Company "Very Optimistic" About Future Of Tanker Deal

In spite of allegations that the deal was rigged, in spite of the fact two company executives were fired for breaching ethics in the process of completing the agreement, Boeing says it's now "very optimistic" about Boeing's 767 tanker deal.

"We believe that the 767 is the only aircraft that best meets the solutions required by the Air Force to satisfy their great needs for tankers in the future," said Boeing spokesman Douglas Kennett. "We're very optimistic."

Why the optimism? Last week, the House Armed Services Committee passed the 2005 Defense Authorization Bill. The measure includes $95 million to speed up the Air Force's lease of 20 767 aircraft to replace the aging KC-135 fleet. The Air Force plans to purchase another 80 767 tankers.

The measure would also set up a committee of outside experts who would be tasked with making sure the controversial deal makes sense. A lot of lawmakers on Capitol Hill are worried that Boeing bullied the bill through Congress when it was approved last year, before the scandal involving CFO Michael Sears and former Air Force negotiator Darleen Druyun came to light.

Druyun reportedly accepted employment as a senior Boeing vice president before the deal was consummated. That would be a direct violation of Pentagon ethics. Boeing also reportedly rewrote the government's request for proposal, making sure the Chicago-based aircraft manufacturer would have an edge over Europe's Airbus in the tanker competition. Druyun last month pleaded guilty to conspiracy for talking to Boeing about a job even as the tanker negotiations continued.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) is said to be 100 percent behind the idea of putting the tanker deal on a fast track. That's something Boeing is all too happy to see -- an ally on Capitol Hill, where allies seem to be few and far between these days.

"The Air Force urgently needs these new tankers to fight the war on terror," said Boeing's John Feehery. "The speaker is optimistic that the Department of Defense will sign a contract for 100 tankers this fall."

But before that happens, the measure still has to pass the Senate Armed Services Committee, where it could face trouble from the likes of Senator John McCain (R-AZ). He and other senators say the bill is bad for taxpayers.

Boeing indeed, however, seemed on the way to building the new tankers when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld put the project on hold December 1st.

But the deal is by no means done -- yet. The Pentagon's own science advisory board says the problem of corrosion aboard KC-135 tankers is "manageable," contrary to the Air Force's own expert opinions. The military's top weapons procurement official, Michael Wynne, reportedly wants to see more results on that issue before making a decision to go with the 767. Even if the decision is made to go ahead with buying new tankers, however, Wynne has said he might consider reopening the bidding process. That's something Boeing certainly doesn't want to see happen, since that would bring its arch-rivals Lockheed-Martin and Airbus back into the picture.

FMI: www.af.mil