"The eyes and ears of the Commanding General"
The Command Inspector General promotes readiness, integrity, efficiency, effectiveness, and credibility through impartial and independent inspections, assessments, inquiries, and investigations. The Inspector General’s (IG) office also serves as the Designated Request Mast Review Authority for Marines and Sailors conducting Request Mast applications to the Commanding General.
FRAUD, WASTE, ABUSE of authority, & MISMANAGEMENT HOTLINE
Marine Corps Logistics Command’s HOTLINE reporting process provides a direct means by which personnel may report suspected cases of Fraud, Waste, Abuse of Authority and Mismanagement (FWAM) without fear of retribution.
FWAM may be reported via the following
on the web
If the desire is to file a complaint with your local Inspector General:
To ensure that your complaint reaches the Marine Corps Logistics Command's Inspector General, please select "Logistics Command" and not "MCLB Albany" from the drop-down menu. The selection of "MCLB Albany" may delay the processing of complaints.
CORRECT - "Logistics Command"
INCORRECT - "MCLB Albany"
Command Inspector's General Office - email@example.com
HOTLINE (confidential voicemail) - (229) 639-5555
Still have questions? Give the local Marine Corps Logistics Command IG team a call - (229) 639-5967 / (229) 639-6212
U.S. POSTAL MAIL
Command Inspector General
Marine Corps Logistics Command
814 Radford Blvd
Building 3700, Room 151 A/D
Albany, Ga 31704-0201
What are examples of FWAM?
FRAUD - Intentional deception
WASTE - Expenditure disproportionate to benefit
ABUSE OF AUTHORITY - Capricious exercise of power
MISMANAGEMENT - Action/inaction creating significant risk or impact
Matters Inappropriate for Inspector General Inquiry/Investigation
The Command Inspector General will refer inquiries and investigations of certain types of issues and allegations to other organizations.
MAJOR CRIMES: The Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) has authority to investigate allegations that Department of the Navy (DoN) civilian or military personnel have committed major crimes, which are defined in SECNAVINST 5520.3B (Criminal and Security Investigations) as those offenses for which imprisonment for more than one year may be imposed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) or federal, state, or local laws (such crimes often are referred to as felonies).
Although IG organizations often investigate standards of conduct violations, many of the standards are derived from Federal felony statutes (see, for example, Office of Government Ethics Regulations at 5 CFR 2635.401 through 503 for a discussion of conflicts of interest based on a criminal statute, 18 USC 208, and conflicts based on agency regulations). In those cases, NCIS would be apprised of the allegations before the IG investigation proceeds.
When NCIS has reason to believe the cognizant United States Attorney will not prosecute a case, it may decline jurisdiction in order to permit an IG investigation to proceed. When a matter appropriate for an IG investigation must be referred to NCIS for investigation pursuant to SECNAVINST 5520.3B, the IG will log the case into its tracking system and monitor the progress of the NCIS investigation. Should the NCIS investigation fail to establish a basis for criminal prosecution, NCIS may return the action to the IG for such further investigation as may be necessary to permit the responsible authority to determine whether non-criminal (judicial or administrative) action is appropriate.
CRIMES COMMITTED BY MILITARY PERSONNEL: A request for an IG inquiry or investigation may arrive in the form of a complaint alleging that a military member has committed an offense punishable under the UCMJ. When such cases indicate the commission of a major crime within the jurisdiction of NCIS, upon consultation with the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA), the case will be referred to NCIS for investigation. Whenever NCIS declines to investigate the matter, the IG organization may next consider referring the allegation to the alleged violator's commander for action.
A referral is appropriate when the allegation is not one that would normally be the subject of an IG investigation. When a matter appropriate for an IG investigation could constitute an offense punishable under the UCMJ, close coordination with the convening authority is made to ensure the IG investigation does not interfere with any potential or actual judicial action.
ADVERSE ACTIONS: Military and civilian personnel often seek IG assistance when faced with adverse action for which another more specific remedy or means of redress is available. For example, many adverse personnel actions taken against civilian employees are able to be appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) or subject to resolution through agency grievance procedures. Non-judicial punishments and court-martial actions under the UCMJ are subject to the appellate process within the military judicial system.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY CASES: Complaints of discrimination should be addressed through the command EO/EEO process. In some cases, sexual harassment may be appropriate for IG inquiry, but all allegations of sexual assault should be referred to NCIS or civil authorities, as appropriate. When allegations of discrimination are mixed with other allegations appropriate for IG inquiry, they will be split up. When the issues and allegations are so intertwined as to make separation inefficient, consultation with EO/EEO investigative personnel is made in order to decide how to proceed.
CORRECTION OF FITNESS REPORTS: The Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) is the appropriate authority to review allegations of improper fitness reports and other requests for correction of records. Allegations of reprisal for military whistleblowing should be referred to the Inspector General immediately.
CHAIN OF COMMAND: Many requests for assistance are most appropriately handled within the chain of command. In these cases, the issues are referred by the IG to the command for information and/or action.
REDRESS OF WRONGS: The fact that an individual believes that he or she has been wronged by "the system" is not itself sufficient to justify an IG inquiry or investigation. IGs are not a substitute for the chain of command and other dispute resolution mechanisms, and should not be used for that purpose unless there is evidence those systems are being misused or are malfunctioning. Complaints from individuals seeking relief from adverse personnel or disciplinary actions, unfavorable findings in EO/EEO investigations, or other matters for which the chain of command provides a review mechanism, will be accepted for IG inquiry or investigation, only when coupled with a non-frivolous issue or allegation that the chain of command is unable or unwilling to address the matter fairly and impartially.
OUTSIDE ORGANIZATIONS: Some violations of law or regulations must be investigated by specific organizations outside of the Marine Corps. For example, allegations of Hatch Act violations (18 U.S.C. 594 et.seq: Partisan Political Activities) must be referred to the Office of Special Counsel. The Department of Labor is responsible for investigation of many matters relating to wages and hours of work. Some outside organizations have special or unique powers to help. For example, the Office of the Special Counsel can seek a stay of a pending personnel action it believes is based on a prohibited personnel practice. Complainants need to be aware of these special circumstances so they may make an informed choice among the investigative organizations authorized to address their concerns. When an outside organization such as the Office of Special Counsel initiates an investigation into a matter that is already the subject of an IG investigation, it may be appropriate to suspend the IG investigation pending the outcome of the external investigation.
HOTLINE tips for filing a complaint with the Command Inspector General
The pointers listed below will help you understand the complaint process and what the Command Inspector General can do for you.
1. BE SURE THERE IS A PROBLEM: Personal pet peeves loom large in the minds of some people, but there is little the Inspector General can do about a pet peeve. If the cooks consistently turn out lousy chow, that's an issue. If someone doesn't like the menu for one particular meal, that's a peeve.
2. GIVE THE CHAIN OF COMMAND A CHANCE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM: The chain of command consists of the people who can solve problems. Your congressional representative or Inspector General can help, but they must ultimately work with the chain of command.
3. TRY OTHER APPROPRIATE REMEDIES: The Inspector General is always an option to contact, but it is strongly encouraged to use whatever low-level remedies that are available.
4. BE TOTALLY HONEST WITH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL; ONCE THE INSPECTOR STARTS INVESTIGATING, THEY WILL KNOW SOON ENOUGH IF THE TRUTH IS TWISTED: A lot of time and effort will be wasted if you are not honest in your complaint.
5. KEEP IN MIND THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S REGULATORY AND STATUTORY LIMITS: The Inspector General cannot change a regulation just because it does not suit you. However, the Inspector General can recommend changes to regulations that are determined to be inappropriate or out of date.
6. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL IS NOT A COMMANDER; THEY CAN ONLY RECOMMEND, NOT ORDER: You may get upset because nothing seems to happen as a result of your complaint. Keep in mind that the Inspector General can advise the commander, but cannot order him or her. There may be good reasons why the recommendation was not acted upon.
7. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL CAN ONLY RESOLVE A CASE ON THE BASIS OF PROVABLE FACT: If the Inspector General cannot find concrete proof, they cannot resolve the case in your favor. Just because you say your supervisor violated the rules does not make it a proven fact.
8. DO NOT EXPECT IMMEDIATE RESULTS FROM AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION OR EVEN A COMPLETED ONE: Some people assume that the commander has intervened and suppressed the Inspector General if they do not hear the results of the investigation immediately. Inquiries and investigations take time, especially when there are multiple ones received at the same time.
9. BE PREPARED TO TAKE "NO" FOR AN ANSWER: Do not assume that a negative answer from the Inspector General is wrong just because it seems vague. If you are certain the answer is wrong, and if you have some additional evidence to support that certainty, the case may be reconsidered. If, on the other hand, you are merely unhappy because the report does not go in your favor, it is pointless to continue presenting the IG with the same complaint and the same evidence.
After careful consideration of these pointers, you will be able to determine whether you have an issue or allegation that is appropriate for the Inspector General. You will also save yourself and others a lot of time and avoid unnecessary frustration.
Filing A Complaint
Please read the below items prior to filing a formal complaint with the Command Inspector General.
1. AVENUES OF REDRESS: In most situations, law or regulations provide uniformed service members and civilian personnel a remedy or means of redress. All personnel are strongly encouraged to exhaust these venues including their chain of command, before the Command Inspector General provides assistance. Examples of such are the Equal Employment Opportunity Office, Human Resources Department, etc.
2. CONTENT OF COMPLAINT:
To assist in the review of the complaint, provide as much of the following information as possible:
Who...Service Member's or employee's full name, rank/grade, and duty station
What...Specific wrongdoing and why you believe the activity was misconduct, to include the rule, regulation or law you think they violated
Where...Location where the wrongdoing occurred
When...Specific dates and times
How much...Estimated dollar loss
Why and how...Describe why and how you believe the individual(s) perpetrated the offense
Don't forget to include:
3. WEBSITE TO SUBMIT A COMPLAINT: Hotline.USMC.mil
4. CONFIDENTIALITY: You may request to remain "confidential." Every effort will be made to protect your identity from disclosure; however, we cannot guarantee confidentiality since disclosure may be required during an investigation or in the course of corrective action. If this is so, we will tell you.
5. ANONYMITY: You also have the right to remain anonymous. If you choose to remain anonymous, we will not be able to advise you of the status or outcome of your complaint. Anonymous complaints are given the same attention as non-anonymous complaints. However, it may be more difficult to determine whether an investigation is warranted without additional information. Absolute anonymity is not guaranteed.
6. INVESTIGATIVE MERIT: All complaints received will be reviewed to determine if an inquiry or investigation is warranted. A complaint, in and of itself, does not guarantee an inquiry or investigation.
7. WHO CAN FILE A HOTLINE COMPLAINT:
Any military or civilian member may file an Inspector General Hotline complaint.
Anyone, including civilians with no Marine Corps or Department of the Navy affiliation, may file complaints with the Office of the Inspector General regarding Fraud, Waste, Abuse of Authority, Mismanagement, or reprisal.
For additional information about reporting hotline complaints, please reference the Inspector General of the Marine Corps and Department of Defense Inspector General pages.
Request mast guide
What is Request Mast?
Request Mast includes both the right of the member to personally talk to the Commanding Officer, normally in person, and the requirement that the Commanding Officer consider the matter and personally respond to the member requesting mast.
Request Mast provides a member the opportunity to communicate not only with his or her immediate Commanding Officer, but also with any superior Commanding Officer in the chain of command up to and including the member's immediate Commanding General. Request Mast also provides Commanding Officers with firsthand knowledge of the morale and general welfare of the command.
Who can request mast?
All Marine Corps members should first make every effort to address offending behavior directly with the party responsible, verbally or in writing. You can also discuss the matter with your immediate supervisor and request assistance. If you are unable to resolve the issue informally, you have the right to Request Mast.
Can a Commanding Officer deny a Request Mast application?
A Commanding Officer may deny a Request Mast application if there is another specific avenue of redress available to the member. The Commanding Officer should explain to the member why he/she denied the Request Mast application and, if appropriate, explain the procedure the member should follow to resolve the issue.
The Commanding Officer may also require the member to go through the Chain of Command prior to approving Mast.
What are some issues that are not appropriate for Request Mast?
Generally, a military member can speak to their Commanding Officer about any subject; however, the member cannot use Request Mast for the following reasons:
Request Mast should not be used as a means of attacking the proceedings, punishment, or findings and sentence resulting from a disciplinary action brought under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
Request Mast may not be used to harass, avoid duty, or intentionally interfere with the Commanding Officer's ability to carry out the functions and mission of the command.
Request Mast cannot be used if the member is being processed for involuntary separation or if the subject of the complaint is an ongoing Article 138, UCMJ, or Article 1150, Navy Regulations.
How do I submit a Request Mast application?
Complete the Request Mast Application form (NAVMC 11296 Rev 5-19) and submit it through the chain of command to the Commanding Officer.
*to access fillable PDF download form first*