DOCSLIB.ORG

Compendium of Open Office of Inspector General Recommendations to the Department of Defense As of March 31, 2017 (Redacted)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MISSION Our mission is to provide independent, relevant, and timely oversight of the Department of Defense that supports the warfighter; promotes accountability, integrity, and efficiency; advises the Secretary of Defense and Congress; and informs the public. VISION Our vision is to be a model oversight organization in the Federal Government by leading change, speaking truth, and promoting excellence—a diverse organization, working together as one professional team, recognized as leaders in our field. Fraud, Waste, & Abuse HOTLINE Department of Defense dodig.mil/hotline|800.424.9098 INTEGRITY EFFICIENCY ACCOUNTABILITY EXCELLENCE FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY INSPECTOR GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA 22350‑1500 July 11, 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SUBJECT: Compendium of Open Office of Inspector General Recommendations to the Department of Defense The DoD Office of Inspector General (DoD OIG) is issuing this Compendium of Open Recommendations (Compendium) to the DoD and Congress. The DoD OIG conducts independent audits and evaluations of DoD programs and operations. These reports often include recommendations for improvement or corrective actions that, if implemented, could enable the DoD to reduce costs, realize monetary benefits, and improve performance and efficiency. The DoD OIG regularly follows up on open recommendations to determine the status of corrective actions. This Compendium summarizes all recommendations we issued to DoD Components that remained open as of March 31, 2017. As of March 31, 2017, there were 1,298 open recommendations that were issued to 46 DoD Components in 288 DoD OIG audit and evaluation reports. DoD management agreed to take corrective actions on 1,251 of those recommendations. For the remaining 47 open recommendations, the DoD OIG and DoD Components have not agreed on an acceptable corrective action that meets the intent of the recommendation. Of the 1,298 open recommendations, 58 have associated potential monetary benefits. If the DoD Components implemented all 58 recommendations, DoD could save $33.6 billion. The DoD OIG will continue to track open recommendations and engage with DoD senior managers who are responsible for resolving disagreements and implementing corrective actions. Until disagreements are resolved and corrective actions are completed, these recommendations will remain open. In addition, through this report, the OIG’s Semiannual Reports to Congress, and other reports, the DoD OIG intends to keep the heads of DoD Components and Congress informed about the status of the DoD’s actions toward reaching a resolution on unresolved recommendations and the progress on completing agreed-to corrective actions. We will also provide reports to you, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, and DoD Component leadership listing open and unresolved recommendations on a semiannual basis. If you have questions about the Compendium, please contact me or have your staff contact , at . Glenn A. Fine Acting Inspector General FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 4 Compendium of Open Office of Inspector General Recommendations to the Department of Defense FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................................1 BACKGROUND ON OIG FOLLOWUP PROCESS..................................................................3 Policy for OIG Followup Process on Recommendations ...............................................................................3 Recommendation Followup Process ...............................................................................................................................4 SUMMARY OF OPEN RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................7 CHAPTER 1. HIGH‑PRIORITY OPEN RECOMMENDATIONS ...................15 CHAPTER 2. REPORTS WITH REMAINING UNCOLLECTED POTENTIAL MONETARY BENEFITS ...........................................................................................77 TABLE: Uncollected Potential Monetary Benefits .......................................................................................... 79 CHAPTER 3. REPORTS WITH UNRESOLVED RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 97 TABLE: Unresolved Recommendations ..................................................................................................................111 APPENDIX A. ALL OPEN RECOMMENDATIONS AS OF MARCH 31, 2017 ...............................................................................................................................127 Deputy Secretary of Defense ...................................................................................................................................128 Department of the Army ..............................................................................................................................................130 Department of the Navy ...............................................................................................................................................194 U.S. Marine Corps ................................................................................................................................................................234 Department of the Air Force ..................................................................................................................................... 241 Joint Chiefs of Staff .............................................................................................................................................................278 Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics .......................283 Under Secretary of Defense for Policy ............................................................................................................305 Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) .................................................................................................310 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness .........................................................319 Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence .............................................................................................335 DoD Deputy Chief Management Officer .......................................................................................................341 National Guard Bureau ...................................................................................................................................................342 U.S. Pacific Command .....................................................................................................................................................346 U.S. European Command ..............................................................................................................................................347 U.S. Southern Command .............................................................................................................................................348 U.S. Central Command ....................................................................................................................................................349 U.S. Special Operations Command .....................................................................................................................358 U.S. Transportation Command ................................................................................................................................366 U.S. Northern Command .............................................................................................................................................369 U.S. Strategic Command ................................................................................................................................................370 4 Compendium of Open Office of Inspector General Recommendations to the Department of Defense Compendium of Open Office of Inspector General Recommendations to the Department of Defense i FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY CONTENTS U.S. Africa Command ........................................................................................................................................................371 U.S. Cyber Command ........................................................................................................................................................372 DoD Office of the General Counsel ....................................................................................................................373 Director of Operational Test and Evaluation ............................................................................................. 374 DoD Chief Information Officer ................................................................................................................................375 Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs ...............................................................................377 Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security ...........386 Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict .............................................................................................388
Recommended publications
  • THE NAVAL SERVICE.Tif

