According to Defense Secretary Bob Gates, the post-9/11 "gusher of defense spending" that nearly doubled the Pentagon's budget is officially closed. But like the gusher at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, there's still a whole lot of sludge spewing out -- despite the best efforts of Gates and others to bring this beast out of control. The Pentagon wants to spend $548.9 billion next year, plus another $159.3 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and another $33 billion for the Afghanistan troop surge.
The result: billions spent on a mind-boggling array of material -- from medical care to aircraft carriers. At Danger Room, we see it every day. That's because around 5 p.m., the Defense Department e-mails reporters a list of the latest contracts that it awards. And you see some of the craziest stuff in that e-mail, with the biggest price tags attached. Perhaps because the announcement is so regular and defense overspending so routine, it rarely gets the attention it deserves.
So we thought we'd do our part. Every day after that email goes out, we're going to present you with the Daily Pentagon Jackpot, a quick compendium of the most eye-opening items it contains. Some of 'em are absolutely necessary, others are deeply questionable. All of the contracts are being paid for by you. So join us as we document who's getting rich keeping the money spigots open. Because this five-sided gusher is never truly shut.
Today's Winner: CH2M Hill, Inc. of Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Score: $75 million through 2015, estimated.
For What?: Environmental compliance for Navy facilities, including "oil spill preparedness" and adherence to Clean Water Act standards.
Wait, Seriously?:__ __Sure, calculating the environmental impact of a military facility and squaring it with the alphabet-soup of enviro regulations are bane of engineers' existence. But it's hard to understand how the Navy could actually spend so much money to test the water table or inspect the sewage systems. (Maybe it's the "waste management," "pesticide management," and "radon and related products" that are the money-drainers.) Plus, is using one company to conduct all these assessments -- across 21 states, territories and overseas facilities, including some as far away as Japan -- really cheaper than doling out the work to local contractors?
Photo: Tracy Olson / Flickr
**
See Also:
