GAO IJnit,t:tl Sktt.es Gt!nt?rd Account.ing Off,ce

Fact Sheet for the Honorable Christopher Shays, House of Representatives

DEFENSE PROCUREMENT FRAUD

Information on Plea Agreements and Settlements

GAO (;t~twral Govtw~mt~nt I)ivinion

B-250029

September 17, 1992

The Honorable Christopher Shays House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Shays:

This fact sheet transmits the information you requested on defense procurement fraud cases. The fact sheet contains information on cases the Department of Justice brought against the top 100 companies that received the largest Department of Defense contracts in 1991 that resulted in a criminal conviction or a civil settlement or judgment. You also asked about the extent to which the results of these cases were sealed from the public.

Your interest stemmed from a February 27, 1990, plea agreement between the Northrop Corporation and the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Central District of California in which part of the plea agreement was sealed from the public. In exchange for Northrop's guilty plea, the U.S. Attorney basically agreed to drop certain previous and/or then pending criminal investigations against the company in the Central District of California. Further, it was agreed that neither party would issue a press release or make any public statements regarding the U.S. Attorney's decision to decline prosecution in the pending investigations.

We obtained information on defense procurement fraud cases against the top 100 defense contractors that resulted in a criminal conviction or a civil settlement or judgment from October 1981 through June 1992. For each case, we obtained the (1) name of the contractor, (2) judicial district, (3) case type, (4) case disposition, (5) disposition date, and (6) amount of any monetary award to the government. We also obtained information on the Department of Justice's policy with regard to sealing the plea agreements and settlements of defense procurement fraud cases from the public.

RESULTS

From October 1981 through June 1992, there were 38 criminal convictions involving 28 of the top 100 defense contractors or their subsidiaries (see app. I). Defense

B-250029

contractors pled guilty in 35 out of the 38 criminal convictions. In the other convictions, two contractors were found guilty at trial and the other pled no contest. The criminal fines ordered in these cases exceeded $167 million. Restitution was ordered in 12 cases and totaled over $64 million. Individuals associated with certain contractors were also charged and convicted.

During the same period, there were 92 civil defense procurement fraud cases involving 38 of the top 100 defense contractors or their subsidiaries (see app. II). Fifty eight of the civil cases were settled without litigation. Another 27 cases were settled after the case was filed in court and brought to trial. In three cases, the government had won at least one or more awards and was pursuing further relief. Finally, the government won several awards in four cases. The total amount awarded to the government in the 92 cases exceeded $631 million.

Justice officials told us that information on the number of plea agreements and settlements that were sealed in defense procurement fraud cases is not readily available. They said that the Department of Justice does not have, and views as unnecessary, a formal policy regarding the filing of plea agreements or civil settlements under seal. According to these officials, the Department rarely files criminal plea agreements and civil settlements under seal. They said that criminal plea agreements are only filed under seal to meet certain litigation needs (e.g., in organized crime cases to protect and safeguard confidential sources who are cooperating in continuing investigations). Further, they told us that in a civil qui tam action,l the initial complaint is made under seal for 60 days and can be extended at the government's request. However, the settlement is usually not sealed from the public.

OBJECTIVES, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY

To meet the objectives of your request, we obtained information on all criminal and civil defense procurement fraud cases handled by the Department of Justice that involved the top 100 defense contractors and their subsidiaries for fiscal year 1991 (see app. III). Once a contractor obtains top 100 status, the Department of Defense will always consider that enterprise a top 100 defense contractor.

We interviewed officials from the Department of Justice's Criminal and Civil Divisions and the Department of Defense's

'In a civil qui tam action, a private party brings suit in the name of the United States and is entitled to a portion of the proceeds if the prosecution is successful.

2

B-250029

Office of the Assistant Inspector General. Since the Department of Justice could not identify all criminal defense procurement fraud cases in its management information system, we obtained information on criminal convictions of the top 100 defense contractors from the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Defense. In addition, we reviewed, when available, press releases issued by U.S. Attorney Offices on the criminal convictions. We obtained information on civil settlements from the Justice Department Civil Division's management information system. Generally, we did not independently verify the information provided.

We are sending copies of this fact sheet to the Attorney General; the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil and Criminal Divisions, Department of Justice; the Inspector General for the Department of Defense; and other interested parties. We will also make copies available to others upon request.

Major contributors to this fact sheet are listed in appendix IV. If you have any questions on the material provided, please contact me on (202) 566-0065.

Sincerely yours,

Harold A. Valentine Associate Director, Administration

of Justice Issues

APPENDIX I

CRIMINAL DEFENSE PROCUREMENT FRAUD CONVICTIONS OF TOP 100 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CONTRACTORS, FROM OCTOBER 1981 THROUGH JUNE 1992

APPENDIX I

CBS0 Judicial CS4E Date of number contractor case type district dispoeition conviction Criminal fine Restitution

1. Avco Corporation Procurement Massachusetts Pled guilty 6/24/87 $220,000 0 (oubsidiary of fraud 'SBXtlOn, Inc.)

2. Ror! I ng Company Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 11/13/09 20,000 $4,000,000 fraud Virginia

.I . Enmrflon Electric Company Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 5/11/90 40,000 9,000,000 fraud Missouri

4. E Systems, Inc. Procurement Middle Pled guilty 10/z/90 2,000,000 1,000,000 fraud Florida

5. Fairchild Industries, Procurement western Pled guilty 5/11/90 2,950,000a 0 Inc. fraud Washington

6. OTE Government Systems Procurement Eastern Pled guilty g/12/05 10, OOOb 0 corporation fraud Virginia (subsidiary of GTE Corporation)

7. GTE Government systems Procurement Northern Pled guilty 2/3/09 20,000 0 Corporation fraud California (subsjdiary of GTE corporatiorl)

A. Gnrlorai Electric Company Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 5/13/s 1,040,000 4,000,000 fraud Pennsylvania

9. Goneral Electric Company Procurement Eastern Found 2/2/90 10,000,000 2,200,000 fraud and mail Pennsylvania guilty fraud

1 0 . Could Defense Systems, Procurement Northern Ohio Pled guilty 10/4/85 50,000 0 Inc. fraud

11. Grumnar~ COI poxation Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 3/16/90 20,000 0 fraud Virginia

1%. Aarriu corporation Procurement Middle Pled guilty 7/22/07 40,000 2,053,ooo fraud Florida

1 3 . Harris Corporation Kickback Eastern Pled no 7/2/09 200,000 0 Virginia contest

14. iIazc?lt.inr? corporation Procurement Eastern Pled guilty l/6/09 1,000,000 0 (subsidiary of Emerson fraud Virginia Elrxtric Company)

1 '> . Huqhon Rircratt Company Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 3/g/90 20,000 0 (subsidiary ot General fraud Virginia Mot-or B Cnrporat.ion)

16. Hughes Aircraft Company Procurement Central Found b/15/92 C

(subsidiary of General fraud California guilty Motors Corporation)

1'1 . ITT corporation Procurement Massachusetts Pled guilty 10/24/88 200,000 0 fraud

4

APPENDIX I APPENDIX I

C&H43 Judicial Case Date of number contractor caes type district disposition conviction Criminal fine Restitution

18. Litton Systems, Inc. Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 7/15/M 3,000,000 6,320,OOO (subsidiary of Litton fraud and mail Pennsylvania Industries, Inc.) fraud

19. Loral Corporation Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 12/0/09 1,500,000 0 fraud Virginia

20. LTV Aerospace and Procuremmt Western New Pled guilty e/14/90 10,000 0 Dofnnae Company fraud York (suboidiery of LTV Corporation)

21. Magnavox Government and Procurement Massachusetts Pled guilty g/17/90 150,000 0 Indutltrial Electronics fraud Company (subsidiary of Philip0 GloRilomponfabrieken)

22. Martin Marietta Procurement Maryland Pled guilty 2/17/07 10,000 0 corporation fraud and mail

fraud

23. Motorola, Inc. Procurement Arizona Pled guilty 3/28/88 30,000 15,950,000 fraud

24. Northrop Corporation Procurement Central Pled guilty 2/27/90 17,000,000 0 fraud California

25. Raytheon Corporation Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 3/20/90 10,000 0 fraud Virginia

26. RCA Corporation Procurement Eastern Pled guilty 2/s/90 20,000 0 (subnidiary of General fraud Virginia ElecLric Company)

27. Rocket Research Company Procurement Western Pled guilty 4/17/84 51,000 0 (subsidiary of Olin fraud Washington Corporation)

28. Rockwell International Procurement Northern Pled guilty 10/30/85 200,000 1,000,000 corpoIatlon fraud TC3XL36

29. Rockwell International Procurement Central Pled guilty l/19/89 5,500,000 446,000 corporation fraud California

IO. Science Applications Procurement Southern Pled guilty 8/26/91 550,000 0 International fraud California Corporation

31. Sperry Corporationd Procurement Minnesota Pled guilty 12/83 30,000 650,000 fraud

12. Surldetrilnd Corporation Procurement Western Pled guilty 10/19/88 500,000 0 fraud Washington

:I 3 . SundnLrnnd Corporation Procurement Northern Pled guilty 10/21/88 115,000,000e 0 fraud Illinois

34. TKW, Inc. Procurement Colorado Pled guilty g/3/07 100,000 17,000,000 fraud

35. TRW, Inc. Procurement Northern Ohio Pled guilty a/25/00 30,000 0 fraud

APPENDIX I APPENDIX I

(lane JudJcial n umhr * contractor Case type district

.36. Telodynu, Inc. Procura~nt Eastern fraud Virginia

17. UrlinyR corporation Procurement Arizona

IH. UrliHyH corporation Procurement Eastern fraud Virginia

'rota I

CZlO0

I

Date of diswsitian conviction I Criminal fine

Pled guilty

Pled guilty

Pled guilty

3/23/89 1,500,000

11/10/8l3 250,000

9/b/91 4,000,000

$167.221.000

nevtitution

0

0

0

S64.419.000

"'l'his includ~~e flSO,OOO that Fairchild's subsidiary Voi-Shari agreed to pay as part of guilty pleas to one count each of mail fraud In Lho cMnt.1~11 Dlrrtrict of California, the District of Kansas, and Northern District of Texas.

b ,lusLIcr~ officiala were not sure that the $10,000 criminal fine wa8 in fact assessed in this case.

"AI% ot ~July 1992, Hughes Aircraft Company had not been sentenced in the case.

d I ,I Sr?pt.‘?‘“t”” 1 YHlr, Burroughs Corporation purchased Sperry Corporation and formed a new company called Unisys Corporation.

'%'ho I)cqxirr.munt of .Just.lc!e's Civil Division and the Department of Defense's Office of the Inspector General each recorded $115 ml Illon as the amount received in criminal and civil fines, penalties, and restitution. No specific breakdown was available.

:iourct,: Ikpar-tmfsnt. of Defense, Office of the Inspector General; and Department of Justice, Criminal Division.

6

APPENDIX II

CIVIL DEFENSE PROCUPBlF.NT FRAUD SETI'LHMHNTS WITH TOP 100 OEPAR'H4ENT OF DEFENSE CONTNAC'TOFS. FROM OCTOBER 1981 THHOUGH JUNE 1992 -

APPENDIX II

CAM3 Judicial case oate Of Award to the numbor contractor case type district disposition disposition government

1. AT&T Company Procurement fraud Middle North Settled without q/12/90 $625,000 Carolina litigation

2. Ar9onynttrms, Inc. (subsidiary Voluntary Northern a a 3,000,000 of Honing Company) disclosure fraud California

3. AVCO Corporation (subsidiary Procurement fraud Massachusetts Postfiling 3/31/87 4,405,303 of 'Textron, Inc.) settlement

