TOPICS

Wartime commission scrutinizes contractors' role in Iraq drawdown

By Elizabeth Newell enewell@govexec.com November 2, 2009

The struggle to balance contractors with military and civilian government personnel in Iraq continues -- and might be intensifying -- as the military effort there tapers off.

Witnesses told the Commission on Wartime Contracting on Monday that contractors are playing a strong supporting role in the drawdown in Iraq, and the ratio of contractors to military personnel is likely to increase before it decreases. Rear Adm. Thomas Traaen, vice director for logistics for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the number of contractors will not decrease as quickly as the number of federal employees in theater, because contractors must help close forward operating bases and redeploy equipment.

According to Traaen, the ratio of contractors to military in Iraq was 1:1 for the past several years, but likely will increase to about 1.5:1 by August 2010. "As the forward operating bases close and equipment is redeployed, that ratio will also start to decrease," he said. "These numbers will be flexible, and there will be a continual decrease in both contractors and military as the drawdown progresses."

RELATED STORIES

Commission co-chairmen Christopher Shays and Michael Thibault agreed that the absolute and comparative numbers of contractors could rise as military units move out of bases and contractors prepare for base handover or closure, but they said the general trend should move toward a decline in the number of contractors.

"We need to be clear about the role of contractors in supporting the Iraq drawdown and be sure that numbers of contractor personnel are appropriately geared to the reduction of U.S. military strength and base closures, and are being timely adjusted for that reduction," Thibault said, also speaking on behalf of Shays. "Either way, the government needs to monitor and adjust as appropriate the contractor staffing needed to support the mission."

William Solis, director of defense capabilities and management at the Government Accountability Office, testified that the Defense Department has not yet fully determined its need for contractors during the drawdown or the extent to which it will move contractors out of Iraq to address other needs.

The Defense Contract Audit Agency waved a red flag by reporting that contractor KBR Inc., which will manage significant portions of the drawdown under the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) III contract, already is costing the government millions of dollars by ineffectively withdrawing its own staff. Outgoing DCAA Director April Stephenson said an audit performed in October showed KBR could save the government at least $193 million by improving its staff management and aligning its drawdown with the military's.

"When the military reduced its troop levels from 160,000 to 130,000 -- a 19 percent reduction -- KBR's staffing levels remained constant," Stephenson said. "At the time of the audit, KBR did not have a detailed, written plan to reduce staffing levels in consonance with the military drawdown."

DCAA estimated that without significant action, the ratio of KBR staff to troops would shrink from 1:9.4 before troop drawdown began to 1:3.6 by August 2010.

Under LOGCAP III, KBR will be responsible for providing logistic services in support of the withdrawal of theater transportation equipment, the retrograding of supplies and equipment, and other logistics such as packaging equipment for shipment.

In addition to discussing contractors' role in the Iraq drawdown, the commission noted the difficulties the Defense Department and other agencies face as they track the number of contractors working in contingency zones.

"How can contractors be properly managed if we aren't sure how many there are, where they are and what they are doing?" Thibault asked.

The commissioners also followed up on the relationship between DCAA and the Defense Contract Management Agency, which panelists called dysfunctional during an August hearing. Officials from both agencies and Shay Assad, director of the Defense Procurement Acquisition Policy Office, said they were working to improve cooperation and take a more uniform, compatible approach to contractor oversight.

VIEW ALL 10 COMMENTS POST COMMENT

COMMENTS

  • Response to V Wayne: I must first thank you for your service to this great nation: With all due respect sir. What you describe as the truth is unfortunatly your fantasy $$. I do not get my views on this situation from the media. You are correct about the draft to make up for short comings if contractors where not used. However I am seeing the money spent and can not see how anyone can justify paying one individual three soldiers salaries. Also I do not believe that these functions are inbedded in the ARMY from here on. A matter of fact the more the taxpayers learn of the repeated waste and beatings we are taking finacially in many areas of this war effort by contractors the wave of discontent will devour this situation. You are correct again the youth does not want anything to do with this conflict for many reasons this war is not popular with the kids. A draft will be met with protest for sure, this entire situation could have and should have been avoided we know this today our leadership both parties have thrown us into the economic quagmire at home and abroad. Soldiers do their jobs for us the citizens who they protect the flag they honor and the country they love and I for one am indedted to them and respect each of them. We are only seeing contractors do what they do for greed no flag no country no cause but their own pockets which appauls me. I will say though, we get in a conflict this country believes in and the youth will pour into service look at WWII. This is a money machine for some and that view does not come from my TV its just a reality and I for one have seen enough. LC Posted November 6, 2009 1:45 PM
  • Most of the argumentative points I'd make have already been made by previous commentors, I'd simply stress the macro-issue, as follows: What do the commenters that are suspicious of contractors expect to receive if you agree that the USA will have overseas battles fighting with overseas ground units. More to the point -- what are your expectations for: 1) predicting operational costs 2) predicting operational inefficiency as well as graft, 3) predicting where in the private sector or where in the uniformed and US government sector - operational support structures and units will be raised, maintained, and administered. 4) Minimizing graft, inefficiency, and unfairness – supply your personal yardstick. Sorry, commenters, but, most of the contractor-suspicious seem vastly uninformed if not naive on the realities especially the historical record, deep and rich, of war operations. By war operations, I mean actual shooting battles – chaos, dying, killing, heroes and cowards on any given battlefield. Such activities are famously difficult to predict in terms of cost, dollars and lives—the wise or politically clever don’t try. Pre-battle predictions and post-battle costs generally differ dramatically -- pick your favorite multiplied number -- say 10X what Congress has approved, what the public hopes. So who can best supply military supplies and services: is it self-serving contractors or the virtuous civil servants? Do you want to re-establish US government factories - we could do that -- the Springfield Armory made Union Army rifles, in WWII battleships were made in US Navy Shipyards – e.g. Boston, Mare Island, and the famous Brooklyn yard. Here's a fun test: assume the TOE US Army regiment has about 40,000 individual inventory items – food, uniforms, mortars, ammo, plasma, etc. Now, check out your local town public works unit - do they stock 40,000 items? Any funny business therein and if so, are you equally shocked at local perfidy? Do you expect, local graft should be 0%, 1.5%, 15% of inventory? Under 2% ? Oh my, bless you my children, for you war is just too childish for your apparently ethereal values. Perhaps, we can nosh on a different topic some time. Yo, check you at the next roundtable on IRS audit targets, oh the unfairness to the Little Guy! Plus ca change. Concerned Retiree Posted November 3, 2009 5:27 PM
  • where is our vaulted state dept and us aid?? Why aren't they involved and taking over the missions that are there's and not the military's. I'm tired of their bloated budgets and bloated payroll and their 0 contribution to this nations well being dan m ketter Posted November 3, 2009 4:41 PM
VIEW ALL 10 COMMENTS

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR