Blue Origin Lawsuit Delays NASA HLS Work – Again
Keith’s note: NASA PAO is sending this statement to news media – but you have to request it. Oddly although this is an official statement they will not post it on their own website for the public to see. And If PAO is in a bad mood they won’t send it to you – even if you ask for it several times. They never sent it to me after 2 requests so I typed this from the various low res screen grabs that have been tweeted – any errors are due to my typing: (update: NASA PAO sent it to me – only after I made this post).
“NASA has voluntarily paused work with SpaceX for the human landing system (HLS)Option A contract effective Aug. 19 through Nov. 1. In exchange for this temporary stay of work, all parties agreed to an expedited litigation schedule that concludes on Nov. 1. NASA officials are continuing to work with the Department of Justice to review the details of the case and look forward to a timely resolution of this matter. NASA is committed to Artemis and to maintaining the nation’s global leadership in space exploration With our partners, we will go to the Moon and stay to enable science investigations, develop new technology, and create high paying jobs for the greater good and in preparation to send astronauts to Mars”
|
|
According to an Eric Burger tweet ( https://twitter.com/SciGuyS… )
If that’s true I just don’t understand that mentality. Why does this guy still have a job?
A chance to screw SpaceX. Bezos has had it out for them ever since the Blue droneship patent was overturned and SpaceX got LC-39A + a ton of symbolism.
Spiteful arrogance, pure & simple.
The enmity goes back into the 1990s between Musk and Bezos, at levels that are probably latched hard.
Yea some cement footings on their stances are probably involved too.
I LITERALLY posted in another popular space forum, in 2012 when SpaceX was only starting to test propulsive reentries, that they ought to have a barge out in the ocean to land on. It’s an OBVIOUS physics problem. At the time some posters laughed at me and told me that was a ridiculous idea.
Sadly, it’s too bad the gang at Blue Origin focuses more attention and effort towards trying to thwart SpaceX every time Elon hands Jeff his lunch than they do for getting the BE-4 engines right for Vulcan.
Perhaps they’ll start suing ULA for demanding BO actually deliver a working rocket engine. How dare they!
CNBC
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/0…
If Bezos is actually investing $1 Billion a year were the heck is it going? There seems to be no progress at all on New Glenn.
CNBC now reports 17 have left, including more HLS and Propulsion leads..
Those Glassdoor findings and exit comments say a lot.
Such is the DRAMA from the HEOMD AA decision. The whole procurement for HLS was rushed and had errors from the Start. NASA Systems Engineering Handbook flow chart shortcuts as an example. This was approved by NASA ” A ” Jim himself and caused the old HEOMD AA to resign as some decisons “errors” had been discused. on closed documents.
Then the wonder person was assigned. I remember her statement at the starliner failure review. The decision process continues.
key point in the sealed documents.
Jeff Bezos’ space company Blue Origin filed a sealed complaint in federal court against NASA on Monday.
“This bid protest challenges NASA’s unlawful and improper evaluation of proposals,” Blue Origin wrote in its court filing.
A sole source was not required. now it is kinda like the US airforce tanker with airbus/boeing back in court.
Blue Origin’s filing in court comes a couple of weeks after the U.S. Government Accountability Office denied the company’s protest, upholding NASA’s decision.
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/…
From The HEOMD AA statement.
In my role as the Source Selection Authority (SSA) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA or Agency) Human Landing System (HLS) Option A procurement, for the reasons set forth below, I have selected Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) for an HLS Option A contract award. This selection statement documents my independent analysis and judgment as the SSA and constitutes “my final determination on this matter” correct?.
Bezos gets what he wanted: Delay, delay, delay.
I think and hope that Space X mostly operates independently of NASA; if they do not get the NASA cash then Elon simply has to make up for the shortfall. Hopefully in time Elon will get a medal for his clearly leading role. Maybe it is for the best? It looks like Elon and StarShip will make it into orbit within a couple months, and then onto the Moon in a couple years; if things were really dependent on the Feds, then it would be like Orion and SLS all over again and we would never get anywhere. Is there a way to penalize NASA? Maybe NASA or Bezos can be charged interest for the delays?
And this helps us, the program (landing humans on the Moon, again), and the US … exactly how?
Mind you, Elon barely needs the $3B that they’re squabbling over. As I’ve said (regarding Blue Origin’s lander) keep building and the worst case scenario is that we have two different landers available when we get closer to actually landing on the Moon (again).
It helps the program because, in return for the stay, Blue Origin’s lawyers agreed to a schedule which ends litigation on November 1. They could have used various legal tactics to delay matters and kept NASA in court for months or perhaps even years.
With Blue losing 11 key people, many from Propulsion and HLS, just how does it benefit other than the delays and the joy Smith apparently gets from stomping his feet like a 2 year old?
This is not from HEOMD.
“NASA has voluntarily paused work with SpaceX for the human landing system (HLS)Option A contract effective Aug. 19 through Nov. 1. In exchange for this temporary stay of work, all parties agreed to an expedited litigation schedule that concludes on Nov. 1. NASA officials are continuing to work with the Department of Justice to review the details of the case and look forward to a timely resolution of this matter. NASA is committed to Artemis and to maintaining the nation’s global leadership in space exploration With our partners, we will go to the Moon and stay to enable science investigations, develop new technology, and create high paying jobs for the greater good and in preparation to send astronauts to Mars”
Cancel sole source is the goal. Bring NASA back to the table to talk with whoever is working to task. The court is the only method, prior it was the vice president, you can see how well this worked. artemis who ?
Just to be clear, the HLS contract is _not_ a sole source contract. A sole source contract is what you get when the government awards a contract _without_ requesting proposals, reviewing them and selecting the best one(s). That happens when the government can show that there is only one company capable of providing whatever the government needs, so a competitive process is pointless. That isn’t what happened with HLS. NASA solicited proposals, reviewed them, and awarded a contract to SpaceX. They had said they would _like_ to award two contracts, but reserved the right to select two, one or none, depending on the budget and the quality of the proposals. But selecting one bid after a competitive selection process is _not_ a sole source selection. It’s important to be clear on that, because Blue Origins statements have tried to muddle that important, legal distinction.
SpaceX won a sole source award from NASA after the first contract period, It did not have to be sole source, this was NASA’s choice; Option A was chosen with a sole vendor, IE sole source in the design phase, not mature proposal for operations.
SpaceX has chosen rapid prototyping for it’s effort, This may not be the best and only approach. Will see how well it performs.
Option A did not include a mature design from anyone.
It is still wide open. Musk and Bezos would do well to attempt to be open and have communications about this. The method for mission operations is still open for review. The NASA mini station may go away. NASA seems to want to avoid this design phase for some reason. This is how the procurement was formed. The artemis mission concept is still not well formed by any one vendor. I have not read the complaint. “my final determination on this matter” is being reviewed in Federal Court. I am happy to see that it is taking place for the best chance of more then one vendor still operating is the design phase. They could share this design phase time frame. The hurry model put forth by NASA may not be the best approach also. It is good to see that this paper push it taking place at this time.
From The HEOMD AA statement.
In my role as the Source Selection Authority (SSA) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA or Agency) Human Landing System (HLS) Option A procurement, for the reasons set forth below, I have selected Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) for an HLS Option A contract award. This selection statement documents my independent analysis and judgment as the SSA and constitutes “my final determination on this matter”
“SpaceX won a sole source award from NASA after the first contract period”
Again, this is not true. A “sole source” award has a very specific, legal meaning when it comes to government contracts. It means that no other source was even given an opportunity to put in a bid, because the contracting officials decided that there was clearly only one qualified source. NASA did consider other sources, received and reviewed proposals and selected on based on those reviews. That means, by definition, SpaceX did not get a “sole source award.” The selection of one company is not a “sole source” if it is the result of a competitive bid.
“Option A did not include a mature design from anyone. It is still wide open.”
I’m not sure what you mean by that, but the Option A contract is _not_ wide open. It has been awarded. That solicitation is closed. The government could cancel the SpaceX award and restart the whole process. Or they could open a new solicitation for a second HLS provider. But they can’t make additional awards based on the unselected proposals by Blue Origin and Dynetics. That’s not how the federal acquisition regulations work. The competing companies put in their best and final bid, before learning anything about what their competitors are proposing.
Mr. Bezos can’t come back after the fact, offer a different (e.g. lower cost) bid, and have NASA fund it. That would be illegal. Dynetics would protest to the GAO, saying that they should also be given the chance to revise their proposal, and be considered as well. And the GAO would agree. If either were selected at the expense of the existing SpaceX contract, then SpaceX would protest to the GAO, and the GAO would agree. The newly selected company would have been given an uncompetitive advantage by being allowed to revise their bid after seeing detail (e.g. cost) of the selected SpaceX proposal.
Option A was one(sole) or more(not sole) awards,or none. This would depend on funds. NASA did not communicate with the other vendors it appears. this is why the complaint was filed I guess.
I have not read the complaint, it is sealed. I checked the US courts for NASA there is no filing.
Mr Bezos suit contends something was done illegal by NASA, I have no idea if the NASA FAR was used.
https://search.uscourts.gov…
Tony, as fcrary has pointed out, “sole source” has a specific legal meaning when it comes to federal contracting. It is awarding a contract without bidding and directing the contract to a specified vendor. It doesn’t mean awarding to only one vendor after a competitive bid process.
I have written sole source procurements for NASA, while working there as a contractor. There are specific reasons that can be used for them, the most common being only one source for the item/service and no other source will do. One I wrote was for a memory expansion for a LISP Machine computer – nobody else in the world made them and no other vendor was available.
:”I have no idea if the NASA FAR was used.”
All NASA procurements are done under the FAR.
For Option A factor 1 SpaceX and Blue Origins seem to be equal. The funds for the 2021 option A had to be know by SpaceX to factor in what it did.
it is not clear the rapid protype of starship will work. the conops document depends on this.
what is wide open is factor 1 products; all vendors are not mature in the design phase.
Evaluation Factor Area of Focus Factor 1: Technical Approach Technical Design Concept Development, Schedule, and Risk Verification, Validation, and Certification Insight Launch and Mission Operations Sustainability Approach to Early System Demonstrations
Factor 2: Total Evaluated Price No focus areas
For Factor 2, SpaceX’s Total Evaluated 2021 Price of $2,941,394,557 was the lowest among
the offerors by a wide margin.
Factor 3: Management Approach Organization and Management Schedule Management Risk Reduction Commercial Approach Base Period Performance Small Business Subcontracting Plan Data Rights
SpaceX appears to be outstanding in factor 3. This is completely not mature and it simply SpaceX best guess based on current performance of there equipment and how it is operated with ISS for cargo and humans.
If you remember SpaceX also sued the DOD on the same grounds “sole source” no one was crying Musk was delaying the efforts of the DOD. The DOD helped develop the raptor engine with spaceX way back when 2016.
Table 1: Option A Evaluation Factors and Areas of Focus
The best I can tell NASA did not communicate with all vendors in the same way. This may be the illegal notion. Could be.
Keith, can you offer any thoughts on what, if any, impact this will have on SpaceX’s work on the project? Along the same lines, what can NASA *not* do during this pause that will meaningfully impact the timeline?
Keep in mind that what SpaceX is currently working on, getting to orbit, needs to be done before you can go to the Moon or anywhere else. So I don’t expect this to delay the progress of the HLS Starship development at all.
Also I read elsewhere that NASA made a payment of $300 Million to SpaceX the same day as the GAO decision was released.
NASA FAR
https://www.acquisition.gov…
The above is how NASA is to operate in contracting. Some sort of base period with options is not described in the current NASA FAR, at least I have not found it.
How to release information is described.
They was some amount of discussion with HEMOD AA “doug” prior to departing his positon. dealing with release information.
PART 1803 – IMPROPER BUSINESS PRACTICES AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. It is unclear what the sealed complaint is. However NASA cannot dismiss the complaint on it own at this point. It could after the GAO finding. Why the US court complaint was delayed is unknown.
This should be interesting and the 2024 hurry schedule and was thought to be not reachable with A Jim and HEOMD AA Bowersox with talking with the Congress on NASA goals for the 10 year period.
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine as well as the agency’s acting associate administrator for human exploration of space Kenneth Bowersox
https://www.c-span.org/vide…