KBR Still Dealing with Lawsuits From LOGCAP III

November 19, 2012 | Justice Abroad

The United States has filed a civil complaint against Kellogg, Brown & Root Services Inc. (KBR) and First Kuwaiti Trading Company for submitting inflated claims for the delivery and installation of trailers to house troops in Iraq, the Justice Department announced today. KBR is headquartered in Houston. First Kuwaiti, a KBR subcontractor, is based in Kuwait.

KBR is the Army’s primary contractor for logistical support in Iraq. On Dec. 14, 2001, t he Army awarded KBR the LOGCAP III contract, the third generation of contracts under the Army’s Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) since the program’s inception in the 1980s. LOGCAP III required KBR to provide logistical support in the military theater whenever and wherever it was needed. Support included services such as transportation, dining services, facilities management, maintenance and living accommodations for United States and coalition forces. LOGCAP III was originally awarded to Brown and Root Services, a division of KBR. The United States has paid KBR tens of billions of dollars for logistical support services since awarding the contract.

Continue Reading ▼

The government’s complaint arises from the Bed Down Mission, a push to replace the tents used to house soldiers during the early days of the war with trailers, also called living containers. KBR performed many of the services required under LOGCAP III, including the Bed Down Mission, through foreign and domestic subcontractors. According to the complaint, KBR awarded a subcontract to First Kuwaiti on Oct. 16, 2003, to supply, transport and install 2,252 living containers at Camp Anaconda in Iraq for about $80 million. The government alleges that First Kuwaiti was required to complete delivery and installation of the trailers at Camp Anaconda by Dec. 15, 2003. The government further alleges that in July 2004, First Kuwaiti presented two claims to KBR contending that government-caused delays in providing military escorts for convoys into Iraq entitled the company to an increase in the contract price to cover its increased costs. According to the complaint, KBR agreed to pay First Kuwaiti an additional $48.8 million and passed that cost on to the United States.

"We depend on companies like KBR to provide valuable noncombat services to our military such as housing and feeding our troops,” said Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. “We will en sure that contractors live up to their promises, and are not permitted to profit at the expense of the taxpayers at home who are supporting our men and women in uniform.”

The government’s complaint alleges that First Kuwaiti knowingly inflated its crane and truck costs, among other items, and misrepresented the cause of its delays. The complaint further alleges that KBR charged these costs to the United States knowing they were improper.

“When dealing with the government, just like dealing with anyone else, it’s important to give an honest account,” said Jim Lewis, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of Illinois. “The facts alleged in the complaint indicate that KBR and First Kuwaiti did not provide an honest accounting.”

The United States is suing KBR and First Kuwaiti under the False Claims Act. The act holds persons responsible for presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for gov ernment money or property they know are false. The statute entitles the government to recover three times its damages, plus a $5,500 to $11,000 civil penalty for each false claim.

The United States is also suing KBR under the antifraud section of the Contract Disputes Act and for breach of contract. The Contract Disputes Act establishes liability for contractors who certify that they are entitled to money under a contract, if any part of their claim is unsupported due to a misrepresentation of fact or fraud. Under the Contract Disputes Act, the government may recover the false and unsupported part of the claim, plus its costs of review.

This matter was investigated by the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division; the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of Illinois; and the Defense Contract Audit Agency, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and the Defense Contract Management Agency of the Department of Defense. The claims asserted against KBR and First Kuwaiti in the United States’ complaint are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.

The lawsuit was filed in the Central District of Illinois and is captioned United States v. Kellogg, Brown & Root Services, Inc., et al.

The United States has filed a civil complaint against Kellogg, Brown & Root Services Inc. (KBR) and First Kuwaiti Trading Company for submitting inflated claims for the delivery and installation of trailers to house troops in Iraq, the Justice Department announced today. KBR is headquartered in Houston. First Kuwaiti, a KBR subcontractor, is based in Kuwait.

KBR is the Army’s primary contractor for logistical support in Iraq. On Dec. 14, 2001, t he Army awarded KBR the LOGCAP III contract, the third generation of contracts under the Army’s Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) since the program’s inception in the 1980s. LOGCAP III required KBR to provide logistical support in the military theater whenever and wherever it was needed. Support included services such as transportation, dining services, facilities management, maintenance and living accommodations for United States and coalition forces. LOGCAP III was originally awarded to Brown and Root Services, a division of KBR. The United States has paid KBR tens of billions of dollars for logistical support services since awarding the contract. http://www.justice.gov

Fluor False Claim Lawsuit Department of Energy (DOE)

November 15, 2012 | Justice Abroad

The government has intervened in a lawsuit against Fluor Hanford Inc. and its parent company, Fluor Corporation (collectively Fluor), in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, the Justice Department announced today. Fluor Hanford, Inc. is a subsidiary of Fluor Corporation, a Texas-based corporation that provides a wide variety of services to government and private customers. The False Claims Act lawsuit was originally filed by whistleblower Loydene Rambo, a former employee of Fluor.

