their prime contractors, be directed to SDVE. This legislation also established supporting authority and institutions to enable the implementation of the P.L. 106-50 legislation. ASDV also co-sponsored P.L. 108-183 Section 3, unanimously passed by the U.S. Congress and enacted by the President of the United States, 20 December 2003. P.L. 108-183 establishes SDVE "SOLE SOURCE" and "RESTRICTED COMPETITION" for federal procurements.
ASDV now proposes to assist both the private and public organizations to define their obligations and to implement a successful and conforming SDVE program.
ASDV has developed a database of "CERTIFIED" service disabled veteran "owned" and "operated" businesses that builds on the previous base established for California in 1990. That base has grown in size and scope and includes certified applicant SDV from throughout the nation. It is the only database of CERTIFIED SDVE in existence. Existing federal SDVE databases are SELF CERTIFIED by simple "BOX CHECKING".
To avoid federal felony misrepresentation and other disruptions resulting from PROCUREMENT AWARD CHALLENGES, it is important to design legitimate processes.
ASDV provides a "simplified certified database (CDB) procedure whereby;
1. Procurement Sources (PS) query the CDB by entering the NAICS code of the product or service sought and submit;
2. CDB query results display the number of corresponding candidates in CDB;
3. Procurement Source (PS) then enters select data usually required in the pertinent solicitation format or synopsis form and submits;
4. The data will be immediately transmitted to all SDVE in CDB with the pertinent NAICS Code that has been supplied by the SDVE;
5. Subsequent response is between the SDVE and the PS.
This system permits the SDVE to be specifically alerted to the opportunities and for the PS to meet its outreach requirements.
To obtain your PS access code to the CDB, please email ACDB@asdv.org.
Provide:
• Name of authorized procurement official
• Organization
• Address
• State and Zip
• Telephone contact
• Email contact
Thank you for your cooperation.

Source: http://www.asdv.org/BUSRES/ACDB/index.cfm

ASDV Certified Database (ACDB) Search

Step 1:
To search availability of SDV Businesses by NAICS code, type in code and press Submit:
NAICS Code 1:

NAICS Code 2:

NAICS Code 3:

NAICS Code 4:

Source: http://www.asdv.org/BUSRES/ACDB/NAICSSearchForm.cfm
“ATTACHMENT C”

PCOR Introduction
PATRIOTS VS PROFITEERS

The PCOR: Index was devised as a mechanism for tabulating and evaluating the performance response of the leading corporations and organizations operating in the United States of America, to the needs and aspirations of those persons who have sacrificed their well being to ensure a safe and hospitable national business and economic environment for the nations business community.

Although some segments of the U.S. Industry and Commerce have respond with enthusiasm, the general reaction to the concept of assisting service disabled and prisoner of war veterans to pursue and achieve in entrepreneurial activities has been muted.

As a means of quantifying and qualifying this private sector "attitude" ASDV has developed indices that will be gathered and consolidated for presentation to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. public as the basis for action initiatives.
PCOR has added a new Composite Index based on the information available that classifies organizations as PROFITEERS when evaluation shows that tax revenues have been directed to their benefit, without a corresponding indication of responsibility to those persons that sacrificed their well being for the organization's prosperity.
This is tabulated as a “D” or “F” effort. Among the primary sources of evaluative data are
1. Federal Procurement Data System
2. DoD Directorate for Information Operations and Reports
3. Defense Contract Management Agency

Criteria Used in Evaluation

CRITERIA USED IN EVALUATION
Company/
Organization True
Diversity Supplier
Participation Continuous
Awards Education and
Training Internal
Promotions Program
Evaluation

Company/
Organization Event
Participation Yearly $ Loans
in 000's (K) Comprehensive
Participation Participant
Alliances Strategic
Redesign Aggressive
Outreach

An evaluation of the performance of selected organizations in providing opportunities for the rehabilitation of disabled in military service and prisoner of war veterans (SDV). The score 12 reflects the highest number of individual and positive programs. The letter rank indicates the combined evaluation of performance:
"A" is Excellent
"B" Is Superior
"C" is Average "D" is Poor
"F" is Failed Effort.