4. Avondale Industries, Inc. Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 10/10/89 2,500,OOO Louisiana litigation

5. Bclll Helicopter (subsidiary of Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 3/11/SS 80,000,000 Textron, Inc.) Virginia litigation

6. Roolng Company Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 11/13/89 5,000,000 Virginia litigation

7. Hoeing Military Airplane Procurement fraud Kansas Settled without 11/6/89 11,000,000 Company (subsidiary of litigation lloel ng Company)

A. Computer Sciences Corporation Procurement fraud Maryland Settled without 10/q/90 1,750,000 litigation

9. E syotemti, Inc. Procurement fraud Middle Settled without a/23/90 2,650,OOO Florida litigation

10. Eaton corporation Procurement fraud Eastern New Settled without 2/29/88 6,000,000 York litigation

11. Emerson Electric Company Bribery, conflict Eastern Postfiling l/21/06 325,000 of interest, and Missouri eattlement kickback

12. Emerson Electric Company Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 5/7/90 14,000,000 Missouri litigation

13. EX Cell 0 Corporation Procurement fraud central Settled without s/20/90 91,000 (auh:%ldlary of Textron, California litigation Inc.)

14. 1:x Ceil 0 Corporation Procurement fraud District of Settled without g/20/90 3,650,OOO (uubnidiary of Textron, Columbia litigation Inc.)

15. Fairchild Industries, Inc. Qui tamb Central Postfiling 5/11/90 12,036,513 California settlement

16. Ford Aerospace and Procurement fraud Central Settled without 9/22/es 7,000,000 Communication Corporation California litigation (vubuidiary of Ford Motor Compnny )

'I '7 . Ford Aw wpaco and Procurement fraud Central Settled without 10/6/89 200,000 Communication Corporation California litigation (subuidiary of Ford Motor Company)

7

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

ClifWl Judicial case oate of Award to the numt~Ir contractor case type district disposition disposition government

16. F'ord Ae,roepace and Procurement fraud Northern Settled without a/10/90 119,250 Communication Corporation California litigation (uubsldinry of Ford Motwr Company)

19. Ford Aerospace and Voluntary Colorado Settled without R/10/90 111,300 Communication Corporation disclosure fraud litigation (~ubrridiary of Ford Motor Company)

2 0 . Ford Motor Company Procurement fraud Northern Multiply S/10/90 2,606,063 CalifOrnL3 disposedC

21. O~nwal OynamicR Corporation Procurement fraud Northern Settled without 11/21/88 2,600,OOO Texas litigation

22. General Dynamics Corporation Procurement fraud Eastern Postfiling 12/20/91 8,000,000 Michigan settlement

2 .1 . Cerrwal Electric: Company Procurement fraud Eastern Postfiling 9/13/85 1,900,000 Pennsylvania settlement

24. Cunorel Electric Company Procurement fraud Middle Settled without 2/5/88 535,000 Florida litigation

2 !I . Cr?neral E1oct.r ic Company Qui tamb Southern Ohio Postfiling 3/20/89 182,520 settlement

2 6 . Oenotiil Electric Company Qui tamb Southern Ohio Postfiling 3/21/89 265,200 settlement

%'/. Gcrwrdl Electric Company Qui tamb Southern Ohio Postfiling 3/21/09 2,137,200 settlement

28. Gt:nnral Klectric Company Procurement fraud Massachusetts Settled without 10/5/89 900,000 litigation

29. General Electric Company Voluntary Northern Settled without g/19/90 41,200 disclosure fraud California litigation

IO. Gunaral Electric Company Procurement fraud Eastern Postfiling g/28/90 23,690,500 Pennsylvania settlement

.lI. Cr:n~s dl Elcxtric Company Voluntary Massachusetts Settled without 7/19/91 6,303,OOO disclosure fraud litigation

I%. Cwlerill F:1ec:tr ic: company Procurement fraud Southern Ohio Settled without g/9/91 106,617 litigation

$1. Gr~rlc:1‘11 EiocLrlc Company Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 4/3/92 350,000 Pennsylvania litigation

34. Goii Id 0efenxs Systems, Inc. Procurement fraud Northern Ohio Postfiling 11/25/85 2,228,741 settlement

i5. Orummar~ Corporation MiSC. fraud Eastern Settled without 3/16/90 2,480,OOO Virginia litigation

36. GTE corporation Procurement fraud Northern Settled without l/27/09 383,000 California litigation

l/ . lldr 11s Corporation Procurement fraud Middle Postfiling 9/15/07 4,306,OOO Florida settlement

8

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

C’illS“ Judicial Case Date of Award to the r111111tx11 <:01,t, ac t.o* case type district disposition disposition government

jfl. H<ll I in Cclrporat.ior, d Procurement fraud District of Multiply b/5/09 300,000 Columbia disposedc

j'>. tliizlrl t., ii‘! Car pc~~atlon Bribery, conflict Eastern Settled without l/6/89 500,000 ( nuts idinry of Emerson of interest, and Virginia litigation E lort. I ic Company) kickback

40. Horloywt3 I 1 , I "C . Voluntary Middle Settled without l/3/91 700,000 disclosure fraud Florida litigation

41. tlonc?yw? I I , I nc. VOlU"tary Northern Settled without 12/30/91 2,013,813 disclosure fraud Illinois litigation

42. Iluqhc?!l Aircraft Company Voluntary Central Settled without 6/29/09 1,295,OOO (nuh~itli,iry of General disclosure fraud California litigation Mot or !i (!or ~>c'riit.i on)

4 1. tfuqhwi Aircraft. Company Misc. fraud Eastern Settled without 3/g/90 3,600,000 (~ut~!l idir(ry of Gerleral Virginia litigation Mot 01 R i!or poration)

44. fluqhw A i I c* aft. Company Qui tam' Central Postfiling 12/1-l/91 9,000,000 (~ub!iidiary of General California settlement Mot or :s Corporation)

4 5 . tluqtwri Mil:ni I<! Syritems Group Volu"tary Central Settled without 12/19/88 151,716 ( !iutx*idiary of General disclosure fraud California litigation Motor :i (!orpor;~tion)

46. I, i t.t.on Syn Wmn, 1 nc. Qui tamb Southern Postfiling 6/S/83 137,610 ( rrubr4 idiary of Litton Mississippi settlement I Iltfll~lt I lr!a, Inc.)

4'7. I> i t.t on sy:i t.om:i , I nc . Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 10/10/80 1,950,000 (riub~idiary ot Litton Pennsylvania litigation I ndu~it I i en, T nc . )

4". I. i 1. Li,Il !;y!ltm!J, Inc. Procurement fraud Southern Iowa Settled without 5/6/91 2,400,OOO (uutxiidiary of Litton litigation I r~durit.f ien, Inc. )

40. I,cn cl f (:<)I par <rt.ion Bribery, conflict Eastern Settled without 12/S/89 4,270,ooo of interest, and Virginia litigation kickback

‘I 0 . Lor .,I Co1 poration Qui tamb Southern New a a 2,000,000 York

0 1 . LTV nr:r mipdcc and Dof CnYe Qui tamb Massachusetts Postfiling S/24/90 1,125,OOO Ccmpi~ny ( :sutm idiary of LTV settlement Cot pnration)

5%. Mnqririvox GCWOI ,mrmt. and Procurement fraud Northern Settled without 5/24/91 1,630,000 1 rltlu:it I itl 1 t: Ic?r:tronics Indiana litigation C'~mptr~y (rlub:iidi<lry of I'h i I I p!' (:Ior?i l~%mp'!ntdbr iokc?")

5 I. MC11 Li n Mar iot.ta Car poration Procurement fraud Central Postfiling j/12/135 200,000 California settlement

!J 4 . Mill tin Md1 ic?t.t.a Corporation Procurement fraud Maryland Postfiling S/26/88 430,000 settlement

9

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

ClltlE Judicial CL388 Date of Award to the number contractor Caee type district disposition disposition government

55. Martin Marietta Corporation Procurement fraud Middle Settled without a/31/90 2,565,377 Florida litigation

56. Martin Marietta Corporation Procurement fraud Maryland Settled without 4/22/92 752,000 litigation

57. McDonnell Douglas Corporation Qui tamb Central Postfiling 8/29/89 28,000 California settlement

56. McDonnell Douglas Electronics Procurement fraud Eastern Postfiling l/Zl/t38 1,600,000 Company (subsidiary of Missouri settlement McDonnell Douglas Corporation)

s9. McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Procurement fraud Arizona Settled without 3/13/91 7,500,000 Company (subsidiary of litigation McDonnell Douglas Corporation)

60. McDonnell F115, McDonnell Procurement fraud Eastern Settled without 3/13/91 1,100,000 Aircraft Company, McDonnell MiSSOWi litigation Douglas Corporation; General Motors Company; Hughes Aircraft Company

61. Motorola, Inc. Procurement fraud Arizona Settled without 3/28/88 16,776,057 litigation

62. Motorola, Inc. Procurement fraud . Arizona Settled without l/19/90 750,000 litigation

63. Northrop Corporation Procurement fraud Central Multiply B/7/89 45,050 California disposedC

64. Northrop Corporation Qui t.amb Central Postfiling 7/30/91 7,136,OOO California settlement

65. Northrop Corporation Procurement fraud Central Postfiling 12/31/91 2,200,000 California settlement

66. Northrop Corporation Qui tamb Middle Settled without 5/19/92 525,000 Georgia litigation

b-i. Northrop Corporation Qui tamb Central Postfiling 5/19/92 1,500,000 California settlement

68. Olin Corporation Voluntary Connecticut Settled without 5/17/91 694,586 disclosure fraud litigation

69. Raytheon Company MiSC. fraud Eastern Settled without 3/21/90 990,000 Virginia litigation

70. RCA Corporation (subsidiary of Misc. fraud Eastern Settled without 2/5/90 2,480,OOO General Electric Company) Virginia litigation

71. Rocket Research Company Procurement fraud Western Postfiling 4/27/04 450,000 (subsidiary of Olin Washington settlement Corporation)

72. Rockwell International Corporation

7 3 . Science Applications International Corporation

Procurement fraud Central Settled without 6/26/89 1,264,752 California litigation

Voluntary Southern Multiply a/27/91 880,871 disclosure fraud California disposed=

10

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

I I Judicial I

CatX3 I

Date of case twx district diswsition disoonition

Award to the aovernment

'14. !;pNrry ~!mpolatione Procurement fraud I

Utah I

,Postfiling I

11/5/&K settlement

600,000

‘I ‘1 . I

!jp+rry C!c)rpOratiOtlD I Procurement fraud 500,000 Arizona Settled without

litigation 10/1s/es

Middle Alabama

New Mexico

Settled without litigation

Settled without litigation

3/2?/89

g/6/91

Northern Settled without Illinois litigation

Western Settled without Washington litigation

10/2l/SS

5/23/SS

1,514,ooo 7 f, . Spwrry Corporatione Procurement fraud

17. Sperry c01 poratione Procurement fraud

7 H . Sundetrand Corporation Procurement fraud

'79. Sundst.rand Data Control, Inc. Procurement fraud (nubsidiary of Sundstrand cornornt. ion I

12,000,000

115,000,000f

12,591,533

II 0 . I

Tc!ludyrw!, In{:. Procurement fraud I

Northern Ohio I

Postfiling 6/13/86 settlement

i Settled without litigation

12/2O/fJS

Postfiling settlement

12/29/88

Settled without litigation

3/23/89

148,677

1,261,662

255,000

2,077,742

RI. 'Sc~lodyr~:, Inc.

0%. 'SC> 1 ttd yne, I nc .

