Former owner of DoD contractors pleads guilty to exporting military blueprints to India

The U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ) has announced that the former owner of two New Jersey defense contracting businesses admitted that she conspired to send sensitive military technical data to India.

Justice Dept. sealHannah Robert of North Brunswick, New Jersey, pleaded guilty on April 1, 2015 to conspiracy to violate the Arms Export Control Act by exporting to India military technical drawings without prior approval from the U.S. Department of State.

“Hannah Robert circumvented the U.S. government and provided defense technical drawings in violation of the Arms Export Control Act,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin.  “We will continue to pursue and hold accountable those who abuse their access to sensitive defense information.  I would like to thank all of the special agents, prosecutors and other personnel whose work led to the guilty plea in this case.”

“Hannah Robert conspired to send to another country thousands of technical drawings of defense hardware items and sensitive military data,” said U.S. Attorney Fishman.  “She was also charged with manufacturing substandard parts that were not up to spec, in violation of the contracts she signed with the Department of Defense.  Enforcement of the Arms Export Control Act is critical to the defense of our country.”

According to documents filed in this case and statements made in court:

  • In June 2010, Robert was the founder, owner and president of One Source USA LLC, a company located at her then-residence in Mount Laurel, New Jersey, that contracted with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to supply defense hardware items and spare parts.  In September 2012, Robert opened another defense company, Caldwell Components Inc., based at the same address.  Along with a resident of India identified only as “P.R.,” Robert owned and operated a third company located in India that manufactured defense hardware items and spare parts.
  • From June 2010 to December 2012, Robert conspired to export to India defense technical drawings without obtaining the necessary licenses from the U.S. Department of State.  The exported technical drawings include parts used in the torpedo systems for nuclear submarines, military attack helicopters and F-15 fighter aircrafts.

In addition to United States’ sales, Robert and P.R. sold defense hardware items to foreign customers.  Robert transmitted export-controlled technical data to P.R. in India so that Robert and P.R. could submit bids to foreign actors, including those in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), to supply them or their foreign customers with defense hardware items and spare parts.  Neither Robert nor P.R. obtained approval from the U.S. Department of State for this conduct.

On Aug. 23, 2012, P.R. e-mailed Robert requesting the technical drawing for a particular military item.  P.R.’s e-mail forwarded Robert an e-mail from an individual purporting to be “an official contractor of the UAE Ministry of Defence,” and who listed a business address in Abu Dhabi, UAE.  The UAE e-mail requested quotations for a bid for the “blanket assembly” for the CH-47F Chinook military helicopter and listed the “End User” for the hardware item as the UAE Armed Forces.  Later that same day, Robert replied to P.R.’s e-mail, attaching, among other things, the electronic file for an export-controlled technical drawing titled “Installation and Assy Acoustic Blankets, STA 120 CH-47F,” to be used in the Chinook attack helicopter.

In October 2010, Robert transmitted the military drawings for these parts to India by posting the technical data to the password-protected website of a Camden County, New Jersey, church where she was a volunteer web administrator.  This was done without the knowledge of the church staff.  Robert e-mailed P.R. the username and password to the church website so that P.R. could download the files from India.  Through the course of the scheme, Robert uploaded thousands of technical drawings to the church website for P.R. to download in India.

On June 25, 2012, P.R. e-mailed Robert, stating: “Please send me the church web site username and password.”  The e-mail was in reference to both an invoice to and a quote for a trans-shipper known to Robert as a broker of defense hardware items for an end user in Pakistan.  This individual used a UAE address for shipping purposes.  Later that day, Robert replied to this e-mail, providing a new username and password for the church website so that P.R. could download the particular defense drawings.

On Oct. 5, 2012, Robert e-mailed P.R. with the subject line “Important.”  The e-mail referenced the Pakistan trans-shipper, a separate potential sale to individuals in Indonesia and the church website: “Please quote [the Pakistan trans-shipper] and Indonesia items today[.] [Dr]awings I cannot do now as if the size exceeds then problem, I should be watching what I upload, will do over the weekend[.]  Ask me if you need any drawing . . . . Talk to you tomorrow . . . .”

There were also quality issues with the parts that Robert provided to the DoD.  After the DoD in October 2012 disclosed that certain parts used in the wings of the F-15 fighter aircraft, supplied by one of One Source USA’s U.S. customers failed, Robert and P.R. provided the principal of their customer with false and misleading material certifications and inspection reports for the parts.  These documents, to be transmitted to the DoD, listed only One Source USA’s New Jersey address and not the address of the actual manufacturer in India, One Source India.  As a result of the failed wing pins, the DoD grounded approximately 47 F-15 fighter aircraft for inspection and repair, at a cost estimated to exceed $150,000.

Until November 2012, Robert was an employee of a separate defense contractor in Burlington County, New Jersey, where she worked as a system analyst and had access to thousands of drawings marked with export-control warnings and information on this defense contractor’s bids on DoD contracts.  Robert misrepresented to her employer the nature and extent of her involvement with One Source USA in order to conceal her criminal conduct.

Count six of the superseding indictment – conspiracy to violate the Arms Export Control Act – is punishable by a maximum potential penalty of five years in prison and a fine of $250,000.  As part of her plea agreement, Robert must pay $181,015 to the DoD, which includes the cost of repair for the grounded F-15s.  Robert also consented to a forfeiture money judgment of $77,792, which represents the dollar value of Robert’s fraudulent contracts with DoD.

The Arms Export Control Act prohibits the export of defense articles and defense services without first obtaining a license from the U.S. Department of State and is one of the principal export control laws in the United States.

Source: http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-owner-defense-contracting-businesses-pleads-guilty-illegally-exporting-military

Government spent less on contracts in 2014 than it did the previous year

Federal spending on government contracts decreased in 2014, with the Defense Department seeing the biggest overall decline, according to a March 3 report from Govini, a business consulting company for government contractors.

Govini, each year, releases a federal scorecard that tallies and analyzes data on federal contract spending and agency performance.

The scorecard, which was released to reporters, shows that overall contract spending from the federal government was down 4 percent in 2014 compared to 2013.

The DoD saw the greatest overall decrease in dollars spent, with a nearly $9 billion year-over-year decrease in both the Navy and Army.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/report-government-spent-less-contracts-2014-it-did-previous-year/2015-03-05

Pass-through contracts for war zones need monitoring, GAO finds

Three agencies working overseas that together spent $322 billion on contracting in fiscal 2013 need to improve guidance given contracting officers to reduce risk of overpayments, a watchdog found. Two-thirds of that money is funneled through prime contractors to smaller contractors who perform most of the work.

Use of pass-through contracts—under which at least 70 percent of funding is routed to subcontractors—requires new analysis and guidance before they are awarded, the Government Accountability Office noted in a Dec. 22, 2014 report.

“Concerns remain that the government could overpay contractors that provide no, or little, added value for work performed by lower-tier subcontractors,” GAO wrote.

The watchdog cited requirements imposed on the Defense and State Departments and the U.S. Agency for International Development under the 2007, 2009 and 2013 versions of the National Defense Authorization Act to reduce waste in purchasing goods and services primarily in Afghanistan.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.govexec.com/defense/2014/12/pass-through-contracts-war-zones-need-monitoring-gao-finds/102024/

GAO says federal agencies need better oversight of contractor-operated systems

Congressional investigators found that several federal agencies are not consistently overseeing security and privacy measures for information systems operated by contractors.

In reviewing six selected agencies, the Government Accountability Office said the agencies generally established security and privacy requirements and had plans to assess the effectiveness of contractor-operated systems. But five of the agencies were inconsistent in such reviews.

For example, the GAO report  released Sept. 9, 2014 said Transportation Department officials responsible for system testing didn’t evaluate whether seven contractor employees had the required background investigation.

“When they did so in response to our audit, they found that three of them did not,” GAO investigators said. “Officials stated that they subsequently removed system access rights for the three contractor employees until their background investigations had been completed.”

Besides DOT, GAO also reviewed the Energy, Homeland Security, and State departments as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and Office of Personnel Management.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/gao-says-federal-agencies-need-better-oversight-contractor-operated-systems/2014-09-10 

 

Contractor suspensions and debarments doubled over the last 4 years

The number of contractor suspensions and debarments government-wide have doubled since fiscal 2009 because agencies have developed better management tools and a more active referral process, a May 21 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report says.

Agencies can use suspension and debarment to exclude individuals, contractors and grantees from receiving future contracts, grants and other federal assistance due to various types of misconduct.

A previous GAO report found agencies issuing the most procurement related suspensions and debarments shared common characteristics: dedicated staff, detailed policies and procedures, and an active referral process.

Many agencies that previously faltered in rooting out contractor misconduct have taken the lead from those stronger agencies, the latest report says.

Keep reading this article at: http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/gao-contractor-suspensions-and-debarments-have-doubled-over-last-4-years/2014-05-22