Military office probed by Pentagon |

Military office probed by Pentagon

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon’s chief investigator is looking into allegations that one of the military’s major command headquarters inflated budget proposals at the Pentagon’s request to hide $20 million from Congress, officials said Monday.

The Pentagon inspector general’s office is conducting a preliminary inquiry into the allegations, which were reported to a Pentagon hot line for anonymous tips on fraud and abuse, the officials said. The audit will determine whether a full-scale investigation is launched.

Marine Corps Lt. Col. Rose-Ann Lynch, a Pentagon spokesman, said Pentagon officials are conducting an audit at U.S. Special Operations Command headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla. She said she had no other details, including when the hot line complaint was made.

The St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times, which was first to report on the charges, said it obtained documents which show Special Operations Command officials divided the $20 million among six projects in their 2003 budget so the money would not attract attention from congressional overseers.

The plan, as described in the documents obtained by the Times, called for Special Operations Command to pad its proposed budget by $20 million so the money could be used later by the Pentagon for other purposes. It is not yet clear what other purposes the Pentagon had in mind.

Federal law requires that money appropriated by Congress be used only for purposes authorized by Congress.

The Times report quoted from an e-mail sent by Special Operation Command comptroller Elaine Kingston to colleagues Feb. 11, 2002.

She wrote that a person in the Pentagon comptroller’s office had asked if her office would “park” $40 million. “They needed an answer in five minutes,” Kingston wrote. “The agency they had it parked with had a problem and couldn’t do it.” She added that her office determined it could not “park” $40 million but found six programs where they could add $20 million.

In her e-mail, Kingston advised colleagues that in budget briefings for congressional aides they should include the inflated figures but not highlight or discuss them.

Special Operations programs that already were getting spending increases were chosen to add the extra millions so they would not stand out when reviewed by Congress, Kingston wrote.

Special Operations Command is responsible for special operations forces for all the military services. Its 2003 budget is $4.9 billion.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.