S. HRG。110-39打击战争亵渎：我们是否正在进行调查和起诉伊拉克滥用欺诈和滥用滥用行为？=======================================================================在司法机构委员会前听证会美国参议院一百个第1届会议__________ 3月20日__________序列号J-110-20 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 35-705 WASHINGTON : 2007 _____________________________________________________________________________ For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800 Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania JOSEPH R. BIDEN, Jr., Delaware ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JON KYL, Arizona RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois JOHN CORNYN, Texas BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island TOM COBURN, Oklahoma Bruce A. Cohen, Chief Counsel and Staff Director Michael O'Neill, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director C O N T E N T S ---------- STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS Page Feingold, Hon. Russell D., a U.S. Senator from the State of Wisconsin...................................................... 5 Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont. 1 prepared statement........................................... 102 Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania................................................... 3 WITNESSES Bowen, Stuart W., Jr., Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, Arlington, Virginia............................ 7 Gimble, Thomas F., Acting Inspector General, Department of Defense, Arlington, Virginia................................... 9 Sabin, Barry M., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C............... 11 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Responses of Stuart W. Bowen, Jr. to questions submitted by Senators Leahy, Kennedy and Specter............................ 19 Responses of Thomas F. Gimble to questions submitted by Senators Leahy, Kennedy and Specter..................................... 32 Responses of Barry M. Sabin to questions submitted by Senators Leahy, Kennedy and Specter..................................... 44 SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD Bowen, Stuart W., Jr., Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, Arlington, Virginia, statement................. 83 Gimble, Thomas F., Acting Inspector General, Department of Defense, Arlington, Virginia, statement........................ 91 Sabin, Barry M., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., statement... 105 COMBATING WAR PROFITEERING: ARE WE DOING ENOUGH TO INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE CONTRACTING FRAUD AND ABUSE IN IRAQ? ---------- TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2007 United States Senate, Committee on Senate Judiciary, Washington, D.C. The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in room SD-226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. Present: Senators Leahy, Feingold, Cardin, Specter, and Coburn. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PATRICK J. LEAHY, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF VERMONT Chairman Leahy. Good morning. As you may have gathered, talking up here, Senator Specter and I are friends. We go back to our days as prosecutors. Sometimes in this job that is a good background to have. He used it well in his days as Chairman, and we were trying to work out some of the logistics for the rest of the week. Today, though, we have an issue of war profiteering, and the efforts to combat war profiteering have a long history. They go back almost as far as the practice itself. During the Civil War, President Lincoln fought against war profiteers, denouncing them as ``worse than traitors.'' He pushed for the first Federal laws curbing this abuse. In World War II, President Roosevelt spoke out against ``war millionaires'' who made excessive profits exploiting the calamity of war. President Truman, when he served in the Senate, crossed this country holding now famous public hearings to expose gross fraud, waste, and abuse by military contractors. As we observe the fourth anniversary of the Iraq war this week, we continue to face war profiteering in that conflict. As Iraq Study Group Co-Chair Lee Hamilton testified before this Committee just a few weeks ago, contracting fraud and abuse significantly undermine the current efforts in Iraq. Our Nation has sent nearly a half a trillion dollars to Iraq--and we are on track to send a trillion dollars--with few or no controls over how that money has been spent. The Bush administration has chosen to use private contractors in this war to a greater extent than at any time in our history. The trend has raised the cost of this military action by untold billions. Predictably, these actions have led to widespread fraud, waste, and abuse in Iraq on a scale that may be unprecedented in our history. The Inspectors General before this Committee today have reported that billions of dollars spent in Iraq are unaccounted for and may have been lost to fraud or other misconduct. Billions of dollars. And if any of you are making out your tax returns for this time of the year, just think about that. It is your money. These Inspectors General have opened hundreds of investigations into fraud, waste, and abuse in Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan involving illegal kickbacks, bid rigging, embezzlement, and fraudulent overbilling. These investigations have uncovered crimes committed by employees of the largest Government contractors in Iraq, including Kellogg, Brown & Root, a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton. Many of these matters involve abuse of the now infamous ``cost-plus'' and ``no-bid'' contracts so often used by the Bush administration to award huge sums to many who, it turns out, have close ties to the administration. Despite these investigations and mounting evidence of fraud, the administration has committed precious few resources to investigate and prosecute those who have illegally exploited this war for profit. I think they relied upon a Congress that would not ask questions. In fact, that same Congress--and it has changed- - attempted to limit the investigation of fraud in Iraq, and they actually wanted to shut down the office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. I am pleased that better sense prevailed and the Inspector General's authority was reinstated after the people spoke last November. During the nearly 4 years of war, the Department of Justice has failed to move aggressively enough in prosecuting fraud in Iraq. Today, the Inspectors General before us have opened hundreds of investigations, they still have more than 70 open and active cases in contracting fraud and abuse in this war. But so far, the U.S. Justice Department has only brought eight criminal cases involving 25 individuals over the last 3 years. The crimes in a number of these cases were committed by employees of Kellogg, Brown & Root, one of the largest contractors in Iraq--as I said, a wholly owned subsidiary of Halliburton. In these cases, the employees have admitted to receiving kickbacks, inflating costs, embezzling money, and stealing millions from the American people. But so far, the Justice Department has brought no legal action, civil or criminal, against KBR or Halliburton. Now, just last week, we learned that Halliburton will move its CEO's headquarters outside the United States to Dubai. They apparently plan to spin off KBR. One of the late-night comics said that moving to Dubai was because of the location--just outside the reach of the long arm of the law. I do not know whether that is so or not, but whether they are or not, the move is an insult to the U.S. soldiers and taxpayers who have paid the tab for these low-bid contracts and ``no-bid'' contracts, and endured these overcharges all these years. I introduced the War Profiteering Prevention Act on the first day of this new Congress. This makes acts of war profiteering a specific crime and reaches all contracting fraud, whether it occurs in this country or outside. It applies to all reconstruction and relief activities overseas. I have been proposing versions of this bill since 2003. It actually did pass the Congress, but the White House brought pressure on the Republican leadership in the House, and they removed it from the conference committee. A new law to combat war profiteering in Iraq and elsewhere is sorely needed, and long overdue. There are anti-fraud laws to protect against the waste of U.S. tax dollars at home, but no law to specifically cover when it is spent overseas. So we want to send one message: Any act to exploit the crisis situation in Iraq or elsewhere overseas for excessive profit is unacceptable, is reprehensible, is criminal, and the American people will not stand for it. That kind of deceit demeans and exploits the sacrifices that our military personnel are making in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world. Combating war profiteering is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. It is an American issue. The American people are sacrificing so far to the tune of half a trillion dollars. We will at least double that amount. We ought to make sure at least--whether they agree with or oppose the war in Iraq--they ought to at least know that their tax dollars are being spent the way they should be. [The prepared statement of Senator Leahy appears as a submission for the record.] Senator Specter? STATEMENT OF HON. ARLEN SPECTER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Senator Specter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that the focus that you have brought to bear on this important issue is very, very important, with your legislation and with this hearing today. There is no better therapy to combat white- collar crime than a prison sentence. You and I both know that from our earlier days as prosecuting attorneys. Senator Leahy and I frequently discuss our first meeting at a national convention of the District Attorneys Association when he was DA of Burlington, Vermont, and I was district attorney of Philadelphia. And that experience has demonstrated to both of us that you really attract the attention of white- collar criminals when they go to jail. There are lots of arguments about whether deterrence is effective. You are not going to stop passion homicides with jail sentences because people are thinking about something else. But profiteering and commercial crimes, white-collar crimes, are customarily very, very carefully thought out. And I believe that President Lincoln had it right on the quotation which Senator Leahy has cited when he said that war profiteering was a characteristic worse than traitors. I think there is something especially opprobrious about contractors going to Iraq and taking advantage of that situation at a time when so many brave young men and women are giving their lives or giving their limbs for their country. And at a time when the American taxpayers are being hit so very, very hard for the costs of Iraq, especially hard and especially difficult under those circumstances. Before coming here this morning, I signed three letters to relatives of Pennsylvanians who had been killed in action, and later this week in the Appropriations Committee, where both Senator Leahy and I serve, we will be taking up the supplemental appropriation which has $100 billion for Iraq. So it is especially disheartening to see what is going on there. Since 2000, ten companies with billions of dollars in U.S. contracts for Iraq reconstruction have paid more than $300 million in penalties to resolve allegations of bid- rigging fraud, and I sharply question whether these matters are appropriately resolved with agreements to pay penalties. Three hundred million dollars is not unsubstantial, but it may be de minimis, relatively meaningless, compared to the billions of dollars which are involved. Probably a very inexpensive license to cheat the American taxpayers. We have seen a few convictions. The Custer Battles firm billed the Government about $10 million when its actual costs did not exceed $4 million, and it billed $400,000 for a $74,000 electric bill. The Pentagon investigation found evidence that Halliburton had overcharged $61 million for fuel deliveries from Kuwait to Iraq. Halliburton also admitted that two of its employees took nearly $6 million in kickbacks. Another major company, Bechtel, hired three subcontractors in Iraq that have been fined more than $86 million over the last 4 years, and those contractors continue to work for Bechtel. A subsidiary of Northrop Grumman, Vinnell Corporation, has been penalized over $190 million over the last 4 years. The company now has a $48 million contract to train a new Iraqi army. If this kind of conduct is met with a small fine or a relatively small fine, really a license, and then rehired, there is no incentive not to violate the law. The majority of contracts for troop support overseas is on a noncompetitive basis, which contrasts with regular contracting procedures which are full and open competition. Well, that ought to be changed. It may be difficult to find contractors to function in Iraq, but I think it can be done with sufficient diligence. And there are cost-plus contracts. Well, that again is an open invitation to run up the costs. So we are dealing with enormously serious problems here. The reality is that the Judiciary Committee cannot trail all of these people, but we have a Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction testifying here today. We have the Department of Defense Acting Inspector General. And we have the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, which really ought to be focusing on these matters instead of so much e-mail traffic which captures all of our attention. I am trying to get some of my colleagues on this side of the aisle to come down. We have had 3,000 documents delivered, and we are about to vote this morning on changing the procedures for replacing United States Attorneys. Every time we turn around, there is another major calamity, catastrophe, within the jurisdiction of this Committee. It will not be until tomorrow that we will have to review what the FBI has done or not done on National Security Letters. They came to us, asked for renewal of the PATRIOT Act, and the Judiciary Committee wanted to be patriotic, so we renewed the PATRIOT Act. And we find major abuses in the National Security Letters. We are in the midst of reviewing many, many documents to prepare for that hearing tomorrow, and a renewed call has come to take away the intelligence function from the Department of Justice and the FBI and give it to an analogy to what the British use. So that we are beset by problems, as we all know, and-- Chairman Leahy. We have one less problem on things to read. With all due respect, Mr. Sabin's testimony did not arrive until after 5:00 last evening, and I remember--I liked the Specter rule on that, so he will not be testifying. We will put his statement in the record. I also feel-- Senator Specter. May I commend you, Mr. Chairman, for finding one less problem. Chairman Leahy. What he is commending me for is following the Specter rule, but what I might say--and I know Senator Feingold wanted to make a brief remark here. But if you are having hundreds of millions of dollars of cost overruns and you get fined a couple million dollars when it is found out, it really is a cost of doing business. I agree with Senator Specter. If people think they are actually going to go to jail, if they think the buyers are going to close on them, what I have found as a prosecutor is that had a lot more impact than any kind of fine or censure you might do. Senator Feingold, did you want to say something before we start? Senator Feingold. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing the need to hold-- Senator Specter. Excuse me one moment, Senator Feingold. I am going to have to excuse myself now. I will have staff here and will review the testimony very closely, and I will join Senator Leahy in his efforts to crack down on this malicious, vicious practice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Leahy. Thank you. Well, Senator Specter, you have always been consistent on that, and I appreciate that. Thank you. Senator Feingold? STATEMENT OF HON. RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN Senator Feingold. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing the need to hold a hearing on this very important issue. I have to leave in a couple of minutes to chair my own hearing in the Foreign Relations Committee on Chad and the Central African Republic as it relates to Darfur and their own problems. But I would like to make a few brief comments about the importance of strong oversight and accountability for U.S. taxpayer dollars going to Iraq. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction plays a crucial role in investigating and reporting fraud and misuse of Iraq reconstruction funding. I recognize the difficult task that SIGIR staff has and commend the SIGIR for its efforts to bring increased transparency to U.S. reconstruction spending. I support efforts to ensure that SIGIR's unique role is preserved as long as this administration continues to request emergency funding for the Iraq war. That said, I believe that we can do even more to deal with those who waste or fraudulently use Iraq reconstruction funds. I strongly encourage all U.S. Government agencies involved in oversight activities in Iraq to work together to aggressively pursue allegations of misuse and to penalize those who use U.S. taxpayer dollars for personal gain. I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that Congress is providing adequate resources to ensure the oversight activities in Iraq are robust and effective. SIGIR has played a significant role in targeting abuse of the U.S. contracting system in Iraq, and I want to briefly touch on the potential for SIGIR to strengthen oversight activities in Afghanistan as well. While Afghanistan receives significantly less funding than Iraq, we also need to ensure that taxpayer funding for reconstruction in Afghanistan is adequately distributed and accounted for. Today, as we examine the value of having strong oversight in Iraq, Mr. Chairman, we should also take into consideration the value it could add in Afghanistan. And I look forward to continue discussions with my colleagues and Mr. Bowen about a potentially expanded role for SIGIR. Once again, I thank you for your important role and the work that you and your staff are doing to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars are being well spent. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Leahy. Thank you very much. Gentlemen, would you--and, incidentally, before I swear you in, I should mention, Mr. Sabin, you did get your testimony here earlier than the incomplete document dump we got in connection with the mass firing of U.S. Attorneys, and obviously anybody is free to ask you any questions. I commend you on that. I know it has been busy down there at the Department of Justice. We are trying to enforce this rule. We have been ignored on the documents, but you were ahead of them, incomplete though they were. Please stand, gentlemen, and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. Bowen. I do. Mr. Gimble. I do. Mr. Sabin. I do. Chairman Leahy. Let the record show that all were sworn in. The first witness, Stuart Bowen, has served as the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction since October of 2004. He previously served as the Inspector General for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. Mr. Bowen has served President George W. Bush as Deputy Assistant to the President, Deputy Staff Secretary and Special Assistant to the President, and Associate Counsel. He has been a partner at the law firm of Patton Boggs, LLP. Of course, Mr. Boggs was a classmate of mine in law school. From 1992 to 1994, Mr. Bowen served as the Assistant Attorney General of Texas in administrative law litigation, holds a B.A. from the University of the South, attended Vanderbilt Law School, and received his J.D. from St. Mary's Law School. Please go ahead, Mr. Bowen. STATEMENT OF STUART W. BOWEN, JR., SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA Mr. Bowen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Leahy, Ranking Member Specter, and members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to address you today on the role of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction's oversight, and specifically investigations, in Iraq reconstruction. This hearing asks whether we can do more to combat fraud in Iraq, and before I answer that question, let me make two salient points to put my answer in context. First of all, corruption within the Iraqi Government is a serious problem inhibiting all progress in Iraq. We have called it the ``second insurgency'' in our reports, and I returned last week from my 15th trip to Iraq and during that time met with the Commissioner on Public Integrity, the analogue to the FBI in Iraq, and the President of the Board of Supreme Audit, the analogue to the Government Accountability Office, and both of them, again, emphasized to me the problem of corruption across the government in virtually every ministry. The CPI Commissioner told me that he has 2,000 cases involving $8 billion of alleged corruption-- Chairman Leahy. How many? Mr. Bowen. Two thousand cases involving $8 billion of alleged corruption within the Iraq Government. The President of the Board of Supreme Audit has hundreds of audits going on and in virtually every case finds missing funds. Again, this is involving Iraqi money on the Iraqi side. My office has a working arrangement with the CPI, and we continue to support them where we come across evidence of potential Iraqi wrongdoing. On the U.S. side, the incidence of corruption with respect to the U.S. reconstruction program that SIGIR has uncovered to date is a relatively small component of the overall investment. We have found egregious incidents of fraud. We have aggressively pursued them, and we have produced prosecutions and imprisonments. As you said, Mr. Chairman, fraud is unacceptable in Iraq. We must aggressively pursue it. And as Ranking Member Specter said, the best way to get attention is to put people in prison, and I agree. And that is my mission and has been from the start. You summarized our overall effort at SIGIR, and that is, to account for how the taxpayers' money has been invested in Iraq. And we continue to do that aggressively. In January, two individuals were sentenced to prison as a result of SIGIR investigations. In early February, indictments were announced of five more individuals as a result of SIGIR investigations. We have opened 300 cases. We have over 70 ongoing, and 28 of those cases are under prosecution at the Department of Justice. So we take seriously the mandate Congress has given us to audit, inspect, and investigate the use of taxpayer dollars in Iraq, and I am committed to maintaining a robust deterrent presence in ia as long as SIGIR exists. Today, we have eight investigators on the ground in Iraq investigating fraud. It is the largest contingent of fraud investigators there. They travel the country pursuing leads and also work regionally. To date, we have produced 12 quarterly reports, 82 audit reports, 80 on-site inspections, and as I said, over 300 investigations opened, yielding 10 arrests, 5 indictments, 5 convictions, and 2 imprisonments, and working on 79 live investigations. We have 19 investigators on staff, eight, as I said, in Iraq and the balance here in Arlington. One of the most important aspects of our work is to develop a task force, working relationships with other agencies involved in oversight in Iraq, including my colleague, Mr. Gimble, and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service. Our first task force was the Special Investigative Task Force for Iraq Reconstruction, SPITFIRE, and it combined the efforts of the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement office, the FBI, and the Department of State IG office. That task force was able to effectively pursue the Bloom-Stein conspiracy that my auditors uncovered in Hilla, Iraq--a very egregious kickback and bribery scheme involving over $10 million in reconstruction funds that Philip Bloom, a contractor, and Robert Stein, the comptroller for that region, engineered to their own criminal ends. SPITFIRE continues and we continue to pursue a number of leads that arose from that case. The other major initiative that SIGIR has begun is the International Contract Corruption Task Force. The Joint Operations Center for that task force is housed at SIGIR, and it is already producing effective cross-pollination of investigative leads and source development with respect to ongoing investigations, including some very significant ones that will be--that news of which will be forthcoming in the course of this year. That task force includes the U.S. Army's Criminal Investigative Division Major Procurement Fraud Unit, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, the FBI, and the Department of State's IG. And, again, a number of the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund cases that we have ongoing are making rapid progress as a result of coordinated effort among the agencies assigned with jurisdiction. We also are part of the DOJ National Procurement Fraud Task Force, and we continue to work closely with DOJ in the investigation and prosecution of our cases. And, finally, to coordinate efforts in oversight in Iraq, I formed shortly after I was appointed 3 years ago the Iraq Inspector General's Council, which brings together everyone in every corridor who has got oversight, and we deconflict and discuss what needs to get done to ensure, as you said, Mr. Chairman, that we account for how the taxpayer dollars are being invested in Iraq. Thank you. [The prepared statement of Mr. Bowen appears as a submission for the record.] Chairman Leahy. Thank you very much. You have made how many trips over there, did you say? Mr. Bowen. Fifteen. Chairman Leahy. God bless you. Mr. Bowen. Thank you, sir. Mr. Gimble became Acting Inspector General of the Department of Defense on September 10, 2005. Prior to his appointment, Mr. Gimble was Principal Deputy Inspector General, has held other key positions in the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Defense. He served with the U.S. Army as an infantry soldier in combat, was awarded the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart, the Combat Infantry Badge. He has a bachelor's of business administration from Lamar University, an MBA from the University of Texas at San Antonio. Mr. Gimble, thank you for joining us today and please go ahead. STATEMENT OF THOMAS F. GIMBLE, ACTING INSPECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA Mr. Gimble. Members of the Committee on the Judiciary, thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Committee today to talk about our oversight and investigation into contracting fraud in Iraq. The Global War on Terrorism is a top priority of our DoD IG office, and currently we have 150 personnel providing oversight of the $463 billion in DoD supplemental funds appropriated to support our fight in the war on terrorism. The Defense Criminal Investigative Service is the investigative arm of the DoD Inspector General and has been investigating DoD-related matters pertaining to the Iraqi theater, to include Kuwait, since the start of the war. We continue to expand our in-theater presence. For example, in March of 2006, we established our first forward field site in Qatar, under the sponsorship of the Commander of the U.S. Central Command. We use the Qatar office as a hub to deploy teams into Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan. Recently, in coordination with the Commanding General of the Multinational Force-Iraq, we established our second forward deployed office, at Camp Victory. We currently have two investigators and eight auditors assigned there. In addition, we have two advisers in the International Zone and two additional investigators stationed in Kuwait. The presence of the DCIS in the region has led to 83 investigations. Our investigations have focused on matters such as bribery, theft, gratuities, bid rigging, product substitution, and conflicts of interest. These alleged crimes expose U.S. and coalition forces to substandard equipment and services, or shortages that aggravate an already harsh and harmful environment. Currently DCIS is conducting 56 investigations involving war profiteering, contract fraud, and contract corruption in Iraq. Fifteen of those investigations are being conducted by four DCIS special agents that are in theater, and the remaining 41 are being conducted by 31 special agents that are housed in our U.S. and Germany offices. The criminal activities being investigated in Iraq involve members of the U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. contractor personnel, as well as foreign personnel. For example, in January 2004, an investigation was initiated on information from the Defense Contract Audit Agency concerning allegations of kickbacks and gratuities that were solicited and/or received by Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) employees. KBR has also been alleged to have been overcharging for food and fuel. The DCIS has also initiated a project to review paperwork associated with payments made by the U.S. Army paying agents in Iraq. Those payment records are currently stored at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Rome, New York. This is expected to be a long-term effort. DCIS is working with the FBI and coordinating its activities with the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Northern District of New York. Also, our Deputy Inspector General for Auditing at DoD IG is conducting a concurrent review of the records, and several questionable transactions have been discovered and referred for further investigation. Since the Global War on Terrorism began, DCIS has pursued criminal, civil, and administrative remedies against U.S. and foreign persons and companies. Ten of those investigations with adjudication fall within the prohibited activities of the War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007. These investigations have resulted in four Federal indictments, nine criminal informations, two Article 32 hearings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. As a result of the investigations, eight U.S. persons and one foreign person were convicted and have a total of 14\1/2\ years in confinement and an additional 9 years of probation. Two individuals and one company were debarred from contracting with the U.S. Government; an additional 17 companies and personnel were suspended, and two contractors signing settlement agreements with the U.S. Government. In all, about $9.8 million was paid to the U.S. in restitution, plus $322,000 was levied in fines and penalties, with another $3,500 being forfeited. We in the DoD IG are committed to remaining an active player in preventing and detecting fraud in the Iraqi theater. Again, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your Committee today. [The prepared statement of Mr. Gimble appears as a submission for the record.] Chairman Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Gimble. On those sentences, what was the average? Of the ones who served time, what was the average sentence? Mr. Gimble. Eight total people had a total of 14\1/2\ years, I think. Chairman Leahy. But that is 14 years for 8 or each one had 14 years? Mr. Gimble. No. It was a total of 14\1/2\ years for all 8. Chairman Leahy. So that would be about a year and a half. Mr. Gimble. About a year and a half, yes, sir. Chairman Leahy. Thank you. Over the last 3 years, I understand the Inspectors General here today have opened hundreds of investigations into fraud. I think there are currently more than 70 that are open and active that have been referred to the Department of Justice. I understand from the public records the Justice Department has brought eight criminal cases involving 25 people over the last 3 years. Is that correct? Mr. Bowen. I believe it is nine. Chairman Leahy. Nine, okay. And you have-- Mr. Bowen. I should say nine SIGIR cases. I don't know about-- Chairman Leahy. What? Mr. Bowen. Nine from our investigations. Chairman Leahy. Have they moved vigorously enough, aggressively enough, in the cases you have referred to them? Mr. Bowen. I think that they are moving very aggressively now, and I think over the last year we have made a lot of progress as the recent indictments and the convictions reveal. We have 28 cases that are being aggressively managed now. I have met with the Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division, Alice Fisher, and she has deployed the resources necessary to vigorously prosecute these cases. Chairman Leahy. Mr. Sabin, when would we expect the Justice Department to start prosecuting these investigations that have been referred to you? And I realize that it sometimes takes a while to put a case together for prosecution. You and I have both been there, but when can we expect this? Mr. Sabin. Mr. Chairman, it is a priority area for the Department of Justice. We have devoted significant prosecutorial and investigative resources to it. Chairman Leahy. How many full-time prosecutors? Mr. Sabin. We have 70 prosecutors, approximately, both in the civil and criminal arena, devoted throughout the Justice Department to these matters. Chairman Leahy. Full-time? Mr. Sabin. I can't represent that it is full-time, sir, but working on these matters, so I would say approximately 70 is the number that the folks have provided. Chairman Leahy. How many are there full-time, this is their one duty? Mr. Sabin. I can walk through specifics. We have folks in the Antitrust Division. We have individuals in the Criminal Division, both in the Asset Forfeiture and Money- Laundering Section, the Public Integrity Section, the Fraud Section, the-- Chairman Leahy. Do you have enough people or do you need more? Mr. Sabin. Well, I am not going to get into the specifics of resource allocation. I can talk to you about the manner in which we have tried to-- Chairman Leahy. I am trying to help you out here. Do you need more-- Mr. Sabin. Right, but I cannot speak for our budgetary process with respect to-- Chairman Leahy. When will the prosecutions start on the backlog? Mr. Sabin. Sir, we believe that we are devoting significant resources to it. We believe that those prosecutions have to date occurred. We have had, as you have noted, 25 defendants charged. I believe it is 12 separate cases. That is on the criminal side. We also have, of those 16 defendants that have been convicted on a wide variety of money laundering, major fraud against the Government, wire fraud, mail fraud, kickback, bulk cash smuggling. So we have tried to use the full resources that Congress-- Chairman Leahy. These are the ones that have been convicted and are serving time? These are the ones that got a year and a half, approximately? Mr. Sabin. Mr. Stein in the Stein and Bloom case, it is my understanding, received a 9-year sentence. Mr. Bloom I believe received a 4-year sentence. Chairman Leahy. Are they in the average then of the 14 months? Mr. Sabin. I am not going to represent what the average or median is. We can work with you to get you those specific statistics. Chairman Leahy. Please, I would be very interested in that. Mr. Sabin. We would be happy to provide that to you, sir. Chairman Leahy. Do you expect further prosecutions to be brought, say, in the next 3 months? Mr. Sabin. I am not going to give a specific time frame, but absolutely we are devoting time and energy to make these criminal cases. Chairman Leahy. In your position, you would know if there is going to be, wouldn't you? Mr. Sabin. I am not going to speculate as to when a particular indictment-- Chairman Leahy. I am not asking you to speculate-- Mr. Sabin. --is going to occur. Chairman Leahy. This is an easy yes or no. In your position, would you know if prosecutions are about to be brought? Mr. Sabin. Yes. Chairman Leahy. Do you know of any that are about to be brought in the next 3 months? Mr. Sabin. Depending on factors, yes. Chairman Leahy. How many? Mr. Sabin. I am not going to give you a specific answer to that, sir, but-- Chairman Leahy. Why not? Mr. Sabin. Because they are ongoing, operational endeavors with respect to those matters. It depends upon search warrants. It depends upon cooperators. Chairman Leahy. I understand. Mr. Sabin. So we are working our way through both individuals and corporate entities to ensure that we are making-- Chairman Leahy. By the end of the year, how many do you think might be brought? Mr. Sabin. Sir, I am not going to commit to a specific number, but I can say here today that we are devoting the resources. It is a priority area, and we are going to make these cases. As you are aware-- Chairman Leahy. Would it surprise you to think that perhaps Senator Specter and I may be asking you this question periodically as the year goes on? Mr. Sabin. And, sir, I would be happy to come up-- indeed, maybe I will have a chance to give an opening statement at that time. But-- Chairman Leahy. Well, if you get the testimony in ahead of time under the rules, then you will. As I said, though, you were better than the incomplete--you came in more timely than the incomplete dump of other information in a different matter. Mr. Sabin. I am not going to comment on that, but-- Chairman Leahy. I do not-- Mr. Sabin. --I would tell you respect-- Chairman Leahy. There are a lot of things you are not going to comment on. I understand. We will ask you though, Mr. Sabin, I am not trying to play games here. I am worried that it has taken a long time on some of these. Mr. Bowen says there are as many as 2,000 investigations of fraud in Iraq. Mr. Sabin. I believe that was referencing, though, if I am not mistaken, in Iraq as opposed to U.S. based. Mr. Bowen. Yes, those are Iraqi cases. We have 28 cases at the Department of Justice right now. Chairman Leahy. Am I correct in understanding there is about $8 billion in missing funds, unaccounted for funds? Mr. Bowen. There are two figures here. One is the 2,000 cases that Judge Radhi told me about involve, according to his figures, about $8 billion in Iraqi funds. You may be referring to our audit of 2 years ago, which looked at about $8.8 billion in money that was provided by the CPA to the then-government of Iraq, and we found that the CPA did not have adequate controls to account for how that money was actually used. Chairman Leahy. When I was in law school at Georgetown, I used to enjoy coming up to enjoy coming up to watch the Senate, and I remember Everett Dirksen, who was the Republican leader at that time, his oft-repeated statement, you know, ``A billion here and a billion there, after awhile we are talking about real money.'' He is right, of course. You have, what, about 20 full-time fraud investigators in Iraq and Kuwait? Mr. Bowen. I have eight full-time in Iraq and another 12 here in Arlington. Chairman Leahy. Is that enough? Mr. Bowen. We can always do more to exercise oversight and investigate allegations of wrongdoing. One of the challenges in Iraq is putting together a case when there is no electronic trail to follow. There is no EFT, electronic funds transfer, in Iraq, which means you depend exclusively on individuals coming forward. And we are talking about individuals coming forward in an environment where their lives are threatened. Chairman Leahy. It is not too easy to come forward. Mr. Gimble, do you have enough investigators? Mr. Gimble. I am with Mr. Bowen. We can always use more. But we actually have 35 full-time equivalents working those issues now. Chairman Leahy. We will come back to that. Dr. Coburn has been waiting patiently here. Senator Coburn, go ahead. Senator Coburn. Mr. Chairman, all of these gentlemen, save Mr. Sabin, have been before the Federal Financial Subcommittee of Homeland Security, and all these questions have been addressed, and we have had hearings exactly like this. And so I do not have any questions. I came to hear the testimony today. Chairman Leahy. I appreciate that. As always, I appreciate having you here. Senator Cardin? Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is somewhat frustrating to all of us because it is a lot of money that the taxpayers of the United States have spent in an effort to try to help rebuild Iraq. So we are talking about billions of dollars. How much money have we recovered from those who have committed wrongdoings as contractors in Iraq with U.S. dollars? How much has actually been recovered to date? Mr. Bowen. SIGIR has recovered about $10 million in cash and illegal property, contraband. Mr. Sabin. In terms of the Department of Justice, on the civil side my understanding is that it is $5.8 million resulting from two civil settlements. And then there is on the criminal side forfeiture and restitution. For example, the Bloom-Stein case, each of the two lead defendants were ordered both forfeiture and restitution $3.6 million jointly and severally, as well as additional matters out of the LOGCAP Working Group task force. In the Central District of Illinois, there is a matter that was $350,000, et cetera. So pull that all together, I would say maybe approximately $8 million, but I can get you the specific breakdown, Senator Cardin. Senator Cardin. Well, I think that would be helpful. The estimates that have been used indicate that the amount of fraud far exceeds those dollars amounts, and I really do applaud your efforts. I know it is difficult. I know it is not easy. I cannot think of a much worse conduct than a contractor taking advantage of a war effort. We have brave men and women who are serving in our armed forces, and you would think that the business community that is involved in Iraq would understand the sacrifices that are being made and, if anything, would be looking at ways to help the mission rather than making a profit unjustifiably through corruption. I am not sure I totally understand the difference in the--I understand the Iraqi corruption issues, but does this involve the U.S. funding? Is there any U.S. dollars involved in the contracts that the Iraqis are investigating? Mr. Bowen. No. Those contracts involve Iraqi funds, according to Judge Radhi's report to me. Senator Cardin. So there are no U.S. dollars involved, no funds made available through our country to Iraq that are involved in these issues? Mr. Bowen. Not in the cases he has reported to me. I have a memorandum of agreement with him wherein if he comes across cases involving the misappropriation of U.S. dollars, he will refer that information to me; and, likewise, if I come across cases involving Iraqi money, I refer them to him. Senator Cardin. I could tell you that from the press accounts and from the information that has been made available to our Committee, there is a significant amount of concerns. I appreciate the fact that investigations are ongoing. It just does not appear that we are being as aggressive as we need to with certain business entities that are extremely active in Iraq, and the reports indicate that U.S. taxpayers have been overcharged. There are also reports that large sums of monies have gone unreported. We do not know where they are. And yet there--am I wrong on that? Mr. Bowen. Senator Cardin, you are right, there has been a problem with waste, as our audits and inspections have documented. However, accumulating evidence in theater up to the standard of review required in criminal cases has been a challenge. That is why I have pushed my office to pursue other alternative punitive measures such as debarments and suspensions. And that is something that we are going to aggressively pursue this year. We have had 14 companies and individuals suspended and another 12 that are--8 that have been debarred, another 12 pending debarments. I think, though, this is a fruitful path to pursue in order to hold accountable those who have taken advantage of the situation in situations where we cannot come up with sufficient evidence to convict them of criminal wrongdoing. Senator Cardin. And Senator Leahy has suggested--yes? Mr. Sabin. I would agree with that. I think we are trying to use the full tools available, so you would have the suspension and debarment procedure that Mr. Bowen referred to. We have brought corporate cases against business entities in the civil realm on two public instances, and we are looking, consistent with the fundamental principles of Federal prosecution relating to corporate entities to explore corporate charges as well in the criminal context. Senator Cardin. And I would just call to your attention Senator Leahy's legislation, because I do think it makes it clear about the particular focus that the United States wants to have on profiteers in our war efforts. That to me takes it to a different level, and those who participate need to understand that this is more than an 18-month sentence. This is someone who has committed a horrible act. When we have our soldiers that we ask every day to take on the challenges, including their own safety, the least that we can expect from contractors is that they will do their job and will not try to take advantage of the circumstances. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Leahy. Thank you. You know, we do not have a law that actually makes war profiteering a specific Federal crime. This bill would do so. I direct this to you, Mr. Sabin. It would also extend extraterritorial jurisdiction to the full extent that we can under both U.S. law and obviously our treaty obligations. Now, should we have such a clear, precise piece of legislation? Mr. Sabin. Fair question, sir. We share common ground in this. We want to make sure that we have all the appropriate tools and authorities to address the war profiteering, to reduce fraud, and protect the public. I, in fact, commend your leadership and attention to this important area. We have as part of our National Procurement Fraud Task Force a working group made up of Inspector Generals throughout the interagency process reviewing appropriate legislative and regulatory mechanisms that may be appropriate, not only on the criminal side but on the civil side. Chairman Leahy. I do not want to get too far off my question. You said that you want all the tools you can. Is this a tool that you could use? Mr. Sabin. The Department has not sent forth particular views on your proposed legislation, but-- Chairman Leahy. Either for or against it. Mr. Sabin. There is not a specific views letter on it, but I can work with the Committee, our staff can work with your staff with respect to some of the technical concerns that we have. For example, the willfulness that is drafted in the statute would increase the burden of proof, the mens rea requirement, as opposed to the normal mail and wire fraud statutes. So it would make it harder to bring these cases. Chairman Leahy. What about the extraterritorial jurisdiction? Mr. Sabin. There is a logistical and a jurisdictional component to extraterritorial jurisdiction. For example-- Chairman Leahy. Let's put aside the logistical one for a moment. What about the-- Mr. Sabin. The jurisdictional, if it is not explicitly stated in a congressional criminal law, then you can in some instances based upon five principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction under international law, read into it an extraterritorial component. Chairman Leahy. Is this specific enough? Mr. Sabin. Well, yours is specific. The point is it may have unintended consequences. For example, the wire fraud statute has been construed to have extraterritorial application-- Chairman Leahy. In what way? Mr. Sabin. You can bring a wire fraud charge, a violation of Title 18 United States Code Section 1343, presently even though extraterritorial jurisdiction is not explicitly stated in the congressional enactment. So we have time-tested fraud statutes. So the fact that you have asserted specific extraterritorial jurisdiction in the proposed War Profiteering Act may have consequences, for example, in the securities fraud realm, in the bank fraud context, in the wire fraud and mail fraud context. So that is what I am suggesting, that we can work through these technical issues. As an explicit statement of extraterritorial jurisdiction, the impact upon the protective principle, the ability for the United States interest in terms of its public fisc, its monies, its documents-- Chairman Leahy. Well, let me talk about under the current laws. How many of these referrals that you have had, how many has the Department of Justice joined in cases? Mr. Sabin. All the referrals that SIGIR has made to us we have worked with them to review and explore criminal or civil potential. Chairman Leahy. You have joined every one of those cases? Mr. Sabin. I believe through the International Contract Corruption Task Force, as an operational matter, we are working with SIGIR and a host of other entities. I am not going promise that criminal charges are going to be brought. Chairman Leahy. Okay. Well, maybe I should ask you, Mr. Bowen: How many matters alleging fraud have been referred to the Justice Department? Mr. Bowen. Total since inception, I am going to have to get you that number. Currently, we have 28. Five are civil and the balance are criminal. But the total number since inception is upwards towards 40. Chairman Leahy. And how many has the Justice Department joined? Mr. Bowen. They have acted or are considering action on everything that we have presented. The turndown rate of our cases has been low. Chairman Leahy. Thank you. I am not sure, Mr. Sabin, whether you are saying this is or is not a tool that a prosecutor can have in their arsenal, this War Profiteering Act. I realize the tools you have now. I always liked the idea, if I had a criminal matter coming before me when I was a prosecutor, that I could look down and find about half a dozen statutes that applied and pick the one that I thought I had the best chance of winning on. Mr. Sabin. Fair point, sir. And we want to make sure that we have the tools that we need. So if--but we have not had any obstacles to bringing cases because, remember, these cases have both an international and domestic component. So that would be a territorial application of U.S. law and not needing to go into an extraterritorial aspect if there are facts and incidents that are occurring in the continental United States. So you do not have to resort to extraterritorial jurisdiction. Chairman Leahy. How much have you recovered on these cost- plus contracts? Mr. Sabin. I do not have that specific answer, but we can absolutely get that to you, sir. Chairman Leahy. Please. Have some of these cost-plus contracts been used to commit fraud? Mr. Sabin. I believe the answer is yes, but, again, we can provide the specifics that are in the public realm. We would be happy to work with the Committee to provide that. Chairman Leahy. And we have a lot of cash contracts. Still, it boggles my mind--maybe it is being a frugal Vermonter where we like to know where the money goes, but seeing these large transport planes coming in with these huge piles of cash that are passed out when we were first there. Are we still paying out war contracts in cash? Mr. Bowen. Yes, contracts are commonly paid out in cash when Iraqi firms are involved in direct contracting in Iraq today. Chairman Leahy. And do I understand from your earlier testimony that that exacerbates the problem of following up on it? Mr. Bowen. It does. When I