1. ANNUAL ACQUISITION ETHICS TRAINING FOR DESIGNATED DEPARTMENT OF ARMY PERSONNEL 2007
Welcome to your 2005 Annual Ethics Training. Our subject this year is “Risky Issues in Ethics”.

2. DUTY……HONOR….. GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS

3. Got Ethics Questions? Contact your ethics counselor before you act.
CPT Nancy Lewis: (703)
If you have questions on how the ethics rules may apply to your particular situation, please contact your ethics counselor before taking action. It is much smarter (and safer) for you to get advice in advance, so you can avoid the risk of taking inappropriate actions, even though they may be very well-intentioned. Improper conduct may be career-ending, as well as result in costly civil or criminal penalties, or adverse administrative actions.

4. Why Ethics Rules?
Ensure that we perform our mission with public interest in mind.
Uphold public’s confidence in integrity of Government.
As Federal officials and personnel, we act for the benefit of the American public, not for private interests. The ethics rules are intended to ensure that we perform our mission with that public interest in mind. Our adherence to ethics principles, and the rules that implement them, is important because it upholds the publics confidence in the integrity of our Government

5. Ex-Air Force Official Gets Prison Time
Boeing Received Special Treatment in Procurement
By Renae Merle and Jerry Markon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 2,2004; Page A01
One of the primary reasons for training Army personnel associated with the acquisition process is the criminal prosecution of Darleen Druyun, who was the number 2 procurement official in the Air Force. Druyun was sentenced in September 2004 to nine months in Federal prison after she admitted to violating ethics rules for negotiating a job with Boeing, while still overseeing the company's Pentagon contracts. Druyun said she favored Boeing in four contract negotiations and called a multibillion Air Force proposal to lease tanker refueling aircraft from Boeing a "parting gift" to her future employer. The former chief financial officer for Boeing also pleaded guilty in federal court to illegally helping Druyun land a lucrative job with the company. The next four slides are verbatim excepts taken from the Department of Justice’s documents and form the factual basis for Druyun’s guilty plea. These examples, although they seem outrageous, demonstrate what not to do in seeking employment and other conflicts of interest. This section may also be used in conjunction with “Seeking Employment” and “Working for Contractors after Government Employment.” You should also note that Ms. Druyun was considered a “model client.” She was advised on at least six occasions concerning post-employment restrictions. Each time she acquired a new asset she informed her ethics counselor. Also, she, in fact, executed disqualification statements pertaining to other contractors while seeking employment.

6. Dragonlady gets her tail caught in the revolving door
"The stain of this offense is very severe," said Judge T.S. Ellis of the U.S. District Court in
Alexandria, Virginia, while sentencing Darlene Druyun this morning. Druyun, also known
as the Dragonlady for being a tough negotiator, was the second-most senior Air Force
procurement official and, while overseeing billions of dollars of Air Force contracts, was
involved in discussions with Boeing for a $250,000-a-year job. She was sentenced to
nine months in prison, a $5,000 fine, three years of supervised release and 150 hours of
community service.
Druyun (who referred to herself as the "Godmother of the C-17") pleaded guilty to\
conspiracy to violate federal conflict-of-interest regulations on a technical basis. That is,
she initially admitted only knowingly violating regulations, but not to using her position in
the Pentagon to give Boeing advantages. However, she failed a lie detector test and then
admitted that she "did favor the Boeing Company in certain negotiations as a result of
her employment negotiations and other favors provided by Boeing to the defendant,"
according to the supplemental statement of facts and supplemental plea agreement .
Druyun helped Boeing obtain a grossly-inflated $23 billion deal where the Pentagon
would lease Boeing tankers, rather than buy them (and save up to $5 billion).
Essentially, she was negotiating for Boeing rather than the government at this point.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Wiechering said, "she did this as a parting gift to Boeing
and to ingratiate herself into Boeing."
For more information on the Boeing tanker deal check out our Contractor Bailout
Archives and our new report The Politics of Contracting.

7. Contractor fraud probed on Kuwait base
U.S. authorities are investigating a web of more than $10 million in favors, bribes and kickbacks among Army officers, contractors and subcontractors at Camp Arifjan, court and military records show.
By Matt Kelley, USA TODAY
October 14, 2007
Replaces Druyun as the poster child for procurement fraud.

8. Camp Arifjan. is the center of the Army's financial operation for Iraq
Camp Arifjan. . . is the center of the Army's financial operation for Iraq. It has handled more than $4.2 billion in military contracts. It's also a center for corruption investigations.
So far, 13 people associated with the Army's contracting operation in Kuwait have been charged with corruption in federal courts — the majority of the 20 corruption cases brought to date involving Army contracts for Iraq. Eight of the 13 have pleaded guilty. Two enlisted soldiers at Camp Arifjan were court-martialed for taking bribes.
Six companies accused of corruption in Kuwait also have been punished administratively by Army contracting officials, records show.
The biggest bribery case of the Iraq war
so far involves Army Maj. John Cockerham,
a former contracting officer at Arifjan, who is
accused of taking $9.6 million in bribes from at least
eight companies seeking contracts to provide bottled
water and other supplies.

9. Those linked to Cockerham include some involved in other cases:
Maj. Gloria Davis, a fellow contracting officer at Arifjan who worked on several contracts with Cockerham. Davis killed herself in December, a day after admitting to Army investigators that she took $225,000 in bribes from contractor Lee Dynamics International, federal court records say. Lee Dynamics also hired Davis' son, Damien Thomas, the company's lawyer says. The Army suspended Lee Dynamics from contracting in July.
Diaa Salem, a businessman from Kuwait whom Cockerham named as a business partner when creating a Texas company in The Army barred Salem and his firm, Jasmine International Trading, from getting contracts for a year in 2006 in a separate case.
In that case, two Army soldiers working at Camp Arifjan's finance office were court-martialed for taking $7,000 from Salem to process Jasmine's payments more quickly, according to Army records released to USA TODAY under the Freedom of Information Act.

10. Other unassociated cases:
LTC Guiterrez: Assigned to ASG-KU as Director of Logistics. Offered to disclose procurement –sensitive information to an employee of a contractor providing logistics support to the Army in exchange for a cash payment of $ LTC Guiterrez committed suicide subsequent to the preferral of bribery charges against him.
CW2 Peleti: Charged in federal court with receiving $50,000 in bribes regarding a food services contract and smuggling $40,000 in cash to the US. Peleti was the Food Services Advisor for Iraq and Kuwait in 2005.
CW2 Wiesemann: Charged with graft and bribery. He has since resigned with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge as he faces federal prosecution.
LTC Bruce D. Hopfengardner, USAR: In connection with a bribery and fraud scheme, accused of fraudulently awarding contracts and authorizing cash payments despite defective or non performance; also accused of stealing $120,000 in cash from the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in cooperation with other co-conspirators; faces wire fraud, wrongful conversion, interstate transportation of stolen property, conspiracy and money laundering charges.

11. Other cases:
COL Whiteford:. Once the second most senior person at CPA. Charged with conspiracy, bribery, wire fraud.
LTC Debra Harrison: Assigned to CPA at one point as the Acting Comptroller. Charged in federal court with conspiracy, bribery, wire fraud, interstate transport of stolen property, bulk cash smuggling, money laundering and falsifying tax report.
LTC Michael Wheeler: Assigned as an advisor for CPA projects for the reconstruction of Iraq. Charged in federal court with conspiracy, bribery, wire fraud, interstate transport of stolen property, bulk cash smuggling.
These three worked in conjunction with LTC Bruce D. Hopfengardner. Phillip Bloom is a US citizen who received more than $8.6 million in rigged contracts. The indictment alleges that Bloom, in return, provided Whiteford, Harrison, Wheeler, Stein, Hopfengardner and others with over $1 million in cash, SUVs, sports cars, a motorcycle, jewelry, computers, business class airline tickets, liquor, promise of future employment with Bloom, and other items of value.

