SECTION III THE TAILHOOK ASSOCIATION A. Background As described in our September 1992 report, the Tailhook Association is a private organization composed of active duty, Reserve and retired Navy and Marine Corps aviators, Defense contractors and others. The annual Tailhook Symposium began as a reunion of naval aviators in 1956. In 1963, the annual reunion moved from San Diego to Las Vegas where it was expanded to include a number of seminar sessions relating to naval aviation, as well as other professional development activities. We questioned attendees about the scheduled symposium events and reviewed material, including videotapes, taken throughout the symposium. A copy of the agenda for Tailhook 91 is at Appendix A. From all reports and appearances, the symposium events were professionally presented and of educational value to people involved in naval aviation. No instances of impropriety were found to have occurred at official symposium functions or in the exhibit area. In addition to the educational forums, the Association, in conjunction with various Defense contractors, hosted formal dinners, lunches and various sporting events (a golf outing and a 10 kilometer run) during the convention. One of the dinners centered around the Association's annual presentation of awards to aviators who had distinguished themselves in various aspects of naval aviation. On Friday and Saturday nights, the dinners featured speakers of interest to the Association's members. The Chief of Naval Operations and the Secretary of the Navy were the respective speakers at the two dinners at Tailhook 91. As with the educational events, we found no instances of impropriety at any of the scheduled functions. B. Professional Aspects of Tailhook 91 In order to provide the Tailhook Association and the Navy the opportunity to present their views of the professional aspects of Tailhook 91, we invited them to provide formal comment for use in this report. Both organizations availed themselves of that opportunity and submitted brief discussion papers (Appendices B and C, respectively). The single, most talked about topic with regard to the Tailhook 91 formal agenda was the Flag Panel. That event attracted more attendees than any other symposium function and did not require registration as a symposium attendee. Contrary to some media accounts, we found that the Flag Panel was conducted in a responsible and professional fashion. The Flag Panel was comprised of eight Navy admirals and one Marine Corps general. Officers attending the event addressed a variety of questions to members of the Flag Panel who responded in a generally straightforward manner. Questions relating to the possibility of women flying combat aircraft elicited strong reactions from attendees. A female officer asked the panel whether women would be allowed to fly aircraft in combat. Her question drew a slight reaction from some members of the audience in recognition that this was a sensitive issue. Vice Admiral (VADM) Richard M. Dunleavy, who fielded the question and first displayed some unease in addressing the issue, responded by saying that the Navy would do as Congress directed, indicating that women could be flying aircraft in combat within a year thereafter. Witnesses told us that VADM Dunleavy's response was not acceptable to either side in the argument. Those who supported the concept of women in combat felt that VADM Dunleavy had not shown sufficient support for their position, whereas those attendees who rejected the proposed role of women in combat believed that VADM Dunleavy, as Assistant Chief of Naval Operations (Air Warfare), had not properly defended the interests of male aviators. One male officer in the audience stood up and forcibly stated his personal objections to women in combat. In response to the officer's statement, the audience erupted into loud cheers and applause. Although some witnesses opined that the "mood" of the attendees changed for the worse as a result of those exchanges, we found insufficient evidence to support the theory that male officers later turned their frustrations over this policy matter into violent acts against women on the third floor. -l3 Perhaps most important in this discussion is that, although the Flag Panel drew the largest crowd of any symposium function, the crowd was estimated to have been no more than 1,500 to 1,600 people, including contractor and civilian personnel. That is especially telling when compared with the fact that, even by conservative estimates, overall attendance at Tailhook 91 was placed at more than 4,000 people. Our investigation disclosed the vast majority of attendees did not register for the conference and did not attend symposium functions. Rather, many officers merely attended the social aspects of Tailhook. Parties were held on the third floor, where virtually all the assaults and most other improprieties occurred. It is especially pertinent to note that of the 117 officers found to be involved in misconduct -14, only 26 appeared as named registrants on the Tailhook Association list of symposium attendees. C. Relationship Between the Navy and the Tailhook Association The Tailhook Association has depended on substantial support from the Navy and from contractors doing business with the Navy. Senior aviation leaders told us they viewed the Association as an integral part of naval aviation. Thus, they felt justified in lending Navy support required by the Association, especially with regard to the annual symposium. The relationship between the Navy and the Tailhook Association dates back to the first Tailhook reunion. Historically, Tailhook Association membership has been comprised of naval aviators and those with interests in or otherwise associated with naval aviation. Active and retired naval aviators serve on the Association's Board of Directors and a senior naval aviator, usually stationed at Naval Air Station (NAS) Miramar, is normally appointed as the Association's