O OF FF FI IC CE E O OF F T TH HE E S SP PE EC CI IA AL L I IN NS SP PE EC CT TO OR R G GE EN NE ER RA AL L F FO OR R I IR RA AQ Q R RE EC CO ON NS ST TR RU UC CT TI IO ON N
A A AT T C C CO O N N NO D D K K KE E EL O ON TT T TE E ES S ST T TA A AT T TI I IO O ON N N E E EN N NG G GA A AG G GE E EM M ME E EN N NT T T
ON N NC C CE E ER R RN N NI I IN N NG G G T T TH H HE E E A A AW W WA A AR R RD D D O O OF F F
- -C C CO O OM M MP P PE E ET T TI N N-
I IT T TI I IV V VE E E C C CO O ON N NT T TR R RA A AC C CT T T
DA A AC C CA A A6 6 63 3 3-
- -0 0 03 3 3-
- -D D D-
- -0 0 00 0 00 0 05 5 5 T T TO O O
L LL L LO O OG G GG G G, , , B B BR R RO O OW W WN N S S SE E ER R RV V VI I IC C CE E ES S S, , , N, , , A A AN N I I IN N NC C C. . .
ND D D R R RO O OO O OT T T
R R RE E EV V VI I IS S SE E ED D D
R R RE E EP P PO O OR R RT T T N N NU U UM M MB B BE E ER R R S S SI I IG G GI I IR R R-
- -0 0 05 5 5-
- -0 0 01 1 19 9 9
S S SE E EP P PT T TE E EM M MB B BE E ER R R 3 3 30 0 0, , , 2 2 20 0 00 0 05 5 5

SPECIAL INSPE CTOR GENE RAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION
September 30, 2005
MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, DEFENSE RECONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
OFFICE
CHIEF OF ENGINEERS AND COMMANDER, U.S.ARMY
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
COMMANDER, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,
SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION
SUBJECT: Attestation Engagement Report Concerning the Award of
Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 to Kellogg, Brown,
and Root Services, Inc. (Report No. SIGIR 05-019)
We are providing this report for your information and use. We performed the procedures
enumerated in Appendix C, which were requested by the Defense Reconstruction Support
Office, because a potential conflict of interest existed with respect to the subject contract
for the public accounting firm that the Defense Reconstruction Support Office had
engaged to perform the attestation engagement of all non-competitively awarded
contracts issued for the Coalition Provisional Authority using funds from the
Development Fund for Iraq. That particular attestation engagement was initiated at the
behest of the United Nations’ International Advisory and Monitoring Board.
This report does not contain recommendations; therefore, no written response to this
report is required. We appreciate the courtesies extended to our staff by the
representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Southwestern Division and the
Defense Contract Audit Agency. For additional information on this report, please contact
Mr. Joseph T. McDermott at joseph.mcdermott@sigir.mil or at (703) 428-1100 or
Mr Brian M. Flynn at brian.flynn@sigir.mil or at (703) 428-1404. For the report
distribution, see Appendix H.
Stuart W. Bowen, Jr.
Inspector General
400 Army Navy Drive • Arlington, Virginia 22202

Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction
Report Number SIGIR 05-019 (Project No. SIGIR-2005-13)
September 30, 2005
Attestation Engagement Concerning the Award of Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 to Kellogg, Brown, and Root Services, Inc.
Executive Summary
Introduction. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) was asked
by the DoD’s Defense Reconstruction Support Office to provide an attestation on a non-
competitively awarded contract that Kellogg, Brown & Root obtained prior to the advent
of the 2003 Iraq war. We performed agreed-upon procedures to determine whether the
non-competitive award of the contract was appropriately justified and whether the goods
and services delivered and billed for were those required under the contract. As the
following report substantiates, we conclude that the use of the non-competitive contract
was appropriately justified and that the goods and services delivered and billed for were
those required under the contract.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 (UNSCR 1483), dated May 22, 2003,
noted the establishment of the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI). UNSCR 1483
authorized the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), in consultation with the Iraqi
interim administration, to direct disbursements from the DFI. Paragraph 14 of UNSCR
1483 directs that the DFI shall be used in a transparent manner to meet the humanitarian
needs of the Iraqi people, for the economic reconstruction and repair of Iraq’s
infrastructure, for the continued disarmament of Iraq, for the costs of Iraqi civilian
administration, and for other purposes benefiting the people of Iraq. The CPA ceased to
exist on June 28, 2004, and the CPA Administrator passed governing authority to the
Interim Iraqi Government.
Pursuant to paragraph 12 of UNSCR 1483, the International Advisory and Monitoring
Board (IAMB) requested that the Department of Defense (DoD) enter into a contract with
an internationally-recognized accounting firm for the audit of non-competitive contracts
awarded by the CPA (and funded from the DFI). The purpose of the audit was to
determine whether disbursements of DFI funds under non-competitive contracts were
consistent with the transparency provision in paragraph 14 of UNSCR 1483 and whether
there was sufficient documentation to justify the non-competitive awards.
Objective. We performed the agreed-upon procedures enumerated in Appendix C,
which were requested by the Defense Reconstruction Support Office, because a potential
conflict of interest existed (with respect to the subject contract) for the internationally-
recognized accounting firm that the Defense Reconstruction Support Office engaged to
perform an attestation engagement of all non-competitively awarded contracts issued for
the CPA using DFI funds.
The procedures we performed were agreed to by the Defense Reconstruction Support
Office and the IAMB. We performed those procedures solely to assist in assessing
whether disbursements of DFI funds for non-competitive contract DACA63-03-D-0005
awarded to Brown and Root Services, a division of Kellogg, Brown, and Root, were
consistent with the transparency provision in paragraph 14 of UNSCR 1483 and whether
there was sufficient documentation to justify the non-competitive award.
i

The overall objectives of this attestation engagement were to determine whether adequate
documentation existed that: (1) a non-competitive contract was justified; (2) a fair and
reasonable price was obtained; (3) the contracting official had the authority to enter into a
non-competitive contract; (4) goods and services received and paid for under the contract
were the goods and services provided for in the contract; and (5) the total amount of
disbursements under the contract did not exceed the total contract amount.
Results The agreed-upon procedures that we performed disclosed that:
1. The non-competitive award of contract number DACA63-03-D-0005 to Brown,
and Root Services, a division of Kellogg, Brown and Root, was properly justified.
2. The contract is a cost-plus award-fee (CPAF) indefinite delivery, indefinite
quantity (IDIQ) contract. Final determination of fair and reasonable price is not
made until the final incurred cost audit by the Defense Contract Audit Agency.
3. The only individual authorized by United States Code, Title 41, Section 253 to
approve non-competitive contracting actions in excess of $50 million is the
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology). The
Justification and Approval for the contract was signed by the Assistant Secretary
of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology).
4. The goods and services received and paid for with DFI funds under the contract
were the goods and services provided for in the contract.
5. The total amount of DFI fund disbursements under the contract did not exceed the
total amount obligated for the contract.
Recommendations. not contain any recommendations.
Because we did not identify any adverse findings, this report does
ii

Table of Contents
Executive Summary i
Introduction
Background 1
Objective 1
Finding
Agreed-Upon Procedures and Results 3
Appendixes
A. Scope and Methodology 7
B. Prior Audit Coverage 9
C. Agreed-Upon Procedures To Be Performed 14
D. Summary of Agreed-Upon Procedure Results 17
E. Schedule of Non-Competitive Contract Justification 20
F. Schedule of Disbursements 22
G. Acronyms 26
H. Report Distribution 27
I. Attestation Engagement Team Members 29

Background
Introduction
The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) was asked by the DoD’s
Defense Reconstruction Support Office to provide an attestation on a non-competitively
awarded contract that Kellogg, Brown & Root obtained prior to the advent of the 2003
Iraq war. We performed agreed-upon procedures to determine whether the non-
competitive award of the contract was appropriately justified and whether the goods and
services delivered and billed for were those required under the contract. As the following
report substantiates, we conclude that the use of the non-competitive contract was
appropriately justified and that the goods and services delivered and billed for were those
required under the contract.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483 (UNSCR 1483), dated May 22, 2003,
noted the establishment of the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI). UNSCR 1483
authorized the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), in consultation with the Iraqi
interim administration, to direct disbursements from the DFI. Paragraph 14 of UNSCR
1483 directs that the DFI shall be used in a transparent manner to meet the humanitarian
needs of the Iraqi people, for the economic reconstruction and repair of Iraq’s
infrastructure, for the continued disarmament of Iraq, for the costs of Iraqi civilian
administration, and for other purposes benefiting the people of Iraq.
The DFI was the primary financial vehicle to channel revenue from ongoing Iraqi oil
sales, unencumbered Oil for Food deposits, and repatriated Iraqi assets into the relief and
reconstruction of Iraq. During the CPA’s administration of Iraq, the CPA Comptroller
managed the DFI and the Program Review Board (PRB), which included voting
representatives from the CPA, Iraqi interim administration, United Kingdom, Australia
and the Council for International Coordination, was responsible for recommending
expenditures of resources from the DFI. The CPA ceased to exist on June 28, 2004, and
the CPA Administrator passed governing authority to the Interim Iraqi Government.
As provided in paragraph 12 of UNSCR 1483, the International Advisory and Monitoring
Board (IAMB) requested that the Department of Defense (DoD) enter into a contract with
an internationally-recognized accounting firm for the audit of non-competitive contracts
awarded by the CPA and funded by the DFI. The purpose of the audit was to determine
whether disbursements of DFI funds under such contracts were consistent with the
transparency provision in paragraph 14 of UNSCR 1483 and whether there was sufficient
documentation to justify the non-competitive awards.
Objective
We performed the agreed-upon procedures enumerated in Appendix C, which were
requested by the Defense Reconstruction Support Office because a potential conflict of
interest existed (with respect to the subject contract) for the internationally-recognized
accounting firm that the Defense Reconstruction Support Office engaged to perform an
attestation engagement of all non-competitively awarded contracts issued for the CPA
using DFI funds.
1

The procedures we performed were agreed to by the Defense Reconstruction Support
Office and the IAMB. We performed those procedures solely to assist in assessing
whether disbursements of DFI funds for non-competitive contract DACA63-03-D-0005
(awarded to Brown and Root Services, a division of Kellogg, Brown and Root [KBR])
were consistent with the transparency provision in paragraph 14 of UNSCR 1483 and
whether there was sufficient documentation to justify the non-competitive award.
The overall objectives of this attestation engagement were to determine whether adequate
documentation existed that: (1) a non-competitive contract was justified; (2) a fair and
reasonable price was obtained; (3) the contracting official had the authority to enter into a
non-competitive contract; (4) goods and services received and paid for under the contract
were the goods and services provided for in the contract; and (5) the total amount of
disbursements under the contract did not exceed the total contract amount.
2

Agreed-Upon Procedures and Results
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) properly justified and obtained
approval from the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and
Technology) for the non-competitive award of contract DACA63-03-D-0005. In
addition, the goods and services received under the contract, and paid for with DFI funds,
were the goods and services required under the contract. And the total amount of DFI
fund disbursements did not exceed the total amount obligated for the contract.
Non-Competitive Award Documentation and Price
Reasonableness
On March 8, 2003, the USACE Fort Worth District Contracting Division awarded a non-
competitive contract to KBR. This cost-plus award-fee (CPAF) indefinite-delivery
indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract, numbered DACA63-03-D-0005, was awarded by
USACE, pursuant to United States Code, Title 10, Section 2304(c)(1), which allows non-
competitive contracting when only one responsible source is available and no other
supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements.
Justification and Approval. Our review determined that prior to awarding the contract,
USACE properly prepared and submitted its justification for the non-competitive
contracting action. The accuracy and completeness of the justification was certified by
the contracting officer. The justification specifically stated that the requirement was
restricted to a sole source due to the necessity that a contract be immediately available to
implement the Contingency Support Plan (CSP), in case armed conflict with Iraq
occurred before a competition could be conducted. The execution of the CSP would see
to the repair and continuity of operations of the Iraqi oil infrastructure. USACE
emphasized that complete familiarity with the CSP and access to proprietary essential
elements was necessary to maintain and implement the CSP. In addition, because the
CSP was and remains classified, any other contractor would require substantial time to
assure appropriate facilities and personnel clearances to enable their review of the CSP.
KBR already had a cadre of individuals cleared for the plan’s classified aspects. As such,
KBR, which developed the CSP under a previously competitively awarded contract, was
the only contractor able to satisfy the requirements for immediate execution of the CSP.
As required by United States Code, Title 41, Section 253, for contracting actions in
excess of $50 million, the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and
Technology) approved the award of the sole source contract on February 28, 2003.
Price Reasonableness. The Justification and Approval document for contract DACA63-
03-D-0005 contained a signed statement from the Contracting Officer that the contract
was a CPAF/IDIQ contract and that costs would be continuously monitored to ensure that
they were fair and reasonable and properly allocated. The process begins with the price
proposal submitted by the contractor and continues through DCAA price proposal audit,
task order definitization, and DCAA internal control audits. Final determination of fair
and reasonable price is not made until the final incurred cost audit by DCAA.
3

