<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face="Verdana Ref" size=4><A
href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-guards12aug12.story"><FONT
size=3>http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-guards12aug12.story</FONT></A><FONT
size=3> </FONT>
<H1>Army Turns to Private Guards</H1>
<H2>The military is criticized for risking security at bases and for a process
that awarded $1 billion in contracts without competitive bidding.</H2>By T.
Christian Miller<BR>Times Staff Writer<BR><BR>August 12, 2004<BR><BR>WASHINGTON
— Stretched thin by troop deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and security needs
at home, the Army has resorted to hiring private security guards to help protect
dozens of American military bases.<BR><BR>To date, more than 4,300 private
security officers have been put to work at 50 Army installations in the United
States, according to Army documents obtained by The Times. <BR><BR>The work was
awarded to four firms — two of which got the contracts without having to bid
competitively. The contracts are worth as much as $1.24 billion.<BR><BR>The Army
says the maneuver lets it free up more soldiers for military duty while quickly
putting private guards in place to meet the need for additional security since
the Sept. 11 attacks.<BR><BR>But the Army's action has drawn criticism on two
grounds: that it compromises domestic military security, and that it amounts to
abuse of a law intended to aid impoverished Alaska Natives.<BR><BR>Two five-year
contracts worth as much as $1 billion went to two small Alaska Native firms with
little previous security experience. The firms, which operate under special
contracting laws enabling them to avoid competitive bidding, subcontracted part
of the work to two of the country's largest security firms: Wackenhut Services
Inc. and Vance Federal Security Services.<BR><BR>Thirty-six bases are covered by
the Alaska Native contracts — including three in California: Ft. Irwin, the
Sierra Army Depot and the Presidio of Monterey.<BR><BR>"I'm concerned about the
protection of our military facilities," said Rep. Lane Evans, an Illinois
Democrat who serves on the House Armed Services Committee and has called for
hearings on the contracts. <BR><BR>"Some of these installations house chemical
weapons and intelligence materials and should not be compromised with
questionable contracting processes and poor security."<BR><BR>Democrats,
watchdog groups and independent contracting experts said that the Army's
contracting arrangement with the Alaska Native firms amounted to a back-door
deal to send taxpayer dollars to Wackenhut and Vance, which lost out the only
time they faced open competition against other companies for the security
contracts.<BR><BR>"It's a total abuse of the intent of the law," said Danielle
Brian, the executive director of the Program on Government Oversight, a watchdog
group. "The law was designed to benefit companies that need a special boost. At
the end of the day, if Wackenhut is benefiting, it's just a blatant abuse of the
system."<BR><BR>The move is part of a larger trend of hiring private contractors
to do many jobs previously done by the military. Since the war in Iraq, the
shift toward private contractors has accelerated. Private companies now do
everything from washing soldiers' laundry to protecting senior American
officials from attack.<BR><BR>At Army bases in the United States, officials said
that security requirements arising from the Sept. 11 attacks had forced them to
use thousands of active duty and reserve units to set up additional patrols and
guard posts.<BR><BR>Defense officials saw private security guards as a way to
perform the additional security duties, free up more soldiers to fight in the
field and make it possible for reserve units to return home when their service
commitments expired.<BR><BR>Defense Department officials first had to lobby
Congress to lift a nearly 2-decade-old federal ban on hiring private security
guards at military bases. The ban was enacted after government unions said they
feared losing nonmilitary Defense Department guard jobs to private
companies.<BR><BR>Army officials said that by the time Congress acted, they
didn't have enough time to mount a full and open bidding competition for the
work.<BR><BR>The ability to award contracts to Alaska Native firms without any
competition enabled the Army to quickly install private security guards. The
Army decided in July 2003 to issue contracts to two firms, each with a cap of
$500 million over five years.<BR><BR>Wackenhut's partner is the Alaska Native
firm Alutiiq Security and Technology, based in Chesapeake, Va. The other Alaska
native firm, Chenega Technical Products, based in Panama City, Fla.,
subcontracted to Vance. <BR><BR>At about the same time it awarded the Alaska
Native contracts, the Army also decided to issue two more contracts to provide
base security through typical open competition. The Army said it had more time
for the second round of contracts, which were awarded in September
2003.<BR><BR>In that competition, Wackenhut and Vance entered the bidding but
lost to other companies, the Army documents showed. <BR><BR>The two winning
companies, Coastal International of South Carolina and Akal Security of New
Mexico, were given $74 million worth of contracts to guard 12 bases.<BR><BR>The
Army said that the private guards have performed well, and were trained to the
same standards as Defense Department civilian guards, who work at Army bases
along with military police officers.<BR><BR>"The overall performance of the
[security guard program] has been excellent and to the standards of the
contract," the Army said in a written response to questions from The Times.
<BR><BR>The private security firms also dismissed the
complaints.<BR><BR>Wackenhut said the criticisms were part of a labor battle
against the company involving one of the country's largest service unions,
Service Employees International Union, which wanted to unionize Wackenhut
guards.<BR><BR>Alutiiq said its performance rating justified the Army's
decision. <BR><BR>The firm's previous security experience consisted of fielding
a 120-man private police force for Kwajalein Atoll, a missile test site in the
South Pacific.<BR><BR>"We are paying [our guards] a little higher. But we're
getting quality performance as a result. You get what you pay for," said Bruce
Swagler, the head of Alutiiq's security program. "Quality-wise and
performance-wise, as far as the government is concerned, we're doing a great
job."<BR><BR>After hearing about the Army's interest in hiring private security
guards, company officials said Alutiiq and Wackenhut pitched their partnership:
Alutiiq provided the contracting speed, and Wackenhut provided the experience.
The two firms jointly recruit the guards, 51% of whom become Alutiiq employees
and 49% Wackenhut employees as set out in the contract.<BR><BR>Alutiiq said that
as far as it knew, one of its guards was an Alaska Native.<BR><BR>"When it was
clear that the Army needed to do something and do it quickly, we believed it was
headed toward Alaska Native corporations,"' said James L. Long, the president
and chief executive of Wackenhut Services, a subsidiary of Wackenhut. "We made
it clear to the Army that we had a relationship with Alutiiq and Alutiiq made
sure that the Army knew they had a relationship with Wackenhut."<BR><BR>Alaska
Native corporations — sometimes called "Stevens Act" corporations because the
firms were strongly supported by Sen. Ted Stevens, the Alaska Republican who
headed the chamber's Appropriations Committee — were created in 1971 as part of
a settlement of land claims with Alaskan tribal groups.<BR><BR>Small businesses
belonging to such corporations can receive no-bid contracts of unlimited value,
an advantage not enjoyed by other types of businesses. And though Alaska Natives
must own the company, tribal members do not have to do any of the work, meaning
the firms can subcontract work to other companies.<BR><BR>The reasoning was that
profit generated by the firms returned to impoverished Alaskan tribes, which
could use the money to pay dividends or set up scholarship funds.
<BR><BR>Although dividends in some years have been more than $50,000 per
shareholder, they more typically amount to a few thousand dollars.<BR><BR>The
military guard contracts awarded to Alutiiq and Wackenhut so far total $90.4
million to guard 16 bases, while Chenega and Vance have received contracts worth
$89.9 million to guard 20 bases.<BR><BR>Because Wackenhut and Vance lost to
other companies when faced with competitive bidding, contracting expert groups
questioned whether the Army was paying too much for the no-bid
contracts.<BR><BR>Steven Schooner, a contracting expert at George Washington
University's Law School, said the Army's actions showed a lack of
planning.<BR><BR>"If it's true that [Alaska Native corporations] are getting
contracts of staggering volumes solely for the purpose of avoiding competition
or being a funnel to the same firms that should be otherwise competing for the
work … it's offensive," Schooner said. "It's ridiculous."<BR><BR>Unions and
watchdog groups have raised concerns about Wackenhut's and Vance's performance
on other contracts.<BR><BR>Unions have attacked Vance for acting aggressively
against striking workers in situations where the company has been hired to
protect factories and work sites.<BR><BR>Wackenhut has been accused by unions
and government officials of allowing lapses in security at the nation's nuclear
plants, many of which employ Wackenhut guards.<BR><BR>A Department of Energy
report this year by the inspector general said current and former security
guards at Oak Ridge nuclear weapons complex had complained that Wackenhut
manipulated the results of drills by altering testing equipment and passing
information to low-ranking guards prior to simulated attacks.<BR><BR>"It seems
really irresponsible to have Wackenhut, which was found to have cheated on
government security tests, doing security work at U.S. military bases," said
Stephen Lerner, the director of the security division at the Service Employees
International Union, which maintains a website critical of Wackenhut.
<BR><BR>"This isn't about mowing the lawn. This is about guarding places that
are potential terrorist targets."<BR><BR>Wackenhut defended its performance,
noting that it continued to receive work from the government. It also said that
the inspector general's criticisms were directed more at the Department of
Energy than at Wackenhut. <BR><BR>"We do what we're told to do. We do what we're
contracted to do," Long said.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>