From Project on Government Oversight (POGO)
9-26-07

Dear

Congress has recently taken great strides toward holding wartime contractors accountable. Last week Senators James Webb (D-VA) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a legislative initiative to establish an independent and bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting. POGO sent Senators Webb and McCaskill a letter to offer support for the bill, which would help to alleviate the burden placed on taxpayers due to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement of wartime contracts.

The bill is currently at a crucial juncture; we need your help to ensure its passage. Please call or write your Senators today and ask them to support "The Commission on Wartime Contracting Act" (S. 1825) so that wartime contractors can be held to account for their misconduct.

Sincerely,
Danielle Brian
Executive DirectorProject On Government Oversight

---------------------------------------------------------------------

My letter I sent to my Senators this evening:

September 26, 2007

Dear Senator...

I continue to be concerned about the actions of contractors in this country, as I have written to you about previously. That includes those contractors who bid for and are awarded contracts for services and goods for wartime activities that the United States is conducting.

I ask you to support and pass “The Commission on Wartime Contracting Act” (S.1825), introduced by Senators James Webb (VA) and Claire McCaskill (MO). It is important that these contractors may be held accountable for their choices and behaviors.

This bill appears that it would help to alleviate the burden placed on taxpayers due to waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement of wartime contracts. Anything less than ethical handling of government contract business is unacceptable, and this law, which would establish an independent and bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting, would be a step in the right direction.

Thank you,

Here is a piece which describes in more detail the failure of Boeing's Virtual Fence IT Project.

ZDNet
Home/blogs
IT Project Failures

Boeing virtual fence: $30 billion failure
August 23, 2007
Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 4:58 pm Categories: Project failures, Government projects Tags: Boeing Co., U.S. Department Of Homeland Security, Fence, Michael Krigsman
16 votes Worthwhile?
The Department of Homeland Security “virtual fence” project, being built by Boeing, is in big, big trouble. The virtual fence is a high-tech network of cameras, lighting, sensors, and technology designed to intercept illegal border crossings. According to the Wall Street Journal:
Boeing Co. has changed the management of an electronic-surveillance project along the U.S.-Mexican border after falling more than two months behind schedule, marking the complications involved in setting up a new generation of border security.
The project, part of a larger Department of Homeland Security program called SBInet, is a critical link in the plan to use technology to monitor the borders for illegal immigrants, drug smugglers and possible terrorists. Towers set up along a stretch of the border near Nogales, Ariz., are supposed to use motion sensors, cameras and radar to keep track of wide areas. According to the government, Boeing has had trouble getting the different components to work together without glitches.
The government’s plans for monitoring as much as 6,000 miles of the Canadian and Mexican borders hinge on towers such as these working properly. If they prove ineffective, officials could be forced to spend billions of dollars for more traditional security measures, such as fences and more officers. The Homeland Security Department currently estimates that the virtual fence will cost about $8 billion through 2013, although the agency’s inspector general wrote last November that the cost could balloon to $30 billion.
Additional information can be found in a superb article by Joseph Richey, of the Nation Institute, which funds investigative journalism:
In Washington, U.S. Congressional representatives are already bristling at the skyrocketing costs of SBInet. Since Boeing won the contract last year, the estimated cost of securing the southwest border has gone from $2.5 billion to an estimated $8 billion just a few months later. When Republican Congressman Duncan Hunter asked SBInet Director Giddens for the real costs at a February 2007 hearing of the House of Representatives Oversight Committee, Giddens replied: “I wish I could answer that with greater clarity.”
At the same Congressional hearings, Boeing vice president and SBInet program manager, Jerry McElwee, took heat from Congressman William Lacy Clay who demanded information about the ballooning costs and the extension of the contract period. “You bid on these contracts and then you come back and say, ‘Oh we need more time. It costs more than twice as much.’ Are you gaming the taxpayers here? Or gaming DHS?” the Missouri Democrat asked.
DHS’s own inspector general, Richard Skinner, says that the Boeing contract is in the “high-risk” category for waste and abuse because of its scope, its dollar value, and “the vulnerabilities stemming from the lack of acquisition management capacity.”
A major concern is the pyramid-like management structure that critics say have led to cost overruns and poor quality in other major projects. They note that the multiple subcontracting tiers allow Boeing to exact a cut at every turn, and create a conflict of interest because the company is also in charge of oversight.
This failure has the potential to eventually rival the UK National Health Service disaster, known affectionately as the “greatest IT disaster in history.” It also brings back memories of the Airbus failure, in which multiple project segments failed to work when brought together as a finished unit.
The level of planning and coordination required to complete a project like this on time and budget almost defies human capability. Why don’t they break it down into smaller, simpler components, increasing the likelihood the thing can actually be built?

Michael Krigsman

United States Department of Justice
Welcome to the District of Kansas

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASENews releases are available at www.usdoj.gov/usao/ks/press.html Contact: Jim CrossPHONE: 316-269-6481FAX: 316-269-6420

July 16, 2007

BOEING TO PAY UNITED STATES $1 MILLION TO SETTLE DISPUTE OVER KC-135 REFITTING

WICHITA, KAN. – The Boeing Company has agreed to pay the United States more than $1 million to settle allegations that it improperly billed for materials used to install new engines in KC-135 aircraft.

“Our investigation focused on requests for payment that Boeing made in 1998 through 2003 for materials used in modernizing KC-135 and RC-135 aircraft,” said U.S. Attorney Eric Melgren. “As a result of that investigation, the government alleged that Boeing double billed for materials.”
The investigation involved charges for “panstock,” which includes nuts, bolts, rivets and fasteners used in the re-engining process. The government alleged that panstock charges were included in the contract, and that it was being doubled billed when Boeing charged separately for the materials.
Boeing alleged that the transfer of the costs was allowed under the contract and that the charges were not improper.
Under the settlement agreement, Boeing will pay $1,093,236, which represents a refund of the charges at issue plus interest.
“Protecting the government from fraud and abuse and ensuring accountability in the way federal tax dollars are spent is important,” Melgren said.

