Attachment A7_JSC-35191_Artemis_Flight_Operations_Standards_Baseline.pdf

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Artemis Programs JSC-35191

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Revision: Baseline

Artemis Flight Operations Standards

Not subject to the ITAR/EAR: This publication does not contain information which falls under the purview of the U.S. Munitions List (USML), as defined in the International Traffic in Arms

Regulations (ITAR), 22 CFR 120-130, and is not export controlled. This publication does not contain information within the purview of the Export Administration Regulation (EAR), 15 CFR

730-774, and is not export controlled. This publication does not require export control. It is not approved for public release. Release to the public requires approval through the appropriate

NASA Release Process (e.g., FOIA, NASA STI, etc.).

Norman Knight Date

Director, Flight Operations Directorate

Artemis Flight Operations Standards JSC-35191

Revision: Baseline

Artemis Programs Page 2 of 68

Record of Revision/Changes

Revision Description Date

Baseline Baseline Artemis Flight Operations Standards document. 2/3/2022

Artemis Programs Page 3 of 68

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

1.2 APPLICABILITY

1.3 SCOPE

1.4 VERB APPLICATION

1.5 TAILORING

1.6 PRECEDENCE

1.7 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

1.8 FLIGHT PHASE & OPERATIONS DEFINITIONS

1.9 MILESTONE OVERVIEW

2.0 APPLICABLE AND REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

3.0 NASA ROLE IN INTERNATIONAL AND COMMERCIAL PROVIDER OPERATIONS

4.0 OPERATIONS PLANNING

4.1 GENERAL OPERATIONS STANDARDS

4.2 STANDARDS FOR MISSION MANIFESTING

4.3 MISSION DESIGN

4.4 NOMENCLATURE DEFINITION

4.5 OPERATIONS PROCEDURES

4.6 VEHICLE/CREW TIMELINES

4.7 OPERATIONS FACILITIES AND GROUND MONITORING/CONTROL SYSTEMS

4.8 LAUNCH COMMIT CRITERIA

4.9 FLIGHT RULES

4.10 OPERATIONS INTERFACE PROCEDURES (OIP)

5.0 OPERATIONAL CONTROLS

5.1 OPERATIONAL HAZARD ANALYSIS AND PROCEDURAL MITIGATION

6.0 OPERATIONS TRAINING

6.1 FLIGHT CREW TRAINING STANDARDS

6.2 OPERATIONS PERSONNEL TRAINING

6.3 OPERATIONS TRAINING ASSESSMENT

7.0 OPERATIONS EXECUTION

7.1 OPERATIONAL COMMUNICATION PLANS

7.2 OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT PLANS

7.3 REAL-TIME ANALYSES

7.4 CONTINGENCY ACTION PLAN

8.0 NASA INTEGRATION AND APPROVAL FORUMS FOR OPERATIONS

8.1 ARTEMIS OPERATIONS PANEL (AOP)

8.2 FLIGHT OPERATIONS REVIEW (FOR)

8.3 SAFETY REVIEW PANEL (SRP)

8.4 ARTEMIS MISSION SYSTEMS PANEL (AMSP)

8.5 FLIGHT RULES CONTROL BOARD (FRCB)

8.6 FLIGHT PROCEDURES CONTROL BOARD (FPCB)

8.7 SPACEFLIGHT TRAINING CONTROL BOARD (STCB)

8.8 ARTEMIS TRAINING PANEL (ATP)

8.9 ARTEMIS MANIFEST PANEL (AMP)

8.10 ARTEMIS UTILIZATION CONTROL PANEL (AUCP)

8.11 ARTEMIS CREWTIME PANEL (ACP)

8.12 CREW EQUIPMENT INTERFACE TESTING (CEIT)

8.13 NASA OPERATIONAL CONTROLS AGREEMENT DOCUMENT (OCAD) PROCESS

9.0 ANOMALY TRACKING AND RESOLUTION

Artemis Programs Page 4 of 68

9.2 FLIGHT CREW AND OPERATIONS PERSONNEL DEBRIEF

APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS

APPENDIX B: DEFINITIONS

APPENDIX C: WHITE PAPER REFERENCES

APPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF “SHALL” STATEMENTS

Artemis Programs Page 5 of 68

1.0 Introduction

Future human spaceflight missions to explore beyond Low Earth Orbit will involve exciting partnerships between Commercial Providers, International Partners, and NASA, including shared responsibility for crewed space vehicle operations. In order to work together to achieve successful human rating certification and mission operations, this document helps communicate the NASA expectations related to operations, training, and ground systems. Each Artemis program will define the operational roles and responsibilities between NASA and Providers via contractual or international agreements, and this document provides additional information on how those agreements will be implemented. This document is intended to apply to any future crewed vehicle developed as part of the Artemis program.

Management processes for review, verification, and validation of operations practices and products will adhere to the same principles of informed risk management previously used in the design and production of integrated space vehicles and systems. Operational standards in this document are derived from best practices and processes established in previous NASA human spaceflight programs. The effective management of, and adherence to, these standards is even more critical within the Artemis program architecture due to the complexity, dependency, and criticality of all the components working together to meet safety and mission critical objectives. Failure to properly manage crew operations standards could significantly impact the technical, cost and/or schedule baseline, the safety and performance of the spaceflight crew, and success of mission objectives.

Every mission exposes the flight crew to various forms of risk. The execution of the mission must balance those risks with the consequences of loss of the mission objectives (such as the incremental risk of repeating the mission or impacts to subsequent missions). Effective real-time operations (including all phases of flight: pre-launch, launch, translunar injection and transit, arrival in lunar orbit, rendezvous and docking between vehicles, operations while docked, undocking, lunar descent and landing, surface operations, lunar ascent, re-rendezvous and docking between vehicles, transearth injection and transit, Earth landing, and crew recovery operations) inherently require the ability to make timely and informed decisions to continue or terminate a mission based on the full understanding of the immediate and future possible risks. The verification of requirements and review of how standards in this document are implemented ultimately allows NASA to ensure the safety and well-being of crewmembers. While some mission phases may not apply to all vehicles (for example, crew landing/recovery on Earth), all items in this document apply unless designated as mission phase-specific for an inapplicable phase. Even if some flight phases occur uncrewed, NASA still requires insight into all phases of flight. This document applies throughout the entire program lifecycle.

1.1 Purpose

This document provides details of NASA expectations for operational products, processes, and facilities that are required by NASA and levied on the Provider(s) of the Artemis Programs. As part of the verification of the operations requirements, NASA will perform reviews of the Provider’s operations, processes, products, and facilities as described in this document. These reviews may consist of observation of operations, observation of training, inspection of facilities, inspection of tools, documentation, or testing. To assist in these reviews, NASA requires access to the Provider’s insight data, as defined in the appropriate Insight Implementation Plan approved by NASA.

NASA encourages the Providers to seek new innovative and cost-effective methods for operations. This document is not meant to imply that the Providers should holistically perform operations in the same

Artemis Programs Page 6 of 68 manner as NASA’s past or present techniques. In order to allow maximum flexibility and innovation to the Provider, the standards in this document may be implemented in numerous ways. For example, procedures must meet standards such as being validated in a test environment, use a consistent format, and clearly identify hazardous steps; however, the specific format and means of storing the procedure

(electronic versus printed) is left to the Provider for mission phases operated solely by the Provider.

During joint training and operations between NASA and Providers involving multiple Artemis elements

(Orion, Gateway, HLS, surface operations), more specific standards must be followed such that joint products adhere to standard formats and are compatible with crew interfaces, including displays and controls, and caution and warning systems. Joint operations plans and products will be developed collaboratively between NASA and the Provider, using NASA standards, processes and schedules as described in Section 8. This enables efficient mission execution across the crewed phases of Artemis missions.

The operations concept for Artemis crewed vehicles and elements will influence the design of flight hardware and ground architecture, therefore, these standards should be considered in the design phase of human space flight transportation systems.

1.2 Applicability

This document is applicable to human-rated spaceflight operations that support NASA missions and are not operated by NASA. Verifiable requirement statements are indicated by the word “shall” beginning in Section 4. To facilitate requirements selection and verification by NASA programs and projects, a summary of all “shall” requirements is provided in Appendix D.

1.3 Scope

This document applies to all Provider-operated Artemis elements with direct crew interfaces and support functions (spacecraft, surface assets such as transfer vehicles, habitation modules, logistics modules, EVA suits, ground systems, and mission support facilities). The standards defined in this document apply during assembly, integration, and testing in the ground processing, and launch of Artemis missions and apply during crewed phases and uncrewed phases that are in support of NASA missions, as defined in Section 1.8. For non-joint, uncrewed mission phases, Providers may utilize alternate standards as appropriate for their independent operations model. While NASA-independent flight operations (e.g. Orion/SLS) are not directly driven by this document, the standards within align, and enable seamless integration, with NASA/Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) internal standards and processes.

1.4 Verb Application

Throughout this document set, “will” is used in a statement of fact, declaration of purpose, or expected occurrence; “shall” is used for binding requirements that must be verified and have an accompanying method of verification; and “should” denotes a statement of best practice.

1.5 Tailoring

Tailoring of this document for application to a specific program or project will be formally documented as part of program or project requirements and approved by the responsible Technical Authority in accordance with NPR 7120.5, NASA Space Flight Program.

Artemis Programs Page 7 of 68

1.6 Precedence

Nothing in this document supersedes applicable laws and regulations, unless a specific exemption has been obtained. Additionally, nothing in this document supersedes operations standards specifically adjudicated, tailored, and levied in program-specific NASA contracts. Beyond the aforementioned items, in the event of a conflict between the text of this document and references cited herein (listed in

Section 2.0), the text of this document takes precedence.

1.7 Delegation of Authority

The applicable Artemis programs (e.g., Orion, Gateway, HLS) are responsible for assuring the definition, control, implementation, and verification of the requirements identified in this document. The

Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for this document is the JSC FOD. Issues will be resolved via the Artemis Operations Panel (AOP) per governance defined in the Artemis Operations Panel

Charter. Proposed changes to this document will be submitted by the OPR via a Change Request to the appropriate Control Board and follows the Configuration Management Change Process for the applicable Program(s).

1.8 Flight Phase & Operations Definitions

There are requirements throughout this document that will vary in scope based on the flight phase of the

Artemis vehicle/element. To provide consistency, the following phase definitions will apply to the entire document:

• Preflight: time period prior to vehicle launch from Earth.

• Near Real-time Operations: time period immediately preceding Real-time operations when final products such as timelines are completed. The majority of Program-direct input into operations occurs in near real-time via Mission Management Team meetings or other coordination means. The Mission Management Team (MMT) chair is responsible for near real-time policy decisions and will be consulted as soon as possible whenever real-time circumstances do not permit operating within the operational baseline as documented in Flight

Rules and procedures.

• Real-time Operations: time period when Provider vehicle/element is in operation, from launch through end of mission and decision making is in the hands of the on-console operations team.

The transition to real-time processes can occur prior to launch depending on completion of other milestones. Between launch and end of mission, decision making can sometimes move into the near-real-time arena when time allows, and Mission Management needs to be consulted for risk acceptance, or modification of mission objectives.

• Post-flight: time period after end of mission, which for crewed missions is typically after the crew lands back on Earth and returns home.

Artemis mission operations involve NASA-led mission phases as well as Provider-led phases.

Additionally, multiple vehicles are involved during some mission phases. To provide consistency, the following definitions and assumptions apply to the entire document:

• Provider-Led Operations: The Provider has operational decision-making authority and command and control of the vehicles in the operations phases as defined in Program contracts/agreements. During these phases, NASA maintains the authority for crew timeline execution, abort decisions, and Go/No-Go calls at Critical Events as defined in the Flight Rules.

Rationale: The Provider is the expert on their vehicle operations and has the operational decision making authority for phases that do not directly affect crew safety or other Artemis elements. During

Artemis Programs Page 8 of 68 these phases there may be specific events or vehicle conditions that affect Artemis mission success in which case NASA maintains decision authority and risk acceptance. These events and conditions will be defined in the flight rules.

• NASA-Led Operations: NASA has operational decision-making authority Provider operations phases as defined in Program contracts/agreements. In these phases, NASA directs the Provider execution of command and control of their vehicles as part of a blended NASA/Provider team, or at the Provider facility, under the direction of the

NASA Artemis Flight Director.

Rationale: NASA is responsible for operations decisions and risk acceptance involving integrated

Artemis vehicles, overall crew safety, and crew timeline execution.

The provider has the expertise with respect to HLS vehicle operations and supports the Artemis Flight

Director with HLS risk identification and operations recommendations.

The provider implements command and control of their vehicles per Artemis Flight Director direction.

(NOTE: That direction nominally involves direction to execute an entire sequence of commands or to take several documented actions, etc. NASA does not provide a GO for every single action the provider takes.)

1.9 Milestone Overview

Mission operations goes through its own Design, Development, Test & Evaluation (DDT&E) process in parallel to vehicle/element DDT&E to ensure readiness to support training and real-time mission execution. The following figure depicts a typical flow for Ground Systems DDT&E; based on previous programs, these activities begin approximately 4 years prior to launch for new, human-rated vehicles/elements:

Figure 1: Mission Operations DDT&E Flow

Generally, the start of Crew training and Integrated Flight Control Team training are the primary drivers for facility readiness (Mission Systems & Training Systems), and Operational product development begins in earnest after vehicle/element Critical Design Review (CDR).

Tables 1 & 2 summarize the key milestones that NASA requires Providers to support in order to ensure operational readiness for Artemis missions. Milestone approximate due dates are based on NASA’s generic plan/train/fly schedule template for Artemis missions, and is intended to inform Provider

Artemis Programs Page 9 of 68 operations plans and development schedules. Approximate due dates listed for each milestone are driven by:

• NASA’s intent to begin Artemis assigned crew training 24 months prior to Orion launch.

• NASA’s responsibility to integrate mission operations across a multitude of joint operations teams, which drives the need for efficient phasing of operational development activities, including:

o Mission and training systems facility interface DDT&E.

o training plans and products development.

o Operations product development.

Milestone dates may be adjusted via mission-specific negotiations and agreements between NASA and

Provider. For example, for the first flight of a vehicle/element, milestone due dates may need to occur earlier than noted below to allow ample time for developing new systems and processes. Subsequent flights of a previously flown Provider vehicle/element may not require certain milestones (e.g., FOR may only be needed if hardware, software, or significant operational changes have been made).

Table 1: Key Milestone Due Dates (Uncrewed Missions)

Overall Timeline

Approximate Due Dates

(Launch Minus)

Draft FCT Training Plan Published* Launch -27 months

Flight Data File (FDF) & Training Product Development

Begins Launch -27 months

Artemis Avionics and Software Process Begins Launch -24 months

Define Final Ground Segment Interface Architecture Launch -24 months

Define Final Training Systems Simulation Interface Launch -24 months

Training Systems Connectivity and Integration Tests

Begin Launch -24 months

Mission & Training Systems Technical Readiness

Review (TRR) Launch -20 months

The Safety Review Panel (SRP) Phase 2 Complete Launch -18 months

Mission & Training Systems Operational Readiness

Review (ORR) Launch -14 months

Start of mission-specific AOP Meetings(s) NLT Launch -12 months***

Ground Segment Interface Verification Test Launch -12 months

FCT Integrated Training Begins Launch -12 months

End to End Test Launch -6 months

Flight Operations Review (FOR) Meeting(s)**** NLT Launch -5 months

FOR Final Documents Published Launch -2 months**

Flight Rule and FDF Approval Launch -5 weeks**

Real-time Change Requests (FDF, Flight Rules, OIP) Real-time**

* The Artemis Training Panel (ATP) will integrate the Provider crew and FCT training plans into the overall Artemis mission training plan (e.g., combining with all other aspects of the mission that require training). Specific start dates and timeframes will be determined by the ATP based on considerations such as new vehicles and operations, proficiency and currency requirements, and skill/operation

Artemis Programs Page 10 of 68 criticality. In order to build the integrated training plan, the ATP requires a draft Provider training plan at the time indicated and the Provider must be prepared with training products to support training start at L-24 months.

** Relative to final Human Lander System (HLS) module/element launches, all other items relative to first HLS module/element launch.

*** For early missions of new vehicles, AOP Meetings expected to begin significantly earlier.

**** See Section 8.2 for more details on FOR milestone planning.

Table 2: Key Milestone Due Dates (Crewed Missions)

Overall Timeline Approximate Due Dates

Start of Artemis Training Panel* Launch -30 months**

Draft Crew & FCT Training Plan Published Launch -27 months

Flight Data File (FDF) & Training Product Development

Begins Launch -27 months**

Crew Assigned & Crew Training Begins Launch -24 months** ***

Artemis Avionics and Software Process Begins Launch -24 months

Define Final Ground Segment Interface Architecture Launch -24 months

Define Final Training Systems Simulation Interface Launch -24 months

Training Systems Connectivity and Integration Tests

Begin Launch -24 months

Mission & Training Systems Technical Readiness

Review (TRR) Launch -20 months

The Safety Review Panel (SRP) Phase 2 Complete Launch -18 months

Mission & Training Systems Operational Readiness

Review (ORR) Launch -14 months

Start of mission-specific AOP Meetings NLT Launch -12 months***

Ground Segment Interface Verification Test Launch -12 months

FCT Integrated Training Begins Launch -12 months

End to End Test Launch - 6 months

Flight Operations Review (FOR) Meeting(s)**** NLT Launch -5 months

FOR Final Documents Published Launch -2 months**

Flight Rule and FDF Approval Launch -5 weeks**

Real-time Change Requests (FDF, Flight Rules, OIP) Real-time**

* The Artemis Training Panel (ATP) will integrate the Provider crew and FCT training plans into the overall Artemis mission training plan (e.g., combining with all other aspects of the mission that require training). Specific start dates and timeframes will be determined by the ATP based on considerations such as new vehicles and operations, proficiency and currency requirements, and skill/operation criticality. In order to build the integrated training plan, the ATP requires a draft Provider training plan at the time indicated and the Provider must be prepared with training products to support training start at L-24 months.

** Relative to Orion launches, all other items relative to first HLS element launch.

*** For early missions of new vehicles, AOP Meetings expected to begin significantly earlier.

**** See Section 8.2 for more details on FOR milestone planning.

Artemis Programs Page 11 of 68

2.0 Applicable and Reference Documents

Table 3 lists higher-level NASA or other Agency documents that are applicable to Artemis Flight

Operations.

Table 3: Applicable Documents Document Number Title

CFR Title 14:

Aeronautics and Space, Part 460

Human Space Flight Requirements, FAA Requirements, Part 460 -

Human Spaceflight Requirements

AES-50018 AES Mission Integration Implementation Plan

HEOMD-003 Crewed Deep Space Systems Certification Requirements and Standards for NASA Missions

HEOMD-003 Annexes International Systems Interoperability Standards

NASA-STD-7009 NASA Standard for Models and Simulations

NPR 8705.2C Human-Rating Requirements for Space Systems

TBD Artemis Operations Nomenclature (OpNom) Plan

TBD Artemis Inventory Management System (IMS) Plan

The following documents contain “best practices” for human space flight operations, and reference documentation for the Artemis Programs. The Provider may refer to these documents when designing the operations architecture and creating operations products. Note that there will be multiple IRDs that are divers for consistency in operations, these have not been referenced in the table.

Table 4: Reference Documents Document Number Title

CA-WI-16 Flight Operations Directorate Spaceflight Personnel Certification Plan

20040041349 Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report

ESD 10018-ANX02 Mission Integration Implementation Plan, Annex 2

JSC 07268A Human Space Systems Operational Design Criteria Manual

JSC-29229 (ISS)

JSC-26843 (STS)

Flight Control Operations Handbooks

NASA-HDBK-8739.18 Procedural Handbook for NASA Program and Project Management of

Problems, Nonconformances, and Anomalies

NASA/SP-2010-576 NASA Risk-Informed Decision Making Handbook

NPR 1800.1D NASA Occupational Health Program Procedures

NPR 8621.1B NASA Procedural Requirements for Mishap and Close Call Reporting, Investigating, and Recordkeeping

NSTS 12820 Space Shuttle Operational Flight Rules, Volume A, All Flights

NSTS 16007 Shuttle Launch Commit Criteria and Background

S1025.100 Flight and Ground Crew Emergency

Egress/Escape Test

MPCV-72524 Cross-Program Operations Nomenclature (OpNom) Plan

Artemis Programs Page 12 of 68

3.0 NASA Role in International and Commercial Provider Operations

International and Commercial partnerships are a vital element of NASA’s Artemis programs and mission architecture. Integration of NASA and Provider mission operations planning and execution is a key component to ensure crew safety and mission success. NASA’s FOD and Human Health &

Performance (HH&P) Directorate, under the authority of NASA Artemis programs, provide end-to-end

Artemis mission operations integration with focus on “following the crew” starting with Orion pre-launch continuing through Orion post-landing and crew return. NASA maintains authority (including medical authority) for all Artemis operations that impact crew safety and/or Artemis mission success.

NASA has an insight role specific to endorsement statements and Certification of Flight Readiness

(CoFR) of the Provider’s mission operations. Providers may opt to utilize their own operations standards and processes (as allowed in contracts/agreements), and NASA has the responsibility to ensure via insight that these meet NASA expectations as defined in assessment descriptions in Sections 4-9.

NASA and FOD are also responsible for signing CoFR for all aspects of the Artemis crewed mission joint training and operations. Additionally, NASA and FOD have the authority to not sign CoFR if