Energy News  
Analysis: USAF's great tanker debacle

Both the GAO and the Air Force were keen to stress the audit had examined only the decision-making process, not the relative merits of the two airplanes, and Payton said the service believed it had made the right decision. "We remain confident that the Northrop Grumman KC-45 is the aircraft best suited to meet the Air Force's critical mission requirements," said Payton.
by Shaun Waterman
Washington (UPI) Jun 19, 2008
The finding by U.S. government auditors that the Air Force used a flawed process in awarding a controversial $35 billion contract for aerial refueling tankers to a European-led consortium, rather than to American aerospace giant Boeing, is a victory for the vociferous "buy American" lobby in Congress.

And the news is also another body blow for the Air Force, following the abrupt sacking earlier this month of its civilian and military chiefs.

The bid process, begun after a lengthy corruption probe ended the service's previous effort to replace its half-century-old fleet of aerial refueling tankers, was perhaps the most closely watched procurement the Air Force has ever undertaken. Officials have said repeatedly the new tanker was their No. 1 purchase priority and that it was up to a decade overdue.

So, despite the troubled history of large Air Force procurements, the auditors' finding that the process was riddled with "significant errors" left many observers open-mouthed.

"This was their No. 1 acquisition priority," Nick Schwellenbach of the Project on Government Oversight told United Press International. "It's astounding that they didn't get it right, given that they knew they would be under the microscope."

But he added that the Government Accountability Office, which reviewed the award, has "repeatedly sustained protests against Air Force contract awards."

"If this is the best the Air Force can do on its most critical contract award, the system remains dysfunctional," said Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste.

The GAO said Wednesday its review had found "a number of significant errors that could have affected the outcome of what was a close competition between Boeing and Northrop Grumman," according to Michael Golden, the GAO's managing associate general counsel for procurement law.

The GAO recommended the Air Force reopen discussions with both companies, "obtain revised proposals, re-evaluate the revised proposals," and make a new decision. Because some of the errors they found related to the service's use in making the decision of factors not properly included in their official solicitation, auditors added that "the Air Force should amend the solicitation prior to conducting further discussions."

By law, the Air Force now has 60 days to respond. Sue Payton, the service's assistant secretary for acquisition, said in a statement Wednesday that though "disappointed" by the auditors' findings, the service was reviewing it and "will do everything we can to rapidly move forward."

"As soon as possible, we will provide the Air Force's way ahead," she said.

The contract is for the development and production of up to 179 tanker aircraft, for approximately $35 billion, but it could swell to $100 billion with follow-up orders.

Although the Air Force, and Northrop Grumman, have the right to appeal the ruling, and Pentagon officials could even ignore the GAO's non-binding findings altogether, that does not seem likely.

"It is highly unlikely that the Air Force would override the ruling, given the huge political firestorm that would provoke," said Schwellenbach.

Both the GAO and the Air Force were keen to stress the audit had examined only the decision-making process, not the relative merits of the two airplanes, and Payton said the service believed it had made the right decision.

"We remain confident that the Northrop Grumman KC-45 is the aircraft best suited to meet the Air Force's critical mission requirements," said Payton.

Nonetheless, the GAO ruling was hailed by those in Congress who have vociferously opposed the award of the contract to a consortium that included U.S. defense contractor Northrop Grumman but was led by EADS, the European aerospace and defense contractor that makes the Airbus.

Schatz said it was important that Congress stay out of the process. "They have to let the process go forward without politicization," he told UPI.

Schatz said that given Air Force procurement officials "missed it by a mile" on such an important deal, "One wonders what might be occurring with other defense procurements."

He was not alone. In a statement Wednesday evening, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said it was vital to find out what had gone wrong -- and deal with those responsible.

"The GAO's decision in the tanker protest reveals serious errors in the Air Force's handling of this critically important competition," he said. "We now need not only a new full, fair and open competition in compliance with the GAO recommendations, but also a thorough review of -- and accountability for -- the process that produced such a flawed result."

Community
Email This Article
Comment On This Article

Share This Article With Planet Earth
del.icio.usdel.icio.us DiggDigg RedditReddit
YahooMyWebYahooMyWeb GoogleGoogle FacebookFacebook



Related Links
The Military Industrial Complex at SpaceWar.com
Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com



Memory Foam Mattress Review
Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily
XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News


Thompson Files: How the USAF fell so far
Arlington, Va. (UPI) Jun 19, 2008
The forced resignation of the U.S. Air Force's top civilian and uniformed leaders earlier this month is the latest chapter in a chronicle of decline that has been unfolding for decades.







  • Bush calls on Congress to lift offshore drilling ban
  • Brazil's Petrobras to start biofuel sales in Japan: report
  • The United States' big crude habit
  • Japan, China strike landmark gas-sharing deal

  • Areva to create world's largest uranium mine in Namibia
  • Russian Nuclear Agency Rejects Rumors Of Radiation Leaks
  • Japan PM says wants 'normal' ties with NKorea
  • IAEA meet to protect nuclear plants from earthquakes

  • Field Project Seeks Clues To Climate Change In Remote Atmospheric Region
  • US And UK Research Centers Launch Major Collaboration On Atmospheric Studies
  • NASA Satellites Illuminate Influence of Pollution On Clouds And Climate
  • New clean air rules may endanger parks

  • Tropical Forest Sustainability Could Be A Climate Change Boon
  • Plan To Conserve Forests May Be Detrimental To Other Ecosystems
  • Britain, Norway launch fund to preserve Congo Basin rainforest
  • If A Tree Falls In The Forest And No One Hears It Does The Climate Change

  • EU to raise ceilings on fishing fuel aid, but no move on tuna ban
  • US breadbasket state Iowa faces crop losses from flooding
  • Italian and French fishermen oppose blue fin tuna ban
  • Panic over delayed rainfall grips northern Nigeria

  • Hungarian "Solo" concept car, super-light and super-ecological
  • Toyota says to ramp up production in China
  • Ford, GM see boost in trade with China
  • Honda starts producing next-generation fuel cell car

  • DARPA Technology Enables Continued Flight In Spite Of Catastrophic Wing Damage
  • The Tu-144: The Future That Never Was
  • China's new jumbo-jet firm no threat to Airbus, Boeing: state media
  • China unveils new jumbo jet company: report

  • Nuclear Power In Space - Part 2
  • Outside View: Nuclear future in space
  • Nuclear Power In Space

  • The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2007 - SpaceDaily.AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA Portal Reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement