Park Service Tightening Contracts : Recreation: New rules are intended to increase competition and give federal officials more bargaining power with concessionaires. Lobbyists have vowed a legal challenge.

The National Park Service announced new rules Wednesday that would reduce the ability of private firms that operate concessions in national parks to win contract renewals.

The rules, sparked by a controversy at Yosemite National Park, are designed to bring competition into the park concession business and strengthen the clout of the Park Service in negotiating with the firms that operate park visitor services.

Upon learning of the changes, the influential concessions lobby threatened to wage a battle against them in court. Environmental groups praised the changes but said they do not go far enough.

Under the current system, private firms that run hotels, recreation facilities, restaurants and stores in national parks are given a preference in bidding when their contracts expire.

If another firm has a more attractive bid, the Park Service is required by law to allow the incumbent concessionaire to match it during contract renewals.

Under the new rules, the right of renewal is removed if the incumbent fails to meet minimum park requirements.

“With the existing system, concessionaires have known that nobody would be bidding against them (because of their preferential rights),” said David Moffitt, an assistant Park Service director. “So it wasn’t uncommon for them not to meet even our minimum standards.”

Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan Jr., who proposed the changes, had complained that the law eliminated competition for contracts.

Environmental groups also oppose the preferential right given to incumbents, arguing that it bars firms with more environmentally sound records from competing and reduces the incentive on incumbent firms to meet Park Service policies.

The new rules would gradually phase out private ownership by concessionaires of buildings within parks. Currently, a concessionaire is entitled to obtain market value for hotels, stores and other facilities it builds in the park if it fails to win a renewal of its contract.

While protecting private investments, the current rule has made it difficult for bidders to compete with incumbents.

Now, the Park Service will charge depreciation against the buildings, eventually reducing their value to nothing, Moffitt said. The Park Service would then acquire them.

It is this rule that most infuriates park concessionaires. “We have no alternative to fight for our rights,” said Rex Maughan, chairman of the Phoenix-based Conference of National Park Concessionaires. “You can’t invest your money in something and then have it taken away.”

Louis Blumberg, assistant regional director of the Wilderness Society, called the changes a step forward but contended that all preferential rights for incumbent concessions should be removed. That would require an act of Congress.

Lujan became embroiled in concessions policy after environmental groups, unhappy with the performance of the Yosemite Park & Curry Co.--the private concession in Yosemite Park--complained that the concession was paying the government too small a franchise fee for the right to run Yosemite’s profitable operations.

That controversy eventually died down when a Japanese firm acquired the Curry Co.’s parent firm. The company’s assets will be turned over to a private park foundation and there will be no incumbent when a new contract is awarded next year.