Home » GOV. CONTRACTORS » Agility/PWC/GCC » Gen. Scott Chambers relieved of command at DLA (updated 12/15)
 

Gen. Scott Chambers relieved of command at DLA (updated 12/15)

US Air Force Brigadier General Scott D. Chambers

Based upon substantial allegations contained in a Department of Defense Inspector General’s Investigative Report, US Air Force Brigadier General Scott D. Chambers, Commander of Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Troop Support has been relieved of his command and has returned to the Air Force. This is effective December 9, 2010.

Defense Logistics Agency Director Alan S. Thompson has appointed Mr. Richard Ellis as Acting Commander, DLA Troop Support.

As of the publishing of this post I have yet to obtain a copy of the Department of Defense Inspect0r General’s report. It will be interesting to see what the Department of Defense Inspector General has uncovered in this latest report. If the report is made available to the public I will link to it.

Anyone following Defense contracting is aware the Defense contracting industry has been wracked with fraud, waste and abuse. There have been countless convictions of contracting officers for both contractors and the Defense Department.

I have sent a request for information to the Defense Logistics Agency asking for a statement and more information, but have not received a response as of the publishing of this post. If you have a copy of the report or more information regarding Brig Gen Scott D. Chambers being relieved of command and returned to the Air Force please let us know.

Ms Sparky

Updated December 13, 2010:

Here’s the email that was forwarded to me. I can’t confirm if this is actually the original email or if it’s in it’s entirety.

I wanted to inform you that based upon substantiated allegations contained in a Department of Defense Inspector General’s Investigative Report, effective 9 December 2010, I have relieved Brigadier General Scott D. Chambers as Commander, DLA Troop Support.

I have appointed Mr. Richard Ellis as Acting Commander, DLA Troop Support.

Mr. Ellis’ appointment as Acting Commander will remain in effect until further notice.

VADM Alan S. Thompson
Director

GovExec.com just came out with an article on this issue. You can read that HERE.

Updated: December 15, 2010:

In a recent article in the AirForce Times is state:

In an e-mailed message to DLA workers, Navy Vice Adm. Alan Thompson, the head of the logistics agency, said he relieved Chambers of command based on “substantiated allegations” in a Defense Department inspector general report.

The allegations involved “personal misconduct” and were not connected to “past or ongoing” business operations at the supply center, McCaskill said.

my image

33 Comments

  1. Comment by FYI:

    This was released yesterday:

    http://www.dodig.mil/
    http://www.dodig.mil/sar/SAR_OCT_2010.pdf

    Findings: The Air Force did not adequately
    address Defense Logistics Agency consumable
    item inventory. The Air Force did not comply
    with legal requirements relating to prime vendor
    contracts for depot level maintenance and
    repair because there is no DoD implementing
    guidance, and the SPLS contract is not consistent
    with Base Realignment and Closure recommendations
    to transfer procurement management
    and distribution functions to DLA. DoD
    availability for C-130 and F-15 Depot-level Repairables
    has been unsatisfactory, and the SPLS
    contract requires significantly improved availability
    starting in contract year three. However,
    the goal of reducing customer wait time was not
    achieved, and contract metrics were not consistent
    with DoD standards. Also, the contract did
    not obtain significant reliability improvements,
    and the Air Force continues to fund improvements
    outside of the contract, which is contrary
    to the performance-based logistics concept.
    Result: After informing the Air Force and DLA,
    they agreed to drawdown $51.1 million of inventory
    for the F-15 secondary power system and
    are addressing $19 million of consumables inventory
    for the C-130.
    Report No. D-2010-063

    • Comment by Ms Sparky:

      I haven’t had the chance to read this 124 page report. Does it speak specifically about Brig Gen Chambers? If so where?

    • Comment by Ms Sparky:

      A reader has had a chance to go though the GAO report listed above. There is no reference to Gen Chambers. We are looking for inferences that elude to “allegations” not being an attorney or government contracting expert I might be missing it.

      Personally, I do not think this link is the GAO report referred to! Anyone else want to elaborate on that?

