WifWaf Posted July 27, 2021 Report Share Posted July 27, 2021 If you were the CO tasked by NASA Administrator to craft a response to this letter from Jeff Bezos, how would you convert its promise to, “waive payments in the government's current fiscal year and the next ones after that” into a contract? Assume no red tape with the GAO or agency counsel. Read the article carefully. Link to Reuters article This is such a juicy topic! I know we should discuss gratuitous v. voluntary services here, but I want to think through the way a CO would propose to make this work for the Administrator first. Is the award vehicle going to incorporate this offer as a proposal revision? Is the award going to include a release of claims? Or does the CO want to negotiate this into something more palatable to GAO, like where the contractor is financing the government up to $2B? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joel hoffman Posted July 27, 2021 Report Share Posted July 27, 2021 Get Congress to codify it. All problems solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constricting Officer Posted July 27, 2021 Report Share Posted July 27, 2021 If we are going to ignore the solicitation, eval and award to SpaceX, we still don't know the type of contract intended (guessing cost), the appropriation type available or the estimated value. The $2B offset may not be enough to outweigh the extensive Past Performance cited for SpaceX by the agency. Not exactly a slam dunk here: From article - "In a letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, Bezos said Blue Origin would waive payments in the government's current fiscal year and the next ones after that up to $2 billion, and pay for an orbital mission to vet its technology." All that being said, if you have a interested and capable competitor in the market that is willing to assume that much financial risk then compete it FFP and see what what happens. Other than that, I don't think there is enough information available to work through this. 9 hours ago, joel hoffman said: Get Congress to codify it. Sounds good, but Congress can't currently agree that water is wet, the sky is blue and gravity still applies in physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted July 27, 2021 Report Share Posted July 27, 2021 Arguably, Bezos' has submitted an unsolicited proposal, or made preliminary contact about one. See the definition in FAR 2.101 and the coverage in FAR Subpart 15.6. The proposal does not appear to in response to the NASA solicitation, which has closed. There should be no need for congressional action, and he does not appear to have offered a voluntary service. He wants a contract. It appears to me to be a potentially very attractive offer. If NASA has competent negotiators it might be able to enter into a very good contract with a very good company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLong Posted August 10, 2021 Report Share Posted August 10, 2021 On 7/27/2021 at 8:14 AM, Constricting Officer said: Sounds good, but Congress can't currently agree that water is wet, the sky is blue and gravity still applies in physics. Gravity is just a theory yo. /jk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vern Edwards Posted August 10, 2021 Report Share Posted August 10, 2021 51 minutes ago, DeLong said: Gravity is just a theory yo. /jk Gravity is a natural law. F=Gm1m2 ∕r2 Theories of gravity are explanations, like Einstein's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif)
Recommended Posts