Lockheed Unit Given No-Bid UN Contract in Darfur Reneged on Congo Air
Bid, Memos Show
Byline:
Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN: News Analysis
UNITED NATIONS,
November 26 -- A Lockheed Martin subsidiary awarded a
$250 million no-bid UN contract for
infrastructure in Darfur had,
only earlier this year, been offered the UN's air field services contract in the
Congo despite not being the low bidder, and nevertheless reneged on its bid and
held out for more money,
documents show.
About the Darfur contract, member states on the UN's budget committee have asked
more than 100 questions, the answers to which will apparently been held
confidential. The irregularities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo air
field services contract, demonstrated in minutes of a UN Headquarters Committee
on Contracts meeting of June 27, 2007 obtained by Inner City Press and placed
online
here,
call into even greater question why the Lockheed subsidiary Pacific Architects &
Engineers was presented internally as the only solution in Darfur, to be awarded
$250 million for six months with two three-month renewal options. These
questions will be pursued.
In the
lead-up to its June 27 meeting, the Headquarters Committee on Contracts was told
by the UN's Procurement Division that PAE and a joint venturer, ESKO, had been
declared the winner for all Congo-related air field services except those
through Entebbe, for $35,813,579. The Entebbe, Uganda portion was awarded to a
company called UNHAS, Entebbe Handling Services, for $24 million. Initially, on
February 27, "both vendors... accepted their respective portions of the (split)
award."
Memo,
Paragraph 4. But once contracts were drafted, "PAE / ESKO reversed their
position and declined to accept the split award." Rather, PAE / ESKO proposed
adding more services to their contract, to raise the amount due to over $114
million.
Memo,
Paragraph 10.
The UN's
Department of Peacekeeping Operations disagreed with PAE / ESKO's argument, and
proposed to award their portion to the "next bidder," Australia-based Patrick
Defence Logistics - PDL. Strangely, PDL had initially lost out despite
submitting a bid, deemed qualified, of $18 million, 50% lower than PAE / ESKO's
$36 million bid.
Memo,
Paragraph 14.
Given
that the lowest qualified bidder than not been selected, the Headquarters
Committee on Contracts "queried the price difference between PAE / ESKO and
Patrick Defence." The UN's Procurement Services dryly "replied that the
difference is substantial. For the three line items proposed to be awarded to
Patrick Defense in the amount of USD 18.6 million, the PAE / ESKO price was
$33.5." Choosing PAE / ESKO's higher bid was justified, without further
explanation, as a "best value exercise."
Minutes
at Paragraph 3.15.
UN air field services, Lockheed as
low bidder (or bidder at all) not shown
News analysis:
UN sources, anonymous from fear of retaliation, note the PAE's already-inflated
Congo contract became linked with the $250 million the UN was going to award for
infrastructure in Darfur. While the latter should, in the normal course, been
put out to bid, instead in April 2007, UN peacekeeper's Department of Field
Support pushed for PAE to be given the contract "sole source," without bidding.
Given the irregularities in the 2007 Congo air field services contract, shown in
this document, and previous criticism of PAE's over-changing the UN, it is more
and more surprising that the Darfur contract was steered to Lockheed's PAE.
The
questions raised last week in the UN's Fifth Committee will, it now appears, now
be publicly answered. In fact, Fifth Committee sources tell of an emerging
position that some of the requested documents will not be provided even to the
Committee. Whistleblowers note that procurement documents were previously
provided, in full, to the General Accounting Office, and for various
prosecutions. Wednesday at the UN's noon briefing, three journalists (two beyond
this one) requested a formal briefing by UN peacekeeping (ideally, the head of
the Department of Field Support, who pushed for the sole source contract). Inner
City Press on Monday asked for an update; "we've asked," was the answer.
Particularly in light of these new documents, and other developments, the time
for disclosure and the promised transparency is now. Instead, some high UN
officials' response to these revelations,
according to
well-placed sources anonymous for fear of retaliation, has been to try to
crackdown on whistleblowers or, through the re-accreditation process, on the
media which reports on the Lockheed and procurement documents. Developing.
* * *
Click
here for a
Reuters
AlertNet piece by this correspondent about Uganda's Lord's Resistance Army.
Click
here
for an earlier
Reuters AlertNet
piece about the Somali National Reconciliation Congress, and the UN's
$200,000 contribution from an undefined trust fund. Video
Analysis here
Because a number of Inner City Press'
UN sources go out of their way to express commitment to serving the poor, and
while it should be unnecessary, Inner City Press is compelled to conclude this
installment in a necessarily-ongoing series by saluting the stated goals of the
UN agencies and many of their staff. Keep those cards, letters and emails
coming, and phone calls too, we apologize for any phone tag, but please continue
trying, and keep the information flowing.
Feedback: Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile
(and weekends): 718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner
City Press are listed here, and
some are available in the ProQuest service.
Copyright 2006-07 Inner City Press, Inc. To request
reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com -
UN Office: S-453A,
UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 212-963-1439
Reporter's mobile
(and weekends): 718-716-3540