Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp. v. NASA, No. 17-1902, 2018 WL 4681012 (D.D.C. Sept. 28, 2018) (Moss, J.)

Northrop Grumman Sys. Corp. v. NASA, No. 17-1902, 2018 WL 4681012 (D.D.C. Sept. 28, 2018) (Moss, J.)

Re:  NASA's decision to release two tables included in plaintiff's contract with NASA for design and manufacture of James Webb Space Telescope

Disposition:  Denying defendant's motion for summary judgment and granting plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment

• Reverse FOIA:  The court holds that "[b]ecause the reasons NASA gave for concluding that release of the information [at issue] was not likely to cause [plaintiff] substantial competitive harm do not withstand scrutiny, its decision must be set aside as arbitrary, capricious and not in accordance with the law."  The court finds that, "[f]irst, although the wrap rates[, the rates at issue,] . . . are, indeed, proposed rates and are not based on the actual indirect costs [plaintiff] incurred in performing under [one] contract, they are by no means unconnected to [plaintiff's] actual rates."  "Second, even if competitors are not able to 'extrapolate' [plaintiff's] 'actual rates,' . . . the proposed wrap rates are themselves 'proprietary information' that [plaintiff] treats as 'closely held' and does 'not share[ ] with competitors[.]'"  The court also finds that defendant "failed to consider [certain future] likely competitive harms[ in its] its rationale" and that "[r]elease of that information 'would likely cause [plaintiff] substantial competitive harm because it would significantly increase the probability [its] competitors would underbid it in' future contracts."  The court finds that "on the present record, there is no reason to doubt [plaintiff's] assertion that just such a [furture] risk exists here – and, more importantly, NASA did not offer any reasoned basis for rejecting the company's representations."