Gates Should Say Sorry on Tanker to Boeing, Northrop CEOs

Gates Should Say Sorry on Tanker to Boeing, Northrop CEOs

Defense Secretary Robert Gates should call in the CEOs of Boeing and Northrop (and probably EADS), apologize to them for the tanker fiasco and promise to make it right by conducting the cleanest, most technically rigorous contract award humanly possible.

That’s what two of America’s most experienced acquisition experts say needs to happen, and fast.

 “I think they need to do that to simply take the political element out of it. The last thing we need is to allow the acquisition process to be politicized,” says Frank Cevasco, an international defense consultant and former head of cooperative programs and director of NATO policy at the Pentagon.

 “You have to call in the CEOs of those two companies and apologize to them and make it right. You want them to have confidence in you,” a long-time procurement analyst told me.

 Part of the problem the Pentagon faces is that almost all of its acquisition community, both with the Air Force and with the undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, John Young, has been tainted by the conclusions of the Government Accountability Office.

 “Somebody has to exercise some leadership and say, we have the highest regard for your companies and we are committed to you as allies,” said a long-time procurement analyst. “All we can do is start over and go by the book.”

 Cevasco notes that “that there was a substantial amount of oversight from John Young and his people and they gave a thumbs up to the process so there have to be questions about just how well they actually oversaw everything.”

 Perhaps one way to help restore confidence in the process would be to do a stand-down of the acquisition system, as the Air Force did recently with its nuclear forces. That, Cevasco says, would give the leadership a chance to make sure everyone is focused on making the system work and knows the basic rules and laws underpinning it. It would also send a very clear message to industry and to the public that the Pentagon knows it has a problem and knows it must fix it.

 That does not mean changing the rules. The acquisition expert says that the laws, regulations and policies underpinning the system are fundamentally sound and do not need changing. What does need changing — and Young has acknowledged this — is the size and quality of the acquisition workforce.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

GREAT ARTICLE MR. CLARK, AND THANK YOU FOR ADDITIONAL NAMES TO CONTACT.….. YOU ARE PERFORMING AN EXCELLENT SERVICE TO THE US!

Stand down the acquisition workforce…?

How? For how long?

The stand down would probably be for a few days or a week. My source didn’t want to place a limit on it so as to leave that decision to those responsible for making it.

I’m so tired of the Acq workforce being blamed for all of these “issues” in the contract award business. Let’s face it, these contract awards are so large and politically charged that those of us who are apparently “lacking in quality” don’t even have a chance to apply our skills and exercise our own integrity to the already extremely scrutinized process (thanks to other past criminals high up). It’s not the workforce that needs overhauled, it’s the politicians and the SSAs that they should examine.

Please do not pain all Air Force Acq with the broad tar brush. Inside of AFMC there are the Electronic System Center and outside of the AFMC there is Acquisition Group inside of Space Command. If this is an issue of command influence by Aeronautical Systems Center(ASC) using one of these groups to take Best and Finals from both competitors rescore the proposals according to the regulations is the quickest and best way forward.

It will take the open Commitment of Secretary Gates, Mr Young and the Acting Secretary of the Air Force to divert the Acq troops outside of ASC and possibly outside of AFMC to do ASC’s work on the tanker proposal we have according to the regulations and the proposals in hand.

Clean and technical as possible? That’s not possible under their own criteria.Even low level
peolpe don’t waste time with:Cleanness and always chase away,technicians…

Apply skills!One we can start here by posting
our skills.Not using their lingo etc.But the actual lingo of scripture.Since scripture has
our enemy Iran,doing nothing, we should be doing
something else.But we are too overwhelmed by:Statements of terrorists?

Back to the subject of the Tanker Deal, it was clearly shall I say at minimal a ” huge mistake” on the part of the USAF to award the contract to EADS/Airbus via NG. There would be no argument to that statement had the GAO not investigated the entire matter and came to the same conclusion. And as Secretary Gates is one who is finally paying attention to matters of military/government failures, we should all pull together and fight for the cause that Boeing clearly has the better product, is years ahead of a foreign entity (EADS/FRANCE et al) and back the reversal of this absurd “decision”. Thank goodness Boeing had the sense to challenge the USAF position

*required

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement