Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division
Johnny Buscema Jr. of New Port Richey, Florida, and his companies, S.A.F.E. Structure Designs, based in Las Vegas, and U.S.A. Manufacturing, based in New Port Richey, have agreed to pay $1,000,000 to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by causing a prime vendor for the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to submit fraudulent contract bids to DLA that resulted in Department of Defense (DoD) customers being overcharged for goods and related services purchased under those contracts. The settlement is based on the settling parties’ ability to pay.
Buscema owns S.A.F.E. Structure Designs, which sells safety equipment to government customers, and USA Manufacturing, a general construction company. Both companies provide third party logistics support, such as product acquisition, receiving, warehousing, transportation, shipping and returns, to military customers through DLA contracts for Maintenance, Repair and Operations (MRO) for the Northeast and Southeast regions of the United States. The MRO contracts covered by the settlement are held by a “prime vendor,” which procures for DoD agencies supplies and equipment, such as chemicals, electrical supplies, hardware, HVAC/refrigeration, prefabricated structures and a variety of small tools. The goal of the MRO program is to achieve favorable product pricing through leveraged buying, infrastructure savings, and inventory cost reductions. To obtain the best price for items procured for the government, the MRO contracts require the prime vendor to engage in a competitive bidding process, soliciting bids from two independently competing vendors for transactions below $25,000 and from three independently competing vendors for transactions at or above $25,000.
The United States alleged that, from 2016 to 2023, the settling parties conspired with other entities to rig bids for awards on the MRO contracts for the Northeast and Southeast regions of the United States. More specifically, Buscema allegedly submitted non-competitive bids, paid other vendors to submit non-competitive bids and submitted multiple bids from his own two companies on the same solicitations to assist the prime vendor to meet its obligation to obtain bids from two or three vendors and to make one of the bids appear more competitive. As a result of these alleged schemes, the United States contends it was overcharged for items purchased under the MRO contracts.
“Those who seek to do business with the government are expected to compete fairly and independently to ensure that the government receives an appropriate price,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The department will hold accountable government contractors that engage in bid rigging or otherwise seek to defraud the American taxpayers.”
“As evidenced in this settlement agreement, these contractors gamed the system to line their own pockets,” said U.S. Attorney Joshua S. Levy for the District of Massachusetts. “They manipulated and undermined the fair and open bidding process designed to save our military — and taxpayers — money. Contractors should be scrupulous in dealing with the government, not coordinating with each other to pad their bottom line. When defense contractors collude, rather than compete, they violate the law and the public’s trust.”
“The DoD expects its contractors to compete in open and fair markets,” said Special Agent in Charge Patrick J. Hegarty of the DoD’s Office of Inspector General’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) Northeast Field Office. “Today’s announcement demonstrates our commitment to work with our law enforcement partners to investigate allegations of anticompetitive practices and ensure the integrity of the DoD’s procurement process.”
“Department of the Army Criminal Investigation Division works diligently to maintain the Army’s readiness and will continue to work closely with our law enforcement partners to prevent and thoroughly investigate fraudulent activity,” said Special Agent in Charge Keith K. Kelly of the Department of the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID)’s Fraud Field Office. “CID is committed to providing expertise and capabilities supporting whole of government efforts to ensure the U.S. Army remains the most technologically advanced, capable, and ready fighting force in the world.”
The resolution obtained in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts, with assistance from DCIS, Army CID, Air Force Office of Special Investigations and the General Services Administration Office of Inspector General.
Trial Attorney Samson Asiyanbi of the Justice Department’s Civil Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Lindsey Ross and Brian LaMacchia for the District of Massachusetts handled the matter.
The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only. There has been no determination of liability.