Putting A Face On Controversy: Greenhouse, the Corps and Iraq

Last week, the Washington Post profiled US Army Corps of Engineers whistleblower Bunny Greenhouse. It's not the first profile; Vanity Fair did one back in the spring. The picture both paint is of a highly professional, highly ethical, incredibly competent woman starring in her own version of David v. Goliath. In this case, Goliath is the Corps and, in part, its Iraq contracts to Halliburton -- contracts which have subsequently been criticized by various government inquiries.

I'm truly not sure which of the revelations in the Post article are the most disheartening. Here are a few:

• Based on her resume, Greenhouse excelled at her career: she had regular promotions to ever-increasingly responsible positions. She went back to school and got three (3!) master's degrees. And yet, once the White House became Republican -- and she criticized proposed contracts -- her work evaluations took a 180-degree turn. Greenhouse was one of the top civilians at the Army Corps of Engineers.
• A Pentagon audit uncovered $61 in overbilling by Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary) for fuel in Iraq. "The audit was quelled, however, when the Corps granted KBR a waiver from explaining the apparent discrepancy. The agency said KBR's pricing had been dictated by an Iraqi subcontractor."
• The FBI investigation into alleged price-gouging, overbilling and awarding of sole-source contracts to firms with political connections is still on-going. Of course, subsequently, we've had the sole-source contracts associated with Hurricane Katrina to clean-up after.
• In the summer of 2004, Greenhouse testified: "I can unequivocally state that the abuse related to contracts awarded to KBR represents the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have witnessed during the course of my professional career." A few weeks later she was demoted from Senior Executive Service. According to Lt. Gen. Carl A. Strock, the demotion was "based on her performance and not in retaliation for any disclosures of alleged improprieties she may have made." Yeah, right.
• Sometime around 2003, Greenhouse filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging race and gender discrimination. She swore in her testimony this summer that the complaint has never been investigated. The Corps would not comment on the status of the complaint when asked about it by the Post, citing employee privacy.

The Vanity Fair piece has its share of raised eyebrow moments as well (emphasis added):

The date was February 26, 2003, three weeks before the Iraq invasion.... A major item on the agenda was deciding which outside contractor would get the multi-billion-dollar job of putting out the oil-well fires that Saddam Hussein's troops would presumably set once the invasion began, and then getting the wells operating again. The project was to be known as RIO, for Restore Iraqi Oil.

Several U.S. companies had the know-how. Texas-based GSM Consulting, for one, had done such work in the wake of the Gulf War. Yet the assumption in the room was that KBR had the job -- an assumption underscored by the extraordinary presence of KBR representatives at the high-level government meeting...

Greenhouse knew that the previous fall KBR had been paid $1.9 million to draft a contingency plan for how RIO should unfold. But that was reason enough not to let KBR do RIO. It was strict protocol in the procurement business that the contractor who drew up the contingency plan for a job should not be allowed to bid on the job itself: he'd know the exact budget and other details that would give him an unfair advantage. Yet here was KBR sliding into the job without an eyebrow raised -- precisely because, as the participants at the meeting agreed, it was the only company that met the criteria outlined in its own contingency plan! To Greenhouse's greater shock, the senior officers and the KBR representatives around the table spoke of a sole-source, non-compete contract that could last five years...

Incensed, Greenhouse went over to whisper in Lieutenant General Strock's ear that the KBR people had to leave the room. The general complied with her request, but seemed adamant that KBR get the job on the grounds of "compelling emergency." All Greenhouse could do was insist that the contract be limited to a year.

The next day, the final contract was submitted to Greenhouse for her approval. The basic terms -- five years, non-compete, cost-plus -- remained. Greenhouse signed -- the country was, after all, on the eve of war -- but only after writing, "I caution that extending this sole source effort beyond a one year period could convey an invalid perception that there is not strong intent for a limited competition." (In light of the pending investigation into Greenhouse's charges, the Army Corps declined to comment on any details of her case.)

Her reward for doing her job -- as a civilian entrusted to guard the public treasury -- for trying to stave off what now appears to be systematic overbilling, lax fiscal controls and perhaps fraud? Demotion, which she has not taken sitting down nor lightly. She joins other whistleblowers who have helped bring audit attention -- if not media or citizen attention -- on KBR's work in Iraq.

Technorati Tags and Profile
Halliburton, Iraq, Pentagon, Politics