On January 5, 2015, the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO), rejected a protest filed by the Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC)
over a NASA contract award to SpaceX and Boeing, to develop crew transportation
vehicles to the International Space Station (ISS), under the Commercial Crew Transportation
Capability (CCtCap) Program.
Last September, NASA awarded 4.2 billion USD to Boeing
and 2.6 billion USD to SpaceX, to develop vehicles that would allow the United
States to launch astronauts into space from U.S. territory. These CCtCap contracts
would end, as of 2017, U.S. sole reliance on Russian Soyuz which has been
delivering U.S astronauts to the ISS at a cost of more than $70 million a trip.
The contracts include test flights to the ISS and up to six operational
missions per company.
SNC was one of the three finalist for the CCtCap
contract, but was ultimately excluded, mainly on the ground that the company’s
vehicle design was less mature and too technical that would eventually result
in project launch delays.
In the announcement of its protest, SNC said that “there are serious questions and
inconsistencies in the source selection process”. SNC explained that NASA’s
original request for proposals “prioritized price as the primary evaluation
criteria for the proposals”. It argued that its own proposal was the second
lowest priced and that the government could have saved up to $900 million while
still achieving mission suitability scores comparable to the other two
proposals.
The GAO in its decision, which has not been fully
released to the public, rejected SNC arguments. In announcing the GAO decision, Ralph White, the agency’s general counsel, stated
that GAO took no position on the merits of the each proposal, but reviewed the
conclusions made by NASA to examine if they were “reasonable, and consistent
with the evaluation approach NASA set out in its solicitation”. In its
statement Mr. White said that despite Boeing’s higher price, NASA considered
its proposal to be the strongest of all three. Boeing’s proposal was found to
be superior in terms of technical approach, management approach and past
performance. Mr. White also stated that NASA recognized several positive
features in both SNC and SpaceX proposals, but SpaceX’s lower price represented
the best value for the government. GAO disagreed with SNC allegations that NASA
evaluation departed from the solicitation’s stated evaluation and selection
criteria.
SNC thanked the GAO and NASA for the time
and effort spent in fully evaluating NASA’s decision. The company expressed its
belief that the Dream Chaser Spacecraft will play a pivotal role in shaping the
future of space transportation. It should be noted that, in the weeks following
the filing of the said legal challenge, the SNC has publicized its success, in being competitively selected, to
develop and build a next generation science and technology demonstration
satellite for the U.S. Department of Defense’s Space Test Program.
NASA expressed its satisfaction with GAO’s decision. The
Agency stated that the decision allows the further continuation of work with
Boeing and SpaceX, which will enable the launch of American spacecraft from
U.S. soil.
why Boeing received more money than SpaceX?
ReplyDeleteThe official explanation is that Boeing simply asked for more money. The amount of the awards was distributed according to each company's proposal, as stated by Kathy Lueders (NASA's Commercial Crew Program Manager) - see e.g. http://spaceref.biz/nasa/nasa-selects-spacex-and-boeing-to-send-humans-to-space.html. on U.S. GAO rejects Sierra Nevada’s protest over NASA $6.8 billion space contracts
Delete