(Washington, D.C.) – Yesterday, GAP released the contract showing that Shaha Riza, companion of Paul Wolfowitz, performed consulting work for defense contractor SAIC in Iraq between March and May of 2003. Total funds paid to SAIC for services, according to the contract, equal $235,231.28. Riza’s attorney has informed the press that she was not paid by SAIC. The details of the contract and Riza’s public statements are at odds and raise serious questions that need clarification.

Under the contract’s Statement of Work, three Subject Matter Experts are named, with Riza appearing first. In the budget they are listed as line items: Executive Management Consultant I, II and III. Labor costs are shown as T&M (Time and Materials) in the detailed contract, while other expenses such as travel are shown as ODC (Other Direct Costs). The contract shows that all three consultants were paid labor costs.

The report shows that labor costs for all three positions were funded. It is important to note that the contract clearly distinguishes between payments made for expenses and fees paid for labor. Labor costs for Consultant I equal $17,100.56; II was paid $97,144.32; and III earned $65,798.40. These appear as consultant fees, net of expenses (ODC).

Paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4 explicitly state that the US Government (USG) will pay all travel expenses, supplies and equipment. Because Riza took four weeks of annual leave to work for SAIC, it is probable that she was Consultant I, paid about $17,000 for approximately 30 days work.

If, as her attorney stated, Riza wasn’t paid by SAIC, then disbursements were not made in compliance with the contract. If SAIC billed the Defense Department for her labor under the contract, but didn’t pay her, SAIC should explain this discrepancy. The public needs the facts to understand what happened here.