DFI Funded Task Orders
Ten task orders were issued under the CPAF/IDIQ contract DACA63-03-D-0005.
Initially, the task orders were funded with U. S. Army Operations and Maintenance
funds. However, beginning in September 2003, the PRB voted to fund some of the task
orders with DFI funds. Task Orders 0001 through 0004 and part of task order 0005 were
funded using U. S. Army Operations and Maintenance funds. Task Order 0005 was also
funded with Iraqi seized and vested funds, as well as DFI funds. Task Orders 0006
through 0010 were funded with DFI funds. From September 2003 to March 2004, the
PRB voted to provide, on a reimbursable basis, nearly $1.4 billion in DFI funds for the
procurement and distribution of fuel products and Iraqi oil infrastructure restoration.
Task Order Supplies and Services. The statements of work for Task Orders 0005, and
0007 through 0010 provide support for Iraq oil restoration and for fuel distribution.
Specifically, these task orders required the repair of fuel products distribution systems,
and the procurement, importation and distribution of refined products (liquid products)
and gas products (mixtures of propane and butanes referred to as LPG) to meet the
domestic demand for commercial and private use of fuel within Iraq. In addition, the
contractor was to monitor fuel demand and availability as necessary to prevent localized
or large-scale fuel shortfalls.
The statement of work for Task Order 0006 provides for restoration of essential oil
infrastructure. Specifically, the effort required was intended to support actions required
to restore the pipeline crossing the Tigris River; install 50 kilometers of pipeline from
Kirkuk to the Tigris River; and install emergency back-up generation capability at
various locations.
Transparency of Contracting Action and Related
Disbursements
The procedures for assessing transparency, which were previously agreed to by the
Defense Reconstruction Support Office and the IAMB required that we obtain and
examine authoritative receipt, invoicing, and disbursement documents related to DFI-
funded contracting actions executed pursuant to this contract. See Appendix C for details
on the agreed upon procedures.
Receiving Reports. USACE did not use a Material Inspection and Receiving Report,
form DD 250, when recording the receipt of goods and services on contract DACA63-03-
D-0005. Instead, an electronic receiving report was generated in the Corps of Engineers
Financial Management System (CEFMS).
According to the stateside Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), the assisting field
ACO in Iraq did not have access to CEFMS. As such, when an invoice was received
from the contractor, the stateside ACO would place a phone call to the field ACO,
identify the invoice, and determine whether the goods or services were delivered. The
field ACO, upon receiving a copy of the invoice, would confirm the receipt of goods or
services. The ACO or other authorized USACE personnel would then sign-off on the
receiving report in CEFMS. The field ACO maintained a daily log of work performed,
and, in the case of the fuel procurement and distribution, he maintained an accounting of
the amount of fuel received.
4

Our review of the receiving reports generated in CEFMS revealed that the amount of
goods and services signed-off for in CEFMS matched the goods and services identified in
the contract file. The goods and services received included the repair of fuel product
distribution systems, the procurement and transportation of refined fuel products, the
construction of a pipeline, and the installation of emergency back-up generation
capability.
Contractor Invoices. Invoices submitted by KBR did not contain descriptive
information identifying the supplies and services rendered. Instead, the bulk of the line
items contained in the invoices were subcontractor names and amounts owed. Attached
to each invoice or group of invoices was a voucher signed and dated by a Defense
Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) auditor approving “provisional payment subject to later
audit.” The DoD Financial Management Regulation requires approval of invoices and
vouchers for cost-plus fixed-fee or other reimbursement contracts by the ACO or his
authorized representative, in this case, the DCAA auditor. We relied on the work of
DCAA auditors in identifying supplies and services.
The DCAA auditors used a six-step process to review and approve contractor invoices for
provisional payment, one of which was the testing of subcontractor invoices to determine
whether they support the contractor’s billed costs. In addition to the provisional approval
of invoices, DCAA auditors reviewed contractor proposals, comparing costs to the scope
of work. A DCAA supervisory auditor audited invoices for Task Orders 0005 and 0007
through 0010 and verified that the invoices were for the procurement and distribution of
fuel products. The DCAA supervisory auditor also reviewed the back-up data for the
proposal for work under Task Order 0006, which involved reconstruction drilling for oil
pipelines.
Based on our review of the invoicing documents and our discussions with DCAA
auditors concerning their provisional approval of contractor invoices, as well as our
review of receiving reports, we determined that KBR submitted 91 invoices dated on or
before April 30, 2005. We also determined that the goods and services identified in the
invoices conformed to the goods and services identified in the receiving reports.
Disbursements. Disbursements were made in accordance with contract terms except for
two instances where late payments resulted in interest penalties.
Our review determined that USACE made a total of 46 disbursements totaling nearly
$1.2 billion on or before April 30, 2005. The disbursements included nearly $6 thousand
in interest penalties. See Appendix F for disbursement details.
The contract required payment on invoices by USACE to the contractor within 30 days of
the invoice’s receipt. Task Order 0005 cited the 30-day payment requirement. However,
payment terms were not defined for Task Orders 0006 through 0010. According to the
ACO, USACE made a request to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Policy and
Procurement) for the endorsement of accelerated payment methods on contract DACA63-
03-D-0005, due to the shortened terms under KBR subcontracts for fuel delivery. On
December 22, 2003, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Policy and
Procurement) issued a memorandum in response to USACE’s request for acceleration
granting the Contracting Officer authority to make interim invoice payments within
14 days of invoice receipt. In all but the two instances in which late payments resulted in
interest penalty, USACE made disbursements in accordance with the required payment
terms.
5

Our review and comparison of disbursement documents in CEFMS for task orders 0005
through 0010 determined that the total amount of PRB-approved disbursements were
made on or before April 30, 2005 for each task order and each disbursement was equal to
or less than the authorized amounts identified in the funding documents. The following
table shows the total disbursements made on or before April 30, 2005, as well as the
funding by task order assigned by USACE.
Task Order Disbursed on or Before
April 30, 2005
Total Funding
0005 $478,918,294.32 $545,000,000.00
0006 $187,005,803.90 $220,000,000.00
0007 $277,500,711.89 $325,000,000.00
0008 $153,000,000.00
0009 $55,080,000.01
0010 $17,337,655.37 $277,235,126.64
Totals $1,168,842,465.49 $1,367,235,126.64
As seen in the table above, the PRB voted to provide, on a reimbursable basis, nearly
$1.4 billion in DFI funds for the procurement and distribution of fuel products and the
restoration of the Iraqi oil infrastructure. To support these efforts, USACE disbursed
nearly $1.2 billion on or before April 30, 2005, pursuant to the task orders we reviewed.
Recommendations
Because we did not identify any adverse findings, this report does not contain any
recommendations.
6

Appendix A. Scope and Methodology
We performed the agreed-upon procedures enumerated in Appendix C, which were
requested by the Defense Reconstruction Support Office because a potential conflict of
interest existed for the internationally-recognized accounting firm that the Defense
Reconstruction Support Office engaged to perform an attestation engagement of all non-
competitively awarded contracts issued for the Coalition Provisional Authority using DFI
funds with respect to contract DACA63-03-D-0005 awarded to Brown and Root
Services, a division of KBR.
The procedures we performed were agreed to by the Defense Reconstruction Support
Office and the IAMB. We performed those procedures solely to assist in assessing
whether disbursements of DFI funds for non-competitive contract DACA63-03-D-0005
awarded to KBR, and funded by the DFI, was consistent with the transparency provision
in paragraph 14 of UNSCR 1483 and whether there was sufficient documentation to
justify the non-competitive award.
The sufficiency of the agreed-upon procedures is solely the responsibility of the Defense
Reconstruction Support Office and IAMB. Consequently, we make no representation
regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described in Appendix C either for the
purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.
We performed attestation work at the USACE, Southwestern Division offices in Dallas,
Texas to review applicable documentation and contract management procedures. We
interviewed representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Contracting Office and
its Resource Management Office. We also conducted telephone interviews with
representatives of the Defense Contract Audit Agency regarding contract auditing actions
and procedures.
We obtained read only access to the USACE’s CEFMS system to review receiving
reports and disbursements made on Task Orders 0005 through 0010 of contract
DACA63-06-D-0005. In addition, we obtained and reviewed Coalition Provisional
Authority PRB service request and funding documents, identifying the type of service
requested and the amount of Iraqi vested and DFI funds obligated, as well as a Funding
Authorization Document identifying the amount of seized funds obligated. We also
obtained and reviewed contractor submitted invoices dated between October 2003 and
April 2005.
We obtained and reviewed the following laws and regulations as they pertain to non-
competitive contracting and the use of DFI funds:
• Title 41, United States Code, Section 253
• UNSCR 1483
• Coalition Provisional Authority Memorandum Number 4
• Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 6
• Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, Part 206
• Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, Volume 10
7

We conducted this agreed-upon procedures engagement from August through
September 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards established by the United States Government Accountability Office for
attestation engagements.
Use of Computer-Processed Data. We relied on computer-processed data contained in
the CEFMS. We tested the accuracy of the data we used from CEFMS by obtaining
supporting documentation for a judgmental sample of the items. Our limited testing
indicated that CEFMS data was accurate for our purposes.
8

Appendix B. Prior Audit Coverage
Reports Involving DFI Funds Under Contract DACA63-03-D-0005.
Our review of prior audit reports related to this attestation engagement of the use of DFI
funds under Contract Number DACA63-03-D-0005 awarded by USACE to KBR
identified reports issued by the: (1) Government Accountability Office (GAO); and
(2) Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). The scope, procedures, and key findings of
those reports are summarized below.
Government Accountability Office. Reports can be accessed on its website at
http://www.gao.gov.
GAO-04-605, “Rebuilding Iraq Fiscal Year 2003 Contract Award Procedures and
Management Challenges,” June 1, 2004
Scope: Review of reconstruction contracts funded, in whole or in part, with
U.S. appropriated funds.
Focused review on high-dollar value contracts and task orders and on
contracts using other than full and open competition.
Key Findings: Agencies generally complied with applicable laws and regulations.
The Army Corps of Engineers properly awarded a sole-source
contract for rebuilding Iraq’s oil infrastructure to the only contractor
DoD had determined was in a position to provide the services within
the required time frame. The Army Corps of Engineers documented
the rationale in a written justification and had the justification
approved by the appropriate official.
Procedures: GAO-04-869T, “Contract Management Contracting for Iraq Reconstruction and
Global Logistics Support,” June 15, 2004
Scope: Testimony before the Committee on Government Reform, U.S. House
of Representatives by the Comptroller General of the United States.
Procedures: Discussion of the above report (GAO-04-869T) and preliminary
findings on the military’s use of global logistics support contracts.
Key Findings: The contracting officer’s written justification for the sole-source
contract to restore Iraq’s oil infrastructure outlined the rationale for
the decision. The justification was approved by the Army’s senior
procurement executive, as required. GAO reviewed the justification
and approval documentation and determined that it generally
complied with applicable legal standards.
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). DCAA offers a wide variety of
products and services to contracting officers. The products and services include, but are
not limited to: (1) audits of proposal costs to assist contracting officers in negotiating fair
9

and reasonable prices for contracts under consideration; (2) reviews of invoices for
interim payments from contractors to assist the contracting officer in determining if they
warrant provisional payment subject to subsequent audit; (3) audits of contractors
internal control systems; and (4) upon completion of contracts, audits of the incurred
costs reported by contractors.
With respect to Task Orders 0005 through 0010, under contract DACA63-03-D-0005,
Task Order 0005 was definitized on July 29, 2005. The other task orders have not yet
been definitized. As a result DCAA has not yet issued reports on the costs incurred.
However, DCAA has issued price proposal audits and financial analyses to assist the
contracting officer in negotiating fair and reasonable prices for the task orders. DCAA
has also reviewed vouchers submitted by KBR for work performed under Task Orders
0005 through 0010.
Price Proposal Audits and Financial Analyses. DCAA provided the USACE
Contracting Officer 23 price proposal audits, revised or supplemental price proposal
audits, and financial analyses. Revised price proposal reports were issued at the
request of the Contracting Officer as he agreed to or directed task order revisions.
Task Report
Order DCAA Report Number Date Description
5 3311-2004 K17 9000 55 10/8/04 Report on Audit of Proposal
5 3311-2005 K21 0000 16 1/11/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
5 3311-2005 K21 0000 24 2/25/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
5 3311-2005 K21 0000 24-S1 4/16/05 Supplemental Report on Audit of Revised
Proposal
5 - - - - 5/26/05 Memo - Financial Analyses in Support of
Delivery Order 05
6 3311-2004 K21 0000 28 9/16/04 Report on Audit of Proposal
6 2131-2004 R27 0000 02-S1 8/5/04 Supplement to Report on Assist Audit of
Definitization Costs
6 2131-2004 R27 0000 05 8/17/04 Report on Assist Audit of Sampled Items for
Material Costs
6 3311-2005 K21 0000 33 7/29/05 Report on Audit of Proposal
7 3311-2004 K21 0000 07 9/17//04 Report on Audit of Proposal
7 3311-2005 K21 0000 17 1/12/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
7 3311-2005 K21 0000 25 2/25/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
7 - - - - 6/29/05 Memo - Financial Analyses in Support of
Delivery Order 07
8 3311-2004 K21 0000 08 8/31/04 Report on Audit of Proposal
8 3311-2005 K21 0000 18 1/19/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
8 3311-2005 K21 0000 26 2/25/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
8 - - - - 6/29/05 Memo - Financial Analyses in Support of
Delivery Order 08
9 3311-2004 K21 0000 11 8/30/04 Report on Audit of Proposal
9 3311-2005 K21 0000 19 2/3/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
9 - - - - 6/29/05 Memo - Financial Analyses in Support of
Delivery Order 09
10

Scope: Procedures: Task Report
Order DCAA Report Number Date Description
10 3311-2004 K21 0000 12 8/31/04 Report on Audit of Proposal
10 3311-2005 K21 0000 20 2/3/05 Report on Audit of Revised Proposal
10 - - - - 6/29/05 Memo - Financial Analyses in Support of
Delivery Order 10
An examination of the KBR proposals and revised proposals to
determine if the proposed costs were acceptable as a basis for the
Contracting Officer to negotiate a fair and reasonable price.
Evaluation of the contractor’s internal controls; examination, on a test
basis, of evidence supporting amounts in the contractor’s proposal;
assessment of accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by the contractor; evaluation of the overall proposal
presentation; and use of technical specialist when needed.
Key Findings: The price proposal audit reports included numerous comments on the
details of price proposals submitted by KBR. As indicated in Table 1
below, the latest versions of the price proposal audit reports at the
time of our attestation engagement for Task Orders 0005 through
0010 question in total $208,491,382 in costs proposed by KBR. The
audit reports also include findings that: (1) the contractor’s proposals
as submitted were not acceptable for negotiation of a fair and
reasonable price; (2) supporting data for subcontract costs were not
always adequate; and (3) proposals were not prepared in all respects
in accordance with applicable Cost Accounting Standards and
appropriate provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
Table 1. Summary of Cost Questioned by DCAA
Task
Order DCAA Audit Report Number 5 3311-2005-K21-0000 24-S1 6 3311-2005-K21-0000 33 7 3311-2005-K21-0000 25 8 3311-2005-K21-0000 26 9 3311-2005-K21-0000 19 10 3311-2005-K21-0000 20 DCAA
Questioned
Costs
Report Date
4/16/2005 7/29/2005 2/25/2005 2/25/2005 2/3/2005 2/3/2005 $84,446,016
$32,077,520
$35,681,321
$22,780,683
$19,902,697
$13,603,145
Total $208,491,382
Note: The DCAA Contract Audit Manual defines questioned costs as those
amounts on which audit action has been completed and which DCAA auditors did
not consider acceptable as contract costs. Because task order costs have not yet
been definitized, questioned costs do not represent unallowable costs which
USACE has accepted for payment. They are costs which KBR submitted with its
proposal which DCAA is advising the contracting officer to consider as not
acceptable. The contracting officer uses the DCAA audit conclusions in
definitizing the contractor’s proposal.
11

Invoice Reviews. Though no audit reports were issued, DCAA also made limited
reviews of invoices submitted by KBR and approved them for provisional payment
subject to subsequent audit. Our review and discussions with DCAA auditors
identified 91 invoices dated on or before April 30, 2005 that had been submitted by
KBR for Task Orders 0005 through 0010. DCAA uses a six step process in
reviewing contractor invoices for provisional payment:
1. The math used on the invoice is checked.
2. The indirect rates used are verified.
3. Cumulative costs are compared to amounts in DCAA records.
4. Cumulative invoice costs are verified to be within overall funding limits.
5. The contractor’s job ledgers are tested to insure that invoiced costs do not
exceed the job ledger amounts.
6. A sample of transactions from larger invoices is tested to determine if
subcontractor invoices support billed costs.
Related Prior Reports Our review of prior audit reports also identified related
reports addressing other than full and open competition for Iraq relief and
reconstruction contracts that did not involve either the use of DFI funds, the
USACE or KBR. Such reports were issued by: (1) SIGIR; (2) Department of
Defense, Inspector General; (3) U.S. Agency for International Development,
Inspector General; (4) Army Audit Agency; and (5) Klynveld Peat Marwick
Goerdeler, Limited Liability Partnership (KPMG). We reviewed, but have not
summarized those reports below. The government reports are available at the
indicated website addresses.
Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Reports (formerly the Coalition
Provisional Authority, Inspector General). Reports can be accessed on its website at
http://www.sigir.mil.
Report No. 04-005, “Award of Sector Design-Build Construction Contracts,”
July 23, 2004
Report No. 04-013, “Coalition Provisional Authority’s Contracting Processes
Leading Up To and Including Contract Award,” July 27, 2004
Department of Defense, Inspector General. Reports can be accessed on its website at
http://www.dodig.mil.
Report No. D-2004-057, “Acquisition Contracts Awarded for the Coalition
Provisional Authority by the Defense Contracting Command-Washington,” March
18, 2004
U.S. Agency for International Development, Inspector General. Reports can be
accessed on its website at http://www.usaid.gov/oig/public/public1.htm.
12

Report No. A-267-05-005P, “Audit of USAID’s Compliance with Federal
Regulations in Awarding the Contract for Security Services in Iraq to Kroll
Government Services International Inc.,” January 6, 2005
Report No. A-000-04-004-P, “Audit of USAID’s Compliance with Federal
Regulations in Awarding the Iraq Basic Education Phase II Contract,”
September 23, 2004
Report No. E-266-04-003-P, “Audit of USAID’s Compliance with Federal
Regulations in Awarding the Iraq Phase II Reconstruction and Rehabilitation,
Program Advisors and Oversight Contract,” August 6, 2004
Report No. A-000-04-003-P, “Capping Report on the Audit of USAID’s Compliance
with Federal Regulations in Awarding the Iraq Phase I Contracts,” May 19, 2004
Army Audit Agency. Reports can be accessed on its website at
https://www.aaa.army.mil/reports.htm.
Audit Report A-2005-0194-ALA, “Program Management in Support of Iraq
Reconstruction Project and Contracting Office, Washington, DC,” May 26, 2005
Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler Limited Liability Partnership
(KPMG).
KPMG Report, “Independent Accountants’ Report on Applying Agreed-Upon
Procedures to Documentation Justifying Non-Competitively Awarded Contracting
Actions For the Period June 29, 2003 through June 28, 2004
KPMG Report, “Independent Accountants’ Report on Applying Agreed-Upon
Procedures to Documentation Related to Non-Competitively Awarded Contracting
Actions For the Period June 29, 2003 through April 30, 2005
13

Appendix C. Agreed-Upon Procedures To Be
Performed
Procedures – Documentation of Non-Competitive Awards
Documentation of Non-Competitive Award (Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part
6 Criteria):
Note: Applicable to contracts, non-competitively awarded by United States (U.S.)
agencies other than the CPA.
1. From applicable government entity, obtain contract files that were non-competitively
awarded by U.S. agencies other than the CPA. Examine written evidence obtained
from contract files and identify existence of the following items:
a. U.S. government agency and/or contracting activity issuing the contract.
Summarize the agency and/or contracting activity issuing the contract for each
contract file in a supplemental reporting schedule.
b. Description of supplies or services identified in the contract. Summarize
description of supplies or services for each contract file in a supplemental reporting
schedule.
c. Citation to statutory authority permitting the non-competitive contracting action as
referenced in FAR Part 6 Criteria. Summarize statutory citation and description for
each contract file in a supplemental reporting schedule.
d. Description of contractors’ unique qualifications or nature of the acquisition
supporting the statutory authority cited in support of the non-competitive
contracting action. Summarize description of qualifications for each contract file in
a supplemental reporting schedule.
e. Description of U.S. government agency efforts made to obtain multiple offers
including listing of offerors that expressed, in writing, an interest in the acquisition.
f. Contracting officer explicit determination that the anticipated cost is fair and
reasonable.
g. Description of the market research conducted and the results or a statement of the
reasons why market research was not conducted.
h. Contracting officer certification that the justification is accurate and complete to the
best of the contracting officer’s knowledge and belief.
2. Obtain from the government entity awarding the contract (e.g., U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers) a list of names of personnel authorized to approve non-competitive
contracting actions in excess of $5 million. For each contract file obtained in
Procedure 1, identify the name of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers personnel
14

approving the non-competitive contracting action and agree the name to list of
personnel authorized to approve noncompetitive contract actions in excess of
$5 million provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Procedures – Transparency of Contracting Action and Related Disbursements
1. Obtain related contract files and results of procedures performed regarding the
documentation of non-competitive contract number DACA63-03-D-0005 awarded by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to Kellogg, Brown, and Root Services, Inc and
attach the supplemental reporting schedules included in that report to this agreed-upon
procedures report.
2. Obtain a list of Iraqi ministries from the Project and Contracting Office (PCO). For
each contract file obtained in Procedure 1, identify the specific ministry for which
goods or services were contracted and agree the identified ministry to the list provided
by the PCO. Summarize the Iraqi ministry for each contract file in a supplemental
reporting schedule.
3. Obtain all authoritative receipt documents evidencing the receipt of goods or services
(e.g. Form DD 250) for each contract file obtained in Procedure 1. For each receipt
document, identify and examine evidence that each was dated on or before April 30,
2005, and identify description of goods or services and delivery requirements and
agree to the description of goods or services and delivery requirements included in the
contract file (e.g., task order, contract, etc.). Summarize the description and delivery
requirements for each contract file in a supplemental reporting schedule.
4. Obtain all invoicing documents or other requests for payment for each contract file
obtained in Procedure 1. For each invoicing document or other request for payment,
identify and examine evidence that each was dated on or before April 30, 2005, and
identify description of goods or services and agree to the description of goods or
services identified on the authoritative receipt documents obtained in Procedure 3.
5. Obtain all disbursement documents for each contract file obtained in Procedure 1. For
each disbursement document, identify and examine evidence of payment terms and
conditions and agree the payment terms and conditions included in the contract file
(e.g., task order, contract, etc.) and assess whether disbursements were made in
accordance with the payment terms and conditions identified in the contract files.
6. Obtain list of personnel authorized to approve an invoicing document or other requests
for payment from the government entity that awarded the contract. For each invoicing
document or other requests for payment obtained in Procedure 4, examine evidence of
an approving signature by a U.S. government official and agree the name of that
official to the list of authorized personnel.
7. For each disbursement document obtained in Procedure 5, identify and examine
evidence that the disbursement was made on or before April 30, 2005. Agree amounts
to be disbursed as evidenced on each disbursement document to the invoicing
document or other request for payment obtained in Procedure 4.
15

8. For each contract file obtained in Procedure 1, compute the total amount of the
disbursements evidenced on each disbursement document that was disbursed from the
Development Fund for Iraq Disbursing Office on or before April 30, 2005, obtained in
Procedure 5 and determine that the total amount of these disbursements for each
contract file is equal to or less than authorized amounts identified in the contractual
requirements contained in the contract file.
16

Appendix D. Summary of Agreed-Upon Procedure Results
Summary of Contracting Actions and Findings
Contracting
Activity
U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Fort
Worth District,
Fort Worth, Texas
U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Fort
Worth District,
Fort Worth, Texas
U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Fort
Worth District,
Fort Worth, Texas
U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Fort
Worth District,
Fort Worth, Texas
U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Fort
Worth District,
Fort Worth, Texas
Task Order 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010
Value $872,887,112 $213,238,847 $325,000,000 $180,000,000 $64,800,000 $29,999,983
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Fort
Worth District,
Fort Worth, Texas
Scope of Work
Construct 50
Kilometers of
pipeline. Install
emergency back-up
generation
capability.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Iraqi Ministry for
which Services
were Contracted
Agrees to Ministry
Listed in
Documentation
No Exceptions
Oil
No Exceptions
Oil
No Exceptions
Oil
No Exceptions
Oil
No Exceptions
Oil
No Exceptions
Oil
17

Summary of Contracting Actions and Findings Continued
Task Order 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010
Dated on or before
April 30, 2005 and
Delivery
Requirements on
Receipt Documents
and Contract File
Agree No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions
Dated on or before
April 30, 2005 and
Invoicing and
Receipt Documents
Agree No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions
Payment Terms &
Conditions on
Disbursement
Documents and
Contract File
Agree No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions
Disbursements
Made in
Accordance with
Terms and
Conditions in
Contract File No Exceptions
Exception Noted:
Interest Penalty
for Late Payment No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions
Exception Noted:
Interest Penalty
for Late Payment
18

Summary of Contracting Actions and Findings Continued
Task Order 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010
Approving
Signature on
Invoicing
Document Agrees
to Name of
Individual on List
of Authorized
Personnel No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions
Amounts to be
Disbursed on
Disbursement
Document Agree to
Amounts on
Invoicing
Documents No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exception No Exceptions
Total
Disbursements
Made Equal to or
Less Than Amount
Authorized in
Contract No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions No Exceptions
19

