SAF/IG Dismisses Complaint 6/15/2011

Today received notice from Mr Vincent Debono of the SAF/IG office that the complaint I filed on 9 May had been dismissed on 9 June 2011. The letter conveying the information is below. Please compare it to the IG complaint I filed and you'll think they were dealing with two separate subjects...the SAF/IG response doesn't begin to deal with any of the IG complaints!

-------------------------

here is the detail page of my IG complaint. Five allegations are made...do you see any answered?
-------------------------

Note: The complaint was escalated to a DOD/IG complaint effective 18 June 2011.

(from the IG form:)

To the Secretary of Defense Inspector General:

"I submitted an IG complaint to the Secretary of the Air Force on 9 May 2011 and it was rejected 9 June 2011 with the recommendation that the issues I raised be brought to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the AF Historical Office. 

I do not know what rule, law or regulation this may have violated but it isn't the purpose for which the SAF/IG is established.

None of the specifics were addressed in Mr. Debono's response to the complaint. The issues raised were detailed on page 2 of the complaint, and the names of numerous Air Force officers, general officers and enlisted personnel were provided as persons having knowledge of the situation. As best I can determine, none of them were interviewed relative to the allegations. 

I am concerned that the allegations I raised concerned actions by multiple Air Force commands, JAG officers, general officers and the General Services Administration, yet the IG complaint was referred to a base-level IG for resolution.

In addition, while I did not raise the issue of Agent Orange exposure of our aircrews needing to be brought to the attention of the Department of Veterans Affairs for resolution, it would be appropriate for the Secretary of the Army to provide a determination to the DVA that the contaminated aircraft flown by crews between 1972-1982 constitute, together, an Agent Orange exposure site, as multiple Air Force tests clearly indicate. 

Finally, in the response to Mr Debono's email announcing the dismissal of the allegations, I asked if the Secretary of the Air Force's office could at least notify the aircrews involved of the possibility of their exposure to dioxin, an issue obviously of concern to them regarding their health and that of their families. Mr. Debono's response, on behalf of the Secretary of the Air Force, was:


"Maj Carter, 
Unfortunately we do not have the ability to identify or notify the individuals in the categories you mention. "

Vincent G. DeBono, Jr., DAFC

Chief, Case Management Division 

Office of the Secretary of the Air Force

Secretary of Air Force Decides Against Informing Dioxin-Exposed Aircrews

In the recent dismissal of our SAF/IG complaint, the IG recommended we turn to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Air Force Historical Center regarding my formally filed allegations regarding... 
-questionable conduct by JAG officers
-questionable decisions by general officers, the Air Force Medical Service and the Air Force Material Command.


So I believe I have been told to resolve the issues of:
-Air Force force management
-Air Force JAG ethics
-Air Force weapon system contamination
-Air Force general officer actions
-Air Force aircrews
-Air Force Medical Corps officer actions-
-Air Force MAJCOM command oversight and
-Air Force treatment of retired members
...by trying to talk the VA into doing something. Get real.


Further, when I asked SAF/IG for help notifying aircrews who'd been exposed to dioxin flying the C-123K/UC-123K between 1972-1982 so the crews and maintainers could take whatever measures deemed appropriate regarding their own health and that of their families, the Secretary's office responded:


"Maj Carter,
Unfortunately we do not have the ability to identify or notify the individuals in the categories you mention.




Vincent G. DeBono, Jr., DAFC
Chief, Case Management Division
Office of the Secretary of the Air Force
Office of the Inspector General
Complaints and Resolution Directorate
DSN: 425-1555
COMM:  (703) 588-1555

-----Original Message-----
From: Rustysilverwings [mailto:rustysilverwings@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 3:20 PM
To: Debono, Vincent G CIV USAF SAF/IGQ
Subject: Re: Air Force Aircrews--Response from National Institutes of Health re: 
Agent Orange exposure

Dear Mr. Debono, 

Thank you for your email today letting me know the results of my complaint to 
the SAF/IG. I take it from your response closing the complaint that the 
conclusion on each of the allegations is that they are either unfounded, not 
issues of law or instruction, or are the responsibility of other agencies.

I do remain concerned about the JAG memo recommending information about dioxin 
contamination be "kept within official channels" and the question about whether 
purchasers of the contaminated aircraft, both domestic and foreign governments, 
have or have not been notified of their toxicity. If these are issues best addressed by addressing them to the Department of Veterans Affairs as you suggest, I'll 
certainly do that. If the Department of Veterans Affairs is responsible for the 
action of Air Force officers in their decision (or failure) to notify aircrews 
of exposure to toxic chemicals. I shall ask them why that was not done as the 
various Air Force reports about the contamination began surfacing.

Thank you for your thorough investigation of these issues which were so 
important to me and to the men and women I flew with for ten years. At least, is there any action the SAF can take to help notify aircrews from the time period involved as to their exposure to dioxin? I'm greatly worried the VA will not be particularly interested in pursuing the idea.

Respectfully,



Wesley T. Carter, Major, USAF Retired