TECHNOLOGY AND THE BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT

The Defense Department is known to be high tech, but the general public doesn't often hear about what goes on inside the Pentagon's walls. In the spirit of engagement, the Army Research, Development and Engineering Command last week debuted Army Technology Live, a free iPhone app intended to build dialogue around Army tech initiatives.

The app brings users news, job postings and social media feeds in a compact, mobile package. When opened, it automatically downloads the latest information from the RDECOM Web site, Twitter and Facebook feeds, as well as Flickr and YouTube pages. The app also connects to all RDECOM-related positions in USAJobs.

RDECOM sees the app as an opportunity to catch the eye of those interested in science and technology, said spokesman Joseph Ferrare. "As we see emerging communications venues, there's an opportunity to tell the Army story. Our goal is to showcase the exciting new technologies our Army scientists and engineers are developing."

Do you know a federal manager who recently took risks to push through a bold idea, policy or program that uses technology to make government work better or improve public services? If so, we'd like to hear your story by nominating your colleague for a Nextgov Award.

The Nextgov Award program, developed in partnership with O'Reilly Media Inc. and TechWeb, will recognize government executives who stepped outside their comfortable confines to think and manage differently. They acted boldly to push through an innovative program, policy or new management practice that relied on technology to move government in a new direction, to challenge employees to think and work differently, and that ultimately improved the lives of citizens.

We know there are many managers who have done just that, and we want you to tell us about them by nominating them for a Nextgov Award. The deadline is March 12, but we suggest you don't wait. Visit the nomination page and spend just a few minutes filling out the form. We'll tell the stories of the winners later this spring on Nextgov.

A panel of respected judges will make choose the winners, who will be honored at a luncheon on May 27 at the Gov 2.0 Expo at the Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C. The expo is co-sponsored by O'Reilly Media Inc. and TechWeb, and Nextgov is the premier media sponsor.

Local governments already are starting to lobby Google for a spot along an experimental super-speed network the company announced Wednesday.

Axcess Ontario, a public-benefit corporation overseeing the development of Ontario County, N.Y.'s community fiber network, began the application process on behalf of the county government on Thursday.

Google plans to test "ultra -high-speed" networks, delivering 1 gigabit of data per second -- more than 100 times faster than typical access -- in a small number of locations. The company that started as a search firm has issued a request for information to identify interested locales.

Ontario County, a rural and suburban community near Rochester, has pledged $12 million for its own 180-mile endeavor. About 60 miles are complete and the rest is expected to be deployed by year's end.

"What Google seeks to accomplish is exactly what the Ontario County fiber optic ring was built for," Ed Hemminger, Axcess Ontario president and chief executive officer, said in a statement. "Ontario County should be at the top of Google's list of potential test sites -- we've been working on this project for seven years."

Currently, service providers including Verizon Wireless, are providing cost-effective telecommunications to businesses along the 60 miles, according to Axcess Ontario. "This means Ontario County actually has the infrastructure to do what Google wants to do -- and quickly," a company press release states.

Hemminger added, "The fiber ring ensures our community will never be left behind in the global economy, and this week we can see with the Google experiment that Ontario County, N.Y., may, in fact, have an opportunity to lead the way."

Nextgov has launched the Nextgov Awards, an inaugural program to recognize federal managers who have shepherded a program, policy or management practice that is not only innovative, but bold and brave.

Yes, we know, there are a lot of awards programs in government. But when we asked federal managers and industry executives what is missing, they told us unanimously: No awards recognize federal employees who took on risks -- personal, political and otherwise -- and boldly acted to see their idea to fruition. Or if their idea died, at least they took on entrenched bureaucratic interests in an attempt to make government better through the use of technology.

We invite you to visit our awards page to learn more and to nominate someone who fits the criteria. The technology isn't the reason for the award, but the bold idea must rely on it in some way. And we encourage you to tell us a story about the individuals you nominate. We want you to wow us because we know there are dozens of stories of federal employees trying to improve government and the lives of citizens, but they are up against big odds. Yet, they have acted bravely and with resolve to bring about change. We want to know about them, the drama they faced and the results they achieved. And, of course, the technology they used.

The winners of the Nextgov Awards will be honored at a luncheon at TechWeb's Gov 2.0 Expo in May. (Nextgov is a TechWeb partner for the event.) We'd love to see you there.

More to come.

Whenever you've got what looks like a clear-cut case of government waste, some sort of manufactured political outrage inevitably follows. Taking up the mantle of the indignant taxpayer this week: Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. The reason for their indignation? Millions in missed savings due to delays in the transition to the Networx telecom contract.

