Source: http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f249900/249957.htm
Timestamp: 2013-12-05 12:35:21
Document Index: 518391438

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 371', '§ 1956', '§ 1512', '§ 371', '§ 53', '§ 1031', '§ 1956', '§ 1343', '§\n1956', '§ 1512', '§ 1621', '§ 401', '§ 1503', '§ 371', '§ 3583', '§ 5', '§ 3583', '§\n3663', '§ 5', '§ 3013', '§ 1956', '§ 3583', '§ 5', '§ 3583', '§ 5', '§ 3583', '§ 3013', '§ 1512', '§ 3583', '§ 5', '§ 3583', '§ 3663', '§ 3553', '§ 3553', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§2']

Plea Agreement : U.S. v. Robert P. Griffiths
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROBERT P. GRIFFITHS,
| Criminal No. 09-cr-506 Filed: 7/6/09 Violation: 18 U.S.C. § 371
18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) PLEA AGREEMENT
The Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice ("Antitrust
Division") and the defendant, Robert P. Griffiths ("Griffiths"), hereby enter into the
following Plea Agreement ("Agreement") pursuant to Rule 11(c)(1)(B) of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure ("Fed. R. Crim. P.").
1.	Griffiths agrees voluntarily to consent to the jurisdiction of the United
States to prosecute this case against him in the United States District Court of New Jersey.
Griffiths also agrees voluntarily to consent to venue in the United States District Court of
New Jersey. Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 7(b), Griffiths will waive indictment and plead
guilty to a three-count Information in the United States District Court of New Jersey, in
the form attached, in which he is charged with (Count One) violating 18 U.S.C. § 371 for
conspiring from approximately December 2001 until approximately August 2004, with
the objectives of defrauding the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA")
and committing offenses against the United States by (a) providing and attempting to
provide kickbacks to employees of a prime contractor ("P-C") at the Federal Creosote
Superfund Site in Manville, New Jersey ("Federal Creosote") and including the amount of
the kickbacks in the sub-contract prices charged to P-C, thereby causing P-C to charge
those inflated prices to the EPA and the United States, in violation of 41 U.S.C. §§ 53(1)
and (3); and (b) executing a scheme or artifice with the intent to defraud the United States,
and with the intent to obtain money or property by means of materially false and
fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises, in the procurement of property and
services as a sub-contractor in connection with prime contracts where the values of those
contracts were $1 million or more, in violation of 18 U.S.C § 1031; (Count Two)
violating 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) for conspiring from approximately February 2003 through
approximately September 2004, to transport, transmit, and transfer funds, that is
approximately $207,000, from a place in the United States to and through a place outside
the United States with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity,
namely to commit wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §
1956(a)(2)(A); and (Count Three) violating 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) for obstructing,
influencing, and impeding an official proceeding before the United States Securities and
DEFENDANT'S COOPERATION 2. Griffiths will cooperate fully and truthfully with the Antitrust Division in the
federal antitrust and related criminal laws involving the award of sub-contracts to provide
environmental remediation services at Federal Creosote, as well as any other federal
investigation resulting therefrom, and any litigation or other proceedings arising or
resulting from any such investigation to which the United States is a party (collectively
referred to herein as "Federal Proceeding"). The ongoing, full, and truthful cooperation of
Griffiths shall include, but not be limited to:
producing in the United States and at other mutually agreed-upon locations all documents, information, and other materials, including claimed personal documents, in the possession, custody, or control of Griffiths, wherever located, that may be requested by attorneys and/or agents of the United States in connection with any Federal Proceeding; making himself available for interviews with the attorneys and agents of
the United States, not at the expense of the United States, at the New York Office of the
Antitrust Division, or at other mutually-agreed upon locations, upon the request of
attorneys and/or agents of the United States;
bringing to the attention of the Antitrust Division all crimes which he has
committed, and all administrative, civil, and/or criminal proceedings, investigations, or
prosecutions in which he, to his knowledge, is or has been a subject, target, party, or
witness; responding fully and truthfully to all inquiries of the Antitrust Division
in connection with any Federal Proceeding, without falsely implicating any person or
otherwise voluntarily providing to the Antitrust Division any materials or
information, not requested in (a)-(c) of this paragraph, that is related to any Federal
Proceeding; when called upon to do so by the United States in connection with any
truthfully and under oath, subject to the penalties of perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1621), making
contempt (18 U.S.C. §§ 401-402), and obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503, et seq.);
and committing no further crimes whatsoever.
3. Subject to the full, truthful, and continuing cooperation of Griffiths, as
described in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement and upon the Court's acceptance of the guilty
plea called for by this Agreement, the Antitrust Division will not bring further criminal
charges against Griffiths for any act or offense committed prior to the date of this
Agreement that was in furtherance of and resulted from the conspiracies or any statements
he made concerning his participation in the conspiracies, as described in the attached
Information, to (a) fraudulently inflate invoices and provide kickbacks to employees of a
prime contractor at Federal Creosote; (b) receive the bid prices of other vendors prior to
the award of sub-contracts at Federal Creosote; (c) agree to not disclose to the United
States Army Corps of Engineers ("USACE") that Bennett Environmental, Inc. had
submitted false invoices for approximately 20,000 tons of soil to P-C; and (d) transport,
transmit, and transfer funds, that is approximately $207,000, from a place in the United
States to and through a place outside the United States. The nonprosecution terms of this
paragraph do not apply to civil matters of any kind, to any violation of the federal tax and
4. The Antitrust Division agrees that when Griffiths travels to the United States
for interviews, grand jury appearances, or court appearances pursuant to this Agreement,
based upon his participation in the conspiracies described in Paragraphs 1 and 3 above, to
subject Griffiths to arrest, detention, or service of process, or to prevent Griffiths from
the United States Department of Justice. However, if requested, the Antitrust Division will
bring the fact, manner and extent of the cooperation of Griffiths to the attention of other
prosecuting, administrative, and other agencies as a matter for such agencies to consider as
POSSIBLE MAXIMUM PENALTIES 6.	Griffiths understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be
imposed against him upon conviction for a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 is: a term of imprisonment of not more than five (5) years; a fine of not more than the greater of $250,000, or the greater of twice his
gross pecuniary gain from the offense or twice the victim's gross pecuniary loss from the
offense; or both such sentences; and
a term of supervised release of no more than three (3) years following any
term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(b)(2) and U.S.S.G. § 5D1.2(a)(2). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), if Griffiths violates any condition of supervised
release, he could be imprisoned up to two (2) years. 7. Griffiths also understands that:
the Court shall impose an order of restitution, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
3663A and U.S.S.G. § 5E1.1; and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(A), the Court is required to order
Griffiths to pay a $100.00 special assessment upon conviction for the charged crime.
8. Griffiths understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be
imposed against him upon conviction for a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) is: a term of imprisonment of not more than twenty (20) years; or
a fine of not more than the greater of $500,000, or twice the value of the
funds involved in the transportation, transmission, or transfer, whichever is greater; or both such sentences; and
a term of supervised release of no more than five (5) years following any
term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(b)(1) and U.S.S.G. § 5D1.2(a)(1). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), if Griffiths violates any condition of supervised
release, he could be imprisoned up to three (3) years. 9. Griffiths also understands that:
pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5E1.1 or 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d), the Court may
impose an order of restitution to the victims of the offense; and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3013(a)(2)(A), the Court is required to order
10. Griffiths understands that the statutory maximum penalty which may be
imposed against him upon conviction for a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) is:
a fine of not more than the greater of $250,000; or both such sentences; and
term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(b)(1) and U.S.S.G. § 5D1.2(a)(2). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), if Griffiths violates any condition of supervised
release, he could be imprisoned up to three (3) years. 11. In addition, Griffiths understands that:
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663 and 3664, the Court may impose
an order of restitution to the victim of the offense; and
defendant to pay a $100.00 special assessment upon conviction for the charged crime. SENTENCING GUIDELINES
12.	Griffiths understands the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("Sentencing
Guidelines") are advisory, not mandatory, but that the Court must consider the Sentencing
Guidelines, along with the other factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in determining and
imposing sentence. Griffiths understands that the Sentencing Guidelines determinations
will be made by the Court by a preponderance of the evidence standard. Griffiths
the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range, its sentence must be reasonable based upon
considerations of all relevant sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). SENTENCING AGREEMENT 13. Griffiths understands that the sentence to be imposed on him is within the
sole discretion of the sentencing judge. It is understood that the Sentencing Guidelines are
not binding on the Court. Griffiths acknowledges that the entry of his guilty plea to the
charged offense authorizes the sentencing court to impose any sentence up to and including
the statutory maximum sentence. The United States cannot and does not make any
promises or representations as to what sentence Griffiths will receive. Griffiths
understands that, as provided in Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(3)(B), if the Court does not impose
a sentence consistent with either parties' sentencing recommendation, he nevertheless has
no right to withdraw his plea of guilty. The Antitrust Division will inform the Probation
Office and the Court of (a) this Agreement; (b) the nature and extent of Griffiths' activities
with respect to this case, and all other activities of Griffiths which the Antitrust Division
deems relevant to sentencing; and (c) the timeliness, nature, extent and significance of the
Griffiths's cooperation with the Antitrust Division. In so doing, the Antitrust Division may
use any information it deems relevant, including information provided by Griffiths both
prior and subsequent to the signing of this Agreement. The Antitrust Division reserves the
the offenses charged in the attached Information, the participation of Griffiths therein, and
any other facts or circumstances that it deems relevant. The Antitrust Division also
reserves the right to comment on or to correct any representation made by or on behalf of
Griffiths, and to supply any other information that the Court may require. 14. If the Antitrust Division determines that Griffiths has provided substantial
assistance in any Federal Proceeding, and has otherwise fully complied with all of the terms
of this Agreement, it will file a motion, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, advising the
Court to sentence Griffiths in light of the factors set forth in U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1(a)(1)-(5),
Guidelines ranges for incarceration and fine. The Antitrust Division and Griffiths are free
to recommend or argue for any specific sentence to the Court.
15. Griffiths understands that this Agreement does not in any way affect or limit
the right of the Antitrust Division to respond to and take positions on post-sentencing
16. Griffiths acknowledges that the decision whether he has provided substantial
assistance in any Federal Proceeding is within the sole discretion of the Antitrust Division.
It is understood that should the Antitrust Division determine that Griffiths has not provided
Antitrust Division from any obligation to file a motion pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, but
will not entitle Griffiths to withdraw his guilty plea once it has been entered. Griffiths
further understands that whether or not the Antitrust Division files its motion pursuant to
U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1, the sentence to be imposed on him remains within the sole discretion of
REPRESENTATION BY COUNSEL 17. Griffiths has reviewed all legal and factual aspects of this case with his
attorneys and is fully satisfied with his attorneys' legal representation. Griffiths has
thoroughly reviewed this Agreement with his attorneys, and has received satisfactory
explanations from his attorneys concerning each paragraph of this Agreement and
alternatives available to him other than entering into this Agreement. After conferring with
his attorneys and considering all available alternatives, Griffiths has made a knowing and
voluntary decision to enter into this Agreement. VOLUNTARY PLEA 18. Griffiths' decision to enter into this Agreement and to tender a plea of guilty
is freely and voluntarily made and is not the result of force, threats, assurances, promises,
or representations other than the representations contained in this Agreement. The Antitrust
Division has made no promises or representations to Griffiths as to whether the Court will
VIOLATION OF PLEA AGREEMENT 19. Griffiths agrees that should the Antitrust Division determine in good faith
that Griffiths has given false, misleading, or incomplete information or testimony, or that
Griffiths has otherwise failed to fulfill any of the obligations set out in this Agreement, the
Antitrust Division shall notify counsel for Griffiths in writing by personal or overnight
delivery or facsimile transmission of its intention to void any of its obligations under this
Agreement (except its obligations under this paragraph), and Griffiths will be subject to
prosecution for any federal criminal violation of which the Antitrust Division has
20. Griffiths understands and agrees that in any further prosecution of him
resulting from the release of the Antitrust Division from its obligations under this
Agreement based on Griffiths' violation of the Agreement, any documents, statements,
States, federal grand juries, or courts, and any leads derived therefrom, may be used
against him in any such further prosecution. In addition, Griffiths unconditionally waives
his right to challenge the use of such evidence in any such further prosecution,
21. Griffiths agrees to, and adopts as his own, the factual statement contained in
Schedule A. In the event that Griffiths breaches this Agreement, Griffiths agrees that this
Agreement, including the factual statement contained in Schedule A, provides a sufficient
United States to face charges either in the Information referenced in Paragraphs 1 and 3 of
this Agreement or in any related indictment. Griffiths further agrees not to oppose or
Information referenced in Paragraphs 1 and 3 of this Agreement or in any related
ENTIRETY OF AGREEMENT 22. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Antitrust
Division and Griffiths concerning the disposition of the criminal charges contained in this
case. This Agreement cannot be modified except in writing, signed by the parties.