12. Topics Gifts Bribery Contractor Personal
Organizational Conflict of Interest
Procurement Integrity Act
Seeking Employment/Post-Government Service Employment
We will cover:
o Accepting Gifts of Travel and Gifts Related to our Official Duty
o Giving Official Endorsements
o Use of Government Resources
o Teaching, Speaking, and Writing – Personally and Officially
o Seeking and Accepting Post-Government Service Employment

13. S G I F T s The servants of the nation are to render
their services without
any taking of presents . .
The disobedient shall, if
convicted, die without
ceremony Plato

14. The rules on the acceptance of gifts are with a few exceptions, the same for all agencies in the Executive Branch.
Everyone in DoD must be aware of the restrictions in order to avoid inadvertent mistakes that could ruin a career.
As decision-makers, we all perform official duties that outsiders may want to unfairly influence. As public servants, we must not allow even the appearance of impropriety.

15. Prosecution !
“. . . Michael Dubberly, GM-15 program director of the Air Vehicle Division for the Naval Air Systems command, pleaded guilty to accepting gratuities from Engineering Matrix Services of Cardiff, N.J Dubberly was treated to four expensive dinners from executives of the company, which he helped award millions of dollars in Navy contracts. He also requested that a portion of the company’s profits be deposited in an offshore mutual fund, according to the inspector general. Dubberly faces a maximum sentence of two years in prison and a $250,000 fine.”

16. Two years in prison and a $250,000 fine in exchange for four expensive meals?!?!?
If Mr. Dubberly were prosecuted under the bribery statute (18 USC 201), he could face penalties of up to 15 years in prison and 3 times the amount of the bribe. The prosecution appears to have decided to ask for lesser penalties in this case.
And don’t forget:
even if the courts don’t prosecute,
the media surely will.

17. Gift Acceptance Analysis
1) Is it
(a) from a prohibited source, or
(b) offered because of your official position?
2) Is it defined as a “gift”?
3) Is there an exception?
4) Is there a limitation on using the exception?

18. General Gift Rule
An employee shall not solicit or accept any gift or other item of monetary value
1. From a prohibited
source; or
2. Given because of the employee’s official position

19. Prohibited Sources D E F I N T Any person O
1) seeking official action from, doing business with, or conducting activities regulated by, the individual’s employing agency; or
2) whose interests may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the individual’s official duties

20. Not “Gifts” Modest items of food and refreshment
Greeting cards and items with little intrinsic
value, such as plaques, certificates, and trophies
Loans from financial institutions
Opportunities and benefits available to
the public or a class of employees
Rewards and prizes to competitors
Pensions and other benefits from a former employer
Anything paid for by the Government or
by the employee
Gifts accepted under specific statute

21. Gift Exceptions
Exceptions
to the gift
acceptance
prohibition

22. Gift Exceptions
Gifts of up to $20, up to $50 per year from the same source
Discounts and similar benefits

23. You may accept gifts (other than cash or investment interests) up to $20 per occasion, if the aggregate market value received from one source under this exception does not exceed $50 in a year.
You may accept reduced membership or other fees offered to all Government employees or all military personnel by professional organizations if the only restriction on membership is professional qualifications. You may accept opportunities, benefits, favorable rates, and commercial discounts offered
(1) to a group in which membership is unrelated to Government employment (e.g., The Association of Retired Persons)
(2) to members of an organization in which membership is related to Government employment if the same is broadly available to large segments of the public through organizations of similar size, (e.g., The Senior Executive Service Association) or
(3) by an entity that is not a prohibited source

24. Gift Exceptions, cont. Gifts based on personal relationships
Gifts based on outside employment
Awards and honorary degrees

25. Gift Exceptions, cont.
Social invitations from other than prohibited sources
Speaking engagements and widely attended gatherings
Mr. and Mrs. Invitee
Defense Pentagon
Washington, D.C.

