Paperwork related to Starship operations (especially with a focus on approval processes and lawsuits).
This document under-pins the operation of the Boca Chica facility. It is on this basis that SpaceX is able to operate, obtain hours of road closure and so on.
- FAA
- Texas State Historic Preservation Office
- National Park Service
- Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
- SpaceX
- Fish & Wildlife Service
- Texas Parks & Wildlife Service
Responsible for local administration for Boca Chica construction and launch sites.
-
Novus Prime vs SpaceX - https://trellis.law/case/48061/2021-dcl-03184/space-exploration-technologies-corp-vs-novus-prime-properties-llc-francisco-chavez
Current status - December 4th Trial
https://www.cameroncounty.us/spacex/
State for KSC and the TPS Bakery
Interesting details:
Official name of facility: "Space Exploration Technologies DBA Starship Tile Facility"
Notable Issues:
- Container labelling
- Contigency planning for fire, explosions or waste release
- First responders aware of contigency plans
- Quick reference guide publication
- Container counts in inspection logs
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=50748.0;attach=2055486;sess=0
State in which both McGregor test facility and Boca Chica construction & launch sites are located.
In 2009, an amendment was passed that protects beach access by the public:
"individually and collectively, has an unrestricted right to use and a right of ingress to and egress from a public beach.” Tex. Const. art. I, §33(b)
Filing: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/83R/billtext/html/HB02623F.HTM
Amending: Texas Open Beaches Act
Purpose: Allows Cameron County officials to close beach access for spaceflight purposes
Status In Force
Summary
In 2009, the Texas Constitution was amended to protect the public's access to the beach. In 2013 (ahead of SpaceX's arrival) Texas passed a bill amending the Open Beaches Act, allowing for beach closures for spaceflight activities.
SaveRGV, a nonprofit environmental organization, filed a lawsuit in State District Court alleging that closing Boca Chica Beach for SpaceX tests and launches violates the Texas Open Beaches Act.
The fundamental questions are:
- Is the beach being closed beyond the judge's orders
- Do the beach closures being ordered fall within the act
- Is the Act itself constitutional given the 2009 amendment
The lawsuit primarily challenges the status quo based on the final point.
Type Civil
Docket Case 2021-DCL-05887 08215
Parties SaveRGV vs. Texas General Land Office,George P. Bush, Cameron County
Initial Filing 11/10/2021
Updates
- Filed 11/10/2021
- Reported in local media "Border Report": https://outline.com/ZxdwKp
- Retrieved at/prior 15/10/2021 (thanks unknown source): https://2fea0d43-01a9-4ffc-8e3a-0d4e11c2f416.filesusr.com/ugd/d1db5d_7e329ee589844c33a1eae9feea8ee0d1.pdf
Responsible for administration of oil & gas wells at Boca Chica.
https://www.rrc.texas.gov/media/brzfosix/cng-lng-regulations.pdf
Case: https://rrctx.force.com/s/case/500t000000Z1fGyAAJ/detail
Status: Ammended Proposal for Decision in favour of LoneStar (SpaceX)
Examiners recommend the Commission approve Lone Star's application to transfer the Wells to Lone Star
Currently engaged in process for selecting Moon-landing system. May also seek to use Starship for future deep space missions.
Time-Resolved Observations of Precipitation Structure and Storm Intensity with a Constellation of Smallsats (TROPICS) Mission Launch Services
https://sam.gov/opp/6660d1e719fb47f6b1b5013e3ae56fac/view?index=opp
- Status: Decided
- Outcome: NASA selected Astra over RocketLab's Electron and Starship
A weakness was assigned because SpaceX’s FPR did not clearly demonstrate progress toward the resolution of the environmental assessment which results in risk associated with obtaining an FAA launch license, increasing the likelihood of delays that would affect contract performance.
SpaceX’s FPR included the same integrated master schedule that was included in the initial proposal and does not indicate that any milestones scheduled for completion have been completed. As a result, there is significant risk in the proposed launch approach based on the required launch date and the current status of the proposed launch vehicle that increases the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance
Astra had the lowest proposed price at $7.95M. SpaceX had the next lowest proposed price and they were somewhat higher than Astra.
SpaceX will partner with NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, to capture imagery and thermal measurements of its Starship vehicle during orbital re-entry over the Pacific Ocean. With the data, the company plans to advance a reusable thermal protection system, which protects the vehicle from aerodynamic heating, for missions returning from low-Earth orbit, the Moon, and Mars.
- Jan 29, 2020 - Solicitations Released
- Feb 19, 2020 - Virtual Industry Forum-ACO
- Mar 18, 2020 - Mandatory Preliminary Proposals Due
- May 15, 2020 - Invitation for Final Proposal Submission (target)
- Jun 25, 2020 - Final Proposals Due
- Aug 31, 2020 - Selection Announcement (target)
- Nov 9, 2020 - Partnerships Announced - https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/2020_NASA_Announcement_of_Collaboration_Opportunity_ACO_Selections
- Nov 9, 2020 - Press Release - https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/new-nasa-partnerships-to-mature-commercial-space-technologies-capabilities
https://www.nasa.gov/nextstep/humanlander2
- CLIN 1 (Base): Contract award through 12 months (October 2020)
- CLIN 2 (Option A): October 2020 through 2024 flight demonstration
- CLIN 3 (Option B): Approximately 2024 mission CDR through 2026 flight demonstration
- CLIN 4 (IDIQ): Contract award through all awarded Options (special studies, support tasks)
SpaceX Starship selected as Option A:
- Press Release: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/as-artemis-moves-forward-nasa-picks-spacex-to-land-next-americans-on-moon
- Source Selection Statement: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/option-a-source-selection-statement-final.pdf
NASA implemented a no-cost extension through Aug. 9, 2021 to each of the base period HLS contracts with Blue Origin Federation, Dynetics, and SpaceX. These extensions continue the contracts for administrative purposes ahead of GAO resolution of the current protests.
NB: "That demonstration mission is targeted for no earlier than April 2025." per https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-provides-update-to-astronaut-moon-lander-plans-under-artemis
SpaceX Starship selected as Option B:
- Press Release: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-provides-update-to-astronaut-moon-lander-plans-under-artemis
Timeline:
- April 28, 2021 – Request for Information (RFI) Issued (Notice ID 21-27-PS50) | Announcement
- May 3, 2021 – Virtual Industry Forum
- June 9, 2021 – Synopsis Issued
- July 1, 2021 – Solicitation Released | Announcement
- July 16, 2021 – Industry Q&A Log posted
- July 20, 2021 – BAA Amendment 1 (minor updates and clarifications)
- July 22, 2021 - BAA Amendment 2 (minor updates and clarifications)
- July 27, 2021 – Industry Q&A Log posted
- August 2, 2021 - Proposals due
- September 14, 2021 - NASA Selects Five U.S. Companies to Mature Artemis Lander Concepts - https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-selects-five-us-companies-to-mature-artemis-lander-concepts/
"SpaceX of Hawthorne, California, $9.4 million."
Docs:
- Press Release: https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-provides-update-to-astronaut-moon-lander-plans-under-artemis
To bring a second entrant to market for the development of a lunar lander in parallel with SpaceX, NASA will issue a draft solicitation in the coming weeks. This upcoming activity will lay out requirements for a future development and demonstration lunar landing capability to take astronauts between orbit and the surface of the Moon. This effort is meant to maximize NASA’s support for competition and provides redundancy in services to help ensure NASA’s ability to transport astronauts to the lunar surface. This upcoming second contract award, known as the Sustaining Lunar Development contract, combined with the second option under SpaceX’s original landing award, will pave the way to future recurring lunar transportation services for astronauts at the Moon.
- Draft EA: https://netspublic.grc.nasa.gov/main/20190801_Final_DRAFT_EA_SpaceX_Starship.pdf
- Final EA: http://netspublic.grc.nasa.gov/main/20190919_Final_EA_SpaceX_Starship.pdf
- FONSI: http://netspublic.grc.nasa.gov/main/SpaceX%20Starship%20FONSI.pdf
Responsible for ensuring other federal agencies (e.g. NASA) follow fair selection process.
- Blue Origin Federation, LLC - File Number: B-419783.3 - https://www.gao.gov/docket/b-419783.3
- Dynetics, Inc- a Leidos Company - File Number: B-419783.4 - https://www.gao.gov/docket/b-419783.4
The Verge FOIA'd (post case ending) the NASA response:
GAO issued statement, denying appeals by both Blue Origin & Dynetics: https://www.gao.gov/press-release/statement-blue-origin-dynetics-decision
In denying the protests, GAO first concluded that NASA did not violate procurement law or regulation when it decided to make only one award. NASA’s announcement provided that the number of awards the agency would make was subject to the amount of funding available for the program. In addition, the announcement reserved the right to make multiple awards, a single award, or no award at all. In reaching its award decision, NASA concluded that it only had sufficient funding for one contract award. GAO further concluded there was no requirement for NASA to engage in discussions, amend, or cancel the announcement as a result of the amount of funding available for the program. As a result, GAO denied the protest arguments that NASA acted improperly in making a single award to SpaceX.
GAO next concluded that the evaluation of all three proposals was reasonable, and consistent with applicable procurement law, regulation, and the announcement’s terms.
Finally, GAO agreed with the protesters that in one limited instance NASA waived a requirement of the announcement for SpaceX. Despite this finding, the decision also concludes that the protesters could not establish any reasonable possibility of competitive prejudice arising from this limited discrepancy in the evaluation.
NB: Blue Origin is suing NASA (Federal Government). Department of Justice is responsible for defending government agencies. SpaceX is an interested party.
- Blue Origin's Motion for Leave to File a Complaint Under Seal - Filed 13th August, Published 16th August (?)
- DoJ requests deadline extension due to issues filing documents
- Judge grants extension (also allowing time for BO to review
- Complaint (partially redacted) is unsealed following request by Blue, responses from DoJ/NASA & SpaceX - https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1440685410456256524
Case ending ~ November 1st
Dominant licensing and authorisation body for spaceflight. Must allow spaceports, launch and landing attempts.
None (which is kinda odd)
Facility Storage Regulations: https://www.govregs.com/regulations/title14_chapterIII_part420_subpartD_section420.66
| File | Company | Desc | State | Company |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LRLO 20-119C (PDF) | Space Exploration Technologies Corporation | Starship Prototype | TX | May 27, 2022 |
https://www.faa.gov/data_research/commercial_space_data/launches/?type=Permitted
| Date | Desc | Vehicle | Company | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 27, 2019 | 150m Hop | Starship Hopper | Space Exploration Technologies Corporation | TX |
| Jul 25, 2019 | 18m Hop | Starship Hopper | Space Exploration Technologies Corporation | TX |
- May 2014 Original: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf
- November 2014 Re-Evaluation: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/20141110_WR_SpaceX_Brownsville_EIS.pdf
- October 2017 Re-Evaluation: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/20171005_SpaceX_Texas_WR_for_Design_Mods.pdf
- May 2019 Re-Evaluation: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/May_2019_WR_for_SpaceX_Texas_Starship_Testing_vfinal.pdf
- August 2019 Addendum: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/August_2019_Addendum.pdf
- November 2019 Addendum: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/November_2019_Addendum.pdf
- June 2020 Addendum: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/June_2020_Addendum_to_May_2019.pdf
- May 2020 Re-Evaluation: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/WR_for_SpaceX_Construction_508.pdf
- December 2020 Re-Evaluation: https://www.faa.gov/space/environmental/nepa_docs/spacex_texas_eis/media/WR_for_Increased_Closure_Hours_508.pdf
