Amazon appeals $10B Pentagon contract won by Microsoft | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Amazon appeals $10B Pentagon contract won by Microsoft

Associated Press
1946429_web1_1946429-c5f5b979c88e459f9da896e726ba72d5
This combination of file photos shows the logos for Amazon, top, and Microsoft. . Amazon is protesting the Pentagon’s decision to award a huge cloud-computing contract to Microsoft, citing “unmistakable bias” in the decision. Amazon’s competitive bid for the “war cloud” drew criticism from President Donald Trump and its business rivals. (AP Photo/Richard Drew and Ted S. Warren)
1946429_web1_1946429-7065354f85264a9781a910ecff1f775e
This March 27, 2008, aerial file photo, shows the Pentagon in Washington. Amazon is protesting the Pentagon’s decision to award a huge cloud-computing contract to Microsoft, citing “unmistakable bias” in the decision. Amazon’s competitive bid for the “war cloud” drew criticism from President Donald Trump and its business rivals. ((AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

SAN FRANCISCO — Amazon is protesting the Pentagon’s decision to award a $10 billion cloud-computing contract to Microsoft, citing “unmistakable bias” in the process.

Amazon’s competitive bid for the “war cloud” project drew criticism from President Donald Trump and its business rivals. The project, formally called the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI, pitted leading tech titans Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle and IBM against one another

In a statement Thursday, Amazon said that “numerous aspects” of the bidding process involved “clear deficiencies, errors, and unmistakable bias.” It did not elaborate.

Amazon added that “it’s important that these matters be examined and rectified.”

Microsoft did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A Defense Department spokeswoman would only say that the Pentagon won’t speculate on potential litigation.

JEDI will store and process vast amounts of classified data, allowing the U.S. military to use artificial intelligence to speed up its war planning and fighting capabilities.

Amazon was long thought to be the front-runner in the competition for the huge military contract. Its Amazon Web Services division is far ahead of second-place Microsoft in cloud computing, and Amazon has experience handling highly classified government data.

It survived earlier legal challenges after the Defense Department eliminated rival bidders Oracle and IBM and whittled the competition down to the two Seattle area tech giants before choosing Microsoft in late October.

The Pentagon was preparing to make its final decision when Trump publicly waded into the fray in July, saying he had heard complaints about the process and that the administration would “take a very long look.” He said other companies told him that the contract “wasn’t competitively bid.” Oracle, in particular, had unsuccessfully argued that Pentagon officials unfairly favored Amazon for the winner-take-all contract.

Experts had generally expected Amazon to appeal the award, saying it had little to lose. Steven Schooner, a professor of government procurement law at George Washington University, said Trump’s comments were “inappropriate and improvident,” but said it would be a challenge for Amazon to prove the White House applied undue pressure in a way that made a difference.

Amazon said it filed its protest in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which deals with financial claims against the federal government.

It’s not uncommon for losing bidders to file a protest, either with the U.S. Government Accountability Office or in court. Unlike a review by the GAO, Amazon’s court filing will enable it to seek documents from the government as evidence for its case.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.