|
US Senator Carl Levin’s response: American Air Force Dumps Boeing for Airbus Tanker
2008 April 9
In response to the Blog and subsequent letter that I sent to several US Senators, here’s Senator Levin’s response:
Dear Mr. Libertiny:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Air Force’s selection of Northrop Grumman Corporation to build their new aerial refueling tankers. I appreciate hearing your views on this matter.
The Air Force’s in-flight air refueling tankers greatly enhance the effectiveness of Department of Defense’s airpower by enabling fighters, bombers, airlift and surveillance aircraft to stay aloft longer and fly farther. Today, however, the KC-135 Stratotanker, which makes up the majority of the Air Force’s tanker fleet, is among the Air Force’s oldest aircraft.
In January 2007, the Air Force released a formal request for proposal (RFP) for the KC-X acquisition program, the first of three such programs intended to replace the Air Force’s aging air refueling fleet. The RFP outlined nine key performance parameters for the aircraft. These included air refueling capability; a fuel offload and range at least as great as the KC-135; compliant communication, navigation, surveillance/air traffic management (CNS/ATM) equipment; airlift capability; the ability to take on fuel while airborne; sufficient force protection measures; the ability to network into the information available in the battle space; survivability measures or defensive systems; and a multi-point refueling system to support Navy and Allied aircraft. Both Boeing and a consortium consisting of Northrop Grumman and European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS) submitted proposals for the KC-X. Boeing offered a variant of its 767-200 aircraft, while Northrop Grumman submitted a version of the Airbus 330-200.
On February 29, 2008, the Air Force awarded the KC-X contract to the Northrop Grumman consortium. In March, Air Force officials debriefed both Boeing and Northrop Grumman officials on the final selection process. As is the case in other competitive contract awards, competitors have the option to protest the decision to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). On March 11th, Boeing protested the decision, asserting that the Air Force used a flawed process in their selection process. The GAO has 100 days after a bid protest is filed to make their ruling.
While awarding such a significant contract warrants thorough congressional oversight, I do not believe it is appropriate for Congress to intervene in the process until the GAO has formally ruled on the bid protest that has been filed by the losing contractor in this case. As Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I will continue to closely monitor the situation and look forward to the GAO’s ruling.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin
|