Status:
- Draft Programmatic Environmental Assesment published (September 17th)
- Public comment period originally until NET October 18th 2021
- Public comment period extended following state & federal requests to November 1st 2021
- Original deadline:
- Extended to February 28th
- Extended to March 28th
Video summary by NASASpaceFlight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTiesMAdlU0
NB: FAA considers work done on OLIT to 'complicate the process' and be done 'at-risk': https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1415437751646818304/photo/1
Components:
- Section 106 (Tribal & Historical Land) - Extended, due to end March 16th
- Fish & Wildlife Service Endangered Species Act - Extended, due to end March 14th
More info:
- Fish & Wildlife Service FAQ on ESA consultations: https://www.fws.gov/endangered/what-we-do/faq.html
(t)he Service is allowed 90 days to consult with the agency and applicant (if any) and 45 days to prepare and submit a biological opinion; thus, a biological opinion is submitted to the action agency within 135 days of initiating formal consultation. The 90-day consultation period can be extended by mutual agreement of the action agency and the Service; however, if an applicant is involved the consultation period cannot be extended more than 60 days without the consent of the applicant. The extension should specify a schedule for completion.
Obstruction Evaluation / Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA) - Notices for Proposed Construction / Alteration (Form 7460-1)
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=474570805&row=115 479ft (469ft tower + 10ft lightning rod)
NB: Provided first hard evidence that the OLIT would actually be used to for "catching" via "arms"
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=543233586&row=0
SpaceX is proposing a height of 504' + 10' lightning rod for the launch tower under construction. The tower shall lift a rocket and booster on the launch mount and catch the booster for landing. The tower will be constructed of structural steel trusses to support mechanical vehicle lift arms.
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=483483974&row=11
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=438876307&row=1
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/searchAction.jsp?action=displayOECase&oeCaseID=438874497&row=0
https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html
Responsible for regulating communications systems. This includes Starlink antennas and ground-vehicle tracking systems (radar dishes).
https://fcc.report/ELS/Space-Exploration-Technologies-Corp-SpaceX/0748-EX-ST-2021
"The FERC is responsible for authorizing the siting and construction of onshore and near-shore LNG import or export facilities under Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act."
SpaceX isn't really an importer or exporter of LNG so this would not seem to apply.
PHMSA's remit is governed by "49 CFR Part 193" which excludes:
LNG facilities used by ultimate consumers of LNG or natural gas.
Given the VLA is a consumer facility this would seem not to apply. But it may cover the gas well lot.
"The Department of the Air Force seeks to leverage the current multi-billion dollar commercial investment to develop the largest rockets ever, and with full reusability to develop and test the capability to leverage a commercial rocket to deliver AF cargo anywhere on the Earth in less than one hour, with a 100-ton capacity," - Budget Justification Book 2021
MSIB Publication Link: https://homeport.uscg.mil/my-homeport/safety-Notifications/MSIB?cotpid=22
Example MSIB: https://homeport.uscg.mil/Lists/Content/DispForm.aspx?ID=66996&Source=/Lists/Content/DispForm.aspx?ID=66996
- Public Notice: https://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20APRIL/PN2_201200381.pdf?ver=mYDsA57a8HMJK0MxAGcVxg%3d%3d
- Project Plans: https://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20March/Plans_201200381.pdf?ver=FRFoaMtv2EGSZh833C4pRA%3d%3d
- Public Notice: https://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20March/PN_201300381.pdf?ver=6MX8YmX4FM43lVrgFQ7WgA%3d%3d
- Project Plans: https://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20March/Plans_201300381.pdf?ver=hid3b2HjHCZZNucHf1LGzw%3d%3d
NB: It's not clear which is actually active, if either
TBD
TBD