The Twenty-Fourth Annual Major Frank B. Creekmore Lecture

Author:Rodney A. Grandon
Position:Member of the Senior Executive Service, and serves as the Deputy General Counsel for Contractor Responsibility, Department of the Air Force, Washington, D.C.
Pages:228-245
 
FREE EXCERPT
228 MILITARY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 218
THE TWENTY-FOURTH ANNUAL MAJOR FRANK B.
CREEKMORE LECTURE1
RODNEY A. GRANDON*
I appreciate the introduction. And it is indeed my pleasure to be here
today in front of my colleagues, and many of my friends.
Indeed, it is a pleasure to be here today to talk about a subject that
has over the years become increasingly important to me as a government
contracts practitioner: fraud remedies. Fraud remedies, for most of my
career, were nothing but a footnote. This is probably the case for most
acquisition professionals in this room and certainly for our clients. Fraud
was a subject I did not have to deal with in my day-to-day acquisition-
related duties. Not my problem. And, that is absolutely wrong.
I want to do a survey. How many in this room, by a show of hands,
have in their portfolio procurement fraud remedies, or any aspect of
procurement fraud remedies? Okay. Actually, it is a trick question. As
acquisition professionals, each of you has in your portfolio
responsibilities to deal with procurement fraud. And that really is the
takeaway I have for you today. You are a part of the team, whether you
recognize it or not.
An effective procurement fraud remedies program is captured in
Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 7050.05.2 That instruction
* This is an edited transcript of a lecture delivered on November 15, 2012, by Mr.
Rodney A. Grandon, to attendees of the 2012 Government Contract and Fiscal Law
Symposium, members of the staff and faculty of The Judge Advocate General’s Legal
Center and School, their distinguished guests, and officers of the 61st Judge Advocate
Officer Graduate Course at The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School,
Charlottesville, Virginia.
Rodney A. Grandon is a member of the Senior Executive Service, and serves as the
Deputy General Counsel for Contractor Responsibility, Department of the Air Force,
Washington, D.C. In that capacity, he is the Air Force’s Suspending and Debarring
Official, and is responsible for providing legal advice concerning contractor
responsibility matters to senior Air Force and Department of Defense (DoD) leadership,
as well as leading the Air Force's Procurement Fraud Remedies Program. Before
assuming his present duties, Mr. Grandon served as the Chief of Procurement Law and
Chief Trial Attorney for the United States Coast Guard.
1 The Major Frank B. Creekmore Lecture was established on January 11, 1989. The
Lecture is designed to assist The Judge Advocate General’s School in meeting the
educational challenges presented in the field of government contract law.
2013] TWENTY-FOURTH CREEKMORE LECTURE 229
requires each of the military services to have a central coordinating
activity that is responsible for communicating, coordinating, and
controlling fraud remedies within that specific military service; in fact,
more broadly, with external stakeholders to include agency leadership,
our friends in the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any other individuals
or organizations affected by a given set of circumstances.
Instruction 7050.05, unfortunately—and I know there are a lot of
folks from civilian agencies out there—has not been exported effectively
to the civilian agencies. I recently came out of the Coast Guard within
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). When I arrived at the
Coast Guard, I was stunned to discover that not only was there no
effective procurement fraud remedies program, there was not a
procurement fraud remedies program in existence at all. There was no
effective program or process for suspensions and debarments, even
though at the time the authority for suspensions and debarments rested
with the head of the contracting activity in the Coast Guard. The DHS
has come under a lot of heat recently from the Hill and from the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) along with many other
civilian agencies for not taking these responsibilities seriously.
Frank Creekmore graduated from Sue Bennett College, London, Kentucky, and from
Berea College, Berea, Kentucky. He attended the University of Tennessee, School of
Law, graduating in 1933, where he received the Order of the Coif. After graduation, Mr.
Creekmore entered the private practice of law in Knoxville, Tennessee. In 1942, he
entered the Army Air Corps and was assigned to McChord Field in Tacoma, Washington.
From there, he participated in the Aleutian Islands campaign and served as the
Commanding Officer of the 369th Air Base Defense Group.
Captain Creekmore attended The Judge Advocate General’s School at the University
of Michigan in the winter of 1944. Upon graduation, he was assigned to Robins Army
Air Depot in Wellston, Georgia, as a contract termination officer for the southeastern
United States. During this assignment, he was instrumental in the prosecution and
conviction of the Lockheed Corporation and its president for a $10 million fraud related
to World War II P-38 Fighter contracts. At the war’s end, Captain Creekmore was
promoted to the rank of major in recognition of his efforts.
After the war, Major Creekmore returned to Knoxville and the private practice of law.
He entered the Air Force Reserve in 1957 and returned to active duty in 1952. Major
Creekmore remained active as a reservist and retired with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel
in 1969. Mr. Creekmore died in April 1970.
2 U.S. DEPT OF DEF., INSTR. 7050.05, COORDINATION OF REMEDIES FOR FRAUD AND
CORRUPTION RELATED TO PROCUREMENT ACTIVITIES (4 June 2001).

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP