The Hill
Monday, July 06, 2009
SEARCH
Home
HillTube
Mobile
White Papers Portal
New Member Guide
BLOGS
Pundits Blog
Congress Blog
Blog Briefing Room
Twitter Room Blog
NEWS
Leading The News
Business & Lobbying
K Street Insiders
John Breaux
John Engler
Vin Weber
Dave Wenhold
The Executive
Campaign
Obama Cabinet
COLUMNISTS
Dick Morris
A.B. Stoddard
Brent Budowsky
Ben Goddard
David Hill
David Keene
Josh Marshall
Mark Mellman
Jim Mills
Markos Moulitsas (Kos)
Cheri Jacobus
John Del Cecato
COMMENT
Editorial
Letters
Op-eds
Weyant's World
CAPITAL LIVING
Today's Stories
50 Most Beautiful 2008
Other Features
In The Know
Bookshelf
Announcements
Food & Drink
Onward and Upward
RESOURCES
Classifieds
Subscribe
Order Reprints
Aerospace
Energy Special Report
Telecom Special Report
Transport Special Report
Earth Day Special Report
Consumer Safety Report
Useful Links
RSS


Home arrow Leading The News arrow Lawmakers urge Gates not to rush on tanker selection
Leading The News PDF Print E-mail
Lawmakers urge Gates not to rush on tanker selection
Posted: 08/16/08 12:25 AM [ET]

Some of Boeing’s strongest congressional supporters are urging Defense Secretary Robert Gates to slow down the selection process for the Air Force’s new aerial refueling tanker.

Several lawmakers said in a letter to Gates that they “remain very concerned about the overly aggressive time line” to issue a new request for bids for the tanker competition. The letter was expected to be sent late Friday.

Among the lawmakers signing on to the letter are Sens. Kit Bond (R-Mo.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and Reps. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Todd Akin (R-Mo.), John Shimkus (R-Ill.) and Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.). Boeing has significant operations in Missouri, Kansas and Washington state.

The competition to win the $35 billion tanker contract has pitted Boeing against a team of Northrop Grumman and EADS North America. The two factions are engaged in an intense lobbying war on Capitol Hill and the Pentagon. 

The Air Force initially awarded Northrop Grumman the contract, but Boeing successfully petitioned the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to re-examine the decision.

GAO found that the Air Force made “significant errors” in awarding the contract to Northrop and EADS, the parent company of Airbus, Boeing’s bitter rival in the aircraft market.

With controversy surrounding the Air Force’s decision, Gates tasked the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer, John Young, with the selection of the tanker, taking the decision out of the Air Force’s hands.

For what will be the third go-round to select a tanker in seven years, the Pentagon implemented an aggressive selection schedule that now does not sit well with some lawmakers, particularly those hailing from states in which Boeing has a significant presence.

Boeing has already signaled dissatisfaction with the first steps the Pentagon has taken to redress the controversial issue. The Pentagon released a so-called draft request for proposals last week, which basically amends the initial request to account for GAO’s recommendations, Pentagon officials said.

But Boeing supporters are signaling that the draft request appears to favor Northrop Grumman’s offering of a larger plane, the A330. Boeing was competing with its 767, but may consider a larger version of that plane or the 777 for the competition.

On Saturday, Boeing executives are supposed to meet with defense officials for a second time this week at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio.

Boeing and Northrop Grumman Corp. executives already met with Pentagon officials on Aug. 12 in Dayton, but after the meeting Boeing said it wanted more discussions, while Northrop said it was pleased with how the process was shaping up.

The Pentagon is planning to make a final decision on the tanker by the end of the year, before the end of the Bush administration. By Oct. 1, the Pentagon wants to release the final request for bids.

But to some lawmakers, the process is too rushed.

“We believe that the current rush to come to agreement on a revised RFP [request for proposals] is putting at risk the third opportunity for a successful decision,” the lawmakers wrote to Gates. “Congressional staff were briefed just last week on components of the revised RFP yet many questions remain unanswered, such as military construction costs, especially for Air National Guard units and the states that support the aerial refueling mission.”

 
 
 
BLOGS
TheHill.com Blogs Briefing Room Pundits Room Congress Blog Twitter Room
ADVERTISER
Home | Privacy Policy | Terms And Conditions
The Hill
1625 K Street, NW Suite 900
Washington, DC 20006
202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

The contents of this site are © 2009 Capitol Hill Publishing Corp., a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc.