Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Senate Votes to Extend Sweeping Bush Era Surveillance Powers
- Revealed: How the FBI Coordinated the Crackdown on Occupy
- The Financial Elite's War Against the US Economy
- The Only Way Left to Beat GOP Fanatics: Call Their Bluff and Go Over the Fabricated "Cliff"
- New Year’s Revolution: Connecting the Dots, Coming Together and Fighting Like Hell
- The Financial Elite's War Against the US Economy
- Revealed: How the FBI Coordinated the Crackdown on Occupy
- Senate Votes to Extend Sweeping Bush Era Surveillance Powers
- New Year’s Revolution: Connecting the Dots, Coming Together and Fighting Like Hell
- The Only Way Left to Beat GOP Fanatics: Call Their Bluff and Go Over the Fabricated "Cliff"
Popular content
Today's Top News
Audit: KBR Must Trim Iraq Work Force or Face Fines
WASHINGTON - The Army's primary support contractor in Iraq is being warned by Pentagon auditors to cut its work force there or face nearly $200 million in penalties for keeping thousands too many on the payroll.
In this May 20, 2009, file photo, KBR, Inc. President and Chief Executive Officer William Utt answers questions during an interview with The Associated Press in Washington. (AP Photo/J. David Ake) The Houston-based KBR Inc., responsible for everything from mail and laundry to housing and meals, has increased employee levels while U.S. troops steadily leave the country after more than six years of war, the audit says. As a result, the U.S. government is paying far more in labor costs in Iraq than it should as military resources are shifted to Afghanistan.
"Each day that passes without taking action results in continued overstaffing and inefficiency," the report from the Defense Contract Audit Agency says.
The Oct. 26 audit, obtained by The Associated Press, opens a window into a behind-the-scenes battle over KBR's billing and management practices. The company provides crucial battlefield services under a $33.8 billion, 10-year deal signed in 2001.
There have been serious disagreements between KBR and defense auditors, who have challenged billions of dollars in charges as questionable. And KBR's critics, many of them Democrats on Capitol Hill, have accused the company of gouging the government during a time of war instead of being a responsible steward of public money.
The report from the audit agency, the military's first line against waste and fraud, is sure to reinvigorate KBR's detractors. The audit also reveals a confrontational approach that a congressional oversight committee has said the agency uses too sparingly when dealing with contractors.
Last week, director April Stephenson was forced out of her job following unflattering reviews of the agency's performance. Stephenson, whose last day as director is Friday, is scheduled to appear Monday at a hearing held by the independent Commission on Wartime Contracting on the management of contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.
KBR officials reviewed the audit before it was finalized and their responses are included in the 26-page report. They disagree with many conclusions, saying the company has planned to cut employee levels in Iraq. But these efforts have been slowed while KBR waited for formal guidance from the military on the drawdown, they said.
In an e-mailed statement, KBR spokeswoman Heather Browne said the company is reviewing the final audit and is closely engaged in the military's drawdown planning. She said the company's work in Iraq "is being conducted in the ever-changing environment of a war-zone which brings its own daily challenges and priority tasks."
But KBR's planning consists of a series of "disjointed processes" and weak accounting procedures when a detailed, forward-looking strategy is needed for dealing with a reduction in forces announced nearly a year ago, the report says. A small company might be excused for such a shortcoming, it says, but KBR should not be.
"A large corporation with nearly 17,000 direct-hire employees in Iraq can not effectively communicate a consistent strategy at all levels of management without a formal written plan," the audit states.
KBR had 17,034 employees in Iraq in January 2008, when there were about 160,000 American forces there to quell a growing insurgency, the audit says. Yet as of Sept. 1, there were 17,095 KBR employees in Iraq even though troop levels had dropped to about 130,000, bases had closed and the services KBR provides were being scaled back.
Current plans call for the number of U.S. troops in Iraq to fall to 50,000 by August 2010. All American forces are scheduled to be out of the country by December 2011.
Although KBR already should have made significant reductions, the report proposes giving KBR until Jan. 1 to put in place a plan that would trim 2,857 employees identified in the audit as excess. Each full-time KBR employee earns about $8,425 a month in pay and benefits, the audit says, so the employee cuts will produce nearly $193 million in savings between the first of January and the end of August, the audit says.
The auditors say if KBR does not make the recommended changes or take even more aggressive steps, the agency will challenge future costs for the excess staff as being "unreasonable," which means the company may not be paid by the government.
The final call, however, on whether to implement the audit's recommendation and withhold any payments rests with the contract managers at Army Sustainment Command in Rock Island, Ill.
The command said Friday it has not completed its analysis of the audit. Lee Thompson, a senior command official, is scheduled to testify at the contracting hearing Monday.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

5 Comments so far
Show AllHow long can it take KBR to make $200,000 back from scamming? Whatever the details, it's obvious that fining one company once or a dozen times makes little difference in the profitability of what's probably the world's largest scam.
From the POV crime and deterrence, is a "fine" a penalty or a price adjustment?
If I'm a KBR exec, and I have swoggled a bonus by my advantages in the corporate hierarchy and by defrauding a mostly-willing government, how am I not still ahead when the government fines the corporation?
These excesses have been public news, albeit not on primetime, for half a decade or so. And it's like the pork barrel was news then. It's not like we do not understand the escape of culpability that incorporation involves: it is a major reason for incorporating.
Criminal prosecutions could and should be taken.
Further, the cultural idea that one "must" do something because one's "boss" demands it needs to change.
However, bosses pass prosecutable actions to underlings and the government, the broader prosecuting body, is more or less always complicit, so little or nothing effective will happen.
Large bonuses and humongous salaries in themselves constitute bribes to lure individuals act against the commons. Their very existence not only makes psychopathy profitable, it makes it requisite for entry to the class of people that make public decisions.
Should bonuses or large bonuses and outsize salaries be banned? That might change CEO's. But it would do little to control owners.
Nationalizing businesses has helped in some cases, but has had severe problems in others.
We might change incorporation itself. What besides public agreement suggests that central organizations should be ownable by capital? Why not a law that subjects all corporate holdings and decisions to the overview of unions, guilds, or some similarly public or distributed body?
Those of you who oppose both nationalization of business and centralized corporate control of public life, how would you structure an organization or network to do business according to the will of its stakeholders?
"The company provides crucial battlefield services under a $33.8 billion, 10-year deal signed in 2001."
A. No private company should be providing ANY battlefield services.
B. KBR (Halliburton) is Mr. Cheney's private pick for looting the Public treasury and should be treated accordingly.
C. This is NOT Capitalism at work....this is Corruption and Robber Baron Capitalism, that has still not been addressed by this administration.
D. A million dollar fine say is not too detrimental when your profit is sdtill a billion dollars after the fine. No pain, no gain.
The US military should have gone with a different bidder for these contracts....oh yeah, there WAS NO BIDDING ON THESE CONTRACTS. (aka Dick Cheney's retirement plan)
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
Corporate "fines" are a convenient means to provide all the rest of their (criminal) activities with an A-OK "Good-Housekeeping Seal of Approval" legal status.
Fines are meaningless. The Corporation writes them off against profits. Corporate profits are taxed at a lower rate.