In case you haven't been following my coverage of the transition from FTS2001 to Networx, you should know that federal agencies are taking much longer to complete the transition than expected. The result: $18 million a month wasted and probably a lot more to come, since it's unlikely General Services Administration will complete the transition before the final FTS2001 bridge contracts expire in June 2011. That means GSA likely will have to come up with some sort of emergency contract to maintain service at a cost many times higher than the prices on Networx.

GSA has stepped up its efforts in recent months, but with agencies facing myriad new requirements, including increased Recovery Act reporting, the Networx transition has gotten lost amid the shuffle. Now the senators want to know why and what's going to be done going forward. From a letter sent yesterday to OMB chief performance officer Jeffrey Zients:

We understand GSA has taken a number of steps to assist the transition to Networx and is working to ensure agencies have adequate information on the steps needed to transition before the FTS2001 contracts expire. However, we also believe that strong leadership from the Office of Management and Budget would be useful in speeding the transition.

In addition to the cost-savings, we also believe that agencies should be using Networx to take advantage of newest technologies instead of solely using the same or similar services from their existing contracts. This is of particular concern given the security of federal networks and the opportunities to use new technologies to assist agencies in strengthening their cyber defenses.

We are interested in knowing the specific actions your office has taken and is taking to ensure that federal agency managers have prioritized this very important transition of telecommunication services. To that end, we would appreciate your responses to the following questions:

1. What actions has OMB taken to assist the transition to Networx?

2. Why have agencies delayed the transition from FTS200 I to Networx?

3. What remedial actions can agency managers take to ensure transition activities are taken before the current contracts expire?

We also request your office provide a briefing on Networx to this Committee no later than January 31, 2010.

Now that lawmakers are involved we can expect the amount of noise and pressure surrounding the transition to ratchet up significantly. While this will no doubt result in a lot of stress and appearances on the Hill for Karl Krumbholz and other members of the Networx team, it may also be the only way to get the attention and resources needed to complete a successful transition by June 2011. A fact that will no doubt be of little comfort to the folks at GSA who will likely be dealing with the increased scrutiny for the next 18 months.

Full letter is below:

The Honorable Jeffrey D. Zients Deputy Director of Management and Chief Performance Officer Office of Management and Budget 7257'" Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20503

Dear Deputy Director Zients:

The General Services Administration (GSA) telecommunications contracts provide basic telephone, network services, and information technology services to federal agencies. These contracts are very important for ensuring that agencies have the telecommunications abilities to perform their missions and efficiently manage taxpayer dollars. As you are aware, GSA's existing telecommunications program, known as FTS2001, is the successor to a line of programs that have provided telecommunications to the federal government. FTS2001 is scheduled to expire in June 2010.

In 2007, GSA awarded contracts for a successor program, known as Networx, and has been working with more than 135 agencies to assist the transition of 50 types of services and thousands of voice and data circuits. As potentially the largest telecommunications service s transition ever undertaken by the federal government, this transition has experienced its own challenges. In particular, as of November 2009, GSA reported that nearly 96 percent of the savings projected by this transition have not been realized, and agencies have been slow to take appropriate steps to ensure a smooth transition.

During the previous transition to FTS2001, delays were encountered that resulted in raised telecommunications costs and an estimated savings lost of $74 million. We are concerned that the slow transition to Networx is a repeat of the past. Specifically, every month that agencies delay transitioning to the new program, an estimated $18 million of savings are lost.

We understand GSA has taken a number of steps to assist the transition to Networx and is working to ensure agencies have adequate information on the steps needed to transition before the FTS2001 contracts expire. However, we also believe that strong leadership from the Office of Management and Budget would be useful in speeding the transition.

In addition to the cost-savings, we also believe that agencies should be using Networx to take advantage of newest technologies instead of solely using the same or similar services from their existing contracts. This is of particular concern given the security of federal networks and the opportunities to use new technologies to assist agencies in strengthening their cyber defenses.

We are interested in knowing the specific actions your office has taken and is taking to ensure that federal agency managers have prioritized this very important transition of telecommunication services. To that end, we would appreciate your responses to the following questions:

1. What action s has OMB taken to assist the transition to Networx?

2. Why have agencies delayed the transition from FTS200 I to Networx?

3. What remedial actions can agency managers take to ensure transition activities are taken before the current contracts expire?

We also request your office provide a briefing on Networx to this Committee no later than

January 31, 2010.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter and assistance in working with federal agencies during this transition to ensure the effective and efficient use of telecommunication services to perform their missions.

Sincerely,

Joseph I. Lieberman Susan Collins
Chairman Ranking Member

Today's Federal Register includes an official notice from the FCC that it is proposing a rule that would "preserve the open Internet." Net Neutrality has been a hot topic in recent days; two weeks ago a White House official spoke out in favor of the concept and took a shot at the broadband industry.