Appendix E. Schedule of Non-Competitive Contract Justification
Schedule of Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 and Task Orders 0005 Through 0010
Scope of Work
Construct 50
Kilometers of
pipeline. Install
emergency back-up
generation
capability.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Contract/Task Order 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010
Contract Value $872,887,112 $213,238,847 $325,000,000 $180,000,000 $64,800,000 $29,999,983
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Yes - Included in
Justification and
Approval of Other
Than Full or Open
Competition
Only one
responsible source
and no other
supplies or services
will satisfy agency
requirements.
Assess and repair
fuel product
distribution systems
and procure and
transport refined
products and gas
products for
commercial and
private use within
Iraq.
Existence of
Documentation
Justifying Reason for
Non-competitive
Contracting Action
Yes - Included in
Justification and
Approval of Other
Than Full or Open
Competition
Yes - Included in
Justification and
Approval of Other
Than Full or Open
Competition
Yes - Included in
Justification and
Approval of Other
Than Full or Open
Competition
Yes - Included in
Justification and
Approval of Other
Than Full or Open
Competition
Yes - Included in
Justification and
Approval of Other
Than Full or Open
Competition
Reason Justifying
Non-competitive
Contracting Action is
in Agreement with the
Former Coalition
Provisional Authority
Memorandum 4
Criteria
Only one
responsible source
and no other
supplies or services
will satisfy agency
requirements.
Only one
responsible source
and no other
supplies or services
will satisfy agency
requirements.
Only one
responsible source
and no other
supplies or services
will satisfy agency
requirements.
Only one
responsible source
and no other
supplies or services
will satisfy agency
requirements.
Only one
responsible source
and no other
supplies or services
will satisfy agency
requirements.
20

Contract/Task Order 0005 0006 0007 0008 0009 0010
Contractor
previously
developed a
Contingency
Support Plan (CSP)
under a
competitively
awarded contract.
This sole source
contract would
involve the
implementation of
the CSP, a classified
plan.
Yes - USACE
conducted limited
consultations with
industry.
Existence of Evidence
that Describes
Circumstance(s) for
Foregoing
Competition
Contractor
previously
developed a
Contingency
Support Plan (CSP)
under a
competitively
awarded contract.
This sole source
contract would
involve the
implementation of
the CSP, a classified
plan.
Contractor
previously
developed a
Contingency
Support Plan (CSP)
under a
competitively
awarded contract.
This sole source
contract would
involve the
implementation of
the CSP, a classified
plan.
Contractor
previously
developed a
Contingency
Support Plan (CSP)
under a
competitively
awarded contract.
This sole source
contract would
involve the
implementation of
the CSP, a classified
plan.
Contractor
previously
developed a
Contingency
Support Plan (CSP)
under a
competitively
awarded contract.
This sole source
contract would
involve the
implementation of
the CSP, a classified
plan.
Contractor
previously
developed a
Contingency
Support Plan (CSP)
under a
competitively
awarded contract.
This sole source
contract would
involve the
implementation of
the CSP, a classified
plan.
Existence of a
Description of Effort
to Obtain Competition
Yes - USACE
conducted limited
consultations with
industry.
Yes - USACE
conducted limited
consultations with
industry.
Yes - USACE
conducted limited
consultations with
industry.
Yes - USACE
conducted limited
consultations with
industry.
Yes - USACE
conducted limited
consultations with
industry.
Existence of
Contracting Officer's
Signature Evidencing
Fair and Reasonable
Price Determination Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Authorized Approval
of Non-competitive
Contracting Action Yes - Approved Yes - Approved Yes - Approved Yes - Approved Yes - Approved Yes - Approved
21

Appendix F. Schedule of Disbursements
DFI Disbursements for Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 Task Order 0005
Task
Order DFI Obligations
Date of
Payment
DFI
Disbursement
Amount
Support for Goods
Received Invoice Number Invoice Amount
Total
Task
Order
0005 $545,000,000.00 $478,918,294.32 $492,523,870.95
*DFI funds were used to pay only part of the total invoice costs.
22
Interest
Amount
0005 25-Nov-03 $22,174,640.48 ACO Signature CEFMS 031034ut163 $35,780,217.11*
19-Dec-03 $66,568,971.44
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS 0311304ut166 $66,568,971.44
05-Jan-04 $66,070,459.12 ACO Signature CEFMS
02-Mar-04 $36,728,691.31
23-Dec-03 $53,508,452.23 ACO Signature CEFMS 0311304ut802 $53,508,452.23
0312304ut162 &
0312304ut802 $66,070,459.12
15-Jan-04 $53,392,471.58 ACO Signature CEFMS 0312304ut805 $53,392,471.58
28-Feb-04 $90,000,000.00 ACO Signature CEFMS 0401304ut162 $106,584,629.54
28-Feb-04 $16,584,629.54 ACO Signature CEFMS 0401304ut162-Split See Above
17-Feb-04 $33,026,815.66 ACO Signature CEFMS 0401304ut800 $33,026,815.66
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS 0402304ut163016 $36,728,691.31
16-Mar-04 $25,431,285.74 ACO Signature CEFMS 0402304ut168-017 $25,431,285.74
19-Apr-04 $15,431,877.22 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut801 $15,431,877.22

DFI Disbursements for Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 Task Order 0006
Task
Order DFI Obligations
Date of
Payment
DFI
Disbursement
Amount
Support for Goods
Received Invoice Number Invoice Amount
Interest
Amount
0006 01-Mar-04 $36,817,287.66 ACO Signature CEFMS 0402304ut162 $36,817,287.66
16-Mar-04 $2,141,215.51 ACO Signature CEFMS 0402304ut171-002 $2,141,215.51
23-Mar-04 $18,069,444.37 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut163-003 $18,069,444.37
19-Apr-04 $10,545,865.39 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut804 $10,545,865.39
11-May-04 $1,243,699.42 ACO Signature CEFMS 0404304ut165 $1,243,699.42
26-May-04 $16,314,509.42
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS
0405304ut164 &
0405304ut807 $16,314,509.42
08-Jul-04 $18,748,390.21 ACO Signature CEFMS 0406304ut164-007 $18,748,390.21
28-Jul-04 $17,570,587.33
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS 0406304ut804-008 $17,570,587.33
17-Aug-04 $2,816,926.82 ACO Signature CEFMS
0407304ut803 &
804-009 $2,816,926.82
08-Sep-04 $15,228,867.04 ACO Signature CEFMS 0408304ut173-010 $15,228,867.04
15-Oct-04 $5,809,706.06 ACO Signature CEFMS
0409304ut184 &
802-011 $5,803,902.16 $5,803.90
03-Nov-04 $3,274,004.67 ACO Signature CEFMS 0410304ut161-012 $3,274,004.67
08-Dec-04 $2,918,533.90
Authorizing Signature
CEFMS 0411304ut161-013 $2,918,533.90
06-Jan-05 $697,010.63
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS
0412304ut161 &
0411304ut181 $697,010.63
10-Feb-05 $19,703,868.44 ACO Signature CEFMS 0501304ut161 & 176 $19,703,868.44
14-Mar-05 $15,105,887.03 ACO Signature CEFMS 0502304ut185,186,187 $15,105,887.03
Total
Task
Order
0006 $220,000,000.00 $187,005,803.90 $187,000,000.00 $5,803.90
23