26. Gift Hypothetical
You are a quality assurance officer for the X-Files Project. UFO Corp. is the contractor. You attend a week of related meetings.
On Monday, the VP for at UFO Corp. takes you to lunch and insists on paying the $18 for your meal
On Tuesday, the CEO of UFO Corp. invites you to join him for dinner for which you never see a bill.
On Wednesday, you run into an old college chum and have drinks in the hotel lounge, where you discover your friend is now the Director of Marketing for UFO Corp. He charges the tab to his own room before you can get out your wallet. You leave the tip.
On Thursday, you sit down for a quiet breakfast alone when a UFO Corp. project officer sits down with you. You ask the waiter for separate checks, but the UFO employee insists on covering the entire amount through his corporate expense account.
Are you in trouble?

27. Analysis:
1) Is it from a prohibited source? YES, YES, YES, and YES
2) Is it defined as a “gift”? YES
3) Is there an exception? YES and NO.
The first meal probably qualifies for the $20 exception.
The second meal probably does not, unless you only had a Caesars salad for dinner. You would need to send a check to UFO Corp. to cover the cost of your dinner if it was over $20.
The drinks in the lounge would have put you over the $50 limit from the same source, since your chum works for UFO Corp. Gifts from different representatives of the same company are deemed to be from the company. BUT, you might accept the gift of the drinks under another exception: gifts based on a personal relationship.
The breakfast with the project officer clearly would put you over the limit of $50 from the same source in a year unless you reimbursed the company for your dinner with the UFO executive AND you were able to accept the drinks under the personal relationship exception.

28. Bribery Accepting a gift, even if nominal in
value, in return for being influenced in
the performance of an official act is a
bribe.
18 USC Section 201

29. Contractors in Government Workplace!

30. Changing Workplace Unchanging Laws Contractors Support DoD
Mission- No longer considered “outsiders” with whom we deal with at arms length!!
Contractors are Perceived as “Partners”
Unchanging Laws
Fundamental Differences
Legal and Ethical Limitations
The last decade has seen remarkable change, not only in the way Army competes and awards contracts, but also a fundamental change in the role contractors play in supporting the Army’s mission. A widely-held, but inaccurate, view is that contractors are no longer outsiders with whom we deal at arms length. Instead, acquisition reform has encouraged the view that contractors are partners – the one team concept. Although contractors play a key role, they have different loyalties than those of Federal employees. So, there remain fundamental differences between the Government and the contractor, and very definite legal and ethical limitations on the degree to which we may act as “partners.”
The following are numbers associated with the changing workplace:
72,000 contracts worth over $215B*
5.6M contractor personnel worked on Federal contracts**
DoD approximately 60% contractor personnel
*GSA’s Federal Procurement Data Center
**Data from Paul C. Light, The True Size of Government (1996), as of 1996

31. Officers and Army Civilians
Oath of Office
Officers and Army Civilians
“I do solemnly swear/affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
The principle guiding Federal employment is self-less service. Principle 1 of the Ethical Code provides that: Public service is a public trust requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.

32. The Contractor’s Oath
BOTTOM LINE
The bottom line. Self-explanatory

33. Goals Re-establish the Lines
Recognize when contractors and Federal employees must be distinguished
The purpose of this training is to re-establish those lines. In many cases, the ethics rules governing your relations with contractor personnel are different from the rules governing your relations with your fellow Government employees. The goal of this training is to enhance your awareness of the differences in these rules.

