Not a surprise. The paperwork is indeed excessive.
That said, I can also guarantee you that there are a lot of issues that commercial providers will never consider unless NASA requires them. A month or so ago somebody sent me a document concerning abort options for an Orion sent to a 52 degree orbit. Turns out that the abort options are horrible because of the risk of dumping a crew in the North Atlantic a thousand miles from recovery forces and during a storm. This really limits the weather constraints (you gotta have good weather all along the launch path) and increases the rescue forces requirements. He thought it was a really tough set of options, but also added the comment "I bet SpaceX has no idea about things like this).
The overriding question is how much NASA oversight/insight is necessary, and can NASA reduce excessive oversight/insight to achieve that level? There are those who say that NASA should have almost no oversight/insight, and that commercial companies will "self-police" because they don't want to risk losing their business in event of an accident. I think that's balderdash, since companies regularly cut safety corners that can wreck their businesses and there's no reason to believe that space is any different at all. (The common response is to use the analogy of commercial aviation, which is very safe. But that analogy falls apart once you consider the maturity of the industry, the amount of regulation imposed upon it, and a number of examples, like ValueJet, where companies cut corners and people died.)