DOCSLIB.ORG

Blue Origin Protests

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Blue Origin Protests TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................ 1 • Blue Origin Is Committed To Lunar Landing and Exploration ................................... 2 • NASA’s HLS Program and Option A Procurement ..................................................... 3 • HLS Base Period Award ............................................................................................. 5 • HLS Option A Procurement Evaluation ....................................................................... 8 • HLS Option A Award................................................................................................... 9 • Impact of Flawed Option A Award to Single Awardee SpaceX On Competition and Commercial Industry Development ............................................................................. 9 II. PRELIMINARY MATTERS ............................................................................................. 11 A. Interested Party Status ..................................................................................................... 11 B. Contracting Officer Notification ....................................................................................... 11 C. Protester Contact Information ........................................................................................... 12 D. Request for Protective Order ............................................................................................ 12 E. Request for a Hearing ....................................................................................................... 12 III. ARGUMENT ....................................................................................................................... 12 A. The Agency Improperly Failed to Amend the Solicitation To Allow Offerors to Revise Their Proposals When the Government’s Requirements Changed Due to a Perception of Significantly Reduced Funding .................................................... 13 • Offerors Were Deprived of a Full and Fair Opportunity To Compete With an Accurate Understanding of the Agency’s True Requirements ........................................................................ 13 B. The Agency’s Evaluation of Blue Origin is Unreasonable and Improper ........................ 15 1. The Agency’s Evaluation Erroneously Determined That Blue Origin Proposed Advance Payments ........................................................................ 15 2. The Agency’s Evaluation of Blue Origin’s Technical Proposal Was Unreasonable and Blue Origin Should Have Received A “Very Good” Rating for Factor 1 .............................................................. 20 • The Agency Unreasonably Assigned Blue Origin a Weakness For Its Description of Transfer Element (TE) Disposal and Planetary Protection Approach ............................................................... 21 • The Agency’s Evaluation of Blue Origin’s Guidance, Navigation and Control System Development Risk Is Unreasonable and Utilizes Unstated Evaluation Criteria ................................................................... 23 i • The Agency’s Analysis of Blue Origin’s Radio Frequency Communication Links Is Inaccurate and Contradicts the Agency’s Own Prior Analysis ......................................................................................... 24 • The Agency Inappropriately Applied Redundancy Requirements On the Manual Control System for Blue Origin’s Ascent Element Leading to a Flawed Evaluation ............................................................. 26 • The Agency Misunderstood Blue Origin’s Plan to Evolve from Initial Design To Sustainable Architecture and Applied Unstated Evaluation Criteria to Evaluate It .............................................................................. 27 • The Agency Unreasonably Evaluated Blue Origin’s Mission Timeline . 28 • Blue Origin’s Proposal Appropriately Addressed How It Would Utilize And Mitigate Risks of Using Heritage Hardware with the Proposed Cabin Atmosphere, Which the Agency’s Evaluation Overlooked ......... 29 • The Agency Improperly Assessed Blue Origin a Weakness Because It Mistakenly Believed Blue Origin and the Agency Had Fully Adjudicated HMTA Requirements, Methods, and Statements ............... 30 • The Risk in Blue Origin’s Propulsion System Development Schedule Has Been Successfully Mitigated and Does Not Warrant a Significant Weakness ................................................................................................ 31 • Overall Rating – When The Agency’s Evaluation Errors are Corrected, Blue Origin Should Have Received a “Very Good” Rating for Factor 1 Technical .................................................................................. 32 3. The Agency’s Evaluation of the Management Factor Was Unreasonable .... 33 • The Agency Previously Accepted Both the Form and Substance Of Data Rights Assertions It Now Claims Lack Required Specificity And Explanation ..................................................................................... 33 • The Agency Erroneously Faults Blue Origin for Not Providing GPR In Data Developed at Private Expense.................................................... 35 o Fuel Cells ......................................................................................... 36 o BE-7 ................................................................................................. 36 o ACFM Controllers and Interfaces .................................................... 37 o Cryocooler Systems, CFD Models ................................................... 37 • The Agency Unreasonably Concluded Blue Origin’s Commercial Approach was Unsubstantiated ............................................................... 37 • Overall Rating – Blue Origin Should Have Received An Outstanding for Factor 3 Management ................................................... 39 ii C. The Agency Treated Offerors’ Proposals Unequally and Disparately .............................. 39 • Disparate Treatment of Cryogenic Fluid Management Development and Verification Approach ............................................... 40 • The Agency Utilizes an Unstated Evaluation Criteria Regarding Risk from Height of Vehicle Presents Risk to EVA Operations (Area of Focus 1) .................................................................................... 41 • Blue Origin Should Be Assessed a “Significant Strength” for Its Comprehensive Abort Strategy and Effective Capability, While SpaceX Likely Should Have Been Evaluated with a Weakness .......................... 42 • Improper Evaluation and Disparate Treatment in Evaluation of SpaceX Launch Vehicle Development ................................................... 44 D. The Agency’s Erroneous Award Decision for HLS Option A Fails To Obtain Full and Open Competition and Contravenes Federal Law And Congressional Intent ................................................................................................. 45 IV. BLUE ORIGIN IS PREJUDICED BY THE DEFECTIVE SOLICITATION ......... 46 V. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 46 VI. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS ................................................ 46 VII. RELIEF REQUESTED .................................................................................................. 48 iii 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20006-4623 U.S.A. (202) 289-1313 Fax (202) 289-1330 www.btlaw.com Scott E. Pickens Partner (202) 371-6349 REDACTED PUBLIC VERSION [email protected] Admitted to Practice Only In The District of Columbia April 26, 2021 GAO PROTECTIVE ORDER REQUESTED IMMEDIATE AGENCY NOTIFICATION REQUESTED Via GAO Electronic Bid Protest Filing System (EPDS) Office of the General Counsel Procurement Law Control Group United States Government Accountability Office 441 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20548 Re: Protest oF Blue Origin Federation, LLC against National Aeronautics And Space Administration award oF Option A contract For Human Landing System under Broad Agency Announcement NNH19ZCQ001K_APPENDIX- H-HLS. Dear Sir or Madam: Blue Origin Federation, LLC (Blue Origin),1 through undersigned counsel, files this protest challenging the award of an Option A contract for the Human Landing System (HLS) under Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) NNH19ZCQ001K_APPENDIX-H-HLS. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA or Agency) selected Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) for an HLS Option A contract award in the amount of $2.89 billion. See NASA Press Release. During the proposal 1 Blue Origin has offices located at 21218 76th Ave., South Kent, Washington, 98032-2242. Its telephone number is (253) 275- 1727. However, please provide all further communications concerning this protest to undersigned counsel at this email address: [email protected]. For facsimiles, please use the following dedicated and protected fax line: (202) 912-8409. Throughout this document, emphasis in quotes has been added unless noted otherwise. Office of the General Counsel April 26, 2021 Page 2 preparation and submission process, 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, eliminating HLS competition, and effectively locking down immediate and future lunar landing system development and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mitchell Thomas JOS Article