34. ALLOWING “TIME OFF”

35. ALLOWING “TIME OFF” Remember: Exercise caution:
Federal Personnel System rules/regulations are inapplicable to contractor personnel
Contractor personnel time is “billed” to the government
Exercise caution:
Organization Day
Holiday Party
Off-Site Conference
Training
Coordinate with contracting officer
Ensure that contractor personnel are informed

36. YOU MAKE THE CALL!
The holiday weekend is fast approaching and the officer-in-charge of the organization invokes the “59-minute rule” for all members of the office – including the contract support team who work with the Soldiers and government employees.
Is it permissible to allow the contractor personnel to leave 59-minutes before their scheduled departure time?

37. ANSWER
Decisions concerning “time off” are to be made by the contractor NOT the government
Contractor personnel are paid pursuant to the terms of the contract with the Army – not according to federal personnel system rules/regulations
The contractor employee has no authority to modify the terms of the contract
Only certain government personnel have the authority to modify the terms of the contract

38. Misuse of Contractor Personnel

39. Misuse of Contractor Personnel
Prohibited from directing
contractor personnel to:
Perform any tasks other than
those in the contract.

40. Sharing a Taxi A DoD employee and a contractor
employee are on official travel and
would like to split the cost of a taxi
ride to the airport. This is permissible.
True/False??

41. TRUE
Sharing the cost of the taxi ride with the contractor is permissible because each traveler would pay his or her pro-rata share to the neutral provider of the transportation.
The DoD employee should, however, consider whether sharing the taxi might constitute an appearance of a conflict of interest.

42. You Make the Call A contractor employee offers to
drive an Army employee to lunch
at a restaurant ten miles off-post
in his personal vehicle.
May the employee accept the ride?

43. Answer The Army employee may accept the ride if it
fits within one of the exceptions to the gift
rule.
Caution: There may be an appearance problem that requires discussion with an ethics counselor if, for example, this arrangement occurs frequently or the Army employee is making official decisions affecting the contractor.

44. Organizational Conflicts of Interest

45. What is an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)?
exists when a contractor is or may be
unable or unwilling to provide the
government with impartial or objective
assistance or advice.
Creates an actual or potential conflict of
interest on a current contract or a
potential future procurement.
The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 9.5 provides guidance on OCI and defines OCI as: “Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) may result when factors create an actual or potential conflict of interest on a contract, or when the nature of the work to be performed on the contract creates an actual or potential conflict of interest on a future acquisition.  In the latter case, some restrictions on future activities of the contractor may be required.” The following are the actual FAR provisions, which you may use to discuss the slides in this section:
The general rules in through prescribe limitations on contracting as the means of avoiding, neutralizing, or mitigating organizational conflicts of interest that might otherwise exist in the stated situations. Some illustrative examples are provided in Conflicts may arise in situations not expressly covered in this section or in the examples in Each individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract. The exercise of common sense, good judgment, and sound discretion is required in both the decision on whether a significant potential conflict exists and, if it does, the development of an appropriate means for resolving it. The two underlying principles are --
(a) Preventing the existence of conflicting roles that might bias a contractor’s judgment; and
(b) Preventing unfair competitive advantage. In addition to the other situations described in this subpart, an unfair competitive advantage exists where a contractor competing for award of any Federal contract possesses --
(1) Proprietary information that was obtained from a Government official without proper authorization; or
(2) Source selection information (as defined in 2.101) that is relevant to the contract but is not available to all competitors, and such information would assist that contractor in obtaining the contract.

46. The two underlying principles are –
1) Preventing the existence of
conflicting roles that might
bias a contractor’s judgment
AND
2) Preventing unfair
competitive advantage
An unfair competitive advantage exists where a contractor competing for award of any Federal contract possesses
Proprietary information that was obtained from a Government official without proper authorization; or
Source selection information that is relevant to the contract but is not available to all competitors, and such information would assist that contractor in obtaining the contract

47. How Does OCI Arise?
Biased ground rules cases government contractor has opportunity to skew a competition in its favor
Unequal access to information access to non public information that would give it an unfair competitive advantage
Impaired objectivity government contractor would be in a position to evaluate itself or a related entity

