Justice Department Convicts and Jails Kansas Resident Michael Clinesmith for Wire Fraud and Kickbacks Linked to Nuclear Weapons Contracts in Kansas City

For years, it all seemed routine — contracts awarded, equipment manufactured, nuclear components measured and approved. But behind the scenes, prosecutors say a Kansas engineer was quietly running a kickback scheme tied to projects supporting America’s nuclear weapons infrastructure.

On Tuesday, a federal judge sentenced 70-year-old Michael Clinesmith of Overland Park, Kansas, to 29 months in prison for his role in a long-running conspiracy involving subcontracts connected to the Kansas City National Security Campus.

The campus supports the National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees key elements of the U.S. nuclear stockpile.

This wasn’t a small internal ethics violation. According to the Justice Department, it was a 15-year arrangement built on secret payments, inside information, and abuse of authority.

How the Scheme Worked

Clinesmith was a veteran employee at a major engineering firm working at the Kansas City National Security Campus.

His role was significant — he was responsible for designing and procuring highly specialized gages used to measure nuclear weapons components. These aren’t off-the-shelf tools.

They’re precision instruments critical to ensuring that weapons parts meet exact specifications.

Prosecutors said Clinesmith leveraged that responsibility to steer subcontracts to a Missouri businessman, Richard Mueller of St. Charles. In exchange, Mueller allegedly paid him handsomely.

The arrangement was blunt in its mechanics. Clinesmith would tell Mueller how much he wanted to be paid for secretly performing work connected to the subcontract.

Mueller’s company would build those figures into its bids. Clinesmith would then approve those bids, telling his employer they were fair and reasonable — without disclosing that he was receiving kickbacks.

Court records show Mueller paid Clinesmith more than $1 million, with total kickbacks exceeding $1.2 million over roughly 15 years.

The Use of Insider Information

Beyond steering contracts, prosecutors said Clinesmith also supplied Mueller with confidential information, including internal budget figures.

That inside knowledge allowed the subcontractor to tailor bids strategically and improve the odds of winning.

That element — misuse of privileged procurement data — is particularly serious in federal contracting cases. Federal acquisition rules exist to prevent exactly this kind of manipulation.

When internal cost estimates leak, competitive bidding collapses into a rigged process.

Officials emphasized that the contracts involved equipment essential to maintaining the integrity of the nation’s nuclear weapons systems. While there was no indication that weapon safety was compromised, the trust underlying the procurement process was.

Conviction and Sentencing

In October 2025, a jury convicted Clinesmith of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud, along with four substantive counts of wire fraud and honest services wire fraud.

Honest services fraud is often charged in cases where someone abuses a position of trust for personal gain — especially when kickbacks are involved. It’s a statute that has been used in public corruption and corporate fraud cases across the country.

This week’s 29-month sentence reflects both the financial scale of the scheme and the national security implications of the work involved.

The Government’s Response

Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva described the conduct as a betrayal of employer trust and public responsibility. He stressed that procurement fraud involving nuclear weapons manufacturing is taken extremely seriously.

The Department of Energy’s Office of Inspector General, which investigated the case, echoed that message.

DOE-OIG officials said safeguarding the integrity of departmental contracts is a core mission and that kickbacks and fraud undermine not just budgets, but confidence in critical federal programs.

Procurement fraud has long been a focus area for federal investigators. In recent years, the government has increased scrutiny over defense and energy contracting, especially where critical infrastructure or national security systems are involved.

Why This Case Matters Beyond One Man

The Kansas City National Security Campus plays a central role in producing and maintaining non-nuclear components for the U.S. stockpile.

These facilities are part of a broader modernization effort underway across the nuclear enterprise, with billions in taxpayer funding allocated to upgrades and sustainment.

When fraud infiltrates that pipeline, even at the subcontract level, it raises concerns about oversight, compliance, and internal controls.

Experts note that long-tenured employees — like Clinesmith, who worked in the system for decades — can sometimes exploit trust and familiarity to bypass safeguards.

That’s why federal agencies often rotate duties, enforce conflict-of-interest disclosures, and conduct internal audits.

In this case, investigators said the scheme went on for approximately 15 years before it unraveled.

What’s next?

Clinesmith will serve his federal sentence, though it remains unclear whether restitution orders or additional financial penalties will follow. Cases like this often trigger internal reviews within contracting firms and may lead to tighter procurement controls.

The Department of Energy and its oversight arms are likely to continue examining contractor compliance procedures at facilities tied to national security missions.

As for Mueller and any additional consequences tied to his role, further proceedings could still shape the final chapter of this case.

For federal agencies, the broader takeaway is clear: even long-standing insiders are not beyond scrutiny.

Summary:

A Kansas engineer, Michael Clinesmith, has been sentenced to 29 months in prison for orchestrating a 15-year kickback scheme tied to nuclear weapons manufacturing contracts at the Kansas City National Security Campus.

Prosecutors said he steered subcontracts to a Missouri contractor in exchange for over $1.2 million in bribes while secretly providing insider information.

Federal officials say the case underscores the government’s commitment to rooting out fraud in critical national security procurement programs.