Chairman Thomas and Members of the National Parks Subcommittee:

I am Scot McElveen, Chief Ranger, Harpers Ferry National Historical Park, but am appearing today on my own time and in my capacity as Board Member for Special Concerns of the Association of National Park Rangers. I am pleased to present this testimony on behalf of ANPR and the Association of National Park Maintenance Employees.

Thank you for holding this oversight hearing on the competitive sourcing effort within the National Park Service.

The Association of National Park Rangers (ANPR) is an organization created to communicate for, about, and with park rangers; to promote and enhance the park ranger profession and its spirit; and to support the management and perpetuation of the National Park Service and System. In meeting these purposes, ANPR provides education and other training to develop and improve the knowledge and skills of park rangers and those interested in the profession; provides a forum for discussion of common concerns of park rangers; and provides information to the public. Our membership is comprised of individuals who are entrusted with and committed to the care, study, explanation, and protection of those natural, cultural, and recreational resources included in the National Park System, as well as of individuals who support these efforts.

The Association of National Park Maintenance Employees (ANPME) is an organization of NPS employees and others that work or have an interest in maintenance, facility management and environmental leadership. Dedicated to supporting the mission of the National Park Service and the professional growth and well-being of maintenance employees, ANPME promotes the highest standards of national park stewardship and environmental leadership, and provides information to its members and to the public through publications, programs, training, and conferences.

As organizations that strongly support the mission of the National Park Service, we have serious concerns about the short and long term effects of this management initiative.

Mission is the Measure

The American National Park System is a worldwide model. Much emulated, and still unrivaled, it is at once a diverse and amazing collection of beautiful natural resources and monuments, an enriching source of learning about American history and culture, as well as a source of recreation and enjoyment for more than 400 million visitors each year. Yet, this amazing system will not endure without proper care. Stewardship of the parks is the role of the National Park Service. Drawn from its enabling statute, the Organic Act of 1916, the mission of the Service is -

"...to promote and regulate the use of the...national parks...which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

Thus, we believe that all decisions and programs affecting the National Park Service should be carefully examined to ascertain whether they will further the NPS mission. Congress eloquently expressed this principle in the Redwoods Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-250) when it stated -

". . . authorization of activities shall be construed and the protection, management, administration…shall be conducted in light of the high public value and integrity of the National Park System and shall not be exercised in derogation of the values and purposes for which these various areas have been established, except as many have been or shall be directly and specifically provided by Congress."

Since the vitality and perpetuation of the National Park System is very dependent upon a properly staffed and skilled Service, management programs that weaken the Service and our ability to prevent impairment of our national parks amount to "derogation of the values and purposes for which these various areas have been established."

A component of the President's Management Initiative, the current competitive sourcing program, is driven by quotas and is being applied in an expensive, wasteful manner. No consideration is given to the NPS mission or to the nature of jobs and work in our national parks. Consequently, the greatest potential is not greater value for the American people, but irreparable harm to the National Park Service and, ultimately, the National Park System.

Public Service and the Uniform

Over the years, a consistent 97 percent of park visitors have indicated that they are "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their national park experience. While the beauty, fun, and educational value of the natural and cultural resources are important factors, so is the service that they receive from park employees. Whether it is the uniformed fee collector at the front gate, the interpretive ranger giving tours, the maintenance worker tending the grounds and facilities, or the law enforcement commissioned ranger safeguarding visitor welfare and park resources, people trust and respect those wearing the National Park Service uniform. It represents a tradition of excellence in public service.

We believe that a uniformed presence in the parks continues to be important. Because of reduced personnel levels, fee collectors and maintenance workers are often the only uniformed employees that visitors see. Yet these positions are considered the most promising for competitive sourcing. Should that happen, a significant number of visitors will never see a park ranger.

Uniform positions that have been targeted for study include NPS archeologists and biological technicians. These professionals routinely enhance their effectiveness by working with 15 to 25 volunteers each - an option not open to contractors. This value-added activity not only augments our resource management efforts but also provides another form of public service - by affording concerned Americans the opportunity to contribute their time, energy, and talents to the preservation of national treasures.

Diversity of Work and Skills

Congress designated each unit of the National Park System because of its unique contribution to America's beauty and heritage. This uniqueness very often requires specialized knowledge, unique skill sets, and work flexibilities that simply are not found in the private sector. With specialized and continuing training and mentoring, NPS employees acquire far broader knowledge and skills than is reflected in their job descriptions. Strongly influencing this diversity of skills is the variable nature of work in the parks. At times as unpredictable as Mother Nature and human behavior, a workday may include major emergencies such as severe weather, injured and/or lost visitors, or wildfires. It likely involves ensuring that visitors are served as needed. This is illustrated by the following story from a young employee at a Western park.

"As a GS-5 visitor use assistant, I am clearly at the bottom of park staffing. Today, I treated a man for a nearly unstoppable razor cut to his face, spoke to three groups of 330 plus people each, dealt with five different school groups visiting the park, and will in one half hour, deliver a 45 minute talk and walk of the park to over 120 people. This morning we were lucky, thanks to the 'donation' of two law enforcement rangers from other parks, so we had law enforcement support. The only other uniformed ranger was one really good experienced GS-9. And that's how we intend to deal with nearly 1000 visitors and their questions and even their small emergencies. Want more? How clear do we need to be that more uniformed presence is needed? Our maintenance man ended up playing interpreter to two school groups out of lack of staff. We had no volunteers, interns or other help for the first 3 hours of the day and this is typical."

A motor vehicle accident at Yellowstone National Park that occurred earlier this month illustrates the nature of employee teamwork.

Over the busy Fourth of July weekend, one of many serious motor vehicle accidents occurred just west of Old Faithful. This accident involved a large van, with four occupants, rear-ending (at a high rate of speed), a small sedan, with two occupants. The first Ranger arrived on the scene sized it up and stated in her initial radio transmission something like, "...need extra help, I have more patients than I do people." Immediately, a Park Service road crew, while at lunch, dropped their sandwiches and went directly to the scene to control traffic. Because of their training and experience with traffic control, with appropriate signs and reflective vests, they very quickly set up a safe traffic control operation that allowed for slow movement of traffic through the scene while the five patients were attended to. The park geologist, a certified Emergency Medical Technician, having heard the radio traffic, responded to the scene and was assigned patient care for one of the more seriously injured patients.

Many park employees are cross-trained - like the geologist as an EMT and the maintenance employees in traffic control. We regularly assist each other in a variety of ways. For example, as maintenance employees go about their work in the park, they serve as the "eyes and ears" of law enforcement by watching for troublesome or suspicious circumstances. Park employees work as teams to see that whatever needs doing is done. At our present, low staffing levels, this is the only way we are able get the job done.

Additionally, employees develop park specific skills - talents not required in other parks and certainly not easily found in private industry. The following story comes from Mount Rainier in Washington State, as reported in The Olympian.

Ralph Bell has worked at Mount Rainier National Park for 20 years, but his job as a sign maker might be replaced under a proposal by the federal government to turn over 1,708 National Park Service jobs to private companies by the end of 2004… Bell is responsible for more than 4,500 signs on buildings, trails, roads and campgrounds. He also conducts safety training and leads peer support sessions to help rescue workers deal with traumatic events, and is a liaison for relatives of accident victims.

"I take [privatization] as a threat to the stewardship of the park," said Jim Fuller, 46, supervisor for utilities at the park. He started at Mount Rainier in 1978 as a seasonal employee … Fuller also works with search and rescue teams and volunteers to help backcountry rangers. He hikes park trails in uniform and talks to visitors.

Like other park employees, Bell and Fuller have stayed at Rainier because they recognize the park's value.

Even workers who clean toilets and pick up garbage in campgrounds contact visitors. They know the park and they answer visitors' questions.

"We haven't figured out how to work that into a contract," [Superintendent Dave] Uberuaga said.

Competitive Sourcing and the NPS

On any given day, 48,000 people report for work in national parks. Of this number, less than half (approximately 20,000) are federal employees - and some of these federal workers are from other agencies. Many of the non-federal workers are contract employees providing outsourced services (e.g. engineering and visual information services). Clearly, the National Park Service is no stranger to competitive sourcing. In fact, we do not oppose the availability and proper use of this authority - only its current application to the Service as required by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of the Interior.

To further describe why this initiative hurts rather than helps, we would like to make two important points.

