Report | Sept. 26, 2012

Wholesale Accountability Procedures Need Improvement for Redistribution Property Assistance Team Operations

DODIG-2012-138

What We Did

We determined whether the Army had accountability over major end items of equipment (Class VII) turned-in at Camp Virginia, Kuwait. From October 18 through December 18, 2011, Camp Virginia Redistribution Property Assistance Team (RPAT) officials relieved units of accountability for approximately 2,300 vehicles and 24,600 items. This is one in a series of reports on RPAT operations in Kuwait.

What We Found

The Army did not have adequate controls over the accountability of items turned-in at the Camp Virginia RPAT yard. Specifically, Camp Virginia RPAT contractors did not use automated procedures to obtain wholesale accountability, properly upload items into the visibility system, or account for all Communications-Electronics Command items at Camp Virginia. This occurred because Army Sustainment Command (ASC) and Army Contracting Command-Rock Island (ACC-RI) officials did not update the performance work statement, and ACC-RI and Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA)-Kuwait officials did not appoint a contracting officer’s representative until 5 months after the contractor began operations. In addition, the quality assurance representative and contracting officer representative’s audits of the contractor did not provide assurance that the contractor met contract requirements.

As a result, of the 297 reviewed items turned-in at the Camp Virginia RPAT yard, 84 items, valued at approximately $6.0 million, were not accounted for; 149 items, valued at approximately $33.0 million, were not accounted for timely; and 14 vehicles, valued at approximately $5.5 million, had multiple records in the inventory systems. Inaccurate or delayed accountability of items in the inventory systems does not accurately represent the Army’s assets and increases the vulnerability for loss or theft.

What We Recommend

Among other recommendations, we recommend that the Commander, ASC, conduct a reconciliation of all items turned-in at Camp Virginia, and that the Executive Director, ACC-RI, determine whether any remedial actions are appropriate for not meeting contract requirements. We also recommend that the Executive Director, ACC-RI, and the Commander, DCMA-Kuwait, determine whether any administrative actions against contract oversight officials are appropriate, and that the Executive Director, ACC-RI, update the performance work statement to include specific RPAT requirements.

Management Comments and Our Response

ASC and DCMA International comments were responsive to the recommendations, and no additional comments are required. ACC-RI comments on Recommendations 2.a-c were responsive or partially responsive and met the intent of the recommendation; therefore, no additional comments are required. Lastly, ACC-RI comments to Recommendation 2.d were not responsive and comments to the final report are required.