Army to consolidate environmental contracts

In an effort to reduce costs and eliminate redundancy, an Army command is preparing to consolidate thousands of environmental support services contracts into three enterprisewide contract vehicles.

While the plan potentially could save the command millions by eliminating duplicative services, critics -- including some base commanders -- are concerned that the megadeals will lead to less responsive and accountable contractors.

The pilot program calls for a gradual start next September in which the Army Environmental Command would merge roughly 5 percent to 10 percent of the contracts, said Randy Cerar, the organization's technical director. The rest of the contracts would be combined as early as fiscal 2009.

The plan is based on an acquisition model in which agencies analyze their spending and use the information to procure commodities and services more effectively and efficiently.

The Army's Installation Management Command, of which the Environmental Command is a subordinate entity, currently maintains about 3,000 environmental services contracts totaling $200 million annually. A large percentage of those are deals originally signed by the General Services Administration or the Army Corps of Engineers.

The consolidation plan calls for the Envronmental Command to award three five-year base contracts valued at a total of $840 million. An advisory and assistance services contract would be worth $400 million, an environmental compliance contract would be valued at $240 million, and a cultural and natural resources contract would total $200 million.

The indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contracts would be competitively awarded to a handful of companies that would then vie for individual task orders. Despite the increased size of the contracts, Cerar said small businesses will have opportunities to compete for task orders and jobs as subcontractors.

While not all the 3,000 existing contracts will be subject to strategic sourcing, command officials said they will likely all be included in one of the three IDIQ contract vehicles. The draft acquisition plans were submitted to the Installation Management Command at the end of September, although the scope of the pilot program will be developed over the next year.

"You can't go from zero right to 100 percent," Cerar said. "So we are looking at about 5 percent [of contracts] right away. But we are not going to force consolidation when it doesn't make business sense."

Cerar expects the consolidation to save the command roughly $150 million in procurement costs over the next five years. The savings would allow the command to address a backlog of currently unfunded projects, he said.

"We are looking for an opportunity to create better buying power," Cerar said. "It's another tool in our toolbox."

The plan was first revealed last month by the advocacy group, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which posted internal documents from a July 25 Army briefing on its Web site.

PEER is not convinced that the strategy will result in a discernable improvement in contract performance.

Environmental conditions change rapidly on the ground and Army bases need contractors that are able to react promptly and effectively to local problems, said Jeff Ruch, the group's executive director. A centralized contract vehicle could lead to a decline in the quality of work because of rapid staff turnover and uneven performance, the group suggested.

"This will impede the command's duty to respond to environmental concerns," Ruch said. "And, that makes the whole environmental command less responsive."

Cerar acknowledged that base commanders have expressed some concern about yielding control of the contracts to a centralized office. He argued, however, that while details are not yet final, base commanders and installation staff will have a voice in evaluating contracts and making changes to work proposals.

Despite such assurances, critics remain skeptical of the military's reliance on contractors to perform environmental work. Ruch cited pollution at formerly used defense sites across the country and problems with drinking water on Cape Cod as sources of major concern.

"The Army's track record with contractors," Ruch said, "is not something that inspires confidence."

In 2005, more than 60 percent of the Installation Management Command's annual environmental spending was devoted to compliance, and nearly a third went toward on conservation, according to the leaked briefing. Five percent was spent on pollution prevention.