Boeing makes formal protest over EADS deal=0A=B7 Aviation firm lambasts US = air force over its decision =0A=B7 Congressional members take protectionist= tack=0AAndrew Clark in New York, Elana Schor and Mark Milner =0AThe Guardi= an, =0AWednesday March 12 2008 =0AArticle history=0AAbout this article=0ACl= ose =0AThis article appeared in the Guardian on Wednesday March 12 2008 on = p34 of the Financial section. It was last updated at 00:08 on March 12 2008= . =0ABoeing has accused the US air force of irregularities, unrealistic ass= essments and unfair judgments in a decision to award a $35bn (=A317.5bn) co= ntract for mid-air refuelling aircraft to a team led by Europe's EADS aeros= pace group.=0AThe Chicago-based aircraft maker vented its fury as it filed = a formal protest yesterday with the US government accountability office (GA= O) - a Congressional body that has the power to order a rethink of the awar= d. "We felt there were serious flaws in the process," said Mark McGraw, hea= d of Boeing's tanker division. "We continue to believe we offered the most = capable aircraft. We believe we were lower risk and we offered a lower pric= e."=0AThe surprise decision to place the work with a European-dominated con= tractor has sparked a row in Washington, with influential members of Congre= ss arguing that the deal is of strategic importance to national defence and= that it should be kept in the US to protect jobs.=0ABoeing said its victor= ious rival, a consortium of EADS and the US-based Northrop Grumman, was giv= en credits for excess capacity in its tankers, even though this was outside= the specifications set by the military. In its complaint, Boeing accused p= rocurement officials of encouraging a "stretched schedule", only to mark Bo= eing down for its proposed timeline. It added that officials had inflated p= erceived Boeing risk factors and had altered its own assumptions to help th= e European consortium, including last-minute "unrealistic" changes to where= aircraft could be parked and the capacity of runways.=0A"We weren't compla= cent; we dotted every 'i' and crossed every 't'. We worked this very hard,"= said McGraw, rejecting suggestions that Boeing had suffered from arrogance= in assuming it would be chosen.=0AThe GAO has 100 days to consider the pro= test but experts say that Boeing's move is a long shot. The GAO only sided = with 27% of the 1,411 complaints about contract awards it received last yea= r. =0AHowever, even if Boeing loses, the deal could still fall victim to cr= itics. Boeing has enlisted powerful allies on Capitol Hill, some of whom ar= e ready to block the EADS award through legislation. John Murtha, of Pennsy= lvania, chairman of the defense sub-committee on appropriations, which cont= rols the Pentagon's purse strings, threatened such a move last week. "[All]= this committee has to do is stop the money," he told US military officials= . "This programme is not going to go forward."=0ABoeing supporters in Congr= ess have made an unashamedly protectionist case. Republican congressman Tod= d Tiahrt, of Kansas, singled out the UK's nationalised healthcare system as= an unfair advantage to EADS. "We give advantages to the UK, to France, to = Germany that we don't have in America," Tiahrt said.=0ALouis Gallois, EADS = chief executive, shrugged off Boeing's protest. "It is not by chance that w= e got it, having won the last five [international] competitions for tankers= . " He insisted that he expected the $35bn contract to be profitable for EA= DS. =0AGallois was speaking as EADS unveiled a net loss of =80446m (=A3340m= ) compared with a net profit of =8099m in 2006. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you wish to unsubscribe from the AIRLINE List, please send an E-mail to: "listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx". Within the body of the text, only write the following:"SIGNOFF AIRLINE".