From: "Tim Eder" <[log in to unmask]>
Corps ordered to open door to privatization
Flood control, other 'non-core' operations
would be included
10/17/02
By Sean Reilly
Newhouse News Service
WASHINGTON -- As part of a sweeping and
controversial restructuring of the Army, the Bush
administration has ordered the Army Corps of
Engineers to open its entire civil works program
to competition from private businesses,
according to government documents.
In an Oct. 4 memo to top subordinates, Army
Secretary Thomas White said the Army must
focus its energies on "core competencies" while
obtaining other goods and services from the
private sector when that makes sense.
Among the Army operations White placed
outside that core category is the Corps of
Engineers civil works program, which
encompasses hundreds of flood-control and
river navigation projects across the country.
Up to 32,500 military and civilian employees
could be affected.
In an agency wide e-mail Oct. 10, the corps
commander, Lt. Gen. Robert Flowers,
acknowledged that employees have concerns
but said he didn't know enough details to
gauge the impact of White's memorandum.
"I would like to be able to tell you that we
have all the answers to your questions, but
at this point, we don't," Flowers wrote.
"Secretary of the Army White signed a
memorandum on 4 October directing
all Army elements to develop implementation
plans to outsource positions considered
non-core competencies," Flowers said in his
e-mail. "These are positions considered to
be not in direct support of the Army's
war-fighting mission that could possibly be
performed by other federal agencies or
the private sector. This requirement is in
support of President Bush's
management initiatives for government."
He pledged that corps brass would do
their best to make higher-ups
understand that "the entire corps is 'core.' "
Under one timetable, corps officials would
have until December to develop a game plan
for competition, with implementation to
follow at some point after next March.
Ramifications unclear
A spokesman for the corps' district
office in New Orleans said it's unclear
how White's proposal will affect operations.
But he said the corps already is using
outside resources and contractors for much of
its public works projects.
"The corps has for a long time been moving
from doing everything itself to using outside
companies that are competitive in price,"
John Hall said. "It used to be that where we
work was a great, sprawling industrial location
with piles of equipment and supplies. The people
who work for the corps now are, by and
large, office workers who seek bids and
manage projects and so forth."
He said the corps still owns and operates
some large equipment, in case of emergencies
and private contractor scheduling conflicts.
"One example is private dredging," he said.
"The corps' dredging fleet today is minimal,
just to assure that there are no problems in
case private dredges aren't available to keep
the port of New Orleans open."
Workers jittery
In recent years, the corps has come
under heavy criticism in some circles
for embarking on costly and environmentally
questionable projects with dubious economic
returns. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
reportedly is angling to split the corps and shift
its responsibilities to the Interior and Transportation
departments.
To advocates of the practice, privatization of
government work offers the opportunity to
produce more bang for the taxpayer buck. In his
memo, White wrote that the Army had to free up
resources quickly for the war on terrorism.
The military simply seeks the "best value," Army
spokesman Maj. Rudy Burwell said. "It could be
in-house. It could be contracted."
For federal workers, however, the possibility of
privatization inevitably stokes worries about job
security, salary and benefits.
At the American Federation of Government
Employees, a Washington-based union
representing some 600,000 workers, Public
Policy Director Jacqueline Simon said White is
bent on steering contracts to administration friends
by bypassing the regulations used for past
public-private competitions.
"The taxpayer gets the shaft," Simon said, adding
that the plan would
also have a "terrible" effect on military readiness.
Burwell declined to comment on those allegations.
Without question, however, White's proposal dwarfs
the Army's two previous forays into privatization.
Along with the Corps of Engineers, more than
a dozen other Army organizations would be pushed
to open their jobs to competition, documents
indicate. Almost 214,000 employees could be
affected in all, about three-quarters of them civilians.
Rep. Sonny Callahan, R-Ala., who chairs the
congressional panel that drafts the Corps of
Engineers' annual budget, said lawmakers have
temporarily blocked any transfer of the agency's
functions because Congress has yet to finish its
work on fiscal 2003 spending bills.
Callahan, who is retiring when his current term ends
in January, said, "I remain hopeful" that the Defense
Department will consult Congress before proceeding
with any changes in the Corps of Engineers' civil
works responsibilities.
Mixed reviews
The agency already depends on private contractors
to do millions of dollars in routine dredging work.
Interested observers have mixed views on the
impact of extending that reliance into other aspects
of the Corps of Engineers workload.
Sheldon Morgan, president of the Warrior-
Tombigbee Waterway Association, predicted
privatization would fragment such interlocking
missions as flood control and keeping rivers fit
for ship traffic, with devastating results.
"You can't separate them; it's like cutting off your
arm or leg," said Morgan, whose association
represents commercial users of the dredged
channels and locks that allow barge traffic
connecting the Tennessee River and Gulf of
Mexico.
But at Business Executives for National Security,
a nonpartisan policy organization in Washington
that pushes for greater efficiency in defense
spending, analyst Paul Taibl said the Army is
following the lead of many corporations by trying
to refocus on core missions.
"That doesn't mean that the Army won't have to go
through a fairly rigorous process before it decides
to outsource," Taibl said. "The way the federal
rules are written today, it's pretty restrictive."
He said federal employees should get "a fair
shake" in competing for their jobs. Howard
Marlowe, a Washington lobbyist who represents
communities seeking to tap into the Corps of
Engineers' growing role in beach renourishment,
saw reason for both worry and optimism.
On the down side, Marlowe said, corps
bureaucrats typically take seven to 15 years
from the first study to actually put sand on a beach.
On the other hand, he said, communities get
high-quality work and a 50-year warranty
on beach maintenance. "We don't want to lose
that in any way, shape or form," Marlowe said.
. . . . . . .
Staff writer Mark Schleifstein contributed to this report.
© The Times-Picayune. Used with permission
National Wildlife Federation
213 W. Liberty Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
734-769-3351 ext. 25 (office)
734-604-7281 (cell)
734-769-1449 (fax)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
to [log in to unmask]
|