    H-SC Journal of Sciences (2017) Vol. VI Thomas Mars: A prospect for settlement Mitchell H. Thomas’17 Department of Biology, Hampden-Sydney College, Hampden-Sydney, VA 23943 The exploration of Mars was once left to the imagination. However, in recent years, the topic of exploring Mars has become more realistic and increasingly popular in news articles and scientific communities. Technology developed in the previous half-century have already allowed humans to send rovers to Mars in order to retrieve some basic data about the planet. Current technological advancements are resulting in reusable rockets that could one day travel between Earth and Mars. Exploration and colonization of Mars are important for the development of research on the planet and the search for life. Current data is limited, but shows that the conditions on Mars could have supported life in the past. To further our knowledge of the red planet, The atmosphere surrounding Earth is nearly organizations like NASA and companies like SpaceX one-hundred times denser than that of Mars and its are developing plans to colonize Mars. Many composition is crucial to life. According to NASA, the obstacles stand in the way before humans can reach Earth’s atmosphere is comprised of 78% Nitrogen, and colonize the red planet. However, Mars is the 21% Oxygen, and 1% Other. On Mars, the sparse best option for interplanetary colonization and the atmosphere is comprised of nearly 96% Carbon most feasible way to research current and future life Dioxide, less than 2% Argon, less than 2% Nitrogen, on a planet other than Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Solutions Fact Sheet
    www.dynetics. Space Solutions Fact Sheet The Space Division at Dynetics, Inc., headquartered Key Facts in Huntsville, Ala., provides flexible flight hardware ▪ Building a Human Landing System (HLS) for NASA’s development from low-cost prototypes through Artemis program complete human-rated solutions. ▪ NASA contractor for Space Launch System’s (SLS) Universal Stage Adapter (USA) Dynetics Space Division’s capabilities include ▪ NASA Glenn Research Center’s Large Business Prime propulsion systems, small satellite development, Contractor of the Year (2018) mechanical and propulsion testing, system ▪ Lonestar Small Satellite Developer for SMDC integration and assembly, mission design and ▪ Propulsion system provider for Astrobotic robotic lunar vehicle sizing and vehicle structure design and lander manufacturing. ▪ Developer of innovative spacecraft and missile propulsion systems About Dynetics ▪ Built the NASA Space Launch System’s Core Stage Pathfinder Dynetics, a wholly owned subsidiary of Leidos, ▪ Designed the Laser Air Monitoring System (LAMS) for provides responsive, cost-effective engineering, NASA Orion program scientific, IT solutions to the national security, ▪ Prime contractor for NASA SLS Advanced Booster cybersecurity, space, and critical infrastructure Engineering Demonstration and Risk Reduction (ABEDRR) sectors. Our portfolio features highly specialized demonstrated low-cost, full-scale cryogenic tank technical services and a range of software and ▪ Provider of critical flight components for SLS Core Stage hardware products, including components, and SLS Exploration Upper Stage ▪ Certified to build NASA, DoD, and commercial flight subsystems, and complex end-to-end systems. hardware The company of more than 3,000 employees ▪ More than 500,000 sq. feet of research and development is based in Huntsville, Ala., and has offices facilities in North Alabama throughout the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Gao-21-330, Nasa Lunar Programs
    Report to Congressional Committees May 2021 NASA LUNAR PROGRAMS Significant Work Remains, Underscoring Challenges to Achieving Moon Landing in 2024 GAO-21-330 May 2021 NASA LUNAR PROGRAMS Significant Work Remains, Underscoring Challenges to Achieving Moon Landing in 2024 Highlights of GAO-21-330, a report to congressional committees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found In March 2019, the White House The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has initiated eight directed NASA to accelerate its plans lunar programs since 2017 to help NASA achieve its goal of returning humans to for a lunar landing by 4 years, to 2024. the Moon. NASA plans to conduct this mission, known as Artemis III, in 2024. Accomplishing this goal will require NASA has made progress by completing some early lunar program development extensive coordination across lunar activities including initial contract awards, but an ambitious schedule decreases programs and contractors to ensure the likelihood of NASA achieving its goal. For example, NASA’s planned pace to systems operate together seamlessly develop a Human Landing System, shown below, is months faster than other and safely. In December 2019, GAO spaceflight programs, and a lander is inherently more complex because it found that NASA had begun making supports human spaceflight. decisions related to requirements, cost, and schedule for individual lunar Notional Human Landing System programs but was behind in taking these steps for the Artemis III mission. The House Committee on Appropriations included a provision in 2018 for GAO to review NASA’s proposed lunar-focused programs. This is the second such report.
