USOC’s Ward Sends Apology

Lloyd Ward, the U.S. Olympic Committee’s chief executive officer, apologized Wednesday for his role in an ethics-related furor that has rapidly enveloped the USOC even as he maintained he did “nothing wrong” while simultaneously acknowledging an “error in judgment.”

In an e-mail sent shortly after midnight Wednesday to most of the 22 members of the USOC’s policy-making executive committee, Ward offered “my extreme regret” that “at a time when we should be focusing on preparation for Santo Domingo and Athens” -- the 2003 Pan American Games in the Dominican Republic and the 2004 Summer Olympics -- “we are again sidetracked.

“Please accept my apology for my part in causing this major distraction,” the e-mail concludes after attempting to explain the genesis and extent of Ward’s involvement in a Detroit company’s bid to supply electrical generators to organizers of the Pan Am Games in August.

The executive committee is due to meet Jan. 13 to discuss Ward’s fate as CEO in the aftermath of a report Monday in The Times that Ward earlier this year directed USOC staff members to introduce the Detroit company Energy Management Technologies (EMT) to organizers in Santo Domingo.

In a phone call Wednesday, Ward declined to elaborate on the e-mail, which he described as a “memo.” He said, “I’m not in the mood to continue -- to have this thing continue in the press. The issue is between the ethics committee, the executive committee and me, and it will unfold at the appropriate time.”

In a related development, Ward, who for some time has had a marketing-related trip planned later this week to Santo Domingo, was instructed Wednesday not to go.

Ward’s brother, Rubert, is identified on at least two company documents as EMT’s president; one of the brothers’ childhood friends, Lorenzo Williams, is identified as CEO.

On Dec. 13, at a meeting in Santo Domingo, Williams offered what Lowell Fernandez, the Games’ project manager, described as a bribe to win a deal; Williams denies offering any bribe. Williams also said that Rubert Ward “has no title now” with EMT. No contract has been signed.

Last July 1, Ward signed a USOC form that said he had no real or potential conflicts of interest. In it, he acknowledged that conflicts may involve “placement of business in, or favorable treatment of, a firm owned or controlled by a volunteer, family member or personal friend.”

Lloyd Ward has no financial interest in EMT -- a fact he points out three times in the e-mail.

Ward says in the e-mail he “simply saw the EMT proposal as an opportunity to use their technology to help provide safety and comfort for our athletes in Santo Domingo,” and thus asked Hernando Madronero, then the USOC director of international relations, to “evaluate the EMT proposal and follow up as he deemed appropriate.”

(Ward fired Madronero in October; Madronero has declined since to comment on any matter related to the USOC.)

Meantime, Madronero introduced EMT executives to Pan Am Games organizers.

In the e-mail, Lloyd Ward says, “I stayed out of the process.”

In a letter dated July 8, a week after Ward signed the USOC disclosure form, Rubert Ward and Williams signed a letter on EMT stationery that thanked Lloyd Ward for “personally taking an interest” in “our project in the Dominican Republic.”

That letter also notes that Rubert Ward and Williams have no experience in moving through the Olympic landscape, and thus they “would be extremely appreciative of any direction, candid thoughts (actually, we expect that from you anyway) and suggestions (up to and including a complete new approach to our presentation) that you may have,” concluding they “can not thank you enough for all your help.”

Ward’s e-mail says: “I did not provide any comments or feedback on that presentation.”

The e-mail also says, referring to the July 1 disclosure form, that “there was no ‘placement of business’ and no ‘favorable treatment of’ the EMT proposal,” and thus “I felt no need to disclose.”

“I am now much clearer that perception is as important as reality,” the e-mail says. “Even though I felt in compliance with the tests for disclosure, I now feel I should have disclosed this situation anyway. I will not make this error in judgment again.”