25 Fraud Investigations Underway

Some U.S. troops tempted by reconstruction cash
By Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times, April 12, 2009

The Justice Department has secured more than three dozen bribery-related convictions in the awarding of reconstruction contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. At least 25 theft investigations are underway.

From the news article, it sounds like these investigations all involve funds issued under the Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP). It is my understanding that Ultra Services supply contracts - totalling around $10-14 million - were paid with CERP funds. So it's possible someone might be looking into Ryan Manelick's case. But that's really just a guess on my part.

UPDATE:

Coincidentally, the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight held a hearing yesterday titled, Improving the Ability of Inspectors General to Detect, Prevent, and Prosecute Contracting Fraud. Testimony was provided by Mr. Charles W. Beardall, Deputy Inspector General for Investigations, Department of Defense. His testimony, available in PDF, goes into a great amount of detail about coordination and collaboration of the different agencies and organizations involved in fraud investigations.

Statement of Charles W. Beardall PDF
Deputy Inspector General for Investigations
Department of Defense
before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee
Subcommittee on Contracting Oversight
on "Improving the Ability of Inspectors General to Detect, Prevent, and Prosecute Contract Fraud"
April 21, 2009

See Page 6:

To date, [Defense Criminal Investigative Service] DCIS has initiated 173 investigations relating to [Department of Defense] DoD operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of these investigations, 41 percent involve procurement fraud offenses; 42 percent involve corruption offenses; and 14 percent involve theft, technology protection, and terrorism.

Iraq Contractors Fight for Care

A great new series of articles and investigations from T. Christian Miller, author of Blood Money: Wasted Billions, Lost Lives, and Corporate Greed in Iraq with Los Angeles Times, ProPublica and ABC News, on the failure of the Defense Base Act to provide care for injured contractors after they return from Iraq.

Injured War Zone Contractors Fight to Get Care From AIG and Other Insurers
By T. Christian Miller, ProPublica and Doug Smith, Los Angeles Times - April 16, 2009

Civilian contractors died like soldiers. They were injured like soldiers. But back home, the U.S. government consigned the wounded and their families to a private insurance system that shunted them to substandard treatment and delayed their care as they suffered from devastating injuries, an investigation by the Los Angeles Times, ABC News and ProPublica has found.

Injured war zone contractors fight to get care
By T. Christian Miller and Doug Smith, Los Angeles Times, April 17, 2009

Civilian workers who suffered devastating injuries while supporting the U.S. war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan have come home to a grinding battle for basic medical care, artificial limbs, psychological counseling and other services.

Bailed-Out AIG Pampers Execs While Denying, Delaying Claims of Contractors Injured in Iraq
By Brian Ross and Avni Patel, ABC News, April 17, 2009

Insurance giant AIG, the same company that rewarded its executives with millions in bonuses and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on a spa retreat at an exclusive California resort and private jets, has been nickel and diming employees of private contractors injured in Iraq, with a pattern of denying and delaying their claims, a joint investigation between 20/20, the Los Angeles Times and the non-profit group ProPublica has found.

FOIA update

FOIA responses take forever. 

According to my records, I've filed well over 20 requests to date.  I'm getting a little better at the wording and procedural issues that pop up in writing these letters. I've now got my first administrative appeal under my belt. I haven't filed a Mandatory Declassification Review yet or requested a Vaughn Index so there's still lots of room for new experiences. And who knows, maybe one day, a request will go to court.

So, let's see...I filed four FOIA requests with CENTCOM back in February of 2008. Still waiting. One with the State Department from 2007 which they actually contacted me about two months ago to say was on its way. It hasn't arrived yet. The appeal with the National Security Agency is still outstanding - while I'm not optimistic on that one, I did expect to get the rejection almost immediately. Not sure what's up with that. A few more FOIA requests outstanding with CENTCOM - one in particular that I hope they'll be forthcoming about. And a new one that I haven't yet received a response letter confirming its receipt and assigning a case number.

So while we wait...wanna learn a little about how to file an FOIA request?

A good place to start is the Department of Justice website page on the Freedom of Information Act. It provides a broad overview and is written in fairly simple and easy to understand language. They have a page, FOIA Post, that includes summaries of recent rulings that effect the FOIA. Good idea to look these over in case a recent ruling might increase the potential for a federal agency to release the information you seek.

After filing the administrative appeal with the NSA, one of the things I learned was the importance of writing an FOIA request with the view towards possibly pursuing information in court. Now, this doesn't mean you have to fill your request with legalese, but it does mean you want to leave a trail of bread crumbs that lead to the information you seek. For example, if you're requesting information that was mentioned in say a White House memo freely distributed to the public, cite and include the memo with your request.

The National Security Archive at George Washington University is a great resource for information regarding FOIA requests that bump up against National Security, otherwise known as Exemptions 1 and 3 of the FOIA and the lovely Glomar response (neither confirm nor deny the existence nor non-existence...) They have a new PDF booklet available online (includes information on Mandatory Declassification Reviews):

EFFECTIVE FOIA REQUESTING FOR EVERYONE
A National Security Archive Guide
Written by Kristin Adair and Catherine Nielsen
Edited by Meredith Fuchs, Yvette M. Chin, Malcolm Byrne and Tom Blanton
January 29, 2009

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press is another great resource. They have an entire area of their website dedicated to Freedom of the Press Resources including an FOIA letter generator. Just plug in some information and it will spit out a letter for you.

And since I brought it up, the National Security Agency also has an area of its website devoted to the FOIA including their version of a handbook - which is really just basic contact information on where to send your request. By the way, NSA isn't all cloaks and daggers. They have aliens too! The NSA has one section devoted to FOIA requests for UFO's under their Declassification Initiatives.

The Department of Defense website for FOIA is the Requester Service Center. They have a handbook which includes a list of their Components and Commands with whom to file an FOIA request. Some times the tricky part with the Department of Defense is just figuring out who to file with.

Well, that's it for now. Back to waiting for the mail...

New Ruling on 2003 Iraq Fraud

Contractor Must Pay in Iraq Fraud, Court Rules

By James Glanz, New York Times, April 10, 2009

The decision, by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., reverses a decision that had put a chill on what are believed to be dozens of pending whistle-blower cases involving contractors in Iraq. The earlier decision set aside a jury’s verdict in 2006 that the contractor, Custer Battles, must pay about $10 million in damages and penalties to the United States government and two whistle-blowers.

The jury had found that under the False Claims Act, Custer Battles filed fake invoices and vastly inflated its costs, as two former employees of the company had charged. But the judge in the case, T. S. Ellis III of the Federal District Court in Alexandria, Va., ultimately made two rulings that would have freed the company from paying any damages.

Custer Battles left "an astonishing spreadsheet" that detailed billing at grossly inflated prices at a meeting in October of 2003. Big oops.

Court Revives Suit Over Iraq Work
By Ellen Nakashima, Washington Post, April 11, 2009

The ruling noted that after an October 2003 meeting between Custer Battles's co-owners, Scott Custer and Michael Battles, and representatives of the CPA and the U.S. military, Battles accidentally left behind "an astonishing spreadsheet" that listed amounts invoiced and actual costs. For instance, the firm provided two flatbed trucks to carry new money that cost $18,000, while billing the authority $80,000, the ruling said.

Holder Memo

I wonder if this will effect the NSA appeal? 

Contractor Deployment Guide

I was looking for more background information on general identification requirements for contractors working overseas when I stumbled upon this Pamphlet. Fascinating reading. As far as I can tell, this is the most recent version. It really is a must read for anyone going to work overseas.

Ed. note for June 14, 2010: please use this new link DA PAM 715-16

Contractor Deployment Guide
Pamphlet 715–16
Department of the Army
27 February 1998

DA PAM 715–16
Contractor Deployment Guide

This new Department of the Army pamphlet provides procedures for contractor operations within the Department of the Army.

The Pamphlet includes a short section on Hostages (see page 6), which contains some information that I don't recall reading before.

Chapter 11

11–1. Hostage aid

a. Hostages

When and where the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, declares that U.S. citizens or resident aliens of the United States rendering service overseas have been placed in a “captive” status as a result of a “hostile action” against the U.S. government, a wide range of benefits accrue to that person and that
person’s dependents. For example, captives can continue to receive their full pay. Captives can claim some, but not all, of the benefits of the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act. A person designated as a captive or his/her family members are eligible for physical and mental health care benefits at U.S. government expense. A spouse
or unmarried dependent of a designated captive is eligible for certain education benefits. If a designated captive ultimately dies from hostile action caused by his/her relationship to the U.S. government, the Secretary of State may provide death benefits to the captive’s survivors.

b. Any person possibly affected (e.g., family members and dependents) may petition the Secretary of State to make the declaration of coverage. Pursuing benefits and remedies under these laws is up to the contractor employee and/or the employee’s family members, dependents or employer.

As far as identification...no surprises. Seems basic. But what exists on paper and what's done in reality are two different things. So, the question that really needs answering is: what identification were Ultra Services personnel expected to carry back in Iraq in 2003?

Identification mentioned in the Contractor Deployment Guide:

Passport
Visas - as needed
Invitational Travel Orders
Uniformed Services Identifications and Privilege Card (DD Form 1173)
Geneva Conventions Identity Card (DD Form 489)
Personal Identification ('dog tags')
Local In-theater Identification (Baghdad International Airport, etc)
Authorization to carry a weapon (from Theater Commander or State Department)
Record of Emergency Data Card (DD Form 93)
Company Id
Drivers license
Record of Immunizations
Medical information ('medical tags')

Not mentioned:

Common Access Card (DD Form 1172-2)

Looking over the list above, what exactly was the green id card issued to Kirk von Ackermann featured in the Rolling Stone article? Was it still valid? And what happened to all of the other identification he should have been carrying?

Always questions.

Related

Base Access
March 20, 2009

Base Access

Color me completely baffled today. An article via Ms Sparky...

KBR Work Presents 'Security Risk' Says Pentagon Official
By David Murdock, The Huffington Post, March 19, 2009

In what appears to be a stunning lack of due diligence, the Pentagon has allowed private contractors to grant civilians access to military bases, including in highly sensitive areas like Iraq and Afghanistan, without evidence of appropriate background checks.

The revelations were detailed in a recent report that the Acting Inspector General of the Department Defense, Gordon S. Heddell, delivered to the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee. The report describes how, since 2002, Common Access Cards -- the IDs that both troops and civilians use to pass through military checkpoints around the world - may have been granted to nearly 40,000 civilians without proper vetting.

Identification

Some basic information on Common Access Cards can be found here and here. Suffice it to say, access cards are not new. As time marches on and technology improves, more security features are added to the id's. Methods of displaying identification are also not new.  When on base, contractors are generally supposed to carry identification at all times, usually in one of those black neck pouches that are commonly found at an office supply store. 

Which brings us to Kirk von Ackermann's id badge. 

Von Ackermann's id badge was featured in the Daniel Halpern's Rolling Stone article, Death of a Contractor. The id shown was issued in 2003 by United States Army, V Corps, and very clearly marked: No Escort. 

Now one really odd thing about this particular photo ID is that it doesn't conform to Geneva Conventions for identification established back in 1949. Examples and more information here. For comparison, here's an example of a 'Geneva Conventions Identification Card for Civilians Accompanying Forces' in use prior to 2006 from the Department of Defense Common Access Card website.

  

So did von Ackermann have another id? And if he did, what was this id used for and what happened to the id that should have conformed to Geneva Conventions?

Anyone else getting the unpleasant feeling that base security was a bit low rent?

The military loves paper trails and back in 2003, to get an id from an organization within the Department of Defense - like the U.S. Army -contractors and civilians were expected to complete an application, DD Form 1172-2. So did von Ackermann complete a DD Form 1172-2 or did everyone in Iraq play by a completely different set of rules? 

Security

From what I understand, military installations are restricted areas with security ratings. Areas are rated Level I, Level II and Level III. Level I is the least secure and has the fewest restrictions, Level II comes with more restrictions followed by Level III the most secure with the most restrictions. The lowest level, Level I, requires an escort if a visitor to an area is not cleared for access. Von Ackermann was cleared for access, so he had a No Escort badge. But according to the news piece at The Huffington Post, so did a lot of other folks and they had much more official identification than von Ackermann. Which just makes you wonder who in the heck was free to wander around bases in Iraq back in 2003.

Assumptions

Anyone who reads this blog knows I have a serious problem with the assumption Kirk von Ackermann disappeared from where his vehicle was found. His behavior that day was so out of character, so irrational, that investigators actually floated the idea he staged his own disappearance.* But there is a much more rational explanation for the sudden and swift departure of basic common sense. Simply put, von Ackermann was abducted and killed elsewhere - likely an American base - and the most likely candidate is Camp Anaconda. All of this, of course, means an imposter placed the call to the Iraqi employee.

Now, on a fairly regular basis I try to tear down and poke holes into the above theory because quite frankly, I don't want to be right. Two of the easy to spot weak points have always been the id badge and base access - both of which tie into getting on to and off of a base.  

I had this wild and crazy assumption that military bases in Iraq actually might have tight security. Oops. Apparently no. Yet another myth shattered. 

So much for poking holes.

*Mystery surrounds US businessman missing in Iraq's 'Sunni triangle'
By Colin Freeman, UK Telegraph, November 9, 2003

The strange circumstances of the case have prevented investigators from ruling out the possibility that he has tried to fake his own disappearance. In particular, they are thought to be puzzled as to why he chose to drive alone that day, rather than taking an Iraqi colleague as he normally did.

Related

The Bridge Theory (includes decision chart) 

March 25, 2008

The ID Badge
April 14, 2007

Annual Longshore Conference

Photo Source U.S. Navy's Military Sealift Command

The Annual Longshore Conference is March 19 - 20, 2009 in New Orleans, Louisiana. I attended the previous conference organized by Loyola University College of Law and the U.S. Department of Labor in the fall of 2008 in Washington D.C. and found it very informative. Pretty much everyone who knew anything about the Defense Base Act was there.

From the registration brochure:

This year’s program will address several timely topics of importance to any workers’ compensation practitioner.

We will examine issues of competing jurisdiction. Despite decades of litigation seeking clarity in competing jurisdictional schemes, significant problems remain in navigating the myriad compensation programs that exist in the maritime field. Recent amendments to the Americans With Disabilities Act will impact return to work issues in workers’ compensation claims. Medicare Set-Asides continue to be important in settlements of longshore claims, and recent changes to the regulations and procedures for MSA will be explained.

We will also address various practice issues, such as trying claims before the Office of Administrative Law Judges, posthearing proceedings, and attorney fee claims. We will have medical experts address the expanding field of chronic pain conditions, and the diagnosis and treatment of these disorders. With the War on Terror continuing in both Iraq and Afghanistan, we will explore the Defense Base Act and War Hazards Compensation Act, as these remain important extensions of the [Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act] LHWCA.

The Defense Base Act/War Hazards Compensation Act Handbook is on sale through Loyola College of Law for $60. Call (504) 861-5441 or Toll Free at (866) 250-8617 to order. For more information, email clelaw@loyno.edu

For anyone with an interest in the Defense Base Act and/or issues facing American contractors working overseas, absolutely buy a copy of the DBA/WHCA Handbook. Most of the chapters were written by lawyers and judges whose careers are narrowly focused in DBA law.

Additional Reading

Defense Base Act Practice: We're Not in Kansas Anymore
By Roger A. Levy, Editor of the DBA/WHCA Handbook, Lexis/Nexis, August 19, 2008

U.S. Department of Labor
The Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) webpage

Appeal

It's done. I sent the appeal letter off in the mail today. It's 12 pages long with another 30 or so pages in enclosures. Maybe once I get the next response back, I'll post some of the appeal letter for grins and giggles. 

I can't help but picture a government automaton seated in a bleak gray office stamping REJECT on all of the FOIA letters that come across the desk, my latest in particular. I don't hold out much hope that my appeal letter will overturn the initial response of neither confirming nor denying the existence or non-existence of the material I seek.

Which, by the way, I haven't exactly divulged what it is that I am seeking.

I requested two audio recordings and/or segregable portions of otherwise exempt material (in other words, transcripts). Specifically, I filed an FOI request with the National Security Agency for an audio recording of the October 9, 2003 satellite phone call that Kirk von Ackermann placed to the Iraqi employee in which he asked for assistance with the flat tire. The second audio recording I requested was one from the previous day in which he left a message on his home answering machine in the United States - that he had arrived safely at a base in Iraq.

The significance of the second recording is that it's what triggered the recording of the first - if statements by public officials are to be believed. The content of neither phone call warrants classification. And as both intercepts are the result of the NSA program revealed by the President, the Attorney General and the Director of the National Security Agency, it's a bit silly to pretend recordings of the intercepts don't exist.

But the NSA will. And an automaton will stamp my letter: REJECT.

Do you think they even bother to read the letters or do they stamp first and then just pretend to read the letters?

Super Double Secret

Working away on the appeal letter for the NSA. I'm hoping to mail it next week. I know it's pointless but I have to at least try. I thought now would be a good time to tell you about my 'assistant' as my dear husband likes to call him.

My assistant is a schizophrenic neighbor - one who refuses to take his medication - who has been helping me with legal research. He likes to hang out in the law library so research gives him a good excuse to be there. If I described his general appearance, you'd understand but I don't want to prejudice your views on his character. Maybe one day I'll post a photo. Anyway, it's been a unique experience.

The first day I went by the law library to check it out, I ran into him. Over the next few days, he pretty much tracked me down (in other words, loitered at my front door basically stalking me and asking my neighbors where I was). Once he successfully intercepted me, he asked if he could make copies for whatever it was that I was working on. To be honest, I'm not sure he really understands about the FOIA appeal because he keeps asking when I go to court. I've explained that the first thing I need to do is file a letter appealing the decision to deny the FOI request. The details seem to get lost because he asked again today about my court date.

Anyway, that first day I gave him $20 for a copy card at the law library and suggested he see what he could find out about court cases that successfully overturned Exemptions 1 and 3 of the FOIA. The next day, he was waiting at my front door with a new briefcase (cost: approximately $20). He announced I would be receiving "reports" by mail. "Don't worry," he said, "they're classified." I had absolutely no idea if a report was in the mail literally or figuratively. It's kind of hard to tell with a schizophrenic who refuses to take their medication just where in reality things stand. He requested another $20 as he was getting short on funds. "It's all accounted for. I sent it to my book keeper." And yes, he actually does have a book keeper but that's a side story.

A few days later, next door received a large manilla envelope in the mail addressed to me care of the little shop. The return address was "Bob Smith, Esq." That first report came in a very official looking plastic binder with a cover letter. It was sealed inside of another envelope marked "Classified." I was just looking through the pile. So far, I've received 8 reports - which consist of various pages copied out of various law books, most not really applicable to the matter at hand.

For example, one recent report was a series of pages from the Supreme Court Reporter. I was looking for a specific case, and I guess the name of the Plaintiff was a problem. I received about ten pages from the Reporter for a variety of cases all beginning with the letter A.

I've probably given you the impression that his contributions to the appeal have been fairly useless. Not at all. In fact, it's his decidedly outside of the box perspective I've found very helpful. For instance, I asked him to look up information regarding the 3rd exemption of the FOIA. He came back with information regarding the 4th Amendment as applies to medical files. In other words, Privacy. I hadn't addressed Privacy in my appeal until his research pointed out the oversight.

I've told him repeatedly he doesn't have to mail the reports. But he always responds, in a slightly petulant tone, "I have the stamps."

Today he was really disappointed to learn we're almost done. On the other hand, it might be good timing. He goes back to court on Wednesday and he might not fare so well this time. You see, he usually represents himself and more importantly - he wins. Which, as one friend who knows him pointed out - what does that really say about the state of our legal system?

If I actually go ahead and follow this all the way to court, he'll be ecstatic. I can just picture him telling a judge he can't possibly go to jail for disturbing the peace because he's the lead attorney on a suit against the National Security Agency. I think I might stand a good chance of winning just on the basis of his participation.

I'm really tempted to scan and post one of his cover notes to me. But since they're classified, I really can't. They're secret.