arrived in Iraq on my first trip 3 years ago and saw the amount of cash that was simply moving out of the pallets, I recognized we had an oversight issue of enormous proportion. And, indeed, that was one of the matters addressed in the audit I referred to earlier. Our other audits also looked at the management of cash in Iraq during CPA and found the controls wanting. Those controls have improved over time, and I might add that one of the important initiatives the SIGIR has engaged in over the last 18 months is our Lessons Learned program. We have presented those reports--Senator Coburn referred to them earlier--before the Senate Governmental Affairs and Homeland Security Committee, and in the Contracting Lessons Learned report, I highlighted the importance for Congress to review the cost-plus contract system. I do think that waste has been the larger issue in Iraq, and the place where that has happened is within the cost-plus arena and the failure to definitize costs as required over time. Chairman Leahy. Thank you. Senator Coburn, I know you have had these matters before your other Committee. Did you have anything further you wanted to add? Senator Coburn. Just a comment, and it is really political in nature. You know, talking about war profiteering, we are going to have a supplemental on the floor, and it is going to have $21 billion worth of war profiteering on it by the Senate, things added to it that do not have anything to do with the war. And so I think it is good that we look at this and then we look at ourselves as we look at that supplemental. Chairman Leahy. Thank you. I see nobody else here. We may have some questions for the record. Mr. Bowen, Mr. Gimble, Mr. Sabin. Is it Sabin? Mr. Sabin. Yes, sir. Chairman Leahy. We have a number of Sabins in Montpelier, Vermont, where I was born. That is how they pronounce it also. Thank you all for being here. I do appreciate it. Mr. Bowen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [Whereupon, at 10:33 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] [Questions and answers and submissions for the record follow.] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.005 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.006 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.007 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.008 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.009 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.010 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.011 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.012 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.013 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.014 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.015 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.016 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.017 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.018 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.019 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.020 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.021 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.022 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.023 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.024 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.025 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.026 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.027 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.028 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.029 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.030 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.031 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.032 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.033 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.034 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.035 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.036 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.037 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.038 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.039 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.040 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.041 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.042 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.043 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.044 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.045 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.046 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.047 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.048 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.049 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.050 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.051 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.052 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.053 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.054 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.055 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.056 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.057 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.058 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.059 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.060 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.061 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.062 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.063 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.064 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.065 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.066 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.067 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.068 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.069 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.070 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.071 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.072 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.073 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.074 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.075 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.076 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.077 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.078 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.079 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.080 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.081 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.082 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.083 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.084 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.085 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.086 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.087 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.088 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.089 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.090 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.091 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.092 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.093 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.094 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.095 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5705.096