Pentagon to decide on Air Force Tanker contract

[Joetown Parrothead]

Pentagon to decide on tanker contract
By Sam Hananel
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
07/09/2008

UPDATED 11:40 A.M.



WASHINGTON -- Congressional sources say the Pentagon will re-compete a $35 billion contract to build the Air Force's fleet of new refueling tankers and pick a new winner by the end of the year.

Reps. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., and Norm Dicks, D-Wash., say the Office of the Secretary of Defense — not the Air Force — will oversee the competition between Boeing Co. and a team led by Northrop Grumman Corp.

The plan, which hands control to the Pentagon's top acquisition chief and sets up a dedicated source-selection committee, indicates that senior civilians at the Defense Department have lost confidence in the Air Force's ability to manage the contract.

The Government Accountability Office last month said Boeing might have won the contract had the service not made mistakes in evaluating the bids.
Had Boeing won, Connecticut-based Pratt & Whitney and Hamilton Sundstrand would have worked on the project.

OUR EARLIER STORY



WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is expected today to announce whether the Air Force will rebid a multibillion contract to build new refueling tankers.

Several lawmakers have been told the Defense Department will decide how to move forward after a government report found major flaws in the decision to award the lucrative contract to Northrop Grumman and its European partner over Boeing Co.

Two congressional staffers, speaking on condition of anonymity because the decision is pending, said the Air Force began informing lawmakers Tuesday afternoon of the pending announcement.

Last month, a Government Accountability Office report said Boeing might have won the contract if the Air Force had not made mistakes in evaluating the competing bids. The GAO recommended the service hold a new competition.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates would not confirm when a decision would be made, but told reporters Tuesday: "I expect to announce the way forward very soon."

"I take the report from the Government Accountability Office very seriously, and particularly (its) identification of some deficiencies in the contract process," Gates said during a visit to Fort Lewis, Wash.

Gates is overseeing the decision on how the Air Force should respond.

The tanker deal — one of the largest in Pentagon history — is the first of three Air Force contracts worth up to $100 billion to replace an aging fleet of nearly 600 refueling tankers over the next 30 years.

Lawmakers from Washington state, Missouri and Kansas have put considerable pressure on the Air Force to reopen the bidding process and cancel the contract with Northrop Grumman Corp. and Airbus parent European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co.

Boeing employs thousands of workers who would work on the tanker. ­Boeing's defense unit is based in St. Louis.

"The Air Force could try anything from a quick fix to starting over," said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute think tank.

But as a practical matter, Thompson said, any attempt that appears to ignore the GAO report would meet resistance in Congress, where lawmakers could move to block the Air Force from awarding the contract to Northrop Grumman.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., introduced a Senate Resolution Tuesday calling on the Pentagon to rebid the flawed tanker contract. The resolution was co-sponsored by Sens. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., Christopher "Kit" Bond, R-Mo., and Claire McCaskill, D-Mo.

"The GAO's decision was clear, and today we are reiterating that message so that the Pentagon knows there is no wiggle room," Murray said. "It's time to go back and hold a truly transparent competition that does our war fighters and taxpayers justice."

[RinglingRingling]

man.. it is fun to watch Senators get all intramural at the bloodsports to support their whoring themselves out for campaign contributions. WA/KA/IL for Boeing.. AL/NY/CA for Grumman.. love that "mistakes were made in evaluating the bidding".. translates into, "my contributors are pi$$ed they didn't get the job, so now I have to make it look good for the money"...

sheesh.

[z-man]

Boeing lost this contract in the first place due to illegal dealing with the Air Force Procurement chief (Darlene Druyun retired from the government after awarding the contract and immediately started at Boeing as a Vice President) the fact that Boeing lost the latest round of bidding for this contract was 'their own damn fault'

Now the lobbyists are just working the trough.

http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05436t.html

As was widely publicized, in October 2004 Darleen Druyun pled guilty to
violating the conflict of interest provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 208(a)
based on the fact that she engaged in employment negotiations with The
Boeing Company while she was negotiating on behalf of the Air Force for
the lease of 100 Boeing KC 767A tanker aircraft. In addition to her
employment negotiations, documents submitted by Druyun in connection
with the criminal proceedings establish that, in 2000, Druyun contacted
Boeing personnel to request that Boeing provide employment for both
Druyun's daughter and the daughter's boyfriend (who subsequently became
Druyun's son-in-law). In response to these requests, Boeing created a
position for Druyun's daughter and hired both her daughter and future
son-in-law in the fall of 2000. In the documents filed in the criminal
proceedings, Druyun further states that her decisions in matters
affecting Boeing were "influenced by her perceived indebtedness to
Boeing for employing her future son-in-law and daughter," and that with
regard to the contract awarded in the C-130 AMP procurement, "an
objective selection authority may not have selected Boeing."

[Dezdmona]

Isn't this the bid that was awarded to Airbus?
Personally, I'd rather see the contract awarded to an American company than a French company.

[SeattleParrotHead]

the fact that Boeing lost the latest round of bidding for this contract was 'their own damn fault'

The USAF issued a RFP for one thing and then awarded the contract to Airbus for something totally different. If the contract had been awarded to the company most responsive and compliant to the requirements of the RFP, the award would have been to Boeing.

"The Air Force bungled its biggest procurement deal to spend $40 billion to buy new aerial refueling tankers to replace its aging fleet, federal investigators declared last week. But what wasn't publicly known until yesterday was just how badly they did so. In a 67-page review, the Government Accountability Office sharply criticized the Air Force for a litany of contracting transgressions, including everything from failing to follow its own evaluation criteria to miscalculating the maintenance costs, size and amount of fuel a plane could carry and holding unfair discussions with one of the bidders."
"The Air Force made mistakes in math and procedure, failed to consider all information it was given, underestimated costs by hundreds of millions of dollars, changed specifications and ratings but only notified Northrop of the changes, and failed to check that the (Airbus) tankers could refuel all planes in the fleet."

Read the GAO's report and tell us how it was "their own damn fault."
http://www.businessweek.com/pdfs/2008/b ... ed_dec.pdf

[SharkOnLand]

Boeing lost this contract in the first place due to illegal dealing with the Air Force Procurement chief (Darlene Druyun retired from the government after awarding the contract and immediately started at Boeing as a Vice President) the fact that Boeing lost the latest round of bidding for this contract was 'their own damn fault'

There's always a woman to blame....

ducking now...

[SeattleParrotHead]

There's always a woman to blame....

ducking now...

Um, well . . . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darleen_Druyun

REALLY ducking . . . .