New Remains Identified - Fouty and Jimenez

Additional remains of two soldiers who were kidnapped and killed in Iraq have been located and identified. Remains of both soldiers were previously buried back in July 2008.

New remains of Lawrence soldier going to Arlington
February 1, 2009, Associated Press

Newly identified remains of a soldier from Lawrence will be buried with those of a comrade from his unit, who were both kidnapped and killed in Iraq.

The Army says the remains of Staff Sergeant Alex Jimenez and Specialist Byron Fouty of Waterford, Mich., will be buried at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia on Feb. 17 with full military honors.

Update: Fouty and Jimenez remains were discovered buried together in a shallow grave. The remains were separated and sent as requested to their families for burial. But a number of other additional materials, including some part of a uniform and weapon was not easily separated. It's from this group of materials that a second set of remains were finally identified as belonging to Fouty and Jimenez.

The newly identified remains were buried co-mingled in a single casket at Arlington Cemetary in a ceremony with full military honors. According to news reports, only 10% of all those eligible for burial at Arlington accept as the general preference is to bury loved ones near the homes of family.

There was a description of the actual process of laying the remains in the casket for burial - an Army blanket is placed in the casket on top of which is laid cotton. The remains are placed on the cotton and then covered with a white sheet. The blanket is folded over and a replica dress uniform of Jimenez, who held higher rank, is placed on top of the blanket.

Previous post:

Remains of Two Missing Soldiers Identified
July 13, 2008

New Graft in Iraq Investigation

This investigation is long overdue. According to the article, they're reviewing information provided by Dale Stoffel, an arms dealer who was killed in a drive by shooting in 2004. Stoffel described clandestine drops of cash hidden in pizza boxes to investigators shortly before he was killed.

I have no idea what relationship, if any, this investigation will have on the case of Ryan Manelick.

Inquiry on Graft in Iraq Focuses on U.S. Officers
By James Glanz, C.J. Chivers, and William K. Rushbaum, New York Times, February 14, 2009

The investigations, which are being conducted by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, the Justice Department, the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command and other federal agencies, cover a period when millions of dollars in cash, often in stacks of shrink-wrapped bricks of $100 bills, were dispensed from a loosely guarded safe in the basement of one of Saddam Hussein’s former palaces.

Former American officials describe payments to local contractors from huge sums of cash dumped onto tables and stuffed into sacks as if it were Halloween candy.

Colin Freeman

Colin Freeman, the journalist who first broke the story of Kirk von Ackermann's disappearance, spent 40 days as a hostage in Somalia. I feel absolutely horrible that I was oblivious to his plight until tonight. You can read about his time - spent mostly in caves - below. The last one, My 40 Days in a Cave Held By Somali Gunmen, is an in-depth piece, full of that lovely biting wit of his.

Colin Freeman celebrates freedom
By Olga Craig, January 6, 2009



Colin Freeman: The moment my Somali kidnap hell began
By Colin Freeman, January 6, 2009

My 40 Days in a Cave Held By Somali Gunmen
By Colin Freeman, January 10, 2009, UK Telegraph

The links below are specific to Freeman's writings that are of interest to the Missing Man. His book about his time in Iraq is a great read, The Curse of the al-Dulaimi Hotel. He covers the disappearance of Kirk von Ackermann and Ryan Manelick's murder in the book, including the only first hand account of the isolated road where von Ackermann's vehicle was discovered abandoned.

Curse of the al Dulaimi Hotel - Pt II (image)
August 16, 2008

Suspicion surrounds missing Bay Area man
by Colin Freeman, San Francisco Chronicle, February 13, 2005

Bay Area civilian vanishes in Iraq
by Colin Freeman, San Francisco Chronicle, November 11, 2003

Mystery surrounds US businessman missing in Iraq's 'Sunni triangle'
by Colin Freeman, Telegraph, November 9, 2003

Take it easy and waterski through Baghdad
by Colin Freeman, The Scotsman, October 26, 2003

POW/MIA - National Security Act of 1947

I'm spending my free time at the local law library trying - more or less hopelessly - to do research for the NSA appeal. I stumbled on a bit related to POW/MIA in one of the books I was reading today on National Security Intelligence.

Makes me wonder, if information is unintentionally acquired prior to the disappearance of someone, but it's later determined that the information might be useful in determining what happened, under whose authority does the information then fall? It's unclear, especially since it wasn't originally collected for investigative purposes.

But that's a separate side issue and unrelated to the appeal at hand. At least, not at this point.

National Security Act of 1947 as amended. Unclassified.

POW/MIA ANALYTIC CAPABILITY

SEC. 117. (a) REQUIREMENT - (1)The Director of Central Intelligence shall, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, establish and maintain in the intelligence community an analytic capability with responsibility for intelligence in support of the activities of the United States relating to individuals who, after December 31, 1990, are unaccounted for United States personnel.

(2) The analytic capability maintained under paragraph (1) shall be known as the 'POW/MIA analytic capabiltity of the intelligence community'.

(b) UNACCOUNTED FOR UNITED STATES PERSONNEL - In this section, the term 'unaccounted for United States personnel' means the following:

(1) Any missing person (as that term is defined in section 1513(1) of title 10, United States Code).

(2) Any United States national who was killed while engaged in activities on behalf of the United states and whose remains have not been repatriated to the United States.

What exactly is a 'missing person'? To find out, it's necessary to visit the United States Code, Title 10 - Armed Forces, Subtitle A - General Military Law, Part II - Personnel, Chapter 76 - Missing Persons. I've covered this before, but it never hurts to take a look at the information again.

U.S. Code Title 10 § 1513

In this chapter:
(1) The term “missing person” means—

(A) a member of the armed forces on active duty who is in a missing status; or
(B) a civilian employee of the Department of Defense or an employee of a contractor of the Department of Defense who serves in direct support of, or accompanies, the armed forces in the field under orders and who is in a missing status.
Such term includes an unaccounted for person described in section 1509 (b) of this title who is required by section 1509 (a)(1) of this title to be considered a missing person.

(2) The term “missing status” means the status of a missing person who is determined to be absent in a category of any of the following:

(A) Missing.
(B) Missing in action.
(C) Interned in a foreign country.
(D) Captured.
(E) Beleaguered.
(F) Besieged.
(G) Detained in a foreign country against that person’s will.

(3) The term “accounted for”, with respect to a person in a missing status, means that—

(A) the person is returned to United States control alive;
(B) the remains of the person are recovered and, if not identifiable through visual means as those of the missing person, are identified as those of the missing person by a practitioner of an appropriate forensic science; or
(C) credible evidence exists to support another determination of the person’s status.

Additional Reading - just for fun:

National Security Investigations and Prosecutions
By David Kris, J. Douglas Wilson, West Thomson, 2007

Rejection

Another FOIA rejection came in. But...I am going to appeal this one all the way. I probably should mention, I filed the FOIA request with the NSA so I wasn't surprised by their response. 

Wish me luck.

Tikrit-Kirkuk Road

I found some photos on the web that I have good reason to believe are of the road between Tikrit and Kirkuk. Colin Freeman described the road in his book, Curse of the al Dulaimi Hotel. From page 136:

[A local Iraqi police chief] directed us to the spot where Kirk had vanished. It was near the brow of a long, winding hilltop road, miles from anywhere and surrounded by rocky outcrops. A long way from any help if you got yourself in a tight spot. At the bottom of the other side of the hill, there was a US Army checkpoint, where Dawkins had handed over a copy of Kirk's photograph.

So far, no luck in confirming the photos linked to below are in fact of the road between Tikrit and Kirkuk through the Jabal Hamrin mountains. I also haven't been able to get in touch with anyone for permission to post the photos here at the Missing Man. I'll keep trying though.

The first of the photos were posted at webshots.com by elpastorek in a folder called #2 Iraq-Camp Danger/Tikrit uploaded July 2, 2005. Of particular interest is Photo 020.

Photo 010

Photo 011

Photo 015

Photo 020

Photo 021

The next photo was posted at TravelPod.com by TeamKnell in a folder called Album #2 uploaded February 16, 2008

Traveling to Kirkuk-Kirkuk, Iraq

Given the landscape in photos, would you drive through this area with a tire problem?

Addendum: I've decided to post one photo, Photo 020. If the photographer objects, I will remove it.

Original source and additional photos by elpastorek: Photo 020

Kirk von Ackermann's Notebook

One thing just keeps bugging me: the missing notebook.

Kirk von Ackermann was known as a prolific note taker, continuing that practice while in the Middle East, writing in code. Shortly after alleging that von Ackermann's disappearance in the fall of 2003 was connected to fraud, Ryan Manelick was killed in a drive-by shooting.

Assuming the fraud allegations are true, seems to me that Kirk von Ackermann's notebook might be the single most important item needed for solving Ryan Manelick's case. 

So what gives - how come no one has ever shown any interest in finding Kirk von Ackermann's notebook?

Related Posts

The Missing Personal Effects
January 2, 2009

The Missing Notebook (image)
June 11, 2008

US Hostages in Iraq

Just this past fall, an article from the Associated Press provided statistics from the Defense Intelligence Agency on Americans who were kidnapped in Iraq.

Iraq calmer but copycat kidnappings spread
By Pamela Hess, Associated Press, October 13, 2008

Five years ago, retired Air Force intelligence officer Kirk von Ackermann became the first of 39 Americans to be kidnapped in Iraq. He's still missing, his wife fearing she'll never see him again.

Attached is a chart showing the incident date, name and status of those 39. Technically, the status of 'released' should more properly be referred to as 'Returned to Military Control' (RMC).

As mentioned in a previous post, there is good reason to believe there are more Americans missing in Iraq than those who have been reported. Employers and family members may choose to keep quiet for a number of reasons (ransom, etc). Just to be clear, 39 is the minimum number of those kidnapped in Iraq to date.

Not included in the chart (at this time) are the troops taken POW (status: missing) during the invasion of March 2003. All were Returned to Military Control:

Spc. Edgar Hernandez
Spc. Joseph Hudson
Spc. Shoshana Johnson
Pfc. Patrick Miller
Sgt. James Riley
Pfc. Jessica Lynch
Chief warrant officer David Williams
Chief warrant officer Ronald Young Jr.