48. Areas Providing systems engineering and technical direction
Preparing specification of work statements
Access to proprietary information
Solicitation provisions, waivers and mitigation plans

49. Providing Evaluation Services
A contractor cannot evaluate its own
offers for products or services, or those of
its competitors, without proper safeguards
to ensure objectivity to protect the
Government’s interests.
See FAR

50. Procurement Integrity Act

51. Resources
41 USC the current version of the Procurement Integrity Act went into effect on 1 Jan 97
Implemented by FAR 3.104, DFAR Part 203, and AFAR Part 5102
The accompanying handout contains significant details regarding the Procurement Integrity Act.

52. Bans
Disclosing contractor bid or proposal or source selection information (for competitive procurements)
Obtaining contractor bid or proposal or source selection information (for competitive procurements)
Accepting compensation from certain contractors after leaving Federal employment
Discussing non-Federal employment with certain bidders or offerors
The last bullet will be discussed later in this briefing under the topic of “seeking employment.”

53. To Whom Does Disclosure Ban Apply?
The disclosure ban applies to:
Current Federal employees and military personnel
Former Federal employees and military personnel
Individuals (such as contractor employees) who are currently advising the government regarding the procurement
Individuals (such as contractor employees) who have advised the government regarding the procurement but are no longer doing so

54. What Are Not Violations of the Disclosure Ban?
Information already disclosed publicly or made available to public
Information disclosed by contractors. They are not prohibited from disclosing their own bid or proposal information.
Source Selection Info disclosed, pursuant to a proper request, to Congress, the Comptroller General, or the inspector general (provided the SSI or CBPI is highlighted and notice given that disclosure is restricted by PIA.)

55. Penalties for Disclosing or Obtaining SSI or Contractor Bid or Proposal info+
And………..

57. Administrative Actions
Cancellation of the procurement.
Disqualification of an offeror.
Suspension or debarment of the contractor.
Initiation of an adverse personnel action.
Any other action in the best interest of the Government.

58. Seeking Employment
There are a number of statutes applicable to seeking employment. The next slide will discuss the prohibitions of the Procurement Integrity Act (PIA). A discussion of these requirements can be found in the handout. After discussing the PIA restriction, you will discuss the general conflicts of interest principles pertaining to 18 U.S.C. 208, as implemented by 5 CFR Section

59. Applicable Procurement Integrity Act 18 U.S.C. Section 208
Joint Ethics Regulation
Standards of Ethical Conduct for Executive Branch Employees
In addition to the Procurement Integrity Act, the next three statutory and regulatory citations refer to Conflicts of Interest.

60. “Seeking Employment” 5 C.F.R.2635.603(b)
You are “seeking employment” when you:
engage in negotiations
make unsolicited employment contact
includes sending resume (up to 2 months)
respond to unsolicited proposal (except unconditional rejection)
Unless an employee says definitely “no” to a unsolicited proposal, then the employee is seeking employment.

61. Disqualification To avoid violation: Take no action
Written notice to supervisor (JER 2-204)
Supervisor response:
Written
Recusal
Copy to Ethics Counselor & subordinates

62. Post-Government Employment Restrictions

63. Post-Government Employment Restrictions
Representational Restrictions 18 U.S.C. § 207
Prohibits representing another before U.S. Government with intent to influence
Lifetime ban
2-year ban
1-year cooling-off period for senior employees
1-year ban on senior employees representing foreign entities
Remember the restrictions under the Procurement Integrity Act – the one year compensation ban. Federal employees who serve in one of seven positions, or who make one of seven types of decisions, on a contract over $10 million, may not accept compensation from the contractor for 1 year as an employee, consultant, officer or director. This one-year compensation ban is applicable to officers, enlisted & civilians.
Additionally, 18 U.S.C. Section 207 imposes a 1-year ban on treaty negotiations. This will not be discussed.