The case was handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Kansas. Melgren commended the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) and Assistant U.S. Attorney Laurie Kahrs for their work on the case.

Foreign Service Officers Call on Embattled IG to Resign
By William Fisher
t r u t h o u t | Report
Sunday 23 September 2007

The organization that represents America's diplomats is calling on the State Department's inspector general to step down "pending the resolution of grave allegations of malfeasance leveled against him by numerous current and former career government officials."
John K. Naland, president of the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), said allegations against the inspector general (IG) cover all investigations, audits and inspections. "They include allegations of his blocking investigations into possible sub-standard construction at the US Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, which may leave employees there unacceptably vulnerable," Naland said.
He noted the 13-page list of allegations released earlier this week by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-California), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, "revealed that AFSA also has been approached in recent days by several concerned former State Department employees with direct knowledge of some of the events in question."
Naland was referring to the letter Waxman sent to the embattled IG, Howard J. Krongard, suggesting he repeatedly blocked investigations into waste, fraud and mismanagement in Iraq and Afghanistan, including construction of the massive new US Embassy in Baghdad to protect the Bush administration from political embarrassment. Waxman plans to convene hearings next month into the charges leveled against Krongard.
Naland added, "The worse-case scenario in corruption is when it endangers lives. The worse-case scenario in public service is when the watchdog becomes the suspected violator. Both of these allegations have been leveled against Mr. Krongard. As long as he maintains day-to-day control, his office's ability to do its vital job with full credibility will be compromised. He should step down until the allegations are resolved one way or another."
The American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), established in 1924, is the professional association of the United States Foreign Service. With 13,000 dues-paying members, AFSA represents 26,000 active and retired Foreign Service employees of the Department of State and Agency for International Development (AID), as well as smaller groups in the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), US & Foreign Commercial Service (FCS) and the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB).
AFSA's principal missions are to enhance the effectiveness of the Foreign Service, to protect the professional interests of its members, to ensure the maintenance of high professional standards for both career diplomats and political appointees and to promote understanding of the critical role of the Foreign Service in promoting America's national security and economic prosperity.

Commentary:

Special Counsel Should
Resign or Be Removed

HTML Attachment [ Scan and Save to Computer ]

By TOM DEVINE and ADAM MILES

September 17, 2007

July’s hearing on the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) leads us to this conclusion: Special Counsel Scott Bloch is hopelessly over his head in his job to defend the federal civil service merit system. To restore legitimacy for the office, he must resign or be removed by the president for cause.

Bloch’s mission is to shield federal employees from retaliation and the civil service from political interference. But his mismanagement casts a cloud over OSC career staff members, who remain effective when allowed to do their jobs.

Productivity has plummeted, including a drop in help for whistleblowers. According to OSC’s own reports, the number of “favorable actions” OSC obtained for whistleblowers, its primary constituency, fell from 98 in fiscal 2002 — the last full year of the previous special counsel — to 40 in fiscal 2006. The figure of 40 is an inflated one considering that OSC broadened its definition of favorable actions in 2005.

The House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on the federal work force met July 12 on the agency’s reauthorization. But the hearing degenerated when Bloch was confronted with charges of authorizing the leak of a draft OSC report to the media.

Special Counsel Bloch actively defends the merit system only when it serves his own political self-interest.

Indeed, shortly after the new Democratic Congress took over, Bloch opened a broad-based investigation of efforts by White House officials, including Karl Rove, to politicize the civil service. This was announced just as reports surfaced that a White House investigation of OSC employees’ allegations of Bloch’s own illegal gag orders and of whistleblower retaliation against OSC staff is nearing a conclusion.

Meanwhile, federal employees have been left out in the cold. Our analysis of OSC’s annual reports indicates that the percentage of complainants helped by OSC, 2.49 percent, is the lowest since the Whistleblower Protection Act’s 1989 passage.

At a Senate reauthorization hearing in March, Bloch blamed the whistleblowers. The “quality” of complaints has dropped, he said. He assured Congress he wants to find “the good” in whistleblower complaints so badly that he engages in “Where’s Waldo?” game strategies with his staff.

There is an easier way to help employees than playing games: Listen and allow staff members to make an honest effort.

Government employees do not view OSC as a reliable outlet for their concerns, and with good reason.
OSC whistleblower Natresha Dawson is a poster child for what has gone wrong. After May 2005 Senate hearings, Bloch responded to senators’ criticisms that his agency was no longer communicating with those who seek OSC help by creating a Customer Service Unit (CSU).

Dawson, who staffed the new unit, was bewildered when she was gagged from telling any of the staff who work on cases about her discussions with complainants. She was serving only as an irrelevant diversion. When she appealed to Bloch, she was gagged from communicating again with him under threat of termination. After eight months, the CSU was dismantled and Dawson was terminated. She has filed a Whistleblower Protection Act complaint.

Federal employees can hardly count on Bloch to defend them from the same harassment tactics he perfects against his own staff.

OSC has become an object of contempt among the constituencies it supposedly serves. But there is a real need for a credible special counsel. Relevant congressional committees are working diligently to overhaul the legal rules governing OSC’s work. This is an important step. Unfortunately, it is not possible to legislate commitment, competence or leadership.

Tom Devine is legal director and Adam Miles is the legislative representative of the Government Accountability Project.


http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=3039412