I also haven't included Captain Michael Scott Speicher, missing since his plane was shot down on January 16, 1991 during Gulf War I. He is, however, listed in the side bar to the right.

American Hostages in Iraq

Kirk von Ackermann
Thomas Hamill
Nick Berg
William Bradley
Keith Matthew Maupin
Timothy E. Bell
Aban Elias
Micah Garen
Jack Hensley
Olin Eugene Armstrong, Jr.
Paul Taggart
Roy Hallums
Dean Sadek
Jeffrey Ake
Tom Fox
Ronald Alan Schulz
Jill Carroll
PFC Kristian Menchaca
PFC Thomas Tucker
Sgt Ahmed Qusai al-Taayie
Jonathon Michael Cote
Paul Christopher Johnson-Reuben
Joshua Mark Munns
John Roy Young
Ronald Withrow
+ 14 unknown persons

The Missing Personal Effects

To date, no one really knows what happened to Kirk von Ackermann's personal effects. News articles mention his lap top, satellite phone and $40,000 were found in his car. But nothing is known about his clothes or any personal items he may have had with him in Iraq - nothing was ever returned to his family.

Now it's possible early investigators filed things away or that maybe his colleagues were too busy to deal with a box kicking around their offices, or maybe his things just got tossed out along the way. It's certainly easy to assume that whatever overnight bag might have held von Ackermann's toothbrush and clean socks just got lost in the shuffle during the early days of the investigation into his disappearance.

But what if von Ackermann's personal effects were never inside of his abandoned vehicle on the day it was found? And what does the absence of those items say about how von Ackermann intended to spend that day?

The source for Colin Freeman's first article - who we later learn was Ryan Manelick - told Freeman that von Ackermann was on a 'day trip.'

Excerpt from Civilian Vanishes in Iraq

"Kirk was on a day trip from Kirkuk to Tikrit that day and was coming back when he rang one of the company's Iraqi employees around 3 p.m. to say he had a flat tire and couldn't get it fixed with the jack he had. He was stopped right on top of a road that runs over a small range of hills ... at the time.

Kirk von Ackermann certainly could have left his belongings somewhere in Kirkuk expecting to return to them at the end of the day. But where? While Ultra Services listed an 'office' in Kirkuk on its company website, von Ackermann is said to have called and left a message for his family the night before saying he was sleeping that night at a base. Ultra Services' offices were said to do double duty as apartments so why stay at a local base instead of the area office?

A quick look at the options of what could have happened to an overnight bag:

1. with von Ackermann in his vehicle
2. at the base - likely in the contracting officer's office
3. at Ultra Services' office
4. at an other unknown location

Continuing on.

According to Ryan Manelick - Kirk von Ackermann was returning from Tikrit to Kirkuk - but if the source of the information in Daniel Halpern's article was accurate, there was a side trip to FOB Pacesetter much further south near Balad.  (Note: FOB Pacesetter was later renamed FOB McMenzie.)

Simply put, Kirk von Ackermann's itinerary on October 9: Kirkuk to Tikrit to FOB Pacesetter near Balad then returning back to Tikrit to Kirkuk. And meanwhile, somewhere along the way he is also believed to have picked up a Nissan Patrol SUV with a bad tire of which von Ackermann was aware.


View Larger Map 

Excerpt from Death of a Contractor

On October 9th, not long after he and Phillips tried to take half of Ultra Services from Dawkins and create a rival company, Kirk von Ackermann visited FOB McKenzie, a U.S. forward operating base near Samarra. After meeting with a Turkish subcontractor, he left the base behind the wheel of his Nissan Patrol SUV. He was alone.

Logic says, keep an overnight bag close at hand as, with all travel, something might come up especially during a roughly 8 hour journey covering 300 miles round trip. In a region where travel could be interrupted for a variety of reasons, such as closed roads due to ongoing searches for Saddam Hussein, a contractor would be well-advised to be prepared.

Now back to the question I first posed...what if von Ackermann's overnight bag was never in his vehicle? Suddenly von Ackermann's movements and intentions that day are much less clear. So, below is another look at trying to construct a time line which is an admittedly rather hopeless project.

Timeline - version II

A conservative estimate based on drive time of 2.5 hours between Tikrit and Kirkuk, averaging 40 miles an hour, a one-hour meeting and backing into approximate times based on the news report of a 3:00 pm phone call.

Time 04:00 05:37 06:02 (6:30) (9:00) (10:00) (10:30) 11:30 11:50 12:00 13:00 15:00 15:05 15:10 15:45 17:27 17:37 18:02 20:00 24:00

AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM

Event Curfew Lifts Twilight Sunrise Leaves guest quarters in Kirkuk Tikrit Balad Arrive FOB Pacesetter (one-hour meeting) Leaves FOB Pacesetter Solar Noon Balad Tikrit Employee receives phone call Passing Patrol Check point report Employee arrives Moonrise (99% full moon) Sunset Twilight Curfew Starts in Tikrit area  Curfew nationwide

There's not much room for error. Somewhere in there, Kirk von Ackermann is believed to purchase his vehicle.

So what do you think - were Kirk von Ackermann's personal effects in the vehicle? Or is it an irrelevant question?

