Takes Flight

21 Apr 2008
Pentagon Official Warns Congress Not to Interfere with Air Force Decision
Boeing's defenders in Congress say they're willing to overrule the Air Force and kill funding for Northrop Grumman's winning bid to build America's next generation of aerial refueling tankers — just because Boeing lost. The Defense Department's current and former top acquisition officials say, "Not so fast."

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer quotes the Pentagon's lead acquisition official as warning Congress not to interfere with the Air Force's decision that Northrop Grumman offered a superior plane — at better value — than Boeing. His predecessor sounds the same theme, telling Defense Daily that Congress shouldn't "meddle" with the Air Force's decision.

According to the P-I, John Young, the undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, warned that moves by some House members to override the Air Force decision by killing funding "would open up 'slippery slopes and dangerous precedents'."

Lawmakers from Washington and Kansas, home to Boeing plants, have launched efforts to cancel funding for the program — even though the Air Force made clear to both companies what it was looking for in a new tanker, and then found Northrop Grumman's bid superior in 4 of 5 crucial evaluation criteria.

Young said that if lawmakers succeed in cutting funding for a contract Northrop Grumman won fair and square, it will open the floodgates to congressional intervention in federal contracting: "Do we have the California delegation kill a program because the Georgia delegation won? I don't know where this stops."

Jacques Gansler, the former Pentagon acquisitions chief, told Defense Daily that Boeing's off-base protest poses a severe challenge to the checks and balances of power within the U.S. government.

"We cannot go back 100 years or more to allow our Congress to be making procurement decisions for the government," Gansler said, according to Defense Daily. "This is a real test of the U.S. Congress and of our procurement process, I think, for the future."

Young said any such moves would also create far greater dangers — compromising the safety of Americans defending freedom at home and abroad.

"If I am going to demand that certain companies or proposals must win regardless of what they cost, I am going to disadvantage the taxpayer and war fighter," the P-I quoted Young as saying. "I am going to deliver (a weapon with) less capability for more cost."

The P-I reported that on Thursday Representative Norm Dicks, a Washington Democrat, said that the House defense appropriations subcommittee, of which he is the vice chairman, will intervene to propose eliminating money for the tanker.

Young told the P-I that doing so wouldn't be fair and wouldn't make sense, particularly since he finds Boeing's protest of the contract — centered on claims that the Air Force changed selection criteria in the middle of the bidding process — to be entirely baseless.

"Everything I have seen is, this was a very well-run source selection, by the books and in accordance with the law," Young told the P-I. "We had an excellent competition, two great proposals, and one proposal clearly delivered better value and better capability."

To read the entire Defense Daily story, go to:
http://www.defensedaily.com/publications/dd/2350.html (Note: Subscription required.)

To read the entire Seattle Post-Intelligencer story, go to:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/359752_tanker19.html

< Back to index