II J. Tc?lodync?, rnt:.

H4. Telodynrl, Inc.

H‘, . 'l%?ledyrl<! Avionics (nubsidiary of Telrdvnr!, Inc. 1

Procurement fraud Northern Ohio

Qui tamb District of Columbia

Rribery, conflict Eastern of interest, and Virginia kickback

voluntary Northern Ohio disclosure fraud

Procurement fraud Western Virainia

1,800,000

230,750

t17 . TRW, lrr. I Procurement fraud 1 Colorado

Qui tamb Eastern New York

1 Seiezhout 1 ::::,: 4,074,ooo

8,200,000

3,200,000 B9. I

llrli!lys Car poration Postfiling I

g/6/91 settlement

Qui t.amb Southern TCBC&S

159,000,000 Bribery, conflict of interest, and kickback

Eastern Settled withqut Virginia litigation

90. unisyu Corporation g/6/91

Procurement fraud / E~f;:i;;~, 2,430,OOO

9%. W01il.i nqhousc? Electric Procurement fraud 1 Maryland 665,000

$631.867.603

litigation

"'l'hrt Dt~parLmerrt of Justice has won one or more awards and is pursuing further relief in the case.

11

APPENDIX II APPENDIX II

bA qui tam action is one in which a private party brings suit in the name of the United States and is entitled to a portion Of the proceeda if the prosecution is successful.

'The Department of Justice haa won several awards in the case. The date listed is the date of tho most recent award.

dThis settlemant Is part of a larger settlement made with Amworld, Inc., and Ocean Applied Research, Inc.

"In September 1986, the Burroughe Corporation purchased the Sperry Corporation and formed a new company called Unisys Corporation.

'The Department of Justice's Civil Division and the Department of Defense's Office of Inspector General each recorded $115 million

AB the amOunt received in criminal and civil fines, penalties, and restitution. No specific breakdown was available.

YOUKO: U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division.

12

APPENDIX III

INDEX OF 100 PARENT COMPANIES THAT RECEIVED THE LARGEST DOLLAR VOLUME OF ~___- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PRIME CONTRACT AWANDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991

APPENDIX III

llnrlk Parent company Rank Parent company 46 Anronpaor? Corporation 27 International Business Machines Corporation ?5 Al 1 iant. ToahrJyatuma, Inc. 87 International Shipholding Corporation 2 'J Allied Slqnal, Inc. 22 ITP Corporation n4 AnY31ntlo fIrme Corporation 44 John Hopkins University ‘J .k Amnr ican Prenidont Companion Ltd. 59 Johnson Controls, Inc. 2 n Arnor icnn l'alr,phone and Telegraph Company 70 Kaman Corporation L,'J Amoricnn 'I'rans Air Kalitta Joint Venture 13 Litton Industries, Inc. 6 t, Amoco Corporation 9 Lockheed Corporation 40 Arco Productn Company 96 Logicon, Inc. "I 1 A~trcxxzutics Corporation of America 16 Loral Corporation 5 1 Avondalc? lndurlt.rios, Inc. 17 LTV Corporation fb7 Hilhrillrl NaLiOnill 01 1 8 Martin Marietta Corporation 21 fic1t.h Holding Car poration 45 Massachusette Institute of Technology 'I h II<?1 1 llrx>inq .Jolnt Venture 1 McDonnell Douglas Corporation 'I '3 fi I n<,k ilrld I)t?ckr?r Car poration 100 MIP Instandsetzungsbetric h 1 lioelnq <!ompnny and Sikorsky Aircraft Joint Venture 41 Mitre Corporation 1n Iicw lnq ('urnpony 64 Mobil Corporation I 5 Il<)ol: Al Ir?n and Hamilton, Inc. 74 Motor Oils Hellas Corinth Refinery (4 'I CAR I nduntr its Ltd. 57 Motorola, Inc. 94 (lit I t.cx I'et.ro Ir?um f!orporetion 78 National Steel and Shipbuilding Company H n Car I yin Cm porntion 99 Norfolk Shipbuilding Drydock Corporation 5h (!l.'M Inter 11~1.ionaI , Inc. 6 Northrop Corporation fib ?hcwr on COT pal atian 31 Olin Corporation 6 1 c:hry!1l(?I corpo,at.,on 39 Oshkosh Truck Corporation ‘ln rOilRt.ill ('01 porntion 54 Penn Central Corporation 41 ('t~mputor Cciencas Corporation 72 Philips Gloellampenfabrieken 57 CSX Corporation 5 Raytheon Company 'I 1 Du k'ont. F: I De NOmwrs and Company 12 Rockwell International Corporation In llyncorp 68 Rolls Royce, Plc. I% t: :;y~3t.on,rl, Inc. 49 Royal Dutch Shell Group of Companies 'JO Eat.on Car poration 36 Science Applications International Corporation 7 7 EGbO, I nc . 82 Sequa Corporation '1 5 Kw:c) F:lw:t~o~~ic:s Cot poration 71 Shore Management, Inc. 1 .1 ~:xxon Cnr porat.ion 83 Ssangyong Oil Refining Company, Ltd.

