Re: Outsourcing

[Peter Strauss <pstrauss@igc.org>]

The operative terms for this discussion are "decision-making and
accountability". Most DoD cleanup programs have a large contractor run
it from top to bottom, with DoD oversight. DOE programs got into trouble
because large contractors made the mess first, and then were paid to
clean them up. Although there was DOE oversight, the technical problems
that created the need for cleanup were often too complex for there to be
meaningful accountability.
Unfortunately, even at DoD cleanup sites, it is very difficult for the
DoD project manager to disagree with the "experts" it has hired. While
decision-making and accountability remain with the miltary branch, I
frankly do not know if it is meaningful. All the more important to have
the public involved.

Peter Strauss

Lenny Siegel wrote:
>
> OUTSOURCING ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
>
> Apparently in response to the recommendations of the Defense Reform
> Initiative, the Defense Department and the armed services are
> increasingly relying upon contractors to run their environmental
> programs. It's one thing to ask a contractor to characterize a site or
> publicize a conference, but decision-making and accountability should
> remain in the hands of government employees. Historically, some of the
> worst aspects of the Energy Department's environmental program can be
> attributed to its overreliance upon contractor personnel.
>
> I would like to hear from subscribers and other readers. Have you seen
> an increase in Defense Department outsourcing of environmental
> responsibility? If so, how has it affected the programs with which you
> deal?
>
> --
>
> Lenny Siegel
> Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
> c/o PSC, 222B View St., Mountain View, CA 94041

> Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
> Fax: 650/968-1126
> lsiegel@cpeo.org