      • Comment by JHowds:

        I didn’t see BG Chanbers mentioned either, but smiled when I read this:

        Audit Report No. D-2010-081 08/27/2010
        Subject: Army Use of Time-and-Materials Contracts in Southwest Asia
        Report: Audit – $3.7 Million Questioned Costs
        Army contracting and DoD program officials did not properly award and administer the 18 T&M contracts and task orders for work performed
        in Southwest Asia. Contracting and program officials awarded contracts and task orders with invalid sole-source justifications or unfair competition, did not negotiate reasonable prices, and did not justify their use of the T&M contract type. These conditions occurred because contracting
        and program officials ignored acquisition regulations. In addition, contracting and program officials did not perform adequate contractor surveillance for the 18 contracts and task orders because of inadequate organization and planning by the Army officials responsible for contractor
        oversight. DoD IG identified potential monetary benefits for the government of $3,688,338 related to unauthorized labor rate increases, subcontractor employees who may not have worked on the contract, and work performed after the period of performance had expired.

        Invalid sole source justifications or unfair competition? Lack of surveillance? Didn’t negotiate reasonable prices? Really? Imagine that! The “competition” has been screaming all of these claims since at least 2003. Why has it taken IG/GAO 7+years to confirm the obvious? Laziness! Incompetence! Corruption!

  2. Comment by DLA Corruption Watch:

    Remember this. This from DLA’s Chief, DDC Contracting regarding DDKS.

    “Please provide the names of the officers that gave you information regarding their interpretation of the minimum requirement.

    Secondly, as Chief of the Contracting office at DDC, Award Fees are something that I am not in favor of using. In the past, I have been directed to use them. If I am not directed, I will not use them because they are not effective, and they prove to be a major administrative burden, with technical personnel not providing substantial input to the process. We have never awarded a DDC contract to Agility with an award fee. It may have been incorporated by direction into the solicitation, but as you are aware, no award was made. My goal is to ensure that the government pays a fair and reasonable cost/price, plus a reasonable fee/profit, with balanced risk to the government and the contractor as much as it is feasible. To me, they are the most important elements of a contract.

    If you have any additional issues, please let me know.”

    Renee Cairo-Iocco

    Who directed Renee to give award fees single sole source to KGL ? US Air Force Brigadier General Scott D. Chambers ?

    Who directed TSgt Wakefield and Major Roberts (both USAF) to award single sole source to NAS (Agility affiliate ) for the Mail Porter contract ? Same General maybe.

    Is the Pentagon playing with pots of money and single sole source their buddies while ignoring Federal Acquisition Regulations, the Excluded Parties Listing System and their own DLA attorney who handed out the suspensions in Nov 2009.

    Pentagon – they think they are above the law. That is U.S. Taxpayer money. It is about time they are held accountable and make awards in a timely manner and stop awarded suspended companies.

  3. Comment by Ms Sparky:

    I wonder if this action could have anything to do with the PWC/Agility contracts, the DFAC and/or Food Vendors.

    I could be way off base, but I think there is much more to this PWC/Agility issue than what we have seen so far. Why haven’t there been any indictments on the DoD side of the house? Agility couldn’t have done all that without help….could they?

  4. Comment by ctc:

    Ms. Sparky,

    why no contact number for you? But an email address is required to submit a comment???? You have no idea. We suppport and are dedicated to the warfighter. You are way off base. You have no idea because you do not work on this side of the house. I am sick and tired of people like you trying and convicting someone but not just one person but thousands of people that work for DOD with your comments when you haven’t even heard the facts. And remember, if there is one bad apple, it doesn’t spoil the whole damn bunch. And I am not saying there is a bad apple. You are way out of line, why don’t you go hunt down rapists and murderers and people that really do massive harm. You have no idea.

    • Comment by Ms Sparky:

      Seriously? Publish my phone number on the internet? Seriously? I’m the only one here who is NOT anonymous. Read my Meet Ms Sparky page. And you? You didn’t leave your real name or phone number!

