Processing your request


please wait...

Enforcement Action Dataset

 

Initiation Date:    12/22/2017  Information

Prosecuting Agency:    U.S. Department of Justice

Type of Action:    DOJ Criminal Proceeding

Docket or Case Number:    17-cr-698

Court:    E.D. New York

Name of Prosecuting Attorneys:   

  • Bridget M. Rohde, Acting U.S. Attorney
  • Patrick T. Hein, Assistant United States Attorney
  • Sandra L. Moser, Acting Chief, Fraud Section, Criminal Division
  • Derek J. Ettinger, Trial Attorney, Fraud Section, Criminal Division
  • David M. Fuhr, Trial Attorney, Fraud Section, Criminal Division
  • Christopher J. Cestaro, Assistant Chief, Fraud Section, Criminal Division
  • Alixandra Smith, Assistant United States Attorney

US Assisting Agencies:   

  • Federal Bureau of Investigation

Foreign Enforcement Action/Investigation:    Unknown

Foreign Assistance:   

  • Brazilian Federal Prosecution Office (Ministerio Publico Federal) (BR)
  • Singaporean Attorney General's Chambers (SG)

Origin of the Proceeding:    Unknown

Whistleblower:    Unknown

Case Status:    Resolved


Summary  Information

Keppel Offshore & Marine Ltd. ("KOM") was a Singaporean corporation that operated shipyards in Asia, North and South America, and Europe. The company primarily built mobile offshore drilling rigs and handled repairs, conversions, and upgrades of shipping vessels. Though not mentioned in the court documents, KOM was a wholly-owned subsidiary if Keppel Corporation, a Singapore corporation publicly traded on the Singaporean stock exchange.

Keppel Offshore & Marine, USA Inc. ("KOM USA") was a wholly-owned subsidiary of KOM based in Houston, Texas, which supervised operations of KOM facilities in Brazil and other locations.

For many years, executives and employess at the Brazil state oil company, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A., commonly known as Petrobras, used the bidding process for large projects at the company to solicit bribes from companies awarded contracts with Petrobras. From about 2007 and 2014, executives at KOM USA participated in these corrupt schemes at Petrobras by agreeing to pay bribes totalling approximately $8.8 million to secure a tension leg platform project with Petrobras. Multiple payments were made over the years to an employee at Petrobras as well as a party official with the Workers' Party of Brazil, a Brazilian political party. In all, KOM and KOM USA obtained approximately $159.9 million in profits (approximately $3.2 million of the profits were directly attributable to KOM USA) through the contract it secured with the bribes to Petrobras.

On December 22, 2017, the DOJ filed a single count Information in the Eastern District of New York against KOM USA alleging conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA. On the same date, the company entered into a plea agreement with the DOJ. Under the terms of the agreement, KOM USA pled guilty to the conspiracy charge and agreed to a criminal fine of $4,725,000, which would be paid by KOM as part of its global settlement with the DOJ as well as the Brazilian and Singaporean authorities.

In a related proceeding on December 22, 2017, the DOJ filed a single count Information in the Eastern District of New York against KOM alleging conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA. On the same date, the company entered into a three year deferred prosecution agreement with the DOJ. Under the terms of the agreement, KOM agreed to pay a total monetary penalty of $422,216,980, which represented a 25% departure below the minimum U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommended fine, and to self-report on the status of the company's improved compliance policies for three years. Of the total criminal penalty, $105,554,245 would be paid to the U.S. government and included a $4,725,000 criminal fine that KOM agreed to pay on behalf of KOM USA. The remainder of the total fine was split between Brazil and Singapore, with $211,108,490 going to Brazilian authorities and $105,554,245 to Singaporean authorities. In agreeing to defer prosecution, the DOJ noted KOM's substantial cooperation and remediation, but the DOJ did not give KOM credit for self-reporting because the DOJ already knew of the alleged misconduct by the time the company reported it to the agency.

Protected Content


Please Log In or Sign Up for a free account to access restricted features of the Clearinghouse website, including the Advanced Search form and the full case pages.

When you sign up, you will have the option to save your search queries performed on the Advanced Search form.