BAH keeps all fees not imposed by NPS - that means the actual reservation fee goes to NPS, but all other fees go to BAH. All fees besides the actual reservation fee are not government fees at all, they are imposed only by BAH based on their own policy and analysis, which the contract gives them the right to do with no obligation to share with anyone. The NPS fee is set through an administrative process and does not change very frequently. Everything else is BAH revenue... booking fees, lottery fees, and some upcharges related to popular sites... and it's not at all unusual for those to be more than the actual reservation fee.
On top of that, NPS seems to have been evasive about the situation and has been resistant to releasing supervision data on how much money is actually involved.
This situation has been widely reported on, not only in this article but by Matt Stoler (https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/why-is-booz-allen-renting...) and in the NYT (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/29/travel/nps-recreation-gov...). There has been a class-action lawsuit over it but I don't think it got anywhere, it's not at all clear that there's any legal problem with this situation despite appearing to be a massive grift on the public. Originally, the structure of the contract (where BAH funds the project by imposing their own fees) was hailed as innovative since it meant there was "no taxpayer money" committed.
On top of that, NPS seems to have been evasive about the situation and has been resistant to releasing supervision data on how much money is actually involved.
This situation has been widely reported on, not only in this article but by Matt Stoler (https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/why-is-booz-allen-renting...) and in the NYT (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/29/travel/nps-recreation-gov...). There has been a class-action lawsuit over it but I don't think it got anywhere, it's not at all clear that there's any legal problem with this situation despite appearing to be a massive grift on the public. Originally, the structure of the contract (where BAH funds the project by imposing their own fees) was hailed as innovative since it meant there was "no taxpayer money" committed.
BAH recreation.gov contract: https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2023-03/AG-3187-...
NPS fee order: https://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DO_22.pdf