23. The undersigned attorneys for the Antitrust Division have been authorized
by the Attorney General of the United States to enter this Agreement on behalf of the
Antitrust Division. Dated: 7/6/09
ROBERT P. GRIFFITHS _______________/s/________________
HELEN CHRISTODOULOU Attorneys, Antitrust Division U.S. Department of Justice 26 Federal Plaza, Room 3630 New York, New York 10278 (212) 264-0653 SCHEDULE A The Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and Robert P.
Griffiths agree to stipulate to the following facts:
From approximately December 2001 until approximately August 2004, Griffiths was employed by Bennett Environmental, Inc. ("BEI"). BEI's main office was in Oakville, Ontario, Canada. From approximately December 2001 until approximately the August 2004, BEI transported, treated and disposed of contaminated soils from the United States and elsewhere. From December 2001 through the August 2004, BEI was awarded sub-contracts to transport, treat, and dispose of contaminated soils at the Federal Creosote Superfund Site in Manville, New Jersey ("Federal Creosote"), totaling approximately $43 million. The prime contracts under which BEI was awarded the sub contracts were greater than $1 million. From approximately December 2001 until approximately August 2004, Griffiths participated in a conspiracy with other persons and entities the primary purpose of which was to defraud the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and to commit offenses against the United States by (1) fraudulently inflating BEI's invoices to include kickbacks to certain employees and officers of a prime contractor of the EPA at Federal Creosote and amounts BEI kept for itself; (2) fraudulently receiving the bid prices of other vendors prior to the award of sub-contracts at Federal Creosote without the knowledge, consent or authorization of the United States Army Corps of Engineers ("USACE"); and (3) concealing material facts by agreeing to not disclose to USACE that BEI had submitted false invoices for approximately 20,000 tons of soil to a prime contractor. Griffiths understood that the prime contractor included BEI's fraudulently inflated amounts as part of the costs the prime contractor charged to the EPA for work performed by BEI. The loss to the EPA totaled approximately $2.41 million and the "improper benefit to be conferred" to BEI, as that term is defined in the current version of the United States Sentencing Guidelines §2B4.1, totaled at least $14 million. Acts in furtherance of this conspiracy were carried out within the United States District of New Jersey. Griffiths and his co-conspirators approved kickbacks sent via wire transfers from BEI's bank account in Canada to a co-conspirator's bank account in New Jersey. From approximately February 2003 through approximately September 2004, Griffiths violated Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(h), by participating in a conspiracy to transport, transmit, and transfer funds, that is approximately $207,000, from a place in the United States to and through a place outside the United States with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity, namely wire fraud in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1343, as described in paragraphs (b) through (e) above. On or about November 3, 2005, Griffiths willfully impeded an
official proceeding of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
by falsely stating that 1) he did not discuss the competitor's bid with an
employee of the prime contractor; 2) he had not received information that was
not available to the other bidders; and 3) an employee of the prime contractor
had not been unethical in the bid process.