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]