EVERETT — Politicians and union leaders on Monday continued to rail against the Pentagon’s decision to award a coveted tanker contract to a company with European ties over the Boeing Co.
“This contract is a $40 billion subsidy to Europe to invest in Airbus and its foreign work force,” said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. “We need to be investing in the American aerospace industry and the high-wage, high-skill jobs it supports. The Airbus contract is a European stimulus plan subsidized by the American taxpayer.”
On Friday, the Air Force selected Northrop Grumman and EADS, the parent company of Airbus, to supply 179 aerial refueling tankers to the agency over the next 10 to 15 years. Boeing had offered its KC-767, which would have been built in Everett and finished in Kansas.
Murray joined the Washington and Kansas congressional delegations Monday in urging defense officials to provide Boeing the details of the Air Force’s decision by the end of the week. The military debriefing allows Boeing to move forward in a protest of the decision, should the company choose to do so. The Air Force said last week it would debrief Boeing on March 12.
Also Monday, leaders of three unions called for Congress to pass legislation blocking the Pentagon’s ability to award military contracts to foreign corporations involved in trade disputes with American companies.
“We have a superior product,” said Richard Michalski, general vice president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, during a press call Monday. “For the Air Force to turn their backs on us is sinful.”
Boeing alleges European governments provided illegal subsidies for Airbus to develop certain commercial jets, including the A330 on which the EADS tanker is based. In turn, EADS and Airbus claim Boeing has received unfair handouts, including the tax incentives Washington state offered to secure final assembly of Boeing’s new 787 Dreamliner jet. The U.S. Air Force said it did not consider World Trade Organization disputes when deciding which company would build 179 tankers to replace its aging fleet of KC-135 tankers.
“No one expected the Air Force to hand over the Holy Grail of defense contracts” to a foreign company, said Ed Fills, with the Texas State AFL-CIO.
Los Angeles-based Northrop and Franco-German EADS will assemble their tanker in Mobile, Ala. The duo say their tanker program will create 25,000 American jobs. Boeing has said its KC-767 would support 44,000 jobs in this country. The Air Force says job creation was not a factor in its decision.
The agency won’t discuss publicly the factors influencing its decision until it debriefs Boeing. However, Pentagon officials said Friday that they considered several criteria in evaluating both Boeing’s and Northrop-EADS’ tanker proposals, including mission capability, proposal risk, past performance and cost. Analyst Loren Thompson with the Lexington Institute suggested in a brief that Boeing essentially missed the mark on all points.
Boeing, which built the KC-135 tankers, had lauded its experience in producing tankers as an advantage. But that didn’t sway the Air Force in terms of proposal risk. The agency initially rated Boeing’s tanker as “high risk” because it viewed the KC-767 as an aircraft that Boeing hadn’t built, Thompson wrote. Boeing’s proposed tanker combined the structural elements — fuselage, wings — of different 767 models. In the end, the Air Force pushed Boeing to scale back its tanker build schedule to lower risk, which added cost.
Chicago-based Boeing has the opportunity to protest the Air Force’s decision with the Government Accountability Office. Pentagon officials emphasized their hope that Boeing won’t delay the delivery of the new tankers by protesting their decision.
“It’s absolutely important and critical for us to get on with this,” said Air Mobility Commander Gen. Arthur Lichte on Friday. “Anything that would slow down this process has an impact on the warfighter.”
Reporter Michelle Dunlop: 425-339-3454 or mdunlop@heraldnet.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
