Archive

ShareThis Page
Alcoa judgment helps U.S. Attorney’s Office collect 5 times its budget | TribLIVE.com
Allegheny

Alcoa judgment helps U.S. Attorney’s Office collect 5 times its budget

by BRIAN BOWLING
| Wednesday, November 26, 2014 12:01 a.m.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office of Western Pennsylvania has collected about five times its budget in criminal and civil penalties and government restitution, mainly because of an aluminum manufacturer’s guilty plea in a foreign bribery case.

The office collected $52.9 million in the federal fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, U.S. Attorney David Hickton said. That’s about five times the $10.6 million it collected in 2010 and five times the office’s operating budget, he said.

The bulk of the money, $48.9 million, came from criminal cases.

Alcoa World Alumina LLC in January pleaded guilty in a foreign bribery case and was fined $209 million, which it is paying in five annual installments of $41.8 million, according to court records.

In addition to those collections, the Western Pennsylvania office worked with federal prosecutors and Justice Department lawyers in regional cases that brought in $11.6 million more. The office worked with local and state law enforcement to seize $18.8 million in asset forfeitures.

Nationally, the Justice Department collected $24.7 billion in civil and criminal actions, Attorney General Eric Holder said. The 94 U.S. Attorney’s Offices and the divisions of the Justice Department that handle civil and criminal cases have a combined budget of $2.9 billion.

Brian Bowling is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.