U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

35–705 PDF 2007

S. HRG. 110–39

COMBATING WAR PROFITEERING: ARE WE DOING

ENOUGH TO INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE

CONTRACTING FRAUD AND ABUSE IN IRAQ?

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 20, 2007

Serial No. J–110–20

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

MICHAEL O’NEILL, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

(III)

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

(1)

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 

2

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 ‘‘costplus’’ 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 lowbid 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 activiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:09 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 035705 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\35705.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
3

ties 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. 

4

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. con- tracts 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 

5

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. 

6

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. 

7

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 reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:09 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 035705 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\35705.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
8

gionally. 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 

9

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 DoDrelated 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 

10

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 141⁄2 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 141⁄2 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 141⁄2 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? 

11

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. 

12

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 

13

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 efVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:09 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 035705 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\35705.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
14

fort 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. 

15

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. 

16

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. 

17

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 costplus 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? 

18

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.]

19


35705.001
20


35705.002
21


35705.003
22


35705.004
23


35705.005
24


35705.006
25


35705.007
26


35705.008
27


35705.009
28


35705.010
29


35705.011
30


35705.012
31


35705.013
32


35705.014
33


35705.015
34


35705.016
35


35705.017
36


35705.018
37


35705.019
38


35705.020
39


35705.021
40


35705.022
41


35705.023
42


35705.024
43


35705.025
44


35705.026
45


35705.027
46


35705.028
47


35705.029
48


35705.030
49


35705.031
50


35705.032
51


35705.033
52


35705.034
53


35705.035
54


35705.036
55


35705.037
56


35705.038
57


35705.039
58


35705.040
59


35705.041
60


35705.042
61


35705.043
62


35705.044
63


35705.045
64


35705.046
65


35705.047
66


35705.048
67


35705.049
68


35705.050
69


35705.051
70


35705.052
71


35705.053
72


35705.054
73


35705.055
74


35705.056
75


35705.057
76


35705.058
77


35705.059
78


35705.060
79


35705.061
80


35705.062
81


35705.063
82


35705.064
83


35705.065
84


35705.066
85


35705.067
86


35705.068
87


35705.069
88


35705.070
89


35705.071
90


35705.072
91


35705.073
92


35705.074
93


35705.075
94


35705.076
95


35705.077
96


35705.078
97


35705.079
98


35705.080
99


35705.081
100


35705.082
101


35705.083
102


35705.084
103


35705.085
104


35705.086
105


35705.087
106


35705.088
107


35705.089
108


35705.090
109


35705.091
110


35705.092
111


35705.093
112


35705.094
113


35705.095
114

Æ


35705.096