Speaking at a telecom policy conference last week, Deputy CTO Andrew McLaughlin compared censorship in China -- where President Obama's recent comments on open Internet values were blocked from Chinese Web sites -- to the need for net neutrality rules so as to prevent corporations from acting as gatekeepers of information and speech:

"If it bothers you that the China government does it, it should bother you when your cable company does it," McLaughlin said at the policy conference. The administration has made net neutrality a cornerstone of its technology agenda.

Those comments did not sit well with AT&T's chief lobbyist, Jim Cicconi, who issued an angry response. He said it was "ill-considered and inflammatory" to connect censorship in China to the practices of American ISPs, whom he said do not threaten free speech.

The language in today's notice is fairly straightforward:

In this NPRM, the Commission proposes draft language to codify the four principles the Commission articulated in the Internet Policy Statement; a fifth principle that would require a broadband Internet access service provider to treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner; and a sixth principle that would require a broadband Internet access service provider to disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this rulemaking.

Members of the public have until January 14 to submit comments and there will be a second reply period that lasts until March 5. Which means some time next spring is when we can probably expect net neutrality to become official government policy. I'm sure there are users out there somewhere breathing a sigh of relief.

Federal auditors on Thursday reported that workforce costs at the U.S. Postal Service decreased only slightly this year, despite automation at USPS.

Phillip Herr, director of physical infrastructure issues at the Government Accountability Office, testified before Congress,

"USPS's financial condition and outlook continue to be challenging despite recent congressional action that relieved USPS of $4 billion in mandated payments to prefund postal retiree health benefits by September 30, 2009.4 Preliminary results from the end of fiscal year 2009 and USPS' outlook include. . .

Compensation and benefits constitute close to 80 percent of USPS costs--a percentage that has remained similar over the years despite major advances in technology and automating postal operations.

These costs declined by 1.3 percent in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2009 (the most recent data available) as compared to the same time period in fiscal year 2008, in contrast to other costs such as transportation, supplies and services, and depreciation, which together declined 8.2 percent."

In general, GAO found that USPS has not been able to lower costs or generate enough revenue to offset cutbacks in advertising and consumer spending and the ongoing shift to electronic communications.

The White House on Friday invited private equity fund managers to submit proposals for the establishment of a fund that will invest in technology access in countries with large Muslim populations.

The so-called Global Technology and Innovation Fund fulfills a promise Obama made during his June remarks in Cairo on America's relationship with Muslim communities worldwide.

"We will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create more jobs," he said at the time.

The administration will finance between $25 million and $150 million in capital for each fund selected. The funds will focus on, among other tech markets, IT, healthcare and telecommunications to benefit countries throughout Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.

"Examples of financed projects could include . . . strategies that promote the adoption of technology and new media for applications in education, and business and financial services," the call for submissions states. Deadline for proposals is Nov. 30.

The Federal Register is out with an executive order, first announced last week, that prohibits federal employees from text messaging while driving. It pressures companies with government business to "refrain" from distracted driving, too.

Agencies "shall encourage contractors, subcontractors, and recipients and subrecipients to adopt and enforce policies that ban text messaging while driving company-owned or -rented vehicles or [government vehicles], or while driving [privately-owned vehicles] when on official government business or when performing any work for or on behalf of the government," the order states.

Meanwhile, all federal employees "shall not engage in" texting while driving government cars or privately-owned cars during work hours, as well as when using government-owned devices in any car, at any time.

President Obama on Wednesday declared American Samoa a major disaster after the territory was struck by an earthquake and tsunami. But if the president wanted to spread that message nationwide, today, it wouldn't get very far.

A government auditor on Wednesday testified before Congress that the federal government has made limited progress in updating the Cold War-era Emergency Alert System that relies on radio and television broadcasts. A lack of specific timetables and goals has slowed installation of a new system that would spread messages through other media channels, called the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS). Since many Americans get their information from handhelds, PCs and cell phones, this is a problem.

Mark L. Goldstein, director of physical infrastructure at the Government Accountability Office, testified:

Management turnover, inadequate planning, and a lack of stakeholder coordination have delayed implementation of IPAWS and left the nation dependent on an antiquated, unreliable national alert system. FEMA's delays also appear to have made IPAWS implementation more difficult in the absence of federal leadership as states have forged ahead and invested in their own alert and warning systems. In order that IPAWS achieve the federal government's public alert and warning goals, it is essential that FEMA define the specific steps necessary in realizing a modernized and integrated alert system and report on the progress toward achieving that end.

He was speaking to a hearing of a House subcommittee, which was appropriately titled: "This is NOT a Test: Will the Nation's Emergency Alert System Deliver the President's Message to the Public?"