Boeing to File Protest of U.S. Air Force Tanker Contract Award

Wow! What a surprise: :-)

The Boeing Company
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/index.html
Boeing to File Protest of U.S. Air Force Tanker Contract Award

CHICAGO, March 10, 2008 -- The Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] will file
a formal protest on Tuesday asking the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to review the decision by the U.S. Air Force to award
a contract to a team of Northrop Grumman and European Aeronautic
Defence and Space Company (EADS) to replace aerial refueling
tankers.

"Our team has taken a very close look at the tanker decision and
found serious flaws in the process that we believe warrant
appeal," said Jim McNerney, Boeing chairman, president and chief
executive officer. "This is an extraordinary step rarely taken by
our company, and one we take very seriously."

Following a debriefing on the decision by the Air Force on March
7, Boeing officials spent three days reviewing the Air Force case
for its tanker award. A rigorous analysis of the Air Force
evaluation that resulted in the Northrop/EADS contract led Boeing
to the conclusion that a protest was necessary.

"Based upon what we have seen, we continue to believe we submitted
the most capable, lowest risk, lowest Most Probable Life Cycle
Cost airplane as measured against the Air Force's Request for
Proposal," McNerney said. "We look forward to the GAO's review of
the decision."

Boeing said it would provide additional details of its case in
conjunction with the protest filing on Tuesday.

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

Wow! What a surprise:

Maybr they should hire you as their attorney.


Bertie

Unaccustomed to not having their shill at the Pentagon, Boeing squeals
foul:


The Boeing Company http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/index.html
Boeing Protests U.S. Air Force Tanker Contract Award

ST. LOUIS, March 11, 2008 -- Citing irregularities with the process of
the competition and the evaluation of the competitors' bids, The
Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] has filed a formal protest with the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), asking the agency to review
the decision by the U.S. Air Force to award a contract to a team of
Northrop Grumman and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company
(EADS) to replace aerial refueling tankers.

"Our analysis of the data presented by the Air Force shows that this
competition was seriously flawed and resulted in the selection of the
wrong airplane for the warfighter," said Mark McGraw, vice president
and program manager, Boeing Tanker Programs. "We have fundamental
concerns with the Air Force's evaluation, and we are exercising our
right under the process for a GAO review of the decision to ensure
that the process by which America's next refueling tanker is selected
is fair and results in the best choice for the U.S. warfighters and
taxpayers."

Following a thorough analysis of data presented at a March 7
debriefing on the decision, Boeing concluded that what began as an
effort by the Air Force to run a fair, open and transparent
competition evolved into a process replete with irregularities. These
irregularities placed Boeing at a competitive disadvantage throughout
this competition and even penalized Boeing for offering a
commercial-derivative airplane with lower costs and risks and greater
protection for troops.

"It is clear that the original mission for these tankers -- that is, a
medium-sized tanker where cargo and passenger transport was a
secondary consideration -- became lost in the process, and the Air
Force ended up with an oversized tanker," McGraw said. "As the
requirements were changed to accommodate the bigger, less capable
Airbus plane, evaluators arbitrarily discounted the significant
strengths of the KC-767, compromising on operational capabilities,
including the ability to refuel a more versatile array of aircraft
such as the V-22 and even the survivability of the tanker during the
most dangerous missions it will encounter."

Boeing is asking the GAO to examine several factors in the competition
that were fundamentally flawed:

* The contract award and subsequent reports ignore the fact that
in reality Boeing and the Northrop/EADS team were assigned identical
ratings across all five evaluation factors: 1) Mission Capability, 2)
Risk, 3) Past Performance, 4) Cost/Price and 5) Integrated Fleet
Aerial Refueling Assessment. Indeed, an objective review of the data
as measured against the Request for Proposals shows that Boeing had
the better offering in terms of Most Probable Life Cycle Costs, lower
risk and better capability.

* Flaws in this procurement process resulted in a significant
gap between the aircraft the Air Force originally set out to procure
-- a medium-sized tanker to replace the KC-135, as stated in the RFP
-- and the much larger Airbus A330-based tanker it ultimately
selected. It is clear that frequent and often unstated changes during
the course of the competition -- including manipulation of evaluation
criteria and application of unstated and unsupported priorities among
the key system requirements -- resulted in selection of an aircraft
that was radically different from that sought by the Air Force and
inferior to the Boeing 767 tanker offering.

* Because of the way the Air Force treated Boeing's cost/price
data, the company was effectively denied its right to compete with a
commercial-derivative product, contrary not only to the RFP but also
to federal statute and regulation. The Air Force refused to accept
Boeing's Federal Acquisition Regulation-compliant cost/price
information, developed over 50 years of building commercial aircraft,
and instead treated the company's airframe cost/price information as
if it were a military-defense product. Not only did this flawed
decision deny the government the manufacturing benefits of Boeing's
unique in-line production capability, subjecting the Air Force to
higher risk, but it also resulted in a distortion of the price at
which Boeing actually offered to produce tankers.

* In evaluating Past Performance, the Air Force ignored the fact
that Boeing -- with 75 years of success in producing tankers -- is the
only company in the world that has produced a commercial-derivative
tanker equipped with an operational aerial-refueling boom. Rather than
consider recent performance assessments that should have enhanced
Boeing's position, the Air Force focused on relatively insignificant
details on "somewhat relevant" Northrop/EADS programs to the
disadvantage of Boeing's experience.

"Boeing offered an aircraft that provided the best value and
performance for the stated mission at the lowest risk and lowest life
cycle cost," said McGraw. "We did bring our A-game to this
competition. Regrettably, irregularities in the process resulted in an
inconsistent and prejudicial application of procurement practices and
the selection of a higher-risk, higher-cost airplane that's less
suitable for the mission as defined by the Air Force's own Request for
Proposal. We are only asking that the rules of fair competition be
followed."

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:02:35 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:

Boeing Company [NYSE: BA] has filed a formal protest with the
Government Accountability Office (GAO), asking the agency to review
the decision by the U.S. Air Force to award a contract to a team of
Northrop Grumman

When N and G combined, they became a Bush favorite. Boeing has never been.
Simple politics.

See also The Carlyle Company and their per share interests in each. Simple
politics.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!