Legislation News & Report (TM) 

TheWeekInCongress.com (TM)

Managing America: Public Land

TheWeekInCongress.com (TM)

Week Ending April 20, 2006

H.R.1191 To authorize the National Park Service to pay for services rendered by subcontractors under a General Services Administration Indefinite Deliver/Indefinite Quantity Contract issued for work to be completed at the Grand Canyon National Park.

Under this bill the General Services Administration will pay subcontractors $1 million for work done at the Grand Canyon National Park for a contractor who did not pay them.

The National Park Service contracts to the private sector for various construction and maintenance projects in the Grand Canyon National Park. 2002 and 2003 contracts for 43 projects were issued to Pacific General, Inc of California as “indefinite delivery / indefinite quantity” contract work. Pacific General performed the work and was paid $10 million of which $1.3 million was owed to subcontractors. Pacific General did not pay the subcontractors, was not bonded and is now defunct. NPS is not authorized to pay the subcontractors directly.

In 2006 HR 3961 addressed the problem but authorized the National Park Service to pay the subcontractors out of park entry fees. The bill was not signed into law. This bill authorizes the General Services Administration to pay the tab with conditions: the Secretary will pay if the primary contract between PGI and NPS is terminated, the amount owed the subcontractors is verified and all reasonable legal avenues or recourse have been exhausted by the subcontractors to recoup the money. Subcontractors must provide a written statement that payment made by the Secretary is payment in full.

Sponsor:  Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ-1^st)

Vote: passed House by voice vote April 17, 2007

Cost to the taxpayers: Rep Renzi’s bill did not come with any cost data, however, on last year’s bill the cost was estimated this way: “CBO says “$1 million in 2007, but that amount would be offset by less spending over the 2008-1010 period, and the net impact on direct spending over 2007-2010 would thus be `insignificant.”

Earmark Certification:  The payment to private recipients might qualify the bill as containing an earmark.

## All Rights Reserved. © 2007 TheWeekInCongress.com(TM)

No reproduction, language translation or distribution without written permission from TheWeekInCongress.com.(TM)