March 4, 2026
Kokosing Materials, Inc. and Barrett Paving Materials, Inc. have agreed to pay a combined $30 million to resolve allegations that they submitted fraudulent asphalt testing data on federally funded highway infrastructure projects in Ohio.
Kokosing agreed to pay $17.5 million, and Barrett Paving agreed to pay $12.5 million. The cases are believed to be the largest False Claims Act recoveries of their kind involving asphalt mix design and testing fraud. The two cases arose from unrelated schemes at separate companies, but the alleged conduct was materially identical in both.
Before a contractor can pave a highway in Ohio, it must obtain approval from the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for a Job Mix Formula (JMF).
A JMF is the “recipe” for asphalt pavement. While the basic raw materials in asphalt are constant, the proportions and performance characteristics may vary from one project to the next. The mix must withstand expected traffic loads and Ohio’s climate conditions.
Testing data is a required component of the JMF submission. ODOT relies on that data to approve the mix, ensuring that taxpayer-funded public infrastructure will conform with required safety and durability standards. Contractors must also conduct ongoing quality control testing as asphalt is laid.
According to the allegations, rather than performing the required tests for the JMFs, defendants repeatedly submitted JMFs containing testing data copied from prior submissions to ODOT. Both companies also repeatedly submitted false test results during active paving operations.
Notably, the government did not need evidence of physically defective highways to pursue recovery. The fraud was not in the roads themselves, but in the false assurances that accompanied payment. Where compliance certifications are a condition of payment, submitting fraudulent certifications means the government never received what it bargained for, regardless of whether the pavement ultimately performed. There was no need to wait for cracks to form in vital public infrastructure.
These cases are also notable because the relators were not corporate insiders. They were state employees that identified the alleged scheme after reviewing suspicious data and conducting further investigation. They reported their concerns to the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General and the Ohio Inspector General before filing their qui tam complaints.
There was some challenge as to whether state government employees were eligible for a relator’s share. The federal government disagreed, ultimately awarding the relators 19.75% of the recovery.
This is an important reminder that the FCA’s qui tam provisions are not limited to corporate insiders. Public employees who uncover fraud affecting government funds may also qualify as relators under appropriate circumstances.
This is not the first time infrastructure oversight failures have resulted in significant False Claims Act recoveries. In 2006, Whistleblower Law Collaborative’s Suzanne Durrell and Bob Thomas represented a whistleblower in a $407 million settlement stemming from failures to institute concrete testing protocols during Boston’s historic “Big Dig” project, the $14.6 billion reconstruction of downtown Boston’s roadways, tunnels, and bridges.
Highway construction represents one of the most visible and heavily funded areas of public spending, absorbing billions in taxpayer funds each year. The quality of the roads Americans drive on every day is one of the most tangible measures of whether that money is being spent with integrity. Where testing data, certification requirements, and quality controls exist, so too does the potential for fraud.
Our firm represents whistleblowers nationwide in diverse False Claims Act matters. If you have information about possible fraud against the government, including on public infrastructure projects, contact us for a confidential consultation. We have expertise, and we want to help.