First, the National Park Service is, by necessity, very decentralized with a great deal of authority and responsibility vested in the park superintendent. It is his/her job to continually assess how to obtain the greatest value for each operational dollar received. In the last several years, approximately 10 percent of the parks have developed business plans which involve exhaustive analyses of strategic, programmatic, and business goals, resources, and issues. The results are useful blueprints for the most effective and efficient operation of the parks. This is a far superior approach to achieving the NPS mission while ensuring value to the American taxpayer.

Secondly, the parks are hurting for financial and staff resources. Over the last 20 years, the NPS operations budget has eroded by 25 percent (measured in constant dollars). Meanwhile, visitation has increased by approximately 50 percent and park acreage has increased by 166 percent. The result has been ever tightening budgets and shrinking personnel levels. In an effort to deal with the demands of increased visitation and deteriorating facilities and vehicles, park superintendents have become experts at making maximum use of the knowledge, skills, and available effort of every single park employee. We ask you:

• Are contract maintenance workers going to deliver interpretive programs to visitors like the sign maker at Mount Rainier National Park does as he hikes trails performing his sign inventory?
• Are contract fee collectors and maintenance workers going to fight wildfires, search for the lost, and rescue the injured as they routinely do at Canyonland National Park?
• Are contract fee collectors and administrative service workers going to prevent significant building loss by participating in the park's structural fire brigade as they did at Big Bend on July 14?

If not, where's the value for the park or for the American taxpayer? How will the "savings" on these contracts increase the Service's ability to preserve the natural and cultural resources of that park while providing excellent service to visitors? We submit that a cost savings that seriously diminishes park staff capacity is hardly a "better value for the taxpayer."

Avoiding Wasteful Effort and Expenditures

At a time when parks are very underfunded and understaffed, a top-down, quota-driven competitive sourcing initiative is just plain wasteful. It is estimated that the Service is paying nearly $3,000 to study each position to simply determine whether it is feasible. And that does not include an estimate of the value of the person/hours required to work the competitive sourcing process. Thus, Mount Rainier National Park, where 67 positions were scheduled for study, is faced with the prospect of taking approximately $200,000 away from current operations or maintenance, in order to study positions that, in all likelihood, cannot reasonably be privatized. We can ill-afford such a drain on our human and financial resources.

The optimal solution would be to exempt the National Park Service from this management initiative and leave all such decisions to local NPS managers. However, if that is not possible, then we suggest a feasibility assessment process to avoid such a waste of time, effort, and money as we see presently taking place.

NPS should be authorized to employ an initial assessment before beginning the competitive sourcing process with regard to any group of positions in a park or region. Such an assessment would involve the examination of the following questions:

1. Do the jobs proposed for competitive sourcing involve consistent and predictable work within a fixed job description (i.e., no additional responsibilities or emergency duties are involved);
2. Are the skills associated with the positions sufficiently standardized as to be readily and easily found in private industry?
3. Would the sourcing of these positions enhance the overall operation of the park?
4. Are there potential bidders within a short distance of the park so that response time is quick and predictable?

We suggest to the Subcommittee that the initial review of the positions should reveal positive responses to all four questions for the competitive sourcing to proceed. If not, then we should not waste precious resources studying positions that are inappropriate for privatization.

Conclusion

Not everything can - or should be - measured in dollars and cents. Can any of us presume to estimate the monetary value of the breathtaking views or historical importance of our parks? Or the recreational pleasure or spiritual renewal regularly experienced by visitors? Or the iconic value of such places as Independence Hall, the Statute of Liberty, and Old Faithful? We think not.

It is vitally important to understand that the preservation of these resources and experiences requires people with a strong sense of mission, an ability to make decisions based upon value (not just cost), and a willingness to go beyond customary expectations to get the job done. These workforce qualities do not easily lend themselves to replication in a for-profit contractor. We are not saying that there are no positions in NPS that may be appropriate for outsourcing. What we are saying is that, at the park level, they are few and far between. And this top-down, quota-driven program is wasting precious operational dollars studying positions that cannot reasonably be outsourced. In the meantime, we are devastating the morale of the very employees that we are asking to do extra - and sometimes - extraordinary things.

In the end, we are talking about an enormous stewardship responsibility that requires us as a nation to continually put our best - not our cheapest -- foot forward. The goal for the National Park Service should be a sustainable, effective, and efficient organization that emphasizes quality service for the good of the parks and the public.

On behalf of the Association of National Park Rangers and the Association of National Park Maintenance Employees, I thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony. I will be happy to answer any questions.