Related Posts

The Missing Notebook (image)
June 11, 2008

Time Line - Work in Progress (table)
April 27, 2008

Sun, Moon, Weather Data (graphic)
March 17, 2008

FOB Pacesetter (satellite image, photo & maps)
December 26, 2007

Defense Base Act vs War Hazards Compensation Act

This post looks at the significance of a non-hostile event vs a hostile event in determining how a casualty will be handled under the Defense Base Act. Any errors are strictly my own and, as always, corrections are very much welcome.

Casualty

Under United States policies and laws, a casualty is composed of a) TYPE, b) STATUS, and c) CATEGORY.

a) TYPE:

(1) non-hostile or
(2) hostile

b) STATUS:

(1) deceased or
(2) duty status – whereabouts unknown (DUSTWUN) for military, or excused absence – whereabouts unknown (EAWUN) for civilians or
(3) missing or
(4) very seriously ill or injured (VSI) or
(5) seriously ill or injured (SI) or
(6) not seriously ill or injured (NSI) or
(7) Returned to Military Control (RMC) or
(8) Pending - for preliminary reports only

At the DoD Component’s discretion, an additional casualty Status may be used - generally used for illnesses that require hospitalization:

(9) Special Patient (SPECPAT) or
(10) Special Category (SPECAT)

c) CATEGORY:

There are a wide variety of casualty categories depending on the status. For example, categories used for 'Status - Missing' are - Beleaguered, Besieged, Captured, Detained, Interned, Missing, Missing in Action (MIA), and again, Pending is for preliminary reports only.

POW is not a casualty status for reporting purposes, rather Status and Category are "Missing-Captured."

The key to understanding the difference between the Defense Base Act and the War Hazards Compensation Act lies in the TYPE of casualty: non-hostile vs. hostile

Laws

The Defense Base Act is an extension of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act - the equivalent of worker's compensation for Americans working overseas for US government agencies.

The Defense Base Act is, in effect, a group of laws: Defense Base Act (1941), War Hazards Compensation Act (1942), Mutual Security Act (1958), and in part the Dayton Peace Accords (1995). In addition, the Federal Employees Compensation Act (1916) applies should an incident qualify under the War Hazards Compensation Act.

Because coverage under the Defense Base Act is a legal requirement, premiums paid by a contractor are a reimbursable expense under the terms of the contract. Contracts should carry the relevant contract clauses (see: PDF - Memorandum: Inclusion of Defense Base Act Clause in DoD Overseas Contracts 08 Dec 2003).

Defense Base Act vs War Hazards Compensation Act

Incidents are divided into two types: NON-HOSTILE and HOSTILE. Casualties the result of a Non-Hostile event are covered under the Defense Base Act. Casualties the result of a Hostile event, however, are covered under the War Hazards Compensation Act.

The following graphic is an attempt to help clarify the difference between the Defense Base Act and the War Hazards Compensation Act.

right click to open in a new window

Claims arising from incidents that are the result of non-hostile action generally are reported under the Defense Base Act and as such are 15-40% reimbursable. [see note below] Claims arising from incidents that are the result of hostile action are paid under the War Hazards Compensation Act and subsequently the Federal Employees Compensation Act and consequently are 100% reimbursable.

Example:

John Brown sprains his ankle getting out of his truck in Iraq. Even though he's working in a war zone, the type of incident is non-hostile. Claims will be covered under the Defense Base Act. The claims will be reimbursed at 15-40%.

Bob Jones sprains his ankle getting out of his truck in Iraq as he attempts to retreat from mortar fire. Even though the injury is physically and medically identical to that of his co-worker, John Brown, the incident is the result of hostile action. Claims will be covered under the War Hazards Compensation Act and subsequently the Federal Employees Compensation Act. The claims will be reimbursed at 100%.

Previous related posts

Casualty Status of Missing

Iraq Contractors and The Missing Persons Act

Note (added July 19, 2009)

Figures were provided by Department of Labor personnel during several presentations at the Defense Base Act conference in Washington DC in the fall of 2008. The vast majority of claims filed under the Defense Base Act are for injuries. Expense to be reimbursed is usually for Loss Time - that is, the amount of time that an employee is unable to work due to the injury - but only if more than 4 days. The first 4 days are expected to be paid as sick days by an employer, and are not reimbursed.

As a result, the bulk of the claims - which again are for injuries - generally end up being reimbursed at 15-40%. In more concrete terms, the vast majority of injuries result in a time loss of 5 to 7 days of which 1 to 3 days, roughly 15-40%, will be reimbursed.

The Department of Labor breaks down Loss Time as follows:

NLT - No Loss Time - No lost time and no medical expense
NL0 - No Loss Zero - No lost time and no medical expense * but may result in a later claim, Questionable No Lost Time Injury**
NL4 - No Loss Four - No lost time, medical expense incurred or expected *
DEA - Death
COP - Continuation of regular pay*
OTH - Other

* found on a DOL form for Federal Employee's Notice of Traumatic Injury and Claim for Continuation of Pay/Compensation
** CHAPTER 1-300 - INDEX AND CONTROL at the Department of Labor website