 I do have something else I wanted to share real quick, just that happened to me outside of this. We did one of my projects. I got this letter on a project that I recently was, I was awarded. I just started it. We got this letter from a new contract guy and he issued us a letter of concern. Hold on. Let me see it here. So basically this guy issued us a letter of concern about our contract and working on saying that we owed him some documents, like a control plan, activity hazard plan, and all this kind of stuff. So the reason why this is, I'm sharing this, I take all of them out. What was that, you know what, I'm going to be, oh, yo, I'm going to make sure that I don't get it. And the reason why I'm sharing this letter happened is because the, sometimes the government people, they come off as really nice. And this particular guy sent this email and he said, hey, please see this letter of concern in regards to this flooring project. By close this morning, let me know your planned age for the following QC submittal, APP submittal, industrial hygiene testing completion, call me if you have questions. He's a new like project manager, whatever, on this particular job that we rewarded. And we just rewarded this job like last month and we submitted everything to him. So I called my PM, which is Steve on a project and I said, hey, Steve, you know, what's up with that? It's like, I don't know. We submit everything. I'm not really sure where this guy is coming from because he told me if things cool. So I said, well, obviously it's not because he sent the letter. He told my project manager that this was just a formality, right? To do. Okay. And I'm going to tell you why this is important because Steve is like a lot of you out here is if you've never worked with the government, they may be telling you something, right? But they're sending you this letter and saying, it's just a formality. And I'm like, no, this is not no formality. We've got to respond and we've got to trust this and we've got it like, you know, cut the snake off at the head because he's saying he's covering his butt by sending us a letter. But if we didn't do anything wrong, then why did we have a letter? So I talked to Steve and after like several hours, Mike Steve put it in writing exactly what's going on. So what was happening was the government personnel was actually trying to get us to do some additional work without saying it. And so some of the things that he listed on here that they wanted us to do, okay, were related to work that was not in our scope. And this was something that was discussed on the job site. Never made it back to the offices, never made it back to any paperwork side. And then as a result, they said we were like behind a month. And so they issued us this letter. And I'm saying this because Steve was very apprehensive and how to handle the situation. You handle it by addressing the facts, putting them on paper and stating, no, that this is not part of our scope. This is not part of our obligation, which then makes us not late or not delayed because all the things that were in the original scope of work, part of what we agreed to, we've already adhered to those things. We've submitted them, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And I can see already a lot of people out there saying to me, Eric, what should I do? And you being in a situation and asking me, Eric, what should you do? And my answer is always that even if you work something out or like they quote, quote, work something out on the field, you got to put it in writing and get it signed off by the contracting official because, and like I told Stevie today, is that this guy, Joshua Blackley, first of all, Joshua is not the reason we are on this base working. He didn't give me no contracts. He didn't bring me there. Okay. He's not the one that gave me my IDIQ. He's not the one that called me for the sole source. His boss, right here, Mike, Gian Gregorio, called me. Matthew Mielkowski are the ones who I dealt with negotiated my IDIQ for this particular submarine base, not Joshua Blackley. And at the end of the day, if anything goes down and Joshua Blackley is off in Canada somewhere working or in Guam, they're going to say, what, let's go to the file and see what the file says. So it's not going to be hearsay, writing that kind of stuff. You have to document the facts and even the conversations, even if it's in an email and you're saying, hey, I just want to know that this is what we talked about today, right? I just want to kind of summarize what we discussed kind of in the field and send you an email to make sure. And again, if you could say, just like when they call you to say, your phone may be recorded for test reasons or whatever they say. Same thing. We're sending this email just as a summary of our conversation today to make sure we understand each other, we agree. And in that way, you have documented evidence. Don't be afraid to say to the government that they're wrong. And that's kind of like the point is, so we wrote a letter, well, I had Stevie write the letter, and we basically spelled out all the ways in which they were wrong. And we listed out the dates and we told them that this was our contract. These are the mods, insurance submitted. These are all things that we submitted, okay? And then we listed out that they actually changed the contract yesterday, right? So there was some confusion with the scope that was cleared up. And as part of the scope of work, and subsequently this testing analysis, this note, that issue was reported on this date, which was not part of our scope. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So then the guy, when we'd sent that, calls back and say, hey, I'm really sorry, I wasn't trying to be mean, you're right, this was a part of your scope, he came back and said, look, I don't want any problems. I was just, nah, you have to kind of set the record straight. And clear the stuff up in the beginning, there's nothing wrong with that. Because if the actual contact an officer would have called me and questioned me about this letter of concern from the Navy. And what am I gonna say, my project manager Stevie talked to Joshua, who said he talked to you, it's like, really? So now everyone has it in writing, it's plain as English. And the guy came back and actually he had to eat his words and say, look, I'm really sorry for the mishap. We don't want to have to issue a modification on the contract, because there's a lot of paperwork. You're right, this was not your responsibility. It's not part of your scope, which means that we're not late. And that the letter of concern basically is invalid. And so ultimately, what's gonna happen is we're gonna send an email and clarify that we are willing to add that scope, do a swap of services, add that scope, what's called a change order for no cost or no cost change order. And we would do that in an effort to keep the project moving forward expediently. But in essence, we weren't wrong. And so I just wanted to give that example to everyone out there because you may be faced with a situation where we always assume or think like, well, it's the government. So I got to like, they're right and everything they're saying. And I can't really push back, but you do have every right to push back. Because at the end of the day, if someone else is reviewing or looking at, and maybe not that agency, right? But another agency, and they have to request and say, well, how did your company do on this project? They'll say, well, we issued them two letters of concerns because of issues of non-compliance, like it just can carry on further than just that one contract, that one facility. And so for me, I wanted to kind of nip that in the bud. And so if you're out there and you're in that situation, that's the same way that I would say for you to handle it is to just, it's very easy to talk offline and think that you're doing a favor or you're doing it like the easy route by working out with the site manager or the site engineer. But I can tell you that the contracting officer, the contracting specialist, is not going to be happy if they ever learn that you negotiated something outside of what was in writing with a user on the site. They're not going to be happy with you. And their chance of giving you a renewed contract is going to be highly unlikely because you have gone against what they put in writing. So I just want to say that I know we think like, but Eric, wait, it's the government. I'm not making this one guy happy. No. Clear to get writing. I have a question. If regarding the letter you sent to them, are you requesting for more time just to say if the job was, it would take two or three more weeks? Are you requesting for extra time? That had nothing to do with time. No. No. For the extra time. What they were stating was that we were, we had been 30 days without submitting this paperwork. That was what the letter stated. But the actual fact is that we submitted all the paperwork that we were responsible submitting within appropriate time frame. The things that they were asking for were additional items that were not related to our original scope of services. Right. So what I'm saying is that additional work that you're going to do is not, it's not, it's not so it's, it's not additional work for us because what we're doing is the area that they were supposed to originally, we were supposed to originally assess and do testing in that area had already been tested by the government. They made a mistake and they incorrectly read the drawings and the plans. And so ultimately, let's say we were supposed to do building A. Now we're supposed to do building D. But building D is not in my scope. Right. So it's not costing me any more money or time. In fact, I'm actually going to make money on this. Right. But I was willing to give the money back to clarify, to get the point across and get the issue straight now. And we had already made it, like I didn't even ask, I had already made the decision because we're going to actually, we're going to make $10,000 because we don't have to do the remediation. And on this other job, on this other site, we're just going to do testing, which is like 500 bucks. And we've got 10,000 in there. And the government's okay with that. But it didn't matter to me the $10,000 is because if they were claiming that I was delaying the project as a result of that change, I would rather be in compliance and give them back to 10 grand than to be out of compliance to make 10,000. Right. Then you'd be losing relationship. Relationship, future opportunities. You didn't perform well, that kind of stuff. So the 10 bucks for me, the 10. Listen, it's a freaking $900,000 project. We're going to make a whole lot more than 10 grand. We could get 10 grand. Complaint about $3,000 and lose 10,000. I mean, we're going to make, I don't know. I don't know the numbers, but it's a couple million grand, whatever. Hey, Eric, does that go on your, what is it, CP? Like a report card? What's the acronym for that? No, it does not. But that is part of what is evaluated when they do do your CPARs. Yes, let me go. Got you. CPARs, there you go. CPARs, right. That's why you don't want to let that get away. Right, that's why you don't want to let that get away because you were about $10,000 versus being compliant. No, y'all take the 10,000 back and we're compliant. Because when they get back here for the CPARs, which is going to carry me a lot longer, that's $10,000, $20 million worth of contracts down the road. $10,000 is going to be like pennies or fractions. Yeah, facts, man. Chess not checkers, right? Right, there you go. Hey, GovCon Giants family, this is Eric Coffey. I'd like to tell you about a new membership option that YouTube has created and that we here at GovCon Giants TV are taking advantage of. If you notice on our screen, you'll see a button that says Join. When you click the Join button, you'll see different options for people at different price levels, whatever suits your fancy.