    [Show full text]
  • Space News Update – May 2019
    Space News Update – May 2019 By Pat Williams IN THIS EDITION: • India aims to be 1st country to land rover on Moon's south pole. • Jeff Bezos says Blue Origin will land humans on moon by 2024. • China's Chang'e-4 probe resumes work for sixth lunar day. • NASA awards Artemis contract for lunar gateway power. • From airport to spaceport as UK targets horizontal spaceflight. • Russian space sector plagued by astronomical corruption. • Links to other space and astronomy news published in May 2019. Disclaimer - I claim no authorship for the printed material; except where noted (PW). INDIA AIMS TO BE 1ST COUNTRY TO LAND ROVER ON MOON'S SOUTH POLE India will become the first country to land a rover on the Moon's the south pole if the country's space agency "Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO)" successfully achieves the feat during the country's second Moon mission "Chandrayaan-2" later this year. "This is a place where nobody has gone. All the ISRO missions till now to the Moon have landed near the Moon's equator. Chandrayaan-2, India’s second lunar mission, has three modules namely Orbiter, Lander (Vikram) & Rover (Pragyan). The Orbiter and Lander modules will be interfaced mechanically and stacked together as an integrated module and accommodated inside the GSLV MK-III launch vehicle. The Rover is housed inside the Lander. After launch into earth bound orbit by GSLV MK-III, the integrated module will reach Moon orbit using Orbiter propulsion module. Subsequently, Lander will separate from the Orbiter and soft land at the predetermined site close to lunar South Pole.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Planes and Space Tourism: the Industry and the Regulation of Its Safety
    Space Planes and Space Tourism: The Industry and the Regulation of its Safety A Research Study Prepared by Dr. Joseph N. Pelton Director, Space & Advanced Communications Research Institute George Washington University George Washington University SACRI Research Study 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary…………………………………………………… p 4-14 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………….. p 16-26 2.0 Methodology…………………………………………………………………….. p 26-28 3.0 Background and History……………………………………………………….. p 28-34 4.0 US Regulations and Government Programs………………………………….. p 34-35 4.1 NASA’s Legislative Mandate and the New Space Vision………….……. p 35-36 4.2 NASA Safety Practices in Comparison to the FAA……….…………….. p 36-37 4.3 New US Legislation to Regulate and Control Private Space Ventures… p 37 4.3.1 Status of Legislation and Pending FAA Draft Regulations……….. p 37-38 4.3.2 The New Role of Prizes in Space Development…………………….. p 38-40 4.3.3 Implications of Private Space Ventures…………………………….. p 41-42 4.4 International Efforts to Regulate Private Space Systems………………… p 42 4.4.1 International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety… p 42-43 4.4.2 The International Telecommunications Union (ITU)…………….. p 43-44 4.4.3 The Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS).. p 44 4.4.4 The European Aviation Safety Agency…………………………….. p 44-45 4.4.5 Review of International Treaties Involving Space………………… p 45 4.4.6 The ICAO -The Best Way Forward for International Regulation.. p 45-47 5.0 Key Efforts to Estimate the Size of a Private Space Tourism Business……… p 47 5.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Make the Most of Destination Moon
    Challenger Center® and NASA eClips™ Make the Most of Destination Moon PRE-MISSION ASTRONAUT TRAINING (~30 MIN) Prepare your class of Astronauts for a richer virtual mission experience by helping them learn more about mapping, tracking and structure, and engines before the mission. Mapping Tracking and Structure Engines Divide the group into teams of three. Each person in the group will watch a different NASA eClips™ video or listen to the Innovation Now podcast to become an expert on one of the three topics. Mapping Experts Tracking and Structure Engine Experts Real World: Lunar Innovation Now: Launchpad: Apollo 11 - Reconnaissance Orbiter Weather or Not to Challenges of Landing on the Resources Launch Moon • Why is returning to • Why is it important • What criteria should be the Moon important? to conduct weather considered for determining What kinds of checks prior to a landing site? questions can we launch? • Why would landing in a answer through • What conditions crater have presented establishing a could affect a problems for the Apollo Essential launch and must be questions “sustainable astronauts? presence” there? considered? guide experts • How have we built as they watch our understanding of their video. the Moon? • What kinds of tests must scientists and engineers conduct to know a spacecraft is ready for launch? AFTER • How has the Lunar • What is a “Go / No • How did the Apollo viewing the Reconnaissance Go” Poll? astronauts help make a • What are some “do return to the Moon video, experts Orbiter been able to not launch” criteria possible? report map the Moon? that might scrub a findings to • Why was an orbiter the right spacecraft launch? their team.
    [Show full text]
  • Espinsights the Global Space Activity Monitor
    ESPInsights The Global Space Activity Monitor Issue 6 April-June 2020 CONTENTS FOCUS ..................................................................................................................... 6 The Crew Dragon mission to the ISS and the Commercial Crew Program ..................................... 6 SPACE POLICY AND PROGRAMMES .................................................................................... 7 EUROPE ................................................................................................................. 7 COVID-19 and the European space sector ....................................................................... 7 Space technologies for European defence ...................................................................... 7 ESA Earth Observation Missions ................................................................................... 8 Thales Alenia Space among HLS competitors ................................................................... 8 Advancements for the European Service Module ............................................................... 9 Airbus for the Martian Sample Fetch Rover ..................................................................... 9 New appointments in ESA, GSA and Eurospace ................................................................ 10 Italy introduces Platino, regions launch Mirror Copernicus .................................................. 10 DLR new research observatory ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Suborbital Payload Spaceflight Aboard Blue Origin's New Shepard
    Suborbital Payload Spaceflight Aboard Blue Origin’s New Shepard Vehicle Benjamin Lewis Blue Origin, Kent, Washington, USA; [email protected] Abstract payload. This dedicated controller can be Blue Origin’s New Shepard spacecraft offers a programmed to meet the specific needs of the large-format crew capsule, capable of carrying a payload and provides power, payload data logging, wide variety of high-altitude and microgravity high frequency flight telemetry logging and relay, payloads above the Karman Line (100 km). The digital and analog I/O, and camera control. The IPC spacecraft supports unique payload configurations allows researchers to connect via an Ethernet cable ranging from externally mounted hardware to large, to program the IPC and run benchtop mission custom structures inside a shirt-sleeve environment. simulations for payload development and testing. New Shepard also features a standardized payload locker architecture. This enables low cost access to NanoLabs and Custom Payloads flight, streamlined integration and approval, and fast New Shepard offers payload capabilities beyond the reflight for experiment or technology iteration. This standard locker system. The NanoLab form factor is poster will present the payload system architecture, ideal for payloads with lower volume and power interfaces, integration process, and operations for requirements, or customers who are budget payloads aboard New Shepard. constrained. NanoLabs range from elementary school-designed hardware to cutting-edge scientific New Shepard Payload Mission Overview research. Large custom payloads can be mounted Payloads are typically installed four days ahead of in place of payload stacks. The crew capsule is launch, though time sensitive payloads can be easily reconfigurable and able to accommodate any integrated 6-8 hours prior to liftoff with load combination of crew members, payload stacks, and timelines just minutes prior to launch planned for custom payloads.
    [Show full text]
  • FARSIDE Probe Study Final Report
    Study Participants List, Disclaimers, and Acknowledgements Study Participants List Principal Authors Jack O. Burns, University of Colorado Boulder Gregg Hallinan, California Institute of Technology Co-Authors Jim Lux, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Andres Romero-Wolf, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Technology Institute of Technology Lawrence Teitelbaum, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Tzu-Ching Chang, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Institute of Technology Jonathon Kocz, California Institute of Technology Judd Bowman, Arizona State University Robert MacDowall, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Justin Kasper, University of Michigan Richard Bradley, National Radio Astronomy Observatory Marin Anderson, California Institute of Technology David Rapetti, University of Colorado Boulder Zhongwen Zhen, California Institute of Technology Wenbo Wu, California Institute of Technology Jonathan Pober, Brown University Steven Furlanetto, UCLA Jordan Mirocha, McGill University Alex Austin, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Disclaimers/Acknowledgements Part of this research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The cost information contained in this document is of a budgetary and planning nature and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a commitment on the part of JPL and/or Caltech © 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • The Artemis Moon Program
    Position Paper: The Artemis Moon Program May 2020 (updated from November 2019) The NASA Artemis Moon program aims to land the first woman and the next man on the Moon by 2024, a goal that the National Space Society (NSS) applauds. Due to on-going efforts to cancel or reduce some of the best aspects of Artemis, NSS has decided to specifically endorse the following: Human Lunar Lander Commercial Contracting • NSS strongly endorses NASA contracting the service of landing on the Moon, rather than building, owning, and operating a lunar landing system itself. • NSS endorses NASA’s recent selection of three technologically dissimilar vendors, Dynetics, SpaceX, and the Blue Origin “National Team” for the initial contracts to provide human class lunar landers. Although only one vendor can be selected to support the initial return of humans to the lunar surface, NSS urges the development of preferably all three, and definitely at least two of the vendors’ proposals to operational status to ensure that NASA can reliably reach the lunar surface in a sustainable fashion. • NSS endorses the use of commercially procured launch vehicles to send lunar lander components to the Moon. • While it may in the short term seem burdensome to U.S. taxpayers to fund three human landers versus a single government owned vehicle, longer term such a strategy will lead to more diverse capabilities, higher total resiliency, and lower program risk and indeed cost to taxpayers. Instead of funding a government-owned vehicle like the Shuttle that has a finite program life and no market checks on cost, this procurement strategy will create a new sustainable commercial space sector that will over time compete and innovate to bring new capabilities to the market at ever lower price points.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Sector Lunar Exploration Hearing
    PRIVATE SECTOR LUNAR EXPLORATION HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 Serial No. 115–27 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 27–174PDF WASHINGTON : 2017 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California MO BROOKS, Alabama DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon BILL POSEY, Florida ALAN GRAYSON, Florida THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky AMI BERA, California JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut RANDY K. WEBER, Texas MARC A. VEASEY, Texas STEPHEN KNIGHT, California DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia BRIAN BABIN, Texas JACKY ROSEN, Nevada BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia JERRY MCNERNEY, California BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana PAUL TONKO, New York DRAIN LAHOOD, Illinois BILL FOSTER, Illinois DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida MARK TAKANO, California JIM BANKS, Indiana COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii ANDY BIGGS, Arizona CHARLIE CRIST, Florida ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas NEAL P. DUNN, Florida CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chair DANA ROHRABACHER, California AMI BERA, California, Ranking Member FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma ZOE LOFGREN, California MO BROOKS, Alabama DONALD S.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Space Transportation State of the Industry UNOOSA ICAO Symposium August 2017 Highlights
    Commercial Space Transportation State of the Industry UNOOSA ICAO Symposium August 2017 Highlights • U.S. Regulatory Approach • International Perspective • Economics of Commercial Space Transportation • Research and Development • Air and Space Traffic Management • Collaborations Federal Aviation Administration AST Commercial Space Transportation August 2017 | 2 Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration- Statutory Authority 51 U. S. C. Chapter 509 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as amended) • Authorizes the FAA* to license commercial launch and reentry activities and the operation of launch and reentry sites as carried out by U.S. citizens or within the United States. • Directs the FAA to: • Exercise this responsibility consistent with public health and safety, safety of property, and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, and • Encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries by the private sector. * The Secretary of Transportation’s licensing authority has been delegated to the Administrator of the FAA and further assigned to the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST) Federal Aviation Administration AST Commercial Space Transportation August 2017 | 3 AST Organization Associate Administrator Chief of Staff Deputy Associate Administrator Communications Legislative Affairs Director of Director of Special Projects Strategic Operations Space Integration Policy International Outreach Space Traffic Management Interagency
    [Show full text]