DFI Disbursements for Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 Task Orders 0007 and 0008
Task
Order DFI Obligations
Date of
Payment
DFI
Disbursement
Amount
Support for Goods
Received Invoice Number Invoice Amount
Interest
Amount
0007 28-Jan-04 $80,757.97 ACO Signature CEFMS 0401304ut163 $80,757.97
17-Feb-04 $22,235,468.10 ACO Signature CEFMS 0401304ut1801 $22,235,468.10
02-Mar-04 $38,037,829.85
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS 0402304ut164003 $38,037,829.85
16-Mar-04 $99,434,278.18 ACO Signature CEFMS 0402304ut170-004 $99,434,278.18
23-Mar-04 $35,067,973.25 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut162-005 $35,067,973.25
19-Apr-04 $82,644,404.54 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut803 $82,644,404.54
Total
Task
Order
0007 $325,000,000.00 $277,500,711.89 $277,500,711.89
0008 12-Mar-04 $2,348,269.32 ACO Signature CEFMS 0402304ut169-001 $2,348,269.32
23-Mar-04 $51,951,071.04 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut161-002 $51,951,071.04
19-Apr-04 $66,815,727.93 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut802 $66,815,727.93
11-May-04 $7,316,667.97 ACO Signature CEFMS 0404304ut163 $7,316,667.97
26-May-04 $24,568,263.74
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS
0405304ut162 &
0405304ut804 $24,568,263.74
Total
Task
Order
0008
See Combined
Total at Task
Order 0010 $153,000,000.00 $153,000,000.00
24

DFI Disbursements for Non-Competitive Contract DACA63-03-D-0005 Task Orders 0009 and 0010
Task
Order DFI Obligations
Date of
Payment
DFI
Disbursement
Amount
Support for Goods
Received Invoice Number Invoice Amount
0009 18-Apr-04 $17,386,363.48 ACO Signature CEFMS 0403304ut807 $17,386,363.48
11-May-04 $28,320,315.03 ACO Signature CEFMS 0404304ut166 $28,320,315.02
0405304ut165 &
0405304ut808 $9,373,321.50
Interest
Amount
26-May-04 $9,373,321.50
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS
Total
Task
Order
0009
See Combined
Total at Task
Order 0010 $55,080,000.01 $55,080,000.00
26-May-04 $6,084,552.50
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS
0010 11-May-04 $7,304,275.77 ACO Signature CEFMS 0404304ut167 $7,304,275.77
0405304ut166 &
0405304ut809 $6,084,552.50
20-Jul-04 $2,746,639.35 ACO Signature CEFMS 040604ut163-003 $2,746,639.35
0407307ut805 &
806-004 $1,183,233.21
0409307ut182 &
800-005 $18,937.97 $16.57
17-Aug-04 $1,183,233.21
Contracting Officer
Signature CEFMS
15-Oct-04 $18,954.54 ACO Signature CEFMS
Total
Task
Order
0010 $17,337,655.37 $17,337,638.80 $16.57
Total
Task
Orders
0008 to
0010 $277,235,126.64 $225,417,655.38 $225,417,638.80 $16.57
25

Appendix G. Acronyms
ACO Administrative Contracting Officer
CEFMS Corps of Engineers Financial Management System
CPA Coalition Provisional Authority
CPAF Cost Plus Award Fee
CSP Contingency Support Plan
DFI Development Fund for Iraq
DCAA Defense Contract Audit Agency
DoD Department of Defense
GAO Government Accountability Office
IAMB International Advisory and Monitoring Board
IDIQ Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity
KBR Kellogg, Brown, and Root Services, Inc.
KPMG Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler Limited Liability Partnership
PRB Program Review Board
UNSCR United Nations Security Council Resolution
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
26

Appendix H. Report Distribution
Department of State
Secretary of State
Senior Advisor to the Secretary and Coordinator for Iraq
U.S. Ambassador to Iraq
Director, Iraq Reconstruction Management Office
Inspector General, Department of State
Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense
Deputy Secretary of Defense
Director, Defense Reconstruction Support Office
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer
Deputy Chief Financial Officer
Deputy Comptroller (Program/Budget)
Inspector General, Department of Defense
Department of the Army
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology
Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition,
Logistics, and Technology
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Policy and Procurement)
Director, Project and Contracting Office
Commanding General, Joint Contracting Command – Iraq/Afghanistan
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management and Comptroller
Chief of Engineers and Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Commander, Gulf Region Division
Commander, Southwestern Division
Auditor General of the Army
U.S. Central Command
Commanding General, Multi-National Force – Iraq
Commanding General, Multi-National Security Transition Command – Iraq
Commander, Joint Area Support Group – Central
Other Defense Organizations
Director, Defense Contract Audit Agency
27

Other Federal Government Organizations
Director, Office of Management and Budget
Comptroller General of the United States
Inspector General, Department of the Treasury
Inspector General, Department of Commerce
Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services
Inspector General, U.S. Agency for International Development
Mission Director – Iraq, U.S. Agency for International Development
Congressional Committees and Subcommittees, Chairman and
Ranking Minority Member
U.S. Senate
Senate Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Defense
Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs
Senate Committee on Armed Services
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Subcommittee on International Operations and Terrorism
Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information and
International Security
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia
U.S. House of Representatives
House Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Defense
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs
Subcommittee on Science, State, Justice and Commerce and Related Agencies
House Committee on Armed Services
House Committee on Government Reform
Subcommittee on Management, Finance and Accountability
Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International
Relations
House Committee on International Relations
Subcommittee on Middle East and Central Asia
28

Appendix I. Attestation Engagement Team
Members
The Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, prepared this
attestation engagement report. The Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction staff members who contributed to the report include:
Brian Flynn
Lynne Champion
29