search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
maintenance, Army” (OMA) funds to lease the same vehicles multiple times.


“We probably wound up paying for those vehicles three times over,” observed one senior contracting officer familiar with the problem.


To avoid this problem, appropriations laws should change to provide senior commanders with latitude in reprogram- ming (transferring) operational funds. Current federal appropriations law, most notably the Antideficiency Act, “prohib- its federal employees from making or authorizing an expenditure from, or cre- ating or authorizing an obligation under, any appropriation or fund in excess of the amount available in the appropria- tion or fund unless authorized by law.” Tis restriction, which dates to the origi- nal Antideficiency Act passed in 1884, restricts government officials from spend- ing funds they don’t have and further prohibits spending funds appropriated by Congress for purposes not intended by Congress.


Tese prohibitions make perfect sense within the routine, fairly predictable budget cycle in which most federal agencies operate. During contingency operations, however, military command- ers must cope with mission requirements that change on a daily, if not hourly, basis. Because lives are at stake, these operations demand more speed and flexibility, not only from the American military forces performing these missions, but also from the organizations and resources provided to support them.


A WELL-PLACED EXCEPTION Unfortunately, current fiscal laws are ill-equipped to respond to these emerg- ing requirements. Te laws themselves provide limited flexibility for respond- ing to unforecast requirements, and the legislative process is generally slow to


A BETTER MOUSETRAP


Master Sgt. Joe Mancias, 36th Infantry Division Garrison Command noncommissioned officer in charge, directs local Iraqi contractors at Contingency Operating Base Basra, Iraq, in June 2011. The contractors, referred to as “the Blue Man Crew,” loaded up debris left from the move of Army and Air Force Exchange Service facilities. The author recommends a better balance of timeliness, regulation and best value for optimal results in contingency contracting missions. (Photo by Pvt. Andrew Slovensky, 362nd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)


TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITY


Sgt. Peter Streb of the 3rd Advise and Assist Brigade (AAB), 1st Cavalry Division (1st CAV) briefs local Iraqi workers at the start of a June 2011 day on Contingency Operating Station (COS) Garry Owen. The COS transferred to the control of the Iraqi Army later that year when the U.S. military prepared to end its mission in Iraq. Approximately 2,500 contractors continue to support U.S. military operations in Iraq, and about 26,500 in Afghanistan. (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Victor Rios, 3rd AAB, 1st CAV)


ASC.ARMY.MIL


127


COMMENTARY


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192