Archive for September 15, 2010

Here are a couple of excerpts from a post at POGO regarding BAE, Joint Strike Fighter, and the failure of Defense Security Service in protecting matters of National Security.  Later it is correctly stated that there are problems with DSS’s performance as the watchdog in charge of ensuring BAE was adequately protecting classified information and includes soon to be past Director, Kathleen Watson’s inexplicable comments and excuses for her agencies failures.  Please follow the link to read the whole story and to take a look at the other excellent reports on POGO’s website.  (

Note:  This is not the only documented case of this type of problem.  I am told that there are others, involving DSS and other contractors.  -GFS


A “Black Eye” for the Pentagon’s Watchdog: The Backstory of the BAE-Joint Strike Fighter Audit Report Withdrawal

By Nick Schwellenbach

“The findings were troubling to say the least. In spring 2008, British Aerospace Enterprises, the U.K.’s largest defense contractor better known by its initials BAE, had been accused by the Pentagon watchdog agency of possibly losing classified information related to the world’s most expensive weapons program,  the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

This tale did not end here.”  



“On top of findings related to BAE the OIG’s report contained arguably equally troubling, yet less well-publicized findings that a little-known Pentagon agency had failed in its job to ensure that BAE was adequately protecting classified information. Questions about the effectiveness of the Defense Security Service (DSS) in overseeing contractors had been bubbling to the surface since a 2004 Government Accountability Office report—but this was the first real example of the agency’s inadequacy to come to light.”

‘In its defense, DSS Director Kathleen Watson told the OIG that “DSS has a thorough and fundamentally sound facility inspection process which was only marginally diminished by the failure to systematically collect, analyze, and retain BAE’s required reports.”’

Follow Link to complete story:


Sep 08, 2010

Grassley: Pentagon Watchdog Failing in Its Anti-Contract Fraud Mission

The Pentagon’s top watchdog is less productive now than at any time in the last 20 years, according to an article today by Reuters’ Scot Paltrow based on an upcoming report by the staff of Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Among the oversight lapses by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General (DoD IG): zero audits of any “major or non-major weapons contract or contractor” in fiscal year 2009, according to Reuters.

The DoD IG left “huge sums of the taxpayers’ money vulnerable to fraud and outright theft,” Reuters quoted the Grassley report as saying. Grassley has long been a champion of whistleblowers and fighting fraud and waste at the Pentagon. According to Reuters, his office was tipped off by anonymous insiders at the DoD IG’s office who had concerns.

The Grassley report, slated for release tomorrow, says that the DoD IG now focuses on less important kinds of audits, and in numerous instances has failed to follow up on serious evidence of wrongdoing, Reuters reported.

What the Reuters article doesn’t say is that increasingly the DoD IG has had to focus on issues referred to it by Congress or mandated by law, leaving the Office with less discretion to decide what it does with its resources. As the IG noted in a 2008 report to Congress which was uncovered by POGO:

Our ability to provide discretionary (risk-based) coverage is reduced, however, by the amount of work we are required to perform by statute and other management requests. In FY 2007, about 31% of the reports that we issued were mandated and another 18% were requested by Congress or DoD managers.

This means that in fiscal year 2007 less half of the IG’s work in fiscal year 2007 was of its own choosing, when the 5.3% of audits generated from whistleblower hotline tips are also considered.

That said, huge questions still loom, namely: Is the Pentagon’s overseer doing as good of a job as it should be? It seems the answer is no. Especially in the vulnerable area of defense contracting.

“Discovering that the (inspector general) no longer does genuine contract audits was a startling revelation but one that helps to explain why 765 OIG Office of the Inspector General auditors could not document any measurable fraud in FY 2009,” Grassley wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, according to Reuters.

Again, as POGO earlier reported, in fiscal year 2007, nearly half—$152 billion—of the taxpayer dollars spent on weapons acquisition did not receive sufficient audit coverage by the DoD IG (meaning only $164 billion out of $316 billion did).

Grassley’s report apparently takes issue with recent increases in the staffing at the DoD IG office, saying that despite more auditors there hasn’t been more oversight activity. But as POGO found in 2008, the DoD IG had been left in the dust when the spigot of defense spending opened after 9/11. Recent staffing increases still haven’t given the IG the number of trained auditors and investigators it needs to tackle the enormity of issues at the Defense Department.

More evidence that the DoD IG has been conducting less oversight than it should on contracting is the plummeting number of criminal referrals its investigators have made to federal prosecutors for contracting fraud and corruption.

While a reporter at the Center for Public Integrity, I found that as defense contracting grew from about $200 billion in fiscal year 1993 at the start of the Clinton presidency to nearly $400 billion in FY 2008 at the end of the George W. Bush administration (1993 dollars adjusted for inflation to 2008 dollars), Defense Department investigators during the Bush administration sent 76 percent fewer contracting fraud and corruption cases to the Justice Department for potential criminal prosecution than were referred under Clinton. “

No one is minding the store,” William G. Dupree, a former director of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) told me. DCIS is the wing of the DoD IG which investigates contracting fraud.

We’ll post more when we get to see the Grassley report directly. And if you haven’t seen them yet, check out our two reports on Inspector General independence and effectiveness.

UPDATE: The Washington Post has provided a link to the report.

— Nick Schwellenbach

Please follow link to entire story:

From POGO.Org

Aug 20, 2010

Pentagon to Release Names of Moneyed Mentors, Withhold Info about Potential Conflicts of Interest

“USA Today recently published an update to their November 2009 investigation into retired military officers consulting for the Pentagon. At the time, the Defense Department (DoD) wouldn’t release a full list of the mentors, but USA Today reporters Tom Vanden Brook, Ken Dilanian and Ray Locker identified 158 of them, and found that 80 percent had financial ties to defense contractors.

In response, Secretary Robert Gates announced an overhaul of the program to be headed by Deputy Secretary William Lynn—who famously was the first appointee to receive a waiver from President Obama’s ethics standards. We’re still waiting to hear back from the Pentagon as to whether Deputy Secretary Lynn’s first year at the Pentagon was in compliance with ethics restrictions required by the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In July, DoD reworked the program, a process that included revising ethics rules to identify conflicts, and last week Deputy Secretary Lynn announced that “in a step toward transparency” they would release the names and roles of the mentors. But apparently, publicly disclosing information regarding potential conflicts is too big of a leap for Pentagon-kind.

USA Today‘s editorial board appropriately took the Pentagon to task:”

Link to entire post:


 September 01, 2010

Billion Dollar Contract Slips Under DCAA’s Radar

More bad news about the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). Despite promises that DCAA is improving management, Pratap Chatterjee at Corp Watch reports that DCAA had missed a billion dollar contract for translators for the U.S. military until they were accosted by the Wartime Contracting Commission:

The company’s costs have not been singled out as questionable or unsupported, but the failure of the government agency to oversee taxpayer money is an indicator of widespread problems and staff shortages at this key military agency.

The article also runs through a history—all-too-familiar for POGO blog readers—of DCAA’s problems, which started with mismanagement, but now also include a declining number of audits and plummeting returns for taxpayers on those few audits. You can read more about POGO’s concerns about the reform efforts at DCAA here.

n      Mandy Smithberger

Link to POGO and more stories in DCAA’s woes: