Company objects to NASA’s SpaceX pick

Blue Origin is protesting NASA’s decision to select SpaceX — and only SpaceX — to build the lander that will return NASA astronauts to the moon.

“NASA has executed a flawed acquisition for the Human Landing System program and moved the goalposts at the last minute,” Blue Origin said in a statement. “In NASA’s own words, it has made a ‘high risk’ selection. Their decision eliminates opportunities for competition, significantly narrows the supply base, and not only delays, but also endangers America’s return to the moon.”

Last year, NASA selected three companies to develop human landing systems that could lower its Artemis program astronauts to the moon. NASA experts worked with Blue Origin, Dynetics and SpaceX as the companies refined their designs in an effort to win the contract.

Then on April 16, NASA awarded a $2.89 billion contract to SpaceX for the program’s first crewed mission. It promised to work with other companies on subsequent trips. But for now, only SpaceX would get a contract.

Dynetics is also protesting this selection, NASA confirmed.

In its source selection statement, NASA said it offered the contract to the company with the best overall rating and the lowest price. Funding for the lander has come in lower than hoped. For fiscal year 2021, NASA received $850 million for the human landing system. Former President Donald Trump had requested $3.4 billion.

“In light of the three HLS Option A offerors’ evaluation results and in consideration of NASA’s available funding, it is my determination that the award of a single Option A contract is in the best interests of the agency,” Kathy Lueders, head of human spaceflight, said in the source selection statement. “This contract award is the catalyst for developing a critical element needed for

the initial Artemis missions — a human lander — to return astronauts to the moon, including the first woman to touch the lunar surface.”

NASA identified technical weaknesses for all three companies. Those listed for Blue Origin included development and schedule risks for its propulsion systems, which NASA said have complex major subsystems that are immature for Blue Origin’s current phase of development, and communication issues that could interfere with the astronauts on the moon talking to astronauts orbiting the moon or to people in Houston’s mission control.

In its protest, Blue Origin objected to several of the weaknesses identified by NASA. And it said that NASA’s evaluation process and award decision fails to comply with federal procurement regulations.

“NASA had indicated an overriding intention to make two awards, but due to perceived shortfalls in currently available and anticipated future budget appropriations, it made only the award to SpaceX,” Blue Origin wrote in its protest filed with the Government Accountability Office, “eliminating HLS competition, and effectively locking down immediate and future lunar landing system development and launch and lunar landing opportunities.”

Blue Origin said that selecting just one company for the human landing system contract “puts all of NASA’s eggs in one basket” and “introduces technical and schedule risk.”

NASA confirmed that Blue Origin filed a protest but declined to comment on pending litigation.

NASA selected two companies with its Commercial Crew program that’s carrying astronauts to the International Space Station, and its leaders praised this redundancy when Boeing had a software issue that slowed its development.

Blue Origin isn’t alone in raising concerns about NASA’s selection. Last week during former Sen. Bill Nelson’s confirmation hearing to become the next NASA administrator, Sen. Maria Cantwell asked him to give Congress a plan for assuring resilience in the human lander program.

Cantwell, chair of the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, represents Washington, and Blue Origin is based in Kent., Wash.