Between 1999 and 2008, Fluor had a prime contract with the Department of Energy (DOE) to provide a wide variety of security, maintenance and operational services at the DOE’s Hanford Nuclear Site in southeastern Washington State. As part of its contract, Fluor was responsible for managing and operating the Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response (HAMMER) Center, a federally-funded facility established to train Hanford site workers as well as first responders and law enforcement personnel.

Continue Reading ▼

The whistleblower complaint alleges that, as a condition of receiving its DOE contract, Fluor was required to certify that it would not use federal funds for lobbying activities. The complaint further alleges that between 2005 and 2008, Fluor ignored these restrictions and used DOE funding to lobby Congress and executive branch officials for more funding for HAMMER. The complaint alleges that Fluor, and two lobbying firms hired by Fluor and paid using DOE funds, Secure Horizons LLC and Congressional Strategies LLC, lobbied members of Congress and executive branch agencies to include additional funds for HAMMER in agency appropriations. The United States intervened in the lawsuit with respect to Fluor, but declined to intervene with respect to additional defendants, including Secure Horizons LLC and Congressional Strategies LLC.

“The taxpayer money Congress allocated for this program was for training federal emergency response personnel and first responders, not to lobby Congress and others for more funding,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. “When public funds are misused, as alleged in this case, the Justice Department will work to restore them to the Treasury.”

“The allegations set forth in the whistleblower complaint are troubling and very serious,”said Michael C. Ormsby , U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington. “My Office will continue to work with the Justice Department to ensure a just resolution of these alleged violations of federal law.”

Ms. Rambo’s lawsuit was filed under the False Claims Act, which authorizes private parties to sue on behalf of the United States and share in any recovery. The act authorizes the United States to intervene in such a suit and take over the responsibility for litigating it. The United States has informed the court that it intends to file its own complaint in the action.

The case is being handled by the Civil Division of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Washington, with the assistance of the Department of Energy Office of Inspector General.

Ms. Rambo’s lawsuit is captioned U.S. ex rel. Rambo v. Fluor Hanford, et al., cv-11-5037. The claims asserted in this case are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. http://www.justice.gov

Triple Canopy Allegedly Billed U.S. for Security Guards Who Did Not Meet Contract Requirements

November 1, 2012 | Justice Abroad

The United States has filed a complaint against a Virginia-based contractor alleging that the company submitted false claims for unqualified security guards under a contract to provide security in Iraq, the Justice Department announced today. The company, Triple Canopy Inc. is headquartered in Reston, Va.

In June 2009, the Joint Contracting Command in Iraq/Afghanistan (JCC-I/A) awarded Triple Canopy a one-year, $10 million contract to perform a variety of security services at Al Asad Airbase – the second largest air base in Iraq. The multi-national JCC-I/A was established by U.S. Central Command in November 2004, to provide contracting support related to the government’s relief and reconstruction efforts in Iraq.

Continue Reading ▼

The government’s complaint alleges that Triple Canopy knowingly billed the United States for hundreds of foreign nationals it hired as security guards who could not meet firearms proficiency tests established by the Army and required under the contract. The tests ensure that security guards hired to protect U.S. and allied personnel are capable of firing their AK-47 assault rifles and other weapons safely and accurately. The government also alleges that Triple Canopy’s managers in Iraq falsified test scorecards as a cover up to induce the government to pay for the unqualified guards, and that Triple Canopy continued to bill the government even after high-level officials at the company’s headquarters had been alerted to the misconduct. The complaint further alleges that Triple Canopy used the false qualification records in an attempt to persuade the JCC-I/A to award the company a second year of security work at the Al Asad Airbase.

“For a government contractor to knowingly provide deficient security services, as is alleged in this case, is unthinkable, especially in war time,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. “The department will do everything it can to ensure that contractors comply with critical contract requirements and that contractors who don’t comply aren’t permitted to profit at the expense of our men and women in uniform and the taxpayers at home who support them.”

“We will not tolerate government contractors anywhere in the world who seek to defraud the United States through deliberate or reckless conduct that violates contractual requirements and risks the security of government personnel,” said Neil H. MacBride, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

The government’s claims are based on a whistleblower suit initially filed by a former employee of Triple Canopy in 2011. The suit was filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provision of the False Claims Act, which allows private persons to file suit on behalf of the United States. Under the act, the government has a period of time to investigate the allegations and decide whether to intervene in the action or to decline intervention and allow the whistleblower to go forward alone.

This matter was investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia; the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division; and the Army Criminal Investigative Command (CID) and Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) of the Department of Defense.

The claims asserted against Triple Canopy are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability. The government is not aware of any injuries that occurred as a result of the alleged misconduct.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Alexandria, and is captioned United States ex rel. Badr v. Triple Canopy, Inc.