>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:16 2024
Received: by 10.35.37.18 with SMTP id p18mr1258222pyj.1177002439188;
Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <ber..._at_netaxs.com>
Received: from newmx3.fast.net (newmx3.fast.net [209.92.1.33])
by mx.google.com with SMTP id a28si476190pye.2007.04.19.10.07.18;
Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 209.92.1.33 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ber..._at_netaxs.com)
Message-Id: <4627a1c7.747c8af6.0a4f.ffffd2dfSMTPIN_ADDED_at_mx.google.com>
Received: (qmail 21016 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2007 17:07:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO DBYYRR51.netaxs.com) ([209.60.100.26]) (envelope-sender <ber..._at_netaxs.com>)
by newmx3.fast.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for <tscm-..._at_googlegroups.com>; 19 Apr 2007 17:07:16 -0000
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:07:19 -0400
To: TSCM-L2006_at_googlegroups.com
From: Ed <ber..._at_netaxs.com>
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {1467} expert on classified communications systems
In-Reply-To: <c7d.c03196e.3358f1f1_at_aol.com>
References: <c7d.c03196e.3358f1f1_at_aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
yeah, i noticed that at the end ;-)
At 12:25 PM 4/19/2007, you wrote:
>""I would also like to thank Mr. James Atkinson, who is an expert on
>classified communications systems for donating hundred of hours of
>his time to assist our Oversight and Investigations staff with an
>analysis of the certification records. ""
>
>
>http://transportation.house.gov/news/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=163
>
>Link content below
>
>
>
>Chairman Oberstar Previews Serious Management Failings by U.S. Coast Guard
>
>
>
>
>
>Statement of the Honorable James L. Oberstar Hearing On
>Investigating Compliance with the Requirements of the Deepwater Contract
>
>
>
>April 18, 2007
>
>By Mary Kerr (202) 226-4496
>
>When I assumed the Chairmanship of the Committee on Transportation
>and Infrastructure last January, I announced that I would place a
>very strong emphasis upon oversight and investigations of the
>programs within this Committee's jurisdiction. I have always been
>committed to a strong oversight function, and I was Chairman of the
>Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee on our predecessor
>Committee, the House Committee on Public Works and Transportation in
>the 99th - 100th Congresses.
>
>When I was chosen as Chairman of our Committee this year, I
>increased the investigative staff of the Committee, and I urged all
>the Subcommittees to step up their oversight activities. The record
>of this committee's work and the record number of hearings and
>legislation produced by this Committee in less than four months is
>unprecedented and speaks volumes about that commitment. Of all the
>issues that have come before the Committee on Transportation and
>Infrastructure in the 110th Congress, none is more disturbing than
>the failures of the Coast Guard's Deepwater acquisition program.
>
>Our Oversight and Investigations staff has been conducting an
>in-depth investigation over the last three months of the program to
>convert 110-foot patrol boats to 123-foot boats and to modernize
>their electronics suites. What we have uncovered in our
>investigation is far more disturbing than anything previously
>disclosed by other investigations.
>
>Of course, some major problems in the program have been widely
>disclosed. Four years after the Coast Guard began Deepwater to
>replace or upgrade virtually all of its ships, planes and
>helicopters, we know that eight 110 foot patrol boats have been
>found un-seaworthy and were essentially rendered useless by a poorly
>designed hull extension to 123 feet.
>
>We know that plans to produce a new class of 147-foot ships have
>been shelved after a new hull design was found to be flawed. We know
>that serious questions have been raised regarding the structural
>integrity of the new National Security Cutter, and whether it can be
>expected to meet its projected lifetime in service. We know that
>numerous problems have swelled the cost of the fleet renewal program
>from $17 billion to more than $24 billion. We know that the Coast
>Guard's ability to fulfill its mission has been compromised, and
>much needed assets will not be available. The service has been
>forced to cut back on patrols and, at times, ignore tips from other
>federal agencies about drug smugglers. The difficulties will only
>grow more acute in the next few years as old boats fail and
>replacements are not ready.
>
>However, what we have learned in our investigation is even more
>disturbing. In today's hearing, we will hear charges of serious
>management failings in contract execution and oversight among all
>the parties involved in Deepwater.
>
>We will not pass final judgment on these charges until we have heard
>the response of the contractor and the Coast Guard. Without
>prejudging our final conclusions, I should point out that the
>testimony we will hear suggests that serious problems were known
>very early in the program and that many warnings were delivered by
>very courageous individuals involved in the program from the earliest days.
>
>Many of these warnings were consciously rejected or not taken
>seriously by various levels of management. I want to commend those
>individuals who were courageous enough to put their jobs on the line
>at the time by trying to do the right thing, and have assisted us in
>understanding what happened. In particular, I'd like to thank
>Michael DeKort, Robert Braden and Scott Sampson for doing the right
>thing. I would also like to thank Mr. James Atkinson, who is an
>expert on classified communications systems for donating hundred of
>hours of his time to assist our Oversight and Investigations staff
>with an analysis of the certification records.
>
>The Coast Guard seems to be following a "lessons learned" approach
>to the disasters that occurred in the 110/123 conversion program. We
>hope that today's hearing will also make a major contribution to
>this process. We saw evidence of that yesterday, when Admiral Allen
>announced significant changes to the Deepwater contract.
>
>Only time will tell whether these changes are aggressive enough to
>recover from the errors of the past. But, one thing is certain -- we
>will be watching every step of the way.
>
>
> ###
>
>
>
>
>----------
>See what's free at <http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>AOL.com.
>
>
>
>
>----------
>See what's free at <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>AOL.com.
>
>
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:16 CST