Our congressional effort has evolved into three initiatives:

1. Inherently governmental legislation that would stop the A76 award.

2. Correcting the retirement concerns if the award goes to Lockheed.

3. Slowing or forcing a recompete on the award.

Regarding (1) above. We are working toward legislative language in both the House and Senate that has bi-partisan sponsorship. On the House side we�re ready to offer, the bill will be by Sanders, LoBiondo and Loretta Sanchez. It�s now just a matter of timing between the three congressional staffs. Best guess is next week. Once we have a bill number I will forward all info to you so you can brief the membership.

We have also worked with Sanders� staff to draft a related "Dear Colleague Letter" (DCL). LoBiondo and Sanchez have both agreed to sign the DCL. Ron Consalvo and Mike Sheldon have been very instrumental in making this happen.

On the Senate side, we have Tim Johnson ready to offer the language, alone if necessary. The feeling is, however, that it would be much better to have a Republican co-sponsor on the bill. I�m working with both Thune and Specter�s staffs with Specter�s being the more promising one right now. I�ve also put those staffs directly in touch with each other. The feeling is that if we get Specter we will also get Thune. Our hope is to also have this bill offered sometime next week but it may take a little longer.

(2) There are two separate retirement issues we are working. The first is the 1.7% FERs contribution problem that is connected to PL108-176. The second is what we are calling the retirement vesting problem (substantially all retirement contributions will be lost on October 1 for those who cannot meet retirement requirements).

For the past several days we have been working with House staffers to try to correct these problems in the Highway bill. The bill has moved a little faster than we thought and there is a problem with germaneness. This is further complicated by the fact that the FAAMA has language that doesn�t resolve our issues. Per our discussion I talked with FAAMA President Steve Baker as well as their lobbyist and we are now working together on final language.

Another complication is that we now have to deal with House Government Reform as they are the subject matter experts on retirement. The corrections themselves are fairly straightforward. On the 1.7% we are asking that PL108-176 be amended to include FSS coverage. The vesting correction is a pro-rata annuity based on years of service.

If we don�t see the correction in the Highway bill then the next opportunity will probably be appropriations. The appropriations bill process will begin in earnest in late summer and/or the September timeframe. The October 1 date is not a problem since any corrections will be retroactive. We have considerable bi-partisan support on these retirement issues and a legislative correction seems promising. The 1.7% is an easier fix since it requires less explanation and seems to be an oversight in PL108-176.

The next week will tell us whether we can use the Highway bill or if we will need to attach to approps.

(3) Per our discussions, there are reasons to question how the vendor bids were evaluated and whether improprieties exist. I�ve worked with Kucinich�s staff on a congressional letter to the FAA Administrator that is now circulating to the transportation staffers as well as to our membership. Our hope is that our membership will help encourage their congressional representatives to sign on the letter. This will take a little while to germinate but we�re picking up more and more support here.

On outstanding issue:

I asked Lautenberg�s staff again this week whether they will issue a statement on the EEO case. No response yet but will advise.

We expect the next few weeks to remain very busy.