lobivet.blogg.se

That’s what the agency wanted and liked best? If we had known, we would have instead submitted a proposal that resembled the successful offer, but we could have offered a better price and snazzier features and options. Blue Origin is in the position of every disappointed bidder: Oh. “The Court has no way to perform a hypothetical evaluation to determine whether Blue Origin’s alternative proposal would even be awardable much less have a substantial chance of award. Perhaps the two most interesting revelations are that Blue Origin offered an alternative architecture and increased its offer to put in more of its own money from $2 billion to $3 billion.īlue Origin argued that it would have submitted an alternative proposal if it knew NASA would waive certain requirements as it alleged NASA did with SpaceX, but the Court found the alternative “speculative and unsupported by the record.” Credit: Blue Originįurthermore, the Court found that even if the company did have standing, it would have lost on the merits because it did not show that NASA’s conduct was “arbitrary and capricious or otherwise contrary to law.” Illustration of the “National Team” lunar lander concept (Blue Origin, Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin and Draper). Its price was too high and the bid was noncompliant. Government’s position that Blue Origin did not have standing to file suit in the first place because it did not have a substantial chance of winning were it not for the company’s alleged violations by NASA. The 47-page redacted Memoradum Opinion was released this morning.īasically Hertling agreed with the U.S. Government is the Defendant, and SpaceX is a Defendant-Intervenor. Hertling issued his Order of Judgment on November 4 and gave the parties until today to confer and jointly propose redactions to the Memorandum Opinion. It adds details to the brief statement from Judge Richard Hertling earlier this month that confirmed NASA’s selection of SpaceX for the first HLS system. Court of Federal Claims released the redacted report detailing why it ruled against Blue Origin in its lawsuit against NASA over the Human Landing System (HLS) contract award today.

NASA also stated that there will be future contracts for private space companies to bid on, including the construction of a long-term human presence on the moon.The U.S. Work on the Artemis program was paused during litigation. NASA issued a press release stating that they would begin work on the SpaceX contract immediately. A redacted copy of Judge Hertling’s opinion will be released on November 18.

The order by Judge Hertling dismissed Blue Origin’s claims but does not provide the court’s reasoning. Disputes regarding awards of federal contracts are often filed in this court, such as in this case.īlue Origin claimed that NASA selectively enforced safety requirements in the bidding process, allowing SpaceX to proceed with a complex and risky design. Congress created the modern version of the court through legislation in 1982. The court is a specialized court for monetary claims against the US government. The contract, worth $2.9 billion, engages SpaceX to transport NASA astronauts to the moon for the agency’s Artemis missions.īlue Origin filed suit in the US Court of Federal Claims in August. NASA awarded SpaceX the contract to develop the agency’s Human Landing System in April. The US Court of Federal Claims on Thursday ruled against Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin in a lawsuit contesting NASA’s decision to award a lucrative contract to rival SpaceX.