      I don’t recall having tried and convicted 1000′s of people here. My post didn’t call into question the integrity of ALL DoD DLA personnel. My post didn’t even call into question the integrity of Gen Chambers. It just stated what was currently going on in the DLA. I stated there have been many DoD and Contractor contract officers/administrators/personnel who have either plead out or been convicted of bribery and other fraud. That’s no secret. Then there is the PWC/Agility SNAFU. That is no secret. Let’s not forget about the disastrous LOGCAP III and IV contracts. OMG! Don’t tell me “I have no idea”! I think I have “some” idea!

      No one is challenging yours or anyone else’ personal commitment to the war fighter. But as I and others feel, the end does not justify the means especially where Defense contractors are reaping massive financial benefits and putting out a crappy product!

      As far as those rapists and murderers go…..if I know about them……they are in my blogging cross hairs!

  5. Comment by DDKS WATCH:

    The U.S. Taxpayer deserves to have awards made in a timely basis. That would be a couple of months tops.

    Why does DLA have their head shoved so far up KGL and Agility’s A$$ (notice the dollar signs)

    The warfighter is not affected by the corruption – the U.S. Taxpayer is and that is who pays for the warfighter to be out there in the first place. DLA – do your jobs, stop awarding to suspended companies and you won’t be the subject of dismissals and demotions.

    DDKS has been waiting for award for 7 months.

    There are several contracting officers there that should resign if they keep awarding to suspended companies.

    If this General is in the least responsible for them – good – one down and many to go.

    • Comment by john.sensen:

      Just heard and confirmed the Heavy Lift 7 (HL7) award is in “discussions” with multiple vendors. With Agility/PWC ineligible, I guess this leaves the likes of IAP, HETCO, KGL and a few other transporters in Kuwait. Since Agility is suspended and they sold most of their fleet, there’s no chance for Tarek Sultan and his cronies on this one.

      Regarding DDKS, is DLA truly changing the requirement? How can that be? Even with a drawdown in Iraq, DDKS supports the entire region, including Afghanistan. In the short term (1-3 years) there’s ZERO chance DDKS is relocating to another country. So what gives DLA? Why no award and transition to another contractor? I think DLA is attempting to cover something up at Agility. Now with the DLA Commander relieved, this whole acquisition stinks to high heaven!

      DOJ and IG, where are you?

      • Comment by Wut up:

        To john.sensen,

        Don’t be so sure on your statement John, regarding Agility.

        I am sure they are clever enought to “off load” their fleet of trucks to another vendor and strike a “profitable” deal without involving Agility. But, it would have to be under the table type set up and Agility would still benefit. With all the “bribing” and corruption going on in Kuwait, Middle East…..I am sure they will find a way to “funnel” the cash to Agility one way or another….. These vendors have been doing business secretly with each other for years and you never know who is telling the “truth” when you are dealing with some of these “local vendors” Most of them are established and they are well connected because of “who they know” and how they conduct business here in the “Middle East” with other Arab Business Owners……don’t fool yourself, thinking Agility can not “conspire” to do business without the company being involve “directly”….they will do it “indirectly” and funnel the “profit or cash” by some other means…..They just need the “right” person or procurement officer to accept the “bribe”; with corruption and lack of “oversight” by the U.S. Government, all it takes, is another person to “tango with the music” and Agility will be in “business”…….AGAIN!!!!!!

        You’re dealing with a “Well organize, syndicate of Mafias” that’s how they are wealthy and they have the “WASTA/connections” in the Middle East…..you should know that by now, but I guess you must be “NEW” here in Kuwait…….

  6. Comment by JHowds:

    I totally agree. I think the DLA Commander being relieved definitely has something to to with the PWC/Agility issue, the attempt to sole source the Mail Porter contract to NAS (PWC/Agility), then the two unwarranted extensions of the DDKS contract to Agility.

    The only reason I can think the USG continues to award/extend a suspended contractor, Agility, is that they have something to hide.

    What is the latest on the DDKS contract? Why hasn’t it been awarded? What a fricking mess DLA has created!

    True Ms. Sparky. Not all DLA personnel. Not even most DLA personnel, but far too many are allowed to make and follow their own rules and run their own acquisitions to benefit themselves or others of their choosing. Damn it DLA! This is NOT your money. This is US taxpayer money.

    • Comment by Ms Sparky:

      That’s right. The DoD including the DLA work for the US Taxpayer.

      • Comment by JHowds:

        Still no answer or award on DDKS? What about Mail Porter? WTF DLA?!

        Ms. Sparky,

        What have you heard, if anything? Why is DLA such a fricking black hole?

        • Comment by DDKS Watch:

          DRMS did get awarded to HESTON – $ 700,000 higher than the low bidder who was equally qualified.

          The Mike Diettel saga did have a couple of positive outcomes.
          FEDBIZOPPS was in the end used properly and DRMS Contracting withing DLA has recognized that it is too easy to manipulate DoD Contractor’s bids (again – the contracting officers on white horses of integrity missing) and there is a new rule that applies to DRMS and that is they will no longer accept mailed in paper bids and no walk-in bids. Emailed bids or FEDEX’s bids on a DVD will be the only method.

          The other Agencies should look at adopting the same and especially the Army and Air Force.

          DDKS – Does anyone know of any other KGL awards in the last 12 months ? If nothing else awarded to them then you have to assume they are under a defacto suspension. Of course Agility seems to be under a defacto suspension also since the DOJ cannot get the case into court other than a case filed.

          DLA need some overhauls it seems.

          DRMS in Iraq solicitation was cancelled after Germany was forced to adopt the new bid submission rules. That was the timing – probably just canceled so they could give it to an Iraq company and skip bidding openly.

          • Comment by JHowds:

            All good points. It appears the USG has a “we don’t like you list”, but even for indicted and suspended companies (Agility) and convicted felons and probation period companies (ITT) that a sensible person would place at the top of the list, the USG continues to award and extend extremely valuable contracts to them. I can’t figure it out. Seriously. I would say it’s based soley on price, which most of the time is correct, but like you pointed out with DRMS, Heston wasn’t the LPTA bidder. I’ve given up trying to figure contracting out. Too many hidden, political, internal and external pressures to make the whole process legitimate. Where is the “most transparent government ever” Obama and Pelosi?

        • Comment by Ms Sparky:

          I can’t get in any info on this right now. Maybe they are under investigation for misconduct and making sure all their I’s are dotted and T’s are crossed. It does seem ridiculous.

          • Comment by JHowds:

            Who’s under investigation? DLA? I wish! :) Obviously since Agility (NAS) is indicted and suspended they shouldn’t be receiving a sole source for the Mail Porter contract. Multiple other companies can perform this contract.

  7. Comment by DLA Corruption Watch:

    We are waiting for your TWEET General
    No. 338-09 President Obama Order
    May 15, 2009
    General Officer Announcements
    Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announced today that the President has made the following nominations:
    http://www.dscp.dla.mil/general.asp – interesting, this comes up PAGE NOT FOUND today and can only be read in cache.

    Air Force Col. Scott D. Chambers has been nominated for appointment to the rank of brigadier general. Chambers is currently serving as the associate director, resource integration, deputy chief of staff, logistics, installations and mission support, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Pentagon, Washington, D.C.

    Then he heads up DLA Troop Support

    Brigadier General Scott D. Chambers is the Commander of the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support. DLA Troop Support annually buys over $14.5 billion worth of food, clothing, textiles, medicines, medical supplies, construction and equipment items for America’s warfighters and other customers worldwide. This position is Brigadier General Chambers’ fifth command tour over his 25-year career.

    Prior to assuming command at DLA Troop Support, Brigadier General Chambers served as Chief of Staff, Defense Logistics Agency, Fort Belvoir, Va. In this capacity, he directly supported the Director in executing the logistics and acquisition mission of DLA.

    Go to DLA Troop Support today
    http://www.dscp.dla.mil/ellis.asp
    and you see

    Richard A. Ellis
    Acting Commander
    Photo, Richard A. Ellis

    Mr. Richard A. Ellis is the Acting Commander, Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support. DLA Troop Support annually buys over $14.5 billion worth of food, clothing, textiles, medicines, medical supplies, construction and equipment items for America’s warfighters and other customers worldwide.

    He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration from Jacksonville University, a Masters in Business Administration from University of Washington and he attended the Wharton School Executive Development Program at the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Ellis is also certified Level III in Acquisition Management.

    At least he seem to know contracting. General Chambers said he was a Logistics man. That means just get it done and to hell with the Federal Acquisition Regulations. Let’s see how this Navy man does.

    Let’s see a damn award on DDKS.

    Maybe the General was canned for extending Heavy Lift 6 AND extending DDKS in 60 days. What did that cost. Only his integrity. I don’t think so. Who DLA is telling you to do these extensions. A lot of people want to know.

    Well Mr. Ellis. Do you think you can fix this mess in Kuwait and get some clean contracts in place ?

    He holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration from Jacksonville University, a Masters in Business Administration from University of Washington and he attended the Wharton School Executive Development Program at the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Ellis is also certified Level III in Acquisition Management.

    The first thing you should do is yank the warrants of Joe Bednar, Joe Solovey, and James Washington.

    Then cancel out the single sole source contracts ( 5 each ) that Mike Diettel put in place at Camp Arifjan before he left Arifjan in June to get his warrant pulled to have them go into effect at the start of FY 11.

    Did General Chambers know about those. They were worth about $ 12 Mil Triple the contract that was steered and that was canceled by DLA. Cancel them and compete them. There are 440 contractors in Kuwait ready to bid on them Mr. Ellis.

  8. Comment by DLA Corruption Watch:

    How did Diettel and General Joe Bass of ACC miss reading this on the DLA site.

    http://www.dla.mil/BusinessOps.aspx

    Solicitations for Work
    A link to Federal Business Opportunities is the single government point-of-entry for federal government procurement opportunities over $25,000.

    I wonder if the Army Contracting Command’s General Joe Bass can read that.

    He just might be the next General being told to go home.

  9. Comment by JKR:

    If he did commit a crime or develop a case of “poor judgment” the DoD will protect him. He will NEVER be charged with anything. At the very most he will be encouraged to retire. Then he will most likely go straight to work for a defense contractor making 10 times what he made for the Air Force.

    Defense contractors are just foaming at the mouth waiting for this one to retire, quit or be fired. The ink won’t even be dry on the checks before they are making him offers he can’t refuse.

  10. Comment by DLA Corruption Watch:

    Sure – General Chambers may also believe the Procurement Act doesn’t apply to him just like he believe the Federal Acquisition Regulations didn’t apply to Agility while he direct that Agility be awarded extensions while his own agency lawyer had them suspended. OF COURSE – that isn’t his agency is it. So he could care less.

    http://www.dod.gov/dodgc/defense_ethics/…/procurement_integrity.doc

    Part 2: Employment Restrictions After Leaving DoD

    2.1 SIMPLIFIED RULE: For 1 year after a designated date, you may not accept compensation from the concerned contractor on a $10 million+ DoD contract on which you performed designated services.

    2.1.1 RULE: For a period of 1 year after a designated date, former Government officials may not accept compensation from the concerned contractor on a $10 million+ DoD competitively awarded or non-competitively awarded contract if the former officials served or acted in any of the following capacities: (48 C.F.R. 3.104-3(d))

    A. Procuring contracting officers, source selection authorities, members of source selection evaluation boards, and chiefs of financial or technical evaluation teams
    Designated date:
    If you served on the date of selection, but not the date of award – Date of selection.
    If you served on the date of award – Date of award of the contact.

    B. Program managers, deputy program managers, and administrative contracting officers
    Designated date: Last date of service in those positions.
    For DoD purposes, concerned contractors are prime contractors.

    C. Officials who personally made any of the following decisions:
    1) to award contracts, subcontracts, or modifications of contracts or subcontracts, or task or delivery orders in excess of $10,000,000,
    2) to establish overhead or other rates valued in excess of $10,000,000,
    3) to approve issuance of a contract payment in excess of $10,000,000, or

    4) to pay or settle a claim in excess of $10,000,000.
    Designated date – the date of decision.

    2.1.1.2 ACompensation@ – any form of compensation provided directly or indirectly for services rendered as an employee, director or consultant.

