Share the QR code < / P > < p > with wechat scanning code to friends and circles of friends < / P > < p > < / P > < p > on August 12. Although blue origin and dynamics have been protesting, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) stressed that SpaceX is still the only supplier of NASA's manned lunar landing system contract < p > on August 10 local time, the US Government Accountability Office explained why it decided to make SpaceX the sole supplier of the manned lunar landing system contract. Under the contract, SpaceX will develop and build a lunar module for NASA's Artemis manned lunar landing program < p > in April this year, both blue origin and dynamics submitted a protest to the US Government Accountability Office on the grounds that there were defects in the procurement process of the manned lunar landing system and "problems and concerns" in the contract signing process. The US Government Accountability Office rejected the protest on July 30 and announced the detailed reasons for the decision on Tuesday < p > one of the main concerns raised by the two companies is that NASA unexpectedly decided to choose a supplier for the manned lunar landing system instead of two suppliers from the three companies to develop the lunar landing module according to the original plan. In addition, the two companies also protested that NASA gave SpaceX the opportunity to modify the bidding scheme < p > the U.S. Government Accountability Office clearly accepted NASA's abandonment of the original plan and the selection of a supplier for the manned lunar landing system contract: "we still can't find a basis to maintain the protest, and the protesters haven't found any reasonable reason for possible bidding bias." < p > the U.S. Government Accountability Office also believes that according to the procurement terms, NASA can contact the preliminarily selected companies and modify the bidding scheme. According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the NASA resource selection management team headed by Kathryn Lueders, director of NASA manned space, reviewed three bidding schemes and preliminarily decided to conditionally select the SpaceX scheme on April 2 < p > the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that after the initial selection of SpaceX, the current procurement process allows NASA to "negotiate the payment amount, nodes and any aspects of completion criteria of the offeror". NASA therefore asked SpaceX to revise the quotation and add an additional flight readiness review (FRR) process for the lunar module, both of which are allowed by current procurement regulations < p > the U.S. Government Accountability Office also pointed out that choosing a supplier was not NASA's original intention. As stated by NASA and the U.S. Government Accountability Office, NASA's resource selection management team had hoped to "maintain competition at this stage of the manned lunar landing system", but NASA's current budget does not allow this < p > NASA received $850 million for the manned lunar landing system project in fiscal year 2021, which is only about one quarter of the applied funds. Referring to the contract for manned lunar landing system, NASA resource selection management team said: "NASA's budget was not even enough to sign a contract with a supplier." < p > referring to the question of whether there is bias in bidding, the U.S. Government Accountability Office said that the bias in the bidding process can be proved only when the protesters did not abandon the bidding, which does not exist in the manned lunar landing system project < p > the US Government Accountability Office said: "the relevant question is whether protesters will submit another plan that may be selected if they fully know that the bidding plan will be abandoned." The U.S. Government Accountability Office added that there are great differences in the quotations of SpaceX, blue origin and dynamics, and NASA certainly prefers SpaceX's scheme. The U.S. Government Accountability Office believes that there is a "substantial difference" between blue origin and SpaceX in the specific operation concept of manned lunar landing system development, which makes SpaceX unable to obtain more competitive advantages due to increased flight preparation review. The U.S. Government Accountability Office said that the goal of blue origin is to meet the technical requirements of the lunar module through one launch, and SpaceX plans to launch starships many times to complete the project < p > dynamics is mainly worried that NASA will give SpaceX more preferential treatment in the requirements of flight preparation review. But the U.S. Government Accountability Office said it "did not find that the views put forward by the protesters showed that there was bias in the current bidding process." < p > the Gao also added that it did consider other protests from dynamics and blue origin, but not all of them were covered in the interpretation document. At that time, one of the main ideas mentioned by blue origin in the protest also related to the funds obtained by NASA's manned lunar landing system. Jeff Bezos, founder of blue origin, publicly claimed that only SpaceX was asked to modify the proposal quotation to reflect the amount of funding NASA received from the U.S. Congress < p > the US Government Accountability Office said that there were "several reasons" for the failure of the protest, mainly because the whole procurement was conducted in full accordance with the Federal Procurement Regulations (far). Current regulations allow NASA to consider "available funds" when making decisions < p > "in any case, the protesters' views have no factual basis," the U.S. Government Accountability Office continued. SpaceX is superior to its competitors in three main indicators: technical method, price and management. "Even assuming that comparative analysis is needed, SpaceX's scheme seems to be the highest rated among the three evaluation criteria listed," the U.S. Government Accountability Office said（ Chen Chen) < / P > < p >