    THE NAVAL SERVICE.Tif

    CHAPTER TWELVE THE NAVAL SERVICE Ninety percent of the world's commerce travels by sea; the vast majority of the world's population lives within a few hundred miles of the oceans; nearly three quarters of the planet is covered by water. Seapower protects the American way of life. -A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower Every danger of a military character to which the United States is exposed can be met best outside her own territory-at sea. -Rear Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan n 2007 the U.S. Coast Guard, Marine Corps, and Navy issued A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower, representing the first time the three services I jointly crafted a maritime strategy. The document stresses the naval services' mutual commitment to protecting the homeland and winning and preventing wars. Proliferation of weapons and information technology to transnational threats and rogue states poses an increasing range of threats to U.S. security interests. In addition to threats from kinetic weapons, hybrid warfare threats (e.g., financial, cyber) pose new challenges for the sea services, demanding a coordinated strategy and response. To better understand how responsibility for security in the maritime domain is shared among the sea services, this chapter describes organization, mis­ sion, and capabilities of each. 157 158 Naval Officer's Guide The Department of the Navy The Department of the Navy (DON) is to "be organized, trained, and equipped primarily for prompt and sustained combat incident to operations at sea'' (Navy Regulations art. 0202). The National Security Act of i947, as amended in i949, gov­ erns the role of the Navy in national defense.
  • Report No. DODIG-2019-044 for OFFICIAL USE ONLY

    Report No. DODIG-2019-044 for OFFICIAL USE ONLY

    Report No. DODIG-2019-044 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY U.S. Department of Defense InspectorJANUARY 9, 2019 General Summary of Reports Issued Regarding Department of Defense Cybersecurity From July 1, 2017, Through June 30, 2018 INTEGRITY INDEPENDENCE EXCELLENCE The document contains information that may be exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Summary of Reports Issued Regarding Department of Defense ResultsCybersecurity in From Brief July 1, 2017, Through June 30, 2018 January 9, 2019 Background Objective On February 12, 2013, the President issued Executive Order 13636, “Improving Critical Infrastructure Our objective was to (1) summarize Cybersecurity.” Executive Order 13636 calls for the unclassified and classified reports development of a voluntary cybersecurity framework issued and testimonies made from for Federal and non-Federal entities that provides a the DoD oversight community and the prioritized, flexible, repeatable, performance-based, and Government Accountability Office (GAO) cost effective approach to help owners and operators between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018, of critical infrastructure identify, assess, and manage that included DoD cybersecurity issues; cyber risk. The resulting NIST Cybersecurity Framework (2) identify cybersecurity risk areas for was established through collaboration between the DoD management to address based on the Government and private sector entities. The framework five functions of the National Institute has five functions, representing high-level cybersecurity of Standards and Technology (NIST), activities that provide a strategic view of the risk management “Framework for Improving Critical lifecycle—Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover.
  • Oversight of Intelligence Activities with the Department of the Navy

    Oversight of Intelligence Activities with the Department of the Navy

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 1000 NAVY PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC 20350-1000 SECNAVINST 3820.3E NAVINSGEN-N2 21 Sep 2005 SECNAV INSTRUCTION 3820.3E From: Secretary of the Navy Subj: OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY (DON) Ref: (a) Executive Order 12333 (b) DOD Directive 5240.1 of 25 Apr 88 (c) DOD Regulation 5240.1-R of Dec 82 (d) SECNAVINST 5000.34B (e) DOD Directive 5148.11 (f) SECNAVINST 5510.30A (g) US Navy Regulations, 1990 (h) SECNAVINST 5215.1D Encl: (1) Naval Inspector General Intelligence Oversight Inspection Checklist (2) Naval Inspector General Intelligence Oversight Report Format and Content (3) Memorandum of Understanding: Reporting of Information Concerning Federal Crimes, August 1995 1. Purpose. To implement policies, procedures, and governing regulations regarding the conduct of intelligence activities, and a system of program reviews, inspections, and reporting requirements of those activities. This instruction has been substantially revised and should be reviewed in its entirety. Highlights of significant changes from previous instruction are as follows: a. Updated definition of DON intelligence components, to include new and reorganized DON intelligence organizations and describe revised responsibilities under this instruction, b. Further definition of the term “Questionable intelligence activity” and resultant reporting requirements (i.e. Procedure 15 reporting), c. Inclusion of a sample Intelligence Oversight inspection checklist, which may be used by components or elements as a guideline for administering an effective Intelligence Oversight program, (enclosure (1)), and d. Inclusion of a standard format for quarterly reports from DON intelligence components to the Office of the Naval SECNAVINST 3820.3E 21 Sep 2005 Inspector General (NAVINSGEN) (enclosure (2)).
  • BIOGRAPHICAL DATA BOO KK Class 2020-2 27

    BIOGRAPHICAL DATA BOO KK Class 2020-2 27

    BBIIOOGGRRAAPPHHIICCAALL DDAATTAA BBOOOOKK Class 2020-2 27 Jan - 28 Feb 2020 National Defense University NDU PRESIDENT Vice Admiral Fritz Roegge, USN 16th President Vice Admiral Fritz Roegge is an honors graduate of the University of Minnesota with a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering and was commissioned through the Reserve Officers' Training Corps program. He earned a Master of Science in Engineering Management from the Catholic University of America and a Master of Arts with highest distinction in National Security and Strategic Studies from the Naval War College. He was a fellow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Seminar XXI program. VADM Fritz Roegge, NDU President (Photo His sea tours include USS Whale (SSN 638), USS by NDU AV) Florida (SSBN 728) (Blue), USS Key West (SSN 722) and command of USS Connecticut (SSN 22). His major command tour was as commodore of Submarine Squadron 22 with additional duty as commanding officer, Naval Support Activity La Maddalena, Italy. Ashore, he has served on the staffs of both the Atlantic and the Pacific Submarine Force commanders, on the staff of the director of Naval Nuclear Propulsion, on the Navy staff in the Assessments Division (N81) and the Military Personnel Plans and Policy Division (N13), in the Secretary of the Navy's Office of Legislative Affairs at the U. S, House of Representatives, as the head of the Submarine and Nuclear Power Distribution Division (PERS 42) at the Navy Personnel Command, and as an assistant deputy director on the Joint Staff in both the Strategy and Policy (J5) and the Regional Operations (J33) Directorates.
  • Military Law Review

    Military Law Review

    Volume 139 Winter 1993 MILITARY LAW REVIEW 0 ? P JAG SCHOOL w W ARTICLES AUG 1 1993 MILITARY DEPARTMENT GENERAL 7 COUNSEL AS “CHIEF LEGAL OFFICERS”: IMPACT ON LIBRARY DELIVERY OF IMPARTIAL LEGAL ADVICE AT HEADQUARTERS AND IN THE FIELD.. ..............Lieutenant Commander Kurt A. Johnson REASON, RETALIATION, AND RHETORIC: JEFFERSON AND THE QUEST FOR HUMANIW IN WAR.. .........Burrus M. Carnahan JURY NULLIFICATION: A CALL FOR JUSTICE OR AN INVITATION TO ANARCHY? .............................. Lieutenant Commander Robert E. Korroch Major Michael J. Davidson THE TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY sU 2 OF MY LAI: A TIME TO E INCULCATE THE LESSONS. ................Major Jeffrey F. Addicott M Major William A. Hudson, Jr. P w W BOOK REVIEWS Charlottesville, Virginia Pamphlet HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NO. 27-100-139 Washington, D. C., Winter 1993 MILITARY LAW REVIEW-VOLUME 139 The Military Law Review has been published quarterly at The Judge Advocate General's School, U.S. Army, Charlottesville, Virginia, since 1958. The Review provides a forum for those interested in military law to share the products of their experiences and research and is designed for use by military attorneys in connection with their official duties. Writings offered for publica- tion should be of direct concern and import in this area of scholarship, and preference will be given to writings that have lasting value as reference materials for the military lawyer. The Review encourages frank discussion of relevant legislative, admin- istrative, and judicial developments. EDITORIAL STAFF MAJOR DANIEL P. SHAVER, Editor MS. EVA F. SKINNER, Editorial Assistant SUBSCRIPTIONS: Private subscriptions may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
  • Journal of Public Inquiry Is a Publication of the Inspectors General of the United States

    Journal of Public Inquiry Is a Publication of the Inspectors General of the United States

    A PUBLICATION OF THE INSPECTORS GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES FALL 1996 Editorial Board Aletha L. Brown, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission OIG Raymond J. DeCarli, Department of Transportation OIG Stuart C. Gilman, Office of Government Ethics Maryann Grodin, Council of Counsels to the Inspectors General Donald Mancuso, Department of Defense OIG Thomas D. Roslewicz, Department of Health and Human Services OIG Robert S. Terjesen, Department of State OIG David C. Williams, Social Security Administration OIG, Editor Wendy Zenker, Office of Management and Budget Staff Editorial Services Karen M. Shaffer, Social Security Administration OIG Agapi Doulaveris, Social Security Administration OIG Printing Frederick Watson, Department of Defense OIG Public Affairs Robert S. Terjesen, Department of State OIG Design & Layout Automated Graphic Services, Nuclear Regulatory Commission OIG Invitation to Contribute Articles The Journal of Public Inquiry is a publication of the Inspectors General of the United States. We are soliciting articles from participating professionals and scholars on topics important to the the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency and the Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency. Articles should be approximately 6 to 12 pages, doublespaced and should be submitted to Ms. Agapi Doulaveris, Assistant to the Editor, Office of the Inspector General, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Blvd., Suite 300 Baltimore, MD 21235. Please note that the journal reserves the right to edit submissions. The journal is a publication of the United States Government. As such, The Journal of Public Inquiry is not copyrighted and may be reprinted without permission. A PUBLICATION OF THE INSPECTORS GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES Table of Contents Tribute to Derek Vander Schaaf Preamble Author: David C.
  • Air Rescue Association Recognizes Moody Pilot

    Air Rescue Association Recognizes Moody Pilot

    Air Rescue Association recognizes Moody pilot http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story_print.asp?id=123031468 Air Rescue Association recognizes Moody pilot by Airman 1st Class Eric Schloeffel 23rd Wing Public Affairs 11/9/2006 - MOODY AIR FORCE BASE, Ga. -- A Moody helicopter pilot took his experiences flying for the Army to new heights in the Air Force and recently earned the Air Rescue Association's 2006 Richard T. Kight Award. Capt. Eric Trocinski, 41st Rescue Squadron, earned the association's highest honor for his role during a recent deployment. "I was extremely surprised to win the award," said the captain. "I'm very happy and humbled to have won it." Capt. Eric Trocinski, 41st Rescue Squadron pilot, stands The ARA brings together Airmen from across the Air beside an HH-60G Pave Hawk shortly before takeoff from Force rescue community once a year for an awards Moody’s flightline. Capt. Trocinski was recently awarded the Air Rescue Association’s 2006 Richard T. Kight award banquet in which they present the Kight award to the for his performance in the deployed environment. (U.S. profession's highest achiever. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Eric Schloeffel) Though he was deployed to Iraq during the presentation in Savannah, Ga., 347th Rescue Group commander Lt. Col. Lee Pera accepted the award for Captain Trocinski. The Kight award is named for Brig. Gen. (ret.) Richard Kight, the first air rescue commander and originator of the pararescue creed, which includes the phrase "that others may live." Captain Trocinski began his military career as a helicopter pilot and warrant officer for the Army, flying the HH-60 Black Hawk.
  • 'Mobil Tiger' Staged at Macdill

