I care about the truth coming to light “You Can’t Handle the Truth”
Deepwater ICGS Tips
Peter Stinson, founder of CGBlog and an Organizational Performance Consultant with the U.S. Coast Guard wrote a piece in support of Michael DeKorts false claims act suite against Deepwater and ICGS. Stinson’s position appears to be getting to the truth, his statement almost seems like a line from a A Few Good Men,
I, for one, don’t care about success or failure; I care about the truth coming to light.
The reality is that the truth also embroils a number of current and former Coast Guard Flag Officers including the current Commandant of the Coast Guard. Stinson is one of few employees inside Coast Guard willing take a public stand and we applaud him for it. While Stinson has been a strong supporter of Admiral Thad Allen in the past, and we suspect in the future, the reality is that Allen has had a role in Deepwater/ICGS for nearly 7 years. Any truth that may come to light would have his name connected to it if for no other other reason than accountability.
Stinson compares DeKorts battle against Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to David vs. Goliath. Anyone who has followed the Deepwater debacle knows that the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General has lumped Coast Guards leadership into their own definition of “Goliath.” Congress as well has called for Admiral Allen to be more forthcoming in releasing information to the Hill on Deepwater. DHS OIG has reported its own battle at getting to some of the documents related to Deepwater.
Stinson’s post is a great read and gives some insight into reader thoughts at CGBlog.
From Stinson’s Post:
One of the things in any David vs. Goliath battle is that the David is always at a disadvantage. Always. Mr. DeKort realizes this and has issued an ” open call for assistance.” The truth is out there, but one David aligned against the Goliath will not, in today’s world of complex organizations, generally succeed. I know there are readers to this blog who want to see Mr. DeKort fail. I, for one, don’t care about success or failure; I care about the truth coming to light. And, clearly, Goliath and his partners don’t want truth to rear its ugly head. If they did, everyone would be totally forthcoming; and history shows us that is far from reality.
I’m new to this site, but this made my day. Funny.
P.S. The bubbas at CGBlog.org linked me up with you. I don’t think they like this site much, but they helped me find a new source. Bravo!
I don’t think anyone can handle this truth. If Allen wasn’t knee deep in this, the attorney’s would let him talk.
Bollinger doesn’t think the Coast Guard is to blame for the 123s – like Northrop does.
From the Bollinger v Northrop claim
Page 7
27 NGSS, through its sole negligence, delivered late, ill-defined specifications and drawings to Bollinger. Bollinger needed this information in a timely manner to efficiently perform the Subcontract.
28 Bollinger relied exclusively upon NGSS to delievr timely and accurate information. NGSS failed to meet its obligation.
Maybe the Coast Guard could speak out and defend themselves on this?
House passes Deepwater refom bill with escape clauses for Deepwater
House passes Deepwater reform bill – with no teeth
http://coastguardnews.com/house-unanimously-pas...
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/07/coa...
(See Nick Schwellenbach’s comment)
While this legislation is a step forward it unfortunately comes up significantly short. There are clauses in the legislation that permit the Coast Guard to avoid using the measures should they deem it necessary – specifically for the Deepwater project. This in effect allows the LSI’s to continue. As this legislation was originally created due to the Deepwater issues these escape clauses render much of the legislation’s intentions mute. Additionally the Coast Guard has stated they will not be free of the LSI’s until 2011. that is plenty of time for the rest of the NSCs and the new OPCs contracts to be let. They total more than ½ of the entire DW budget. Since the LSI’s will still be around they will have a great deal to say about who wins that work. Maybe themselves?
Also, with regard to Rep Cummings concern about “every single tax dollar”. The Coast Guard is still owed a $100 million refund from the contractors. Not only have the contractor’s refused to pay the refund but they have formally blamed the Coast Guard for the 123 problems, due to their supposed abuse of the boats, and they have suggested they will seek legal recourse against the Coast Guard for canceling the program. The contractor’s have and are continuing to run roughshod over the government entities who are supposed to protect us from this kind of thing. As for thee refund recovery there is currently an FCA case in the federal court system that is trying to recover these funds and hold the contractor’s available. The contractor’s have submitted motions to dismiss. If they prevail the outcomes I mentioned above will most likely come to fruition.
The CGBlog.org vs. Coastguardreport.org scuffle is a microcosm of the greater difficulties that the Coast Guard has.
Very true Erikson. The “us vs. them” mentality which permeates CG culture – which seems to include throwing their own “Guardians” under the bus who seek true transparecy – will be the services ultimate downfall.
Why is there a CBblog vs. Report issue? Apples and oranges. What are you talking about.
Hello — My wife and I operate a small marine services company that operates Pilot boats, tugs and barges. Five years ago, we purchased a Pilot boat from New York and brought it back to the Great Lakes for service. The previous owners did not keep up the Federal Documentation. We tried to renew it shortly after receiving the boat, but made little headway. I was diagnosed with cancer and battled the disease with surgery, chemo and radiation over the last four years. The paperwork effort got sidetracked. I got back on my feet recently and went back to work operating the boat. The local USCG called us a couple weeks ago and charged us with operating a boat in commercial service without a proper Certificate of Documentation. We met with a CWO and he wrote us a Notice of Violation with a penalty of up to $11,000.00 . The actual proposed fine is $2,500.00 . With this being a miserable year, business wise, this will be a considerable financial hardship for us. We have the option of “Declining” the penalty and dealing with a Hearing Officer somewhere. Has anybody dealt with a situation like this and could offer us some idea of how to deal with this? In over 15 years of operation we have never had a violation of any kind. Any information or advice would be most appreciated! E-mail: seaservice@centurytel.net