A growing number of U.S. lawmakers are raising concerns about the potential for SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to interfere with or take over a $2.4 billion Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) telecommunications contract awarded to Verizon, David Shepardson reported for Reuters.

The FAA was reportedly close to canceling the 15-year contract with Verizon and awarding the work to Musk’s Starlink instead.
Musk, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump and owner of the satellite company Starlink, has sharply criticized the FAA’s current telecom system.
“Elon Musk’s tweets suggest he’s trying to interfere in the air traffic control system—including attempting to cancel the FAA’s $2.4 billion competitively awarded telecommunications upgrade contract in favor of a sole-source installation of his Starlink services—which raises serious red flags,” said Senator Maria Cantwel.
Democratic Senators Adam Schiff and Tammy Duckworth also voiced concerns on Friday about the possibility of the FAA awarding billions of dollars to private companies controlled by Musk while he serves as a government employee.
Rep. Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, echoed those concerns, stating that such an award "screams corruption."
In 2023, the FAA awarded Verizon a contract worth up to $2.4 billion over 15 years to design, build, and operate the FAA’s next-generation communications platform.
The Washington Post recently reported that the FAA was close to canceling the 15-year contract with Verizon and awarding the work to Musk’s Starlink instead. The FAA has stated that no decision has been made, but sources told Reuters that the agency is reviewing the contract.
Meanwhile, Verizon clarified that L3Harris, not Verizon itself, is the primary contractor performing the work for the FAA, contradicting Musk’s claims.
“Federal law requires procurements to be competitive and made with public notice,” Cantwell said. “We need answers now about how the administration will enforce these laws to ensure aviation safety takes precedence over private gain.”
Comentários