NASA Expected To Name A Partner In The Near Future

The Government Accountability Office handed a setback to Blue Origin, a commercial spaceflight company backed by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, which had filed a protest over the disposition of Launch Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida which NASA has listed as "surplus" and hopes to lease to a private company.

In its decision, the GAO said "Blue Origin, LLC, of Kent, Washington, protests the actions of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in connection with its issuance of announcement for proposals (AFP) No. AFP-KSC-LC39A, for the lease of Launch Complex 39A (LC 39A) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Blue Origin maintains that the agency intends to misapply the terms of the AFP in evaluating proposals and selecting a prospective lessee for the facility. We deny the protest."

The decision is viewed as being a positive sign for SpaceX, which has also bid for use of the facility.

In a statement, NASA said that it is "looking forward in the near future to selecting an industry partner for negotiations to lease and operate LC-39A," in light of the GAO's decision. "Permitting use of this valuable national asset by commercial entities will ensure its continued viability and will allow for its continued use in support of U.S. space activities."

NBC News reports that in their bids for the launch facility, SpaceX had proposed its exclusive use of LC39A. Blue Origin had said it favored a multi-user approach while it prepared for orbital operations in 2018. Blue Origin had initially protested over statements by NASA administrator Charles Bolden which it said seemed to favor the SpaceX proposal despite prior statements of NASA's needs for a multiple-user facility.

In her ruling, GAO General Counsel Susan Poling said "we agree with the agency that the AFP contemplates two possible approaches, but includes no preference for one approach versus another. The approaches are different--and require the presentation of different information to substantiate the plan being offered--but there currently is nothing in the record beyond the protester’s arguments to show that either approach necessarily is better in terms of meeting the agency’s objective of achieving the fullest commercial use of space. Simply stated, that question will be resolved based on the comparative strength of the business cases presented by the offerors.

"However, the case at hand only concerns whether the agency’s interpretation of the AFP is reasonable and, based on our discussion above, we conclude that nothing in the language of the AFP favors one approach over the other."

(Launch complex 39 pictured in file photo)

FMI: Read the Ruling