    2.1.1.3 A$10 million+@ – determined by the following:
    -Contract, including all options – value or estimated value at the time of award;
    -Indefinite-delivery/indefinite quantity or requirements contract – total estimated value of all orders at the time of award;
    -Any multiple award schedule contract, unless contracting officer documents a lower estimate;
    -Basic Ordering Agreement – value of delivery order, task order or order;
    -Claims – amount paid or to be paid in settlement;
    -Negotiated overhead or other rates – estimated monetary value, when applied to the Government portion of the applicable allocation base.

    2.1.2 EXCEPTION: You may accept compensation from any division or affiliate of the contractor that does not produce the same or similar products or services as the entity responsible for the contract.

    2.1.2.1 Asame or similar@ – It is DoD guidance that a product or service must be Adissimilar enough@ from that under the contract to warrant use of the exception. It is not sufficient that the product or service is produced by a division on the commercial, as opposed to the government, side of the contractor. Any amount of the Asame or similar@ product or service is sufficient to trigger the compensation ban.

    2.1.3 If you do not know whether you may accept any compensation, you may make a written (signed and dated) request for advice, prior to accepting any compensation, from your agency ethics official. The ethics official must issue a written opinion within 30 days after receiving complete information as to whether the compensation would be proper or a violation. The ethics official may rely on that information, unless there is reason to believe that the information is fraudulent, misleading, or otherwise incorrect. You and the contractor may make good faith reliance on that written opinion, i.e., that neither you nor the contractor have actual knowledge or reason to believe that the opinion is based on fraudulent, misleading, or otherwise incorrect information.
    Part 3: Other Restrictions

    3.1 Other restrictions, such as those that apply to all Government employees, may also affect your activities. Your ethics counselor should explain these rules as well. If you believe that these Procurement Integrity restrictions are the only ones that will apply to you, you are mistaken.

  11. Comment by Ms Sparky:

    Here’s the email that was forwarded to me. I can’t confirm if this is actually the original email or if it’s in it’s entirety.

    I wanted to inform you that based upon substantiated allegations contained in a Department of Defense Inspector General’s Investigative Report, effective 9 December 2010, I have relieved Brigadier General Scott D. Chambers as Commander, DLA Troop Support.

    I have appointed Mr. Richard Ellis as Acting Commander, DLA Troop Support.

    Mr. Ellis’ appointment as Acting Commander will remain in effect until further notice.

    VADM Alan S. Thompson
    Director

  12. Comment by Anonymous:

    There could be many reasons why a Commander might be relieved of command. Do not get tunnel vision while trying to root out the truth. Things are not always as they appear. Especially in the Military.

    Has any considered there may be “personnel issues” that have compounded the General’s troubles.

    Keep an open mind.

  13. Comment by Ms Sparky:

    Here’s another great article on this from MilitaryCorruption.com

    http://www.militarycorruption.com/bgchambers.htm

  14. Comment by Dj:

    According to the Air Force Times:

    The allegations involved “personal misconduct” and were not connected to “past or ongoing” business operations at the supply center, McCaskill said.

    • Comment by Ms Sparky:

      Thank you for that tip. I hadn’t seen the article. I updated both posts I’ve done on General Chambers. This could explain some of the interesting search words that have been used recently in connection to General Chambers that have landed readers on MsSparky.com.

  15. Comment by Ms Sparky:

    I have my doubts about this one. Not that he didn’t sexually harass employees. But since when did the DoD place such high importance on their leaders professional integrity and ethics. And since when was harassing your subordinates not a right earned by officers. I think this has been elevated publicly to divert attention from the disasters of the DLA. If they wanted him out of the DLA without using his performance or lack there of as the reason just have the sexual harassment victims (which I’m sure are legitimate) come forward and publicize that.

    As someone told me the other day, it’s the old slight of hand thing….watch this hand while the other is picking your pocket.

  16. Comment by Find the Truth:

    It is interesting that a Defense department
    “wracked with fraud, waste and abuse” quickly relieved a General with a distinguished 25+ year career swiftly, covertly and permanently.

    Look for the Truth and you will find the deception. There is more to this story than is being reported…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *