June 6, Major General Jeffrey N. Colt Deputy Commander, United States Forces Afghanistan

Similar documents
sigar Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT TO SIGAR s JANUARY 2015 February 2015

July 8, The Honorable Charles T. Hagel Secretary of Defense. General Lloyd J. Austin III Commander, U.S. Central Command

SIGAR JANUARY. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction

SIGAR. Management and Oversight of Fuel in Afghanistan: DOD Is Taking Steps to Improve Accountability, but Additional Actions Are Needed APRIL

SIGAR. Afghan National Defense and Security Forces: DOD Cannot Fully Account for U.S.-funded Infrastructure Transferred to the Afghan Government

SIGAR NOVEMBER 2017 SIGAR SP OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS

SIGAR NOVEMBER 2017 SIGAR SP

July 30, SIGAR Audit-09-3 Management Information Systems

SIGAR JANUARY 2013 SIGAR SP-13-2

August 8, Dear Mr. Ginman:

SUPPLEMENT TO SIGAR S APRIL 2018 QUARTERLY REPORT TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS

Inspector General FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY. U.S. Department of Defense INTEGRITY EFFICIENCY ACCOUNTABILITY EXCELLENCE

4 Other Agency. Oversight

ANA Garrison at Farah Appeared Well Built Overall but Some Construction Issues Should Be Addressed

SIGAR APRIL Qala-I-Muslim Medical Clinic: Serving the Community Well, But Construction Quality Could Not Be Fully Assessed

OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS DEPARTMENT OF STATE ASSISTANCE TO AFGHANISTAN: $4 BILLION OBLIGATED BETWEEN 2002 AND 2013

GAO AFGHANISTAN SECURITY

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION. Registration and End-Use Monitoring of Defense Articles and/or Defense Services

March 5, The Honorable P. Michael McKinley U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan. Dear Ambassador McKinley:

June 30, The Honorable Gayle E. Smith Administrator U.S. Agency for International Development

SIGAR APRIL 2017 SIGAR SP GOOD PERFORMERS INITIATIVE: STATUS OF SEVEN COMPLETED PROJECTS IN KHOST PROVINCE, AFGHANISTAN

SECURITY CONTENTS SECURITY

4 Other Agency. Oversight

JOINT STRATEGIC OVERSIGHT PLAN FOR AFGHANISTAN RECONSTRUCTION FY13 JOINT STRATEGIC PLANNING SUBGROUP FOR OVERSIGHT OF AFGHANISTAN RECONSTRUCTION

OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS

Critical Information Needed to Determine the Cost and Availability of G222 Spare Parts

SIGAR JULY. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction

SIGAR AFGHAN NATIONAL ARMY: CONTROLS OVER FUEL FOR VEHICLES, GENERATORS, AND POWER PLANTS NEED STRENGTHENING TO PREVENT FRAUD, WASTE, AND ABUSE

SIGAR Testimony. Before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support U.S. Senate. Statement of John F. Sopko,

March 30, The Honorable Mark Green Administrator U.S. Agency for International Development

1'::\ SIGAR I OfficeoftheSpeclallnspectorGaneral

SIGAR. Department of State s Demining Activities in Afghanistan: Audit of Costs Incurred by the Mine Detection Dog Center M A R C H

4OTHER AGENCY OVERSIGHT

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Security Contents. Security

SUBPART ACQUISITIONS IN SUPPORT OF OPERATIONS IN IRAQ OR AFGHANISTAN (Added September 15, 2008)

SIGAR OCTOBER. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. SIGAR 14-6 Inspection Report. SIGAR 14-6-IP/Gardez Hospital

3RECONSTRUCTION UPDATE

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INSTRUCTION SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE _AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION

SIGAR. Department of Defense Reconstruction Projects: Summary of SIGAR Inspection Reports Issued from July 2009 through September 2015 MARCH

GAO MILITARY BASE CLOSURES. DOD's Updated Net Savings Estimate Remains Substantial. Report to the Honorable Vic Snyder House of Representatives

SIGAR JULY. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. SIGAR Audit Report. SIGAR AR/Legacy and ASOM Programs

GAO WARFIGHTER SUPPORT. DOD Needs to Improve Its Planning for Using Contractors to Support Future Military Operations

SECRET//NOFORN. (U) Child Sexual Assault in Afghanistan: Implementation of the Leahy Laws and Reports of Assault by Afghan Security Forces

SIGAR. $14.7 Million Warehouse Facility at Kandahar Airfield: Construction Delays Prevented the Facility from Being Used as Intended J U L Y

DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY WASHINGTON, DC

November 25, The Honorable Ashton B. Carter Secretary of Defense. Dear Secretary Carter:

DOD INSTRUCTION DOD LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE (LLRW) PROGRAM

Defense Security Cooperation Agency Overseas Contingency Operations Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 3010 DEFENSE PENTAGON WASHINGTON, DC

OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS

SIGAR. CONTRACTING WITH THE ENEMY: DOD Has Limited Assurance that Contractors with Links to Enemy Groups Are Identified and their Contracts Terminated

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

SIGAR. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction QUARTERLY REPORT TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS

Improvised Explosive Devices: Unclear Whether Culvert Denial Systems to Protect Troops Are Functioning or Were Ever Installed

Contract Oversight Capabilities of the Defense Department's Combined Security. Transition Command - Afghanistan (CSTC-A) Need Strengthening

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Report No. D September 25, Transition Planning for the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program IV Contract

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

SIGAR MARCH 2018 SIGAR SP OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND RADM WILLIAM A. MOFFETT BUILDING BUSE ROAD, BLDG 2272 PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND

Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS AND TASKS OF DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC SYSTEMS PROGRAMS, WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, WASHINGTON, DC

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE. SUBJECT: Department of Defense Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization Programs

SIGAR JANUARY. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. SIGAR Inspection Report. SIGAR IP/Camp Commando Phase IV

Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense

Distribution of Funds and the Validity of Obligations for the Management of the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund Phase II

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund Phase III - Accountability for Equipment Purchased for the Afghanistan National Police

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE. SUBJECT: Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs (ASD(LA))

Ministry of Defense Advisors Program Annual Report

DEFENSE HEALTH AGENCY 7700 ARLINGTON BOULEVARD, SUITE 5101 FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA

Department of Defense

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

SAAG-ZA 12 July 2018

A udit R eport. Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense. Report No. D October 31, 2001

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Office of Inspector General Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation New Dawn Operation and Maintenance

GAO DEFENSE CONTRACTING. Improved Policies and Tools Could Help Increase Competition on DOD s National Security Exception Procurements

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR AFGHANISTAN RECONSTRUCTION

A udit R eport. Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense

AfGhAn national police training program Would benefit from better compliance With the economy Act And reimbursable AGreements.

Incomplete Contract Files for Southwest Asia Task Orders on the Warfighter Field Operations Customer Support Contract

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION. 1. PURPOSE. In accordance with the authority in DoD Directive (DoDD) (Reference (a)), this Instruction:

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE. SUBJECT: Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Defense Programs (ASD(NCB))

SIGAR JANUARY 2017 SIGAR SP OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS INFORMATION ON USAID S STABILITY IN KEY AREAS PROGRAM NORTHERN REGION, AFGHANISTAN

DOD INVENTORY OF CONTRACTED SERVICES. Actions Needed to Help Ensure Inventory Data Are Complete and Accurate

Fiscal Year 2012 Comprehensive Oversight Plan for Southwest Asia

Report No. D-2011-RAM-004 November 29, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Projects--Georgia Army National Guard

OPNAVINST DNS 25 Apr Subj: MISSION, FUNCTIONS AND TASKS OF COMMANDER, NAVAL SUPPLY SYSTEMS COMMAND

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

ACQUISITION OF THE ADVANCED TANK ARMAMENT SYSTEM. Report No. D February 28, Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense

Department of Defense INSTRUCTION

Air Force Officials Did Not Consistently Comply With Requirements for Assessing Contractor Performance

Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction

Office of the Inspector General Department of Defense

Transcription:

June 6, 2014 Major General Jeffrey N. Colt Deputy Commander, United States Forces Afghanistan Major General Kevin R. Wendel Commanding General, Combined Security Transition Command Afghanistan Major General Harold Greene Deputy Commanding General Combined Security Transition Command Afghanistan Dear Generals Colt, Wendel, and Greene: Thank you for your response to our April 24, 2014 request for information on the $3 million procurement of patrol boats for the Afghan National Police. I am grateful for the efforts you made to try to answer our questions and your prompt reply was greatly appreciated. I continue to have concerns, however, because CSTC-A was unable to answer a significant number of my questions regarding the patrol boats. The list of unanswered questions is particularly troubling given the fact which CSTC-A acknowledges that this program had been an important national security priority for the Afghan National Security Forces prior to its cancellation. This is not the first time SIGAR has been confronted with lapses in record keeping, which hinder our ability to conduct our congressionally-mandated mission to oversee U.S. reconstruction funds. In this case, the lack of records makes it especially difficult to discern the history of the procurement and cancellation decisions. Among the missing records are the following: A concept of operations for employment of the boats. Whether a feasibility review of the operational requirement s was conducted. Documentation that the operational requirement was approved in 2010. Justification for including these boats on the Tashkil 1 in 2010. The extent of involvement, if any, of the Afghan Ministry of Interior in the procurement process and the decision to cancel. The reasons and justification for cancelling this requirement. Further, CSTC-A s response indicates that its Security Assistance Office (SAO) led a review board that determined that the boats do not fill a valid requirement for Afghanistan. However, no explanation of the basis for this decision is given. 1 The Tashkil is an Afghan government Ministry of Interior document that dictates the force structure, personnel end strength, command relationships, and unit/staff functions and mission descriptions for the ANP.

To help SIGAR better understand how these decisions were made, and to help us prepare lessonslearned reports intended to avert the waste of U.S. taxpayer funds in the future, please provide a detailed accounting of all of the elements of the SAO review boat s proceedings which led to that decision, including, transcripts, testimony, and exhibits. By letter today, I have also requested the Department of the Navy to provide their plans for disposition of the boats, under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-66), Section 1531. Thank you for your cooperation and continued assistance in this matter. Please provide this information no later than June 27, 2014, to Jack Mitchell, Director of the Office of Special Projects, at or. Please do not hesitate to contact him should you have any questions. Sincerely, John F. Sopko Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction Enclosure: I USFOR-A Response to SIGAR-14-54-SP Inquiry Letter: ANP Patrol Boats II CSTC-A Response to SIGAR-14-54-SP Inquiry Letter: ANP Patrol Boats SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 2

ENCLOSURE I: USFOR-A RESPONSE TO SIGAR-14-54-SP INQUIRY LETTER: ANP PATROL BOATS SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 3

ENCLOSURE II: CSTC-A RESPONSE TO SIGAR-14-54-SP INQUIRY LETTER: ANP PATROL BOATS SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 4

SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 5

SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 6

SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 7

SIGAR-14-66-SP-Inquiry Letter: CSTC-A Response to ANP Patrol Boat Inquiry Page 8

April 24, 2014 Major General Kevin R. Wendel Commanding General, Combined Security Transition Command Afghanistan/Ministerial Advisory Groups Dear General Wendel: I am writing to request information on a $3 million procurement of patrol boats for the Afghan National Police (ANP) initiated by the Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan (CSCT-A) in 2010. My focus is on the operational requirements that initiated the procurement of the patrol boats for the ANP and the reasons for the cancellation nine months later. Additionally, I am also interested in the requirement for the U.S. government to pay for the storage and related expenses for these boats for the last 3 years, boats that apparently have no planned use. In a memorandum of request (MOR) dated 12 October 2010 (enclosure I), CSTC-A requested that the U.S. Department of the Navy purchase eight rigid-hulled inflatable boats (RHIBs) for use by the ANP to patrol the Amu Darya river between Northern Afghanistan and Uzbekistan (see figures 1 and 2). According to the MOR, the total cost of the patrol boats, including spare parts and technical assistance, would come to just over $3 million. In response to the MOR, the Department of the Navy procured the patrol craft using the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (ASFF). According to documents obtained by my office, in July 2011, CSTC-A cancelled the requirement for the patrol boats and requested that the contract be terminated and that the disbursed funds be returned. However, because 80 percent of the funds had been disbursed at the time of the requirement cancellation and the boats were nearly finished, it was decided that the contract should be allowed to proceed to completion. According to officials at the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), the patrol boats were manufactured and delivered to the Navy in 2011 and have been in storage at the Naval Weapons Station/Cheatham Annex, Yorktown, Virginia ever since. Figure 2 Region where patrol boats were intended to operate Figure 1 - One of the patrol boats purchased for the ANP

I would appreciate answers to the following questions raised by this procurement decision and subsequent cancellation: How many watercraft do the Afghan National Security Forces currently operate? What is their mission? What was the initial operational requirement for these boats? Was a concept of operations (CONOPS) written for the employment of these boats? Which Afghan and coalition organizations reviewed and approved the requirement and CONOPS for these boats? Did CSTC-A review the feasibility of the operational requirement and proposed equipment solution before the procurement request decision was made? How many patrol boats did that initial requirement call for and what was the cost estimate for their procurement and initial spares? Provide a breakdown of the $3 million dollars expended for these boats. Were any of these ANSF funds returned? The MOR states that the RHIBs were required by the ANP Tashkil. 1 What was the justification for including this capacity on the Tashkil? Does CSTC-A review the feasibility of Tashkil requirements before filling them? Was the Afghan Ministry of Interior (MOI) involved with this procurement? If so, how? Why did CSTC-A cancel the requirement for the patrol boats only nine months after the MOR was issued? Who cancelled the requirement? Were MOI officials involved in the cancellation decision or notified of the cancellation after the fact? Did they concur with the decision? Was the DOD Afghanistan Resources Oversight Council (AROC) 2 involved in the cancellation decision? If so, what was their role and position? What is the accumulated cost of storing and preserving these boats, and what are these costs expected to be in the future? What are the plans for disposing of or utilizing the patrol boats? Has CSTC-A conducted any review as a result of the procurement and subsequent nondelivery of the ANP patrol boats? If so, what were their findings and actions? Please provide your response no later than May 9, 2014. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Mr. Jack Mitchell, Director, Office of Special Projects, at. or Sincerely, John F. Sopko Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction Enclosure: CSTC-A Memorandum of Request to the Department of the Navy requesting the procurement of the patrol boats for the Afghan National Police 1 The Tashkil is an Afghan government Ministry of Interior document that dictates the force structure, personnel end strength, command relationships, and unit/staff functions and mission descriptions for the ANP. 2 The AROC is responsible for approving all financial and activity plans for the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (ASFF) SIGAR-14-54-SP Inquiry Letter: ANP Patrol Boats Page 2

ENCLOSURE I: CSTC-A MEMORANDUM OF REQUEST TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY REQUESTING THE PROCUREMENT OF THE PATROL BOATS FOR THE AFGHAN NATIONAL POLICE SIGAR-14-54-SP Inquiry Letter: ANP Patrol Boats Page 3

SIGAR-14-54-SP Inquiry Letter: ANP Patrol Boats Page 4

SIGAR-14-54-SP Inquiry Letter: ANP Patrol Boats Page 5