    'Mobil Tiger' Staged at Macdill

    Vol. 47, No. 49 Thursday, December 5, 2019 ‘Mobil Tiger’ staged at MacDill - page 8 News/Features: page 2 Native Americans honored News/Features: page 3 No drones within 5 miles Week in photos: page 4 Images from the week News/Features: page 11 Airman awarded silver star Photo by Staff Sgt. Brad Tipton Airmen assigned to the 23rd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, Moody Air Force Base, Ga., load munitions on an A-10 Thun- Community: page 14 derbolt II aircraft assigned to the 74th Fighter Squadron Moody AFB during exercise Mobil Tiger on MacDill Air Force Base Events, Chapel, more... Nov. 20. The exercise allowed Moody Airmen to practice their ability to deliver combat air power from an austere environ- ment with no installation support. NEWS/FEATURES MacDill celebrates Native American Heritage Month by Airman 1st Class Shannon Bowman 6th Air Refueling Wing Public Affairs According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Ameri- can Indians constitute less than 2 percent of the nation’s population. Despite their small number, the Department of Defense acknowledges that today’s military successes depend heavily on Native Americans, with 31,000 serving on active duty and 140,000 living veterans. To commemorate the military service of American Indians and celebrate their contribu- tion to the U.S., MacDill Air Force Base hosted a Native American Heritage Month celebration Nov. 21. The event showcased Navajo art, tradition- al Cherokee dances and traditional Pow Wow Songs from the Kiowa and Cherokee Nations. Members of Team MacDill filled the chapel annex, sampled traditional native foods partici- pated in traditional dances.
  • 10Th Edition | 2019 Table of Contents Foreword

    10Th Edition | 2019 Table of Contents Foreword

    10th Edition | 2019 Table of Contents Foreword . 1 Background . 1 Historical Background . 3 Chronology of Legal and Policy Changes . 5 Women on Active Duty . 17 Women in the Reserves and National Guard Components . 17 Minority Women . 17 Ground Combat Integration Progress . 18 Women Officers . 19 Enlisted Women . 19 Women Veterans . 20 Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Chronology . 20 Bibliography . 30 Tables 1 Women Who Served in Selected U.S. Military and Peacekeeping Actions 1917 – 2018 ..........................35 2 Active Duty Service Personnel by Branch of Service, Officer/Enlisted Status and Sex ................................36 3 Active Duty Service Women by Branch of Service, Enlisted/Officer Status, Race, and Latina Origin ...................37 4 Woman as a Percentage of All Active Duty Officers, as a percentage of Flag/General Officers, and as a Percentage of Colonels and Navy/USCG Captains .................38 5 Women as a Percentage of All Active Duty Enlisted Personnel and as a Percentage of Senior Enlisted Personnel ..................39 6 Guard and Reserve Component Personnel by Component, Officer/Enlisted Status, and Sex ................................40 7 Guard and Reserve Service Women by Branch, Enlisted/Officer, and Race/Ethnicity .............................41 8 Veterans by Sex, Age, Race, and Ethnicity ........................42 Figures 1 Active-Duty Servicewomen in the DoD Services by Officer/Enlisted Status 1984-2018 ........................... 43 2 American Veterans by Sex (in Millions) 1986, 1992, 2004, 2007, 2011, 2017 ............................ 44 ON THE COVER: U.S. Air Force graphic by Corey Parrish Foreword The tenth edition of Women in the Military: Where They Stand represents both change and continuity. The first eight editions were published by the Women’s Research & Education Institute (WREI) between 1991 and 2013.
  • Joint Chiefs of Staff Flag Officers and Senior Enlisted Leaders of the Naval Services

    Joint Chiefs of Staff Flag Officers and Senior Enlisted Leaders of the Naval Services