Fourth Quarter Ending September 30, 2000

Source: http://www.asdv.org/ BUSRES/PCOR/index.cfm?AutoNumID=30

John K. Lopez

Mr. Lopez has extensive experience in business, health services management and economic development; in the application of advanced health care systems, instrumentation and biotechnology, and is an acknowledged pioneer in entrepreneurial development, telecommunications for health care delivery and the application of advanced technology to professional medical and health care systems.

He has been Director of the Business Development Center of Santa Clara County, California, a federal, state and county economic development program that initially (1975) addressed the economic potential of the area now designated as “Silicon Valley” – the largest and fastest growing high technology area in the U.S., encompassing over one million persons and 6,000 high technology organizations.

He has served as a consultant to the State of California, Department of Public Health and the University of California, Los Angeles, where he contributed to the development of 42 professional allied health curriculums and served as an instructor in the Clinical Instructor Training Program, conducting the program in thirty-seven countries throughout the world.

Mr. Lopez has also served as Consultant for Program Development and Evaluation for the Office of Governor Ronald Reagan of California, the Assembly of the State of California, to the Superintendent of Banks of the State of California, the Entrepreneurial Curriculum Development Program of the Stanford University Graduate School of Business and the Small Business Institute of DeAnza college, California. Mr. Lopez was a Regent of the National Institutes of Health-National Library of Medicine by appointment of the President of the United States.

Mr. Lopez is a Disabled in Military Service Veteran (Korea) Member of the United States Marine Corps. His career has been frequently interrupted by physical relapse due to military service injuries. He has accumulated 18 long-term hospitalizations with 21 emergency admissions and 11 home confinements of six (6) months or more.

He has developed several socio-economic smaller business programs for major corporations and presently initiates Disabled Veteran entrepreneurial programs in conjunction with “Memorandums of Understanding” with the U.S. Small Business Administration and the Bank of America. Mr. Lopez is Chairman of the U.S. Congress Advisory Group on the Study of the Needs of Service Disabled Veteran Entrepreneurs, and Co-Chairman of the National Task Force on Veterans Entrepreneurial Development.

He has been Chairman since 1985 of the Association for Service Disabled Veterans (ASDV), a national non-profit organization of Disabled in Military Service and Prisoner of War Veteran Owned Businesses. The Association has sponsored eight (8) business development legislative acts in the California Legislature and ten (10) in the U.S. Congress. All of these initiatives are now public laws including P.L. 108-183 “Sole Source and Restricted Competition Procurement for Service Disabled Veterans” and P.L. 106-50 “The Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act”. Mr. Lopez is Chairman of SDV Group, Inc. (SDVG) and Service Disabled Veterans Business Association (SDVB).

RICHARD WEIDMAN

Richard F. “Rick” Weidman serves as Director of Government Relations on the National Staff of Vietnam Veterans of America. As such, he is the primary spokesperson for VVA in Washington. He served as a 1-A-O Army Medical Corpsman during the Vietnam war, including service with Company C, 23rd Med, AMERICAL Division, located in I Corps of Vietnam in 1969.

Mr. Weidman was part of the staff of VVA from 1979 to 1987, serving variously as Membership Service Director, Agency Liaison, and Director of Government Relations. He left VVA to serve in the Administration of Governor Mario M. Cuomo (NY) as statewide director of veterans employment & training (State Veterans Programs Administrator) for the New York State Department of Labor.

He has served as Consultant on Legislative Affairs to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV), and served at various times on the VA Readadjustment Advisory Committee, the Secretary of Labor’s Advisory Committee on Veterans Employment & Training, the President’s Committee on Employment of Persons with Disabilities - Subcommittee on Disabled Veterans, Advisory Committee on veterans’ entrepreneurship at the Small Business Administration, and numerous other advocacy posts in veteran affairs.

Mr. Weidman was an instructor and administrator at Johnson State College (Vermont) in the 1970s, where he was also active in community and veterans affairs. He attended Colgate University (B.A., (1967), and did graduate study at the University of Vermont.

He is married and has four children.