64. Government Purchase Cards
SCENARIO: No one in your office enjoys drinking from the office water fountain. The water is often warm and sometimes has a weird metallic taste to it. One day Director H2O orders you (after taking a large gulp of warm, metallically water from the fountain) to buy a couple cases of bottled water with your GPC for the office.
QUESTION: May you buy bottled water?
Let’s try one more.
QUESTION:
You have just returned from serving in Afghanistan. Your duty there was to set up offices, i.e., establish phone and computer links, install desks and computers, and equip the offices. One day, while transporting these supplies, your convoy was attacked, which greatly affected you. After that, you devoted a great deal of your personal time to help the people of Afghanistan. Now that you have returned, you want to write a book about those two experiences.
May you receive compensation from the publisher?

65. Answer Bottled water generally does not materially
contribute to an agency’s mission
accomplishment and is generally a personal
expense.
GAO- Sanctioned Exception Where Water is
Unpotable: Agencies may use appropriated
funds to buy bottled water where a building’s
water supply is unwholesome or unpotable.
Please select the best answer among the following.
1. Yes, because the attack did not involve your official duty of setting up offices, and the other experiences involved only your personal activities.
2. No, because when you are deployed, you are on duty 24 hours a day, so everything is official.
3. Yes, if you only write about your personal activities.

66. Contractors
SCENARIO: You are the administrative staff supervisor for an organization. The receptionist for your organization is a contractor employee. He has worked in support of the organization for 2 years and has done a terrific job. He has decided to pursue a college education and has asked you for a letter of recommendation discussing his job performance & work ethic. He intends to include the letter of recommendation with his college application.
We have now looked at your personal teaching, speaking, or writing. But sometimes you may be asked, as part of your official duties, to give a speech, sit on a panel, or make a presentation at an event that is sponsored by an entity outside the Government.
QUESTION:
The Oahu Space Association invites you, as the U.S. Director of Tropical Space Vehicles, to speak at the Really Big Missiles conference in Hawaii. Your supervisor believes that your participation would be in the Department's interest, and issues you official travel orders. The admission fee for everyone is $200 a day. As part of the conference, the Association offers attendees private meetings with you and other Government speakers.
May you speak and participate at the event as part of your official duties?
QUESTION: May you write the letter of recommendation?

67. Answer Impermissible to give preferential treatment to any
non-federal entity. Would need to do the same for
all other contractor employees
The terms of the contract control contract provides for the proper method to provide information on performance awards.
Discuss with contracting officer.
Please select the best answer among the following.
1. No, because, as a senior Government official, it would be inappropriate for you to speak at any conference in which attendees are charged admissions.
2. No, because agencies shouldn’t participate in events that allow people to purchase restricted access to Government officials.
3. Yes, because those private meetings could be quite helpful to you in defining future capabilities and understanding leading-edge technologies.

68. CONTRATORS Scenario: Commander Lewis gave out
coins to contract employees during an office
award day?
Did Commander Lewis do anything wrong?

69. ANSWER Coins purchased with appropriated
funds shall not be presented to
contractor personnel.”
DA Memo , para. 5d(2)
Coins purchased with personal funds are okay!
May give coins purchased with personal funds only!

70. Government Resources QUESTION: Is there a problem here?
SCENARIO: While you are driving home from work your tire blows out. A gas station a block away replaces the tire right away. You are so thrilled that the problem is solved so easily that you inadvertently use your Government travel card to pay. Later, when you get the bill for the card you immediately pay in full.
How are you doing? Ready for the third issue, Use of Government Resources?
QUESTION:
While driving home from work, your tire blows out. Fortunately, a gas station is a block away, and they are able to replace your tire quickly. You are so thrilled that they can repair the tire, you inadvertently use your Government travel card to pay for the new tire and drive home in time for dinner. Several weeks later, when you get the statement for your Government travel card, you pay the bill in full.
Is there a problem here?
QUESTION: Is there a problem here?

71. Correct Answer Misuse of Government travel cards and purchase
cards has received
considerable congressional
and media scrutiny in recent
years.
More misuse:
Cash advances
Vehicle lease agreements
Motor vehicle repair
Long term lease of land or
building
Nordstrom, Macys, Neiman
Marcus
Answer #3 is correct. Misuse of Government travel cards and purchase cards has received considerable Congressional and media scrutiny in recent years. Even when employees have paid off their charges, agencies have taken administrative or disciplinary action.
Answer #1 is incorrect. Commuting costs are personal expenses of the employee. You may not use official funds for such costs.
Answer #2 is incorrect. The Government travel card is to be used for travel expenses incurred while Federal personnel are engaged in official travel. Any other use is improper.
Even when employees have paid off their charges, agencies have taken administrative or disciplinary action.

72. Post-Government Service Employment Restrictions
SCENARIO: Found You!, Inc., is the contractor for the ABC program. You interact with the ABC division of Found You! on technical matters and evaluate their product. Right before a meeting to discuss a product, a ABC employee unexpectedly mentions that Found You! is looking for a manager in a new division, DEF, completely separate from ABC. You tell him you’re going to talk to your ethics counselor ASAP and then get back to him with your decision. You then proceed with the meeting.
QUESTION: Did you do the right thing?
QUESTION:
Found You!, Inc., is the only contractor supporting the Lost and Found program. As part of your duties, you interact with the Gottcha division of Found You! on technical matters involving their program and evaluate their product. Right before a meeting to discuss a product, one of its employees unexpectedly mentions that Found You! is looking for a manager in a new division, Bloodhounds for Hire, that is completely separate from Gottcha. He thinks that someone with your experience would be very valuable and volunteers to send your resume to the division chief. You’re not sure what to do, so you tell him you’re going to talk to your ethics counselor ASAP and then get back to him with your decision. You then proceed with the meeting.
Was that the right thing to do?

73. Answer Once you have engaged in a conversation such as just
described, you are considered to be seeking
employment with the company.
#1 is correct. Once you have engaged in a conversation like the above, you are considered to be seeking employment with that company, and you are considered to have a financial interest in the company. This is the same as if you had just purchased stock in the company. There are two different approaches that you may take in such a situation. First, if you're not sure what you want to do about the offer, at that point you need to immediately disqualify yourself and stop working on any matters that might affect the company. Since you were undecided, as shown by your wanting to obtain ethics advice, you should not have participated in the meeting. That would have given you the time to get advice. If you then decided to reject the employment, unless your supervisor determined that you needed to be disqualified for a longer time, you could resume your participation.
Second, if you want to continue your participation in matters that might affect the company or you know that you aren’t interested in possible employment, then you must clearly reject the prospect of potential employment. Informing the other party that you will be getting advice from an ethics counselor is not a rejection. Once you reject, you may continue to participate in the official matters. The fact that you would be seeking employment in a division of the company that is different from the one that supports the Lost and Found program is not relevant here.
The lesson: If you are interested in possible employment with an entity outside the Government and you are currently doing Government work that may directly affect that entity's financial interests under a contract or other particular matter, talk to your ethics counselor about disqualifying or recusing yourself before you have any communication, including any that you may not initiate. In other words, talk to your ethics counselor now, not later.
Answer #2 is incorrect. If you did not clearly reject employment communications, then you are required to stop participating immediately in any particular matter that may directly affect Found You!’s financial interests.
Answer #3 is incorrect. Your official actions involving Gottcha affect the financial interests of Found You!, Inc., and Bloodhounds for Hire is also part of Found You!, Inc. Consequently, you participated in official matters that affect the financial interest of a company with which you were seeking employment. And that is illegal!

74. Duty. Honor. Government Contracts.
ETHICS
Who you gonna call?
LTC Denise Council-Ross: ;
Duane Zezula: ;
COL Scott Lind: ;

75. Conclusion
Duty. Honor. Government Contracts.
Any questions??