Honeywell: Z Shield Degradation and the Body-Armor Settlement

Honeywell agreed to pay $3.35 million in the body-armor settlement over alleged Z Shield degradation, resolving False Claims Act allegations that it sold material for police vests despite knowing heat and humidity made it unsuitable for ballistic use. If you worked with the material, its performance data or the sales it supported, the central question is what the supplier knew while the product was still reaching officers.

The Department of Justice announced the Honeywell International settlement on October 26, 2022. The Charlotte, North Carolina company supplied material to Armor Holdings, which made the vests. Federal agencies bought those vests, and federal funding also helped other law-enforcement agencies buy them. The alleged problem began inside the protective material and traveled through the purchasing chain.

What Honeywell Sold to Armor Holdings

Honeywell allegedly sold its patented Z Shield material to Armor Holdings between 2000 and 2005 despite knowing it degraded quickly over time in heat and humidity. The government’s allegation concerned Honeywell’s knowledge of the material’s unsuitability for ballistic use while those sales continued.

Z Shield was part of the wider Zylon body-armor business. In its earlier account of the industry investigation, the Justice Department described Honeywell’s product as a laminated version of Zylon used in police armor. Honeywell supplied that material. Armor Holdings manufactured the finished vests.

The Justice Department pursued the material supplier even though Armor Holdings made the finished vests. For someone working upstream, that is the connection between the material business and the public purchase.

The case illustrates the procurement problem behind nonconforming goods: what the buyer pays to receive and what the supplier knows about the product can be very different. The officers were buying protection. The material supplier allegedly knew its product was unsuitable for providing it.

How Z Shield Reached Government Buyers

Armor Holdings’ Z Shield vests reached public buyers through a General Services Administration contract and through purchases partly funded by the Justice Department’s Bulletproof Vest Partnership program.

Federal agencies purchased the vests under the GSA contract. State, local and Tribal law-enforcement authorities also purchased them with partial support from the vest partnership. A local department could therefore be the buyer even though federal money helped pay the bill.

For an insider, that distinction puts the purchasing records beside the product records. Knowing the material can explain the alleged performance problem. Knowing the customer and funding route can explain how taxpayers paid for it.

Why Heat and Humidity Mattered

The alleged Z Shield defect concerned performance deteriorating over time in heat and humidity. The product was being sold for ballistic protection, and the Justice Department alleged that Honeywell knew it was unsuitable for that purpose.

The wider Zylon investigation shows why the degradation issue mattered to officers wearing the finished vests. In its announcement of the separate Toyobo settlement, the Justice Department described the National Institute of Justice’s testing.

In August 2005, the institute completed a study that found more than 50 percent of used Zylon-containing vests failed to stop bullets they had been certified to stop. It then decertified all Zylon-containing vests.

The protection officers had been promised was failing in testing of vests already used.

What the Material Data Told Customers

The Justice Department alleged that Toyobo, the manufacturer of the Zylon fiber Honeywell supplied in laminated form, published misleading data that understated the fiber’s degradation.

Honeywell’s case concerned its Z Shield material sold to Armor Holdings. The case shows why someone who understands product performance may see something a purchasing file alone cannot explain.

The Settlement That Closed the Industry Investigation

The Justice Department said Honeywell’s $3.35 million agreement closed its body-armor investigation after the United States had already recovered more than $133 million from 17 entities and individuals across the supply chain.

The Justice Department’s Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section handled the Honeywell case. The General Services Administration’s Office of Inspector General assisted in the resolution.

What Proof Do You Need as a Whistleblower?

In a body-armor case, we look for the connection between product performance, what people inside the business knew and the government-supported sales. Material specifications, test results, customer communications and purchasing records can give different parts of that account.

If your work involved testing, you may know what the results showed and who received them. If you worked in sales or purchasing, you may know what customers were told about the material and which orders followed. Those are specific points we can examine with you, starting with the work you actually did.

The purchase and payment records matter alongside that technical knowledge. An invoice, the agency’s acceptance of a delivery and the payment are distinct records. We use them to connect what the supplier represented to what the public buyer funded.

You can start that conversation with the part of the transaction you understand. Our role is to assess how it connects to the product, the company’s decisions and the public purchase.

How Much Money Can a Whistleblower Get From a Qui Tam Lawsuit?

A whistleblower case under the False Claims Act can pay 15% to 30% of what the government recovers.

You Know the Material Behind the Vest

If you saw degradation data conflict with what customers were told, speak with our whistleblower experts about the material and the sales it supported. We build the government procurement case with you and bring in government procurement whistleblower lawyers who understand defective-product claims and federally supported purchases. We stay alongside you as your knowledge of the material becomes part of a case about the protection public agencies paid for.