24 F'l!d Ex IBan Am Nor t hwc!nt. et al. Joint Venturea 92 Sun Company, Inc. 1U P’MC’ Cur par at ion 37 Teledyne, Inc. 4% Foundar.ion tif!n 1t.h Corporation 51 Tenneco, Inc. 14 CarlmJr p, I nt: . 21 Texas Instruments, Inc. 2 C0nnra L I>ynamicri Corporation 20 Textron, Inc.

I3 0 Gf:norii I F: Inct.r ir: Company, Plc. 60 Thiokol Corporation '1 Oonc~r a 1 F:lw:t.r ic Company 89 Tracer, Inc. 4 Cwlctrnl t.lo+.r,rn corporation 95 Trinity Industries, Inc. ___...

10 (~runman corporation 19 TRW, Inc. 2 b GTE co1 par ill.1 on 62 Unaka Company, Inc. HI tinlliburton Company 15 unlsys Corporation 5 tt flilr I in CO1 poration 9s United Industrial Corporation I II Iliil SC0 Crlr [101 at.1 on 7 United Technologies Corporation B f, Ilontw 1 I'hc! Ipu Con:ltruction Company 85 Vinnell Corporation 5 0 lic~rc:ulc~f~, Inc. 11 Westinghouse Electric Corporation 3 'I Honc~ywr!l 1 , Inc. 47 World Rosen Key Amer et al. Joint Venture'

%&trill Exprw~i, Northwe!it Airlines, Pan Am World Airways, Tower Air, and United Parcel Service Joint Venture.

t, War Id Ai~wy!~, HoUt?nbalm Aviation, Key Airlines, American Airlines, Evergreen International Airlines, and Emery Worldwide Joint van tu rc) .

13

APPENDIX IV

MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS FACT SHEET

APPENDIX IV

GENERAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Edward H. Stephenson, Assistant Director, Administration of Justice Issues

Katrina R. Moss, Evaluator-in-Charge Eduardo N. Luna, Evaluator

(181947)

1. 4

Orclrring Inform;~t.io~l

The first, copy of tach GAO rt~port. is free. Additional copies are $2 t+dl. Orders should be sent. t,o the following atlclrt*ss, accompanied by a check or money order made oat, to the Slll)erintelll<i~t~t, of I)ocu- IIWII~,S, when necessary. Orders for 100 or more copks to be mailtd to N single addrt9s itrf-L discount.ed 28 l)ercent,.

I J.S. General Accounting Office I’.(). 130x 6015 Gait.h~rsbnrg, MD 20877

Orders may also be plac~l by calling (202) 275-6241.

United States Gc?ncral Accouuting Office Washingtan, D.C. 20548

Official Business Penalty for Private lJst? $300

First-Class Mail Postage & Fees Paid

GAO Permit No. G100