    Copyright © 2013, Proceedings, U.S. Naval Institute, Annapolis, Maryland (410) 268-6110 www.usni.org Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Admiral James Admiral Jonathan General Mark A. General James General Raymond General Frank E. Dempsey A. Winnefeld Jr. W. Greenert Welsh III F. Amos T. Odierno J. Grass U.S. Army U.S. Navy U.S. Navy U.S. Air Force U.S. Marine Corps U.S. Army National Chairman Vice Chairman Guard Bureau Flag Officers and Senior Enlisted Leaders of the Naval Services Depicted here are (a) officers of flag rank and senior enlisted leaders of the U.S. Navy on active duty as of 1 March 2013 (unless advance information was available); (b) officers of flag rank of NOAA and at Maritime Academies as of 1 March 2013; and (c) inactive-duty Reserve flag officers of the same services. Numbers following titles indicate: Navy (month/year assuming billet) lineal number. An index appears on page 136. U.S. Navy Admirals (Line) James A. Winnefeld Jr. Jonathan W. Greenert James G. Stavridis Vice Chairman of the Joint Chief of Naval Operations Supreme Allied Commander, Chiefs of Staff (9/11) Europe/Commander, U.S. (8/11) 2 European Command 1 (6/09) 3 William H. McRaven Samuel J. Locklear III Mark E. Ferguson III Commander, U.S. Special Commander, U.S. Pacific Vice Chief of Naval Operations Operations Command Command (8/11) (8/11) (3/12) 6 4 5 Cecil E. Haney Bruce W. Clingan William E. Gortney Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet Commander, U.S. Navy Forces, Commander, U.S.
  • Analysis of DOD's Actions to Improve Case Timeliness and Safeguard Confidentiality

    Analysis of DOD's Actions to Improve Case Timeliness and Safeguard Confidentiality

    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees March 2019 WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION Analysis of DOD’s Actions to Improve Case Timeliness and Safeguard Confidentiality Accessible Version GAO-19-198 March 2019 WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION Analysis of DOD's Actions to Improve Case Timeliness and Safeguard Confidentiality Highlights of GAO-19-198, a report to congressional committees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Safeguarding confidentiality to the The Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (DODIG) and military maximum extent possible is essential service offices of inspector general (IG) met some but not all fiscal year 2018 for encouraging whistleblowers to timeliness and quality goals for handling whistleblower complaints. For example, report wrongdoing without fear of DODIG met its goals related to referring complaints to the appropriate agency reprisal. In fiscal year 2018, DODIG within a certain number of days. All IGs also generally met goals related to the received over 12,000 contacts from quality of investigations. However, about 85 percent of DODIG reprisal and potential whistleblowers related to senior official misconduct investigations exceeded statutory and internal fraud, waste, abuse, employee timeliness goals. Further, military service IGs did not meet most goals for misconduct, or other violations. The handling cases within prescribed timeframes. For example, the service IGs National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 included a provision averaged between 17 and 84 days to notify DODIG of their receipt of for GAO to review the integrity of whistleblower reprisal allegations, exceeding the 10-day goal. The IGs have DOD’s whistleblower program. This various initiatives underway to improve timeliness, such as a Naval IG program report assesses the extent to which to reduce timeframes for initial credibility determinations.
  • DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE the Pentagon 20301–1155, Phone (703) 545–6700 Fax 695–3362/693–2161

    DEPARTMENT of DEFENSE the Pentagon 20301–1155, Phone (703) 545–6700 Fax 695–3362/693–2161

    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE The Pentagon 20301–1155, phone (703) 545–6700 fax 695–3362/693–2161, http://www.defenselink.mil CHUCK HAGEL, Secretary of Defense; born in North Platte, NE, October 4, 1946, the eldest of four brothers; he joined the United States Army and volunteered to go to Vietnam, rising to the rank of Sergeant and serving as an infantry squad leader alongside his brother, Tom, with the Army’s 9th Infantry Division in 1968; he earned numerous military decorations and honors, including two Purple Hearts. Following his tour in Vietnam, Secretary Hagel graduated from the University of Nebraska at Omaha using the G.I. Bill. Continuing his commitment to public service, Secretary Hagel became Chief of Staff to Nebraska Congressman John Y. McCollister. In 1981, Secretary Hagel was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to serve as Deputy Administrator of the Veterans Administration. In that post he helped pioneer early electronic health recordkeeping and pushed for increased benefits for Vietnam veterans suffering from Agent Orange. This fight became one of the causes of his life, later helping federal courts distribute hundreds of millions of dollars for Agent Orange victims through the Court settlement that set up the Agent Orange Payment Program which he chaired. In the mid-1980’s, Secretary Hagel co-founded Vanguard Cellular Systems, Inc., which became one of the largest independent cellular networks in the country. Secretary Hagel also served as President and CEO of the USO; the Chief Operating Officer of the 1990 Economic Summit of Industrialized Nations (G–7 Summit) in Houston, Texas; Deputy Commissioner General of the United States for the 1982 World’s Fair, President of the Private Sector Council and President of McCarthy & Company, an Omaha based investment bank.