President. Other Association leadership positions such as Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer are generally held by active duty, Reserve or Retired aviators. The Tailhook Association advised us that, as of August 1992, there were 15,479 individual and 10 corporate members. -15 The Navy support of the Tailhook Association is apparent in the Association's former occupancy of Government-owned office space located at NAS Miramar. The Association headquarters occupied 2,500 square feet of office space at NAS Miramar on a rent-free basis from July 1984 to December 1987 and again from May 1990 until December 1991. The rent-free arrangement was severed when the Secretary of the Navy withdrew Navy support for the Association in October 1991. The decision resulted from public disclosures of misconduct by naval officers at Tailhook 91. The Association is currently located in private office space in the San Diego area. Plans to construct a Tailhook Association headquarters building funded by the Association at NAS Miramar are currently being held in abeyance. The Navy authorized and supplied transportation by military aircraft in support of Tailhook 91. According to the Naval Air Logistics Office (NALO), the aircraft, primarily C-9s, transported approximately 1,730 attendees to and from Las Vegas. The NALO advised us that 37 aircraft missions were flown, including 17 missions solely dedicated to Tailhook and 20 missions that had been combined with other, non-Tailhook requirements. Those flights originated at various military air bases throughout the United States. The NALO reported that the missions required approximately 325 flight hours. We determined this resulted in a cost of nearly $400,000 for fuel and contract maintenance. -16 Other transport aircraft, as well as small training planes and fighter jets, were used by some officers as transportation to Las Vegas. In at least one instance, officers rented a private airplane and charged the cost to the Navy under the guise of a "̉training" flight. The Naval IG investigation concluded that subordinate commands believed that Navy guidelines, as well as current and historical instructions from the NALO regarding Tailhook technically permitted the use of aircraft in all cases where an officer was traveling on travel orders, whether those orders were funded or unfunded. -17 Nonetheless, the Naval IG properly criticized the Navy for allowing such widespread use and the apparent and perceived abuses that accompanied that use. Our investigation also disclosed many instances in which attendees were transported to Tailhook 91 by C-9 aircraft despite the fact that they had been issued no orders whatsoever. Since 1974, the Navy has transported officers and even civilian staff, spouses and friends to Tailhook conventions using Navy aircraft. An exception occurred in 1975, after a Government Accounting Office inquiry criticized the Navy for failing to adequately control and oversee the use of such flights. -18 The Secretary of the Navy denied attendees the use of military aircraft for Tailhook purposes. Attendance at that year's convention was greatly diminished and use of military aircraft in support of Tailhook resumed in 1976. Our investigation disclosed that, in addition to military aircraft, other official vehicles such as buses and vans were used to transport attendees to Las Vegas and that enlisted personnel were occasionally the drivers of those vehicles. To our knowledge, fewer than 10 of the Navy or Marine Corps officers who attended Tailhook 91 were required to take annual leave for that purpose. Additionally, countless duty hours were spent by suite administrators and Association committee members during the months prior to the convention in preparation for the 3-day event. The Association assumed most of the costs relating to transportation, accommodations and, in some instances, per diem for approximately 63 committee members, 50 of whom were active duty or Reserve officers. To the best of our knowledge, the Navy did not require active duty officers to take annual leave for the day or two prior to the symposium opening to attend meetings in preparation for the convention. The symposium portion of the convention was supported in large part by the Navy. Although various Defense contractors also participated as presenters in some of the educational seminars, the Navy was the primary source of seminar speakers and played an integral role in determining the agenda for each year's symposium. The Navy provided funded orders for seminar speakers and military personnel who were given awards at the symposium. We found no evidence of any effort by the Navy to require actual registration for the symposium in order to attend the social functions at Tailhook. _____________________ Notes 13 However, one female aviator reported that, immediately following the Flag Panel, she was verbally harassed by male aviators who expressed to her their belief that women should not be employed in naval aviation. They also accused her of having sexual relations with senior officers while deployed on carrier assignment. 14 Includes indecent assault, indecent exposure, conduct unbecoming an officer and failure to act in a proper leadership capacity. 15 Corporate membership numbered 52 just prior to Tailhook 91 but declined dramatically over the ensuing year as a result of adverse publicity arising from Tailhook 91. 16 The costs cited do not include pay and allowances for flight crews and local maintenance expenses. 17 The topic of aircraft use was addressed by the Naval IG in his report on Tailhook dated April 29, 1992. Directives used by the Naval IG in determining the propriety of operational support airlift use in support of Tailhook included DoD Directives 4500.43 and 4515.13-R and OPNAVINST 4630.25B and 4631.2B. 18 Comptroller General Report titled Alleged Use of Military Aircraft for Other Than Official Purposes DoD, Report Number B-156819 dated September 1975.