My preference would be to procure lunar crew transport capabilities to the HLS landers in lunar orbit and/or Gateway; transition off Orion/SLS ASAP even if that means missing 2030 by a bit; focus the rest of Artemis efforts on the handful a priorities that we need to do or can only be done at the Moon; and procure human-scale Mars landers and uncrewed pathfinding landings at Mars.
And a competition allows a reset to Other Transaction Authority (Space Act Agreements), which are much more tailorable than the onerous FAR, which Congress has imposed on these programs ever since commercial crew. An out-of-scope modification means the program is still stuck with the FAR.
Although the Space Act does not explicitly prohibit NASA from using its “other transactions” authority to acquire goods or services, the Agency has taken the position that the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 and other Federal laws and regulations require the use of contracts when the purpose of an agreement is to purchase goods or services intended for the direct benefit of NASA.[22][22] 22 The Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, 31 U.S. Code § 6303 (1977) states “An executive agency shall use a procurement contract as the legal instrument reflecting a relationship between the United States Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient when – (1) the principal purpose of the instrument is to acquire (by purchase, lease, or barter) property or services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government; or (2) the agency decides in a specific instance that the use of a procurement contract is appropriate.”
NASA and Congress take the position that SAAs can be used for development but not for acquisition of services...Quote from: IG ReportAlthough the Space Act does not explicitly prohibit NASA from using its “other transactions” authority to acquire goods or services, the Agency has taken the position that the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 and other Federal laws and regulations require the use of contracts when the purpose of an agreement is to purchase goods or services intended for the direct benefit of NASA.[22]
Although the Space Act does not explicitly prohibit NASA from using its “other transactions” authority to acquire goods or services, the Agency has taken the position that the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 and other Federal laws and regulations require the use of contracts when the purpose of an agreement is to purchase goods or services intended for the direct benefit of NASA.[22]
Sensible though Chojnaki's statement seems, I don't understand the "have to" in it: has it not been widely reported and discussed that the contract requires SpaceX only to demonstrate landing?
NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) is currently conducting a Moon Landing Test (MLT) Project. As part of the project, the Human Landing Systems (HLS) Program is preparing to conduct a series of impact dynamics tests utilizing a Boilerplate Lunar Lander (BLL). Testing will be conducted at LaRC’s Landing and Impact Research (LandIR) Facility. The purpose of this effort is to procure a mobile shelter structure (MSS) capable of moving over the BLL while the BLL is stationed at one of three locations on the LandIR Concrete Pad.
Delivery of the PR [Pressurized Rover] to the lunar surface will expand lunar exploration, science capabilities, and utilization activities within the Artemis architecture. The PR is planned to have a pressurized cabin, allowing astronauts to live and work inside the vehicle to conduct exploration and science activities as they transit longer distances across the lunar terrain. The PR planned mission life is 10 years on the lunar surface, and it is capable of operating both crewed and uncrewed. The PR concept include the ability to-house and transport two crew members during the crewed portions of its mission and the ability to be operated remotely. The PR is being designed and built by the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), with NASA providing delivery of the PR from Earth to the lunar surface. This mission is planned for award to SpaceX because their initial HLS mission award and associated lander development began earlier, and their schedule includes earlier Artemis crewed flight demonstrations, which enables them to meet the PR programmatic schedule with their HDL design.
The delivery of a lunar surface habitat will expand exploration capabilities within the Artemis architecture by enabling increased crew size, range, and duration of exploration missions while also establishing opportunities for Mars-forward precursor missions. As envisioned, a lunar surface habitat will house two crew members for a minimum of 7 days while they live and work on the lunar surface and will enable lunar exploration and science during crewed and uncrewed periods. This mission is planned for award to Blue Origin because their schedule is for a later Artemis crewed flight demonstration which enables them to meet programmatic schedule with their current design configuration of the HDL.
To support NASA's Artemis campaign, as well as future requirements related to human activities on the lunar surface, deep space exploration, and crewed missions to Mars, NASA anticipates the need for future service acquisitions for both crewed and cargo missions to the lunar surface. These future service acquisitions are anticipated to employ services-based pricing, and NASA anticipates awarding at least two service contracts to ensure continuing competition.
The current period of performance for the Appendix H contract is from July 30, 2021 – June 30, 2027, with a firm-fixed price of $4.3B; including base and all options. The current period of performance for Appendix P is from May 18, 2023, to May 17, 2028, with a firm-fixed price of $3.4B; including base and all options. This modification would extend the period of performance for both awardees by no less than 48 months. The exact period of performance is contingent on acceptance of each contractor’s ability to meet the schedule.
The Government currently estimates the duplicated cost of awarding a demonstration mission to a contractor not currently on contract for HDL development to be greater than $2.5B, if the use of firm-fixed price milestone-based contracts are used, with potential for far more cost otherwise. Therefore, contracting with the existing Appendix H and Appendix P contractors avoids duplication of cost to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition.
The PR and lunar surface habitat are novel, first-of-their-kind lunar surface systems with highly complex designs that must consider the capabilities of their respective landers. NASA has entered into an implementing arrangement with the Government of Japan for Japan to develop the PR and is working to complete a separate implementing arrangement for development of the lunar surface habitat. The providers of both the PR and the lunar surface habitat have imminent design milestones that require input from, and engagement with, their respective lander providers. Because of the extensive lander development progress made under current HLS contracts, SpaceX and Blue Origin are uniquely able to provide the requisite inputs with sufficient design maturity to the PR and lunar surface habitat providers as required their respective development schedules. Accordingly, this approach satisfies specific objectives of the Artemis program as well as international policy objectives of the United States.