The point should not be just to have them pay and be punished end of story, nor should it be to just have a group of people there to take a nasty fall.

What should intelligently happen beyond a fine is for the companies who paid to be suppliers, and all Prime Vendors- domestic and overseas ( including and beyond Agility) to have a light shone once and for all. We should know who Prime Vendor Distributors have as suppliers and why. Allowance agreements need to be disclosed. Signed off by both the suppliers and distributors.

Fortune 500 employees and their boardmembers don’t like to commit systemic fraud.

Other Prime Vendors like Sysco and US Foodservice have just had more privacy, and they are more experienced on how to charge entry to be a national house supplier with an allowance program. It amounts to the same padded cost, as what is outlined in the above linked to indictment for PWC Agility. Their allowances are just more institutional, which does not make it right.

The ugly problem is sadly not simple as one offending distributor, it is a lot higher cost and broader than this indictment.

As for the comment:

“I worked closely with Mr. Dalby while at KBR and I was very impressed by him. Unlike almost all of the other senior leadership within KBR, Mr. Dalby was approachable and considerate. He was devoted to maintaining the highest ethics. Most importantly, he did not seem to pursue his own agenda or support past friends or former colleagues like most of the other leadership. His guidance was always simple and predictable: do the right thing and do it openly. He was widely respected by his subordinates and colleagues for his unwavering commitment to ethics.”

It is very common that a person with Mr Dalby’s senior position leaves it up to his underlings to take care of the details and get the money goals met. Middle level management usually takes the fall. Who will it be here? Who should?

I now am compelled to respond to your anonymous contribution and clarify a couple of your misconceptions. First and foremost, KBR did not award the Prime Vendor contract to PWC, the DoD did. If you had actually worked for KBR at the level you claim, you would know this.

Secondly, Najlaa had did in fact have contracts with KBR. Feel free to update yourself HERE

I worked closely with Mr. Dalby while at KBR and I was very impressed by him. Unlike almost all of the other senior leadership within KBR, Mr. Dalby was approachable and considerate. He was devoted to maintaining the highest ethics. Most importantly, he did not seem to pursue his own agenda or support past friends or former colleagues like most of the other leadership. His guidance was always simple and predictable: do the right thing and do it openly. He was widely respected by his subordinates and colleagues for his unwavering commitment to ethics.

In response to this comment….I can not speak for Mr. Dalby personally….be you seemed to nail the rest of KBR management right on the head. Well said

The preceding note from “Curious” is inaccurate to the extent that it attempts to implicate Mr. Dalby or suggest he may have had involvement with any impropriety.

Paul Cerjan (Ret. LG) was KBR’s LOGCAP III Program Manager at a time when GCC received many KBR subcontracts for DFACs. This is significant only to the extent that Mr. Cerjan later worked for Agility and Agility later acquired GCC. This alone suggests no impropriety by Mr. Cerjan, Agility or KBR.

Perry Dalby (Ret. MG) began working for KBR near the end of Mr. Cerjan’s tenure with KBR. Their tenures with KBR overlapped for a period of less than 2 months. While both worked for KBR in Baghdad, Mr. Dalby worked in the IZ (Green Zone) and Mr. Cerjan worked at KBR’s office in South Victory. Mr. Cerjan previously relocated the bulk of senior management from the IZ to South Victory prior to Mr. Dalby’s arrival. Mr. Dalby later relocated to South Victory after Mr. Cerjan departed and was replaced by Steve Arnold. I believe Mr. Cerjan and Mr. Dalby had no prior working relationship or any other relationship preceding KBR. It is unreasonable to suggest that Mr. Dalby was Mr. Cerjan’s righthand man.

I worked closely with Mr. Dalby while at KBR and I was very impressed by him. Unlike almost all of the other senior leadership within KBR, Mr. Dalby was approachable and considerate. He was devoted to maintaining the highest ethics. Most importantly, he did not seem to pursue his own agenda or support past friends or former colleagues like most of the other leadership. His guidance was always simple and predictable: do the right thing and do it openly. He was widely respected by his subordinates and colleagues for his unwavering commitment to ethics.

I’ve worked for KBR in Iraq for a number of years. I enjoy the work and I also understand the validity of much of the criticism aimed at the company and its leadership.

I am compelled to reply to the anonymous contribution of someone who appears to be misinformed of the facts. I agree with most readers of this website that there are, and have been, some poor decisions made by poor decision-makers at KBR that have negatively affected some aspects of the war and in many cases the soldiers themselves. There have been many bad seeds among KBR’s leadership. However, it’s also important to recognize that there have been some individuals who have made significant positive contributions to the war effort, including Mr. Dalby.

I don’t believe Najlaa International Catering Services performed under any cost-plus contracts for the Army or under cost-plus subcontracts for KBR.