Alissa Tabirian
NS&D Monitor
7/24/2015
Two Navy officials who faced allegations of lobbying for Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine replacement funding have been cleared of breaking the law by the Department of Defense Inspector General (DoD IG), according to statements from DoD IG and Navy spokespeople obtained by NS&D Monitor and sister publication Defense Daily this week.
Admiral John Richardson, director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, and Rear Admiral Joe Tofalo, director of undersea warfare, were accused of lobbying in their remarks at a Naval Submarine League symposium last October. Richardson, who is nominated to become chief of naval operations, told symposium attendees to encourage members of Congress to support the Ohio-class replacement program, according to media coverage from the event. Tofalo, nominated to become commander of Naval Submarine Forces, offered the Navy’s help with similar efforts.
The Navy is currently facing the problem of securing funding for 12 vessels it plans to purchase to replace the current Ohio-class fleet, set to be retired by 2040. Cost projections for the replacement program range from $80 to $92 billion, and funding has been a point of contention in the Fiscal Year 2016 National Defense Authorization Act between those seeking to establish an account separate from the Navy’s regular shipbuilding account to fund the vessels and others who argue that such a fund would financially hurt other military services from which it would draw support. The comments made by Richardson and Tofalo about the need for congressional backing for the program’s funding sparked accusations from the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), a watchdog organization, that taxpayer funds were being used to lobby Congress for a congressional appropriations matter.
DoD IG ultimately cleared both officials after POGO requested an investigation into possible Anti-Lobbying Act violations. “DoD IG did not substantiate the allegation,” DoD IG spokeswoman Bridget Serchak said in a statement. “The DoD IG determined, based on the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel’s interpretation of the Anti-Lobbying Act, that the admirals’ brief references to Congress in their speeches and Rear Admiral Tofalo’s limited distribution of the Integrated Undersea Future Strategy for Industry to authorized recipients did not violate the Anti-Lobbying Act,” Serchak said.
Rear Admiral Dawn Cutler, Navy Chief of Information, said in a statement that “the Navy requested the [DoD IG] review his remarks and provide feedback at the earliest opportunity.” This review “found no wrong doing on the part of ADM Richardson,” Cutler said. She echoed Navy Secretary Ray Mabus’ statement in support of Richardson’s nomination, in which he proclaimed “full trust and confidence” in Richardson. “Admiral Richardson has the highest regard for both the spirit and letter of regulations concerning appropriate language during speeches and public appearances, and in no way intended to cross a line asking for support in an inappropriate manner,” Cutler said.
In response to DoD IG’s findings, Danielle Brian, executive director of POGO, released a statement challenging the legitimacy of what it called a “lackluster” investigation. “Unfortunately we’re not surprised to find that the [DoD IG] did not hold senior Pentagon officials accountable,” Brian said. “It appears that, yet again, the [DoD IG’s] Office limited the scope of its inquiry in order to clear Richardson and Tofalo,” she said, noting that the investigation “failed to look into how these actions would be a violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act.”
