United States v. Phillip Fairchild
Opinion
Opinion
Noonan, J.
Phillip Fairchild appeals his conviction of causing false statements to be made to the General Services Administration (GSA) in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 2. We affirm.
FACTS
In August 1986 So-Cal Plastics, Inc. (So-Cal) entered into a contract with the GSA to provide plastic bags. Fairchild was president of So-Cal and signéd the contract, which specified the thickness of the bags, the number of bags per box and the kind of box to be used. The contract also called for certification that each shipment complied with the contract pursuant to the Quality Approved Manufacturer Agreement (QAMA) program which permitted the supplier to get prompt payment and reduced cost to the government by waiving government inspection of every shipment.
After getting the contract, Fairchild requested modifications as to the number of bags per box and the kind of bags to be used. GSA refused the request. The first two sets of pre-production samples of the bags failed the GSA tests. Fairchild then gave directions to make passable samples — directions which increased the thickness of the bags. The third set of pre-production samples was accepted by GSA.