I honestly spent Tuesday trying to process my thoughts past "you've got to be kidding." But, I didn't get very far.

The Small Business Administration (SBA) announced on Monday that an agreement has finally been reached to allow the Department of the Navy (DoN) the authority to set-aside Seaport-e requirements for 8(a) certificate holders. After four years of debating, the last lone set-aside has been thrown into the whirlpool that is the Seaport contract vehicle. What current Seaport primes may or may not know, any requirement that fits within the scope of the 22 functional categories that comprise Seaport, must utilize that vehicle for procurement (according to DoN policy). I have a strange feeling that I'm witnessing the end of most full and open competition.

Tim Foreman, Navy's Director of the Office of Small Business Programs, was quoted as saying "This is good for the Navy, it's good for the SBA, but more importantly, it's good for the small disadvantaged businesses that participate in the 8(a) program." That's when I started wondering - "huh?" I can understand this being good for the Navy; using an existing contract vehicle will obviously save them money throughout the procurement process. In addition, the SBA has the advantage of no longer spending time and manpower operating as a middle-man in many DoN procurements. How this is good for 8(a) participants is not as clear. If a requirement could be reserved as an 8(a) set-aside, it was, regardless of the Command's desire to use Seaport or not. Now, 8(a) participants will have two obstacles: are they Seaport primes already and do they have enough time to respond to the Task Order solicitations?

Currently there are 292 Seaport primes that are participating in the 8(a) program. With the SBA announcement, those 292 vendors are the only competitors for 8(a) set-asides for the next two years. The 2008 Seaport rolling admissions have already closed; awards were announced in late May. NAVSEA previously announced its intent to refrain from re-opening admissions in 2009 and will wait until 2010 to hold another open-admission. How many potential participants have just been weeded out because they no longer have access to the requirements they previously targeted?

I've heard strong criticism from the market regarding Seaport --- mainly due to the fact that Seaport procurements can severely limit competition, even to the point of not allowing sufficient time for competitors to respond to solicitations. In a previous study of Seaport's efficiency and effectiveness, the acquisition timeline was reported to have been shaved from nine or twelve months down to a mere 67 days. Without the advantage of performing the work on a current contract, is it possible to adequately respond and win a Task Order in under 67 days? How about defining, posting, competing, evaluating and awarding? More importantly, do "the small disadvantaged businesses that participate in the 8(a) program" have the resources to respond successfully in that short a time limit?

In the long run, I question the ratio between money saved and Task Orders awarded. In Navy's effort to streamline and cut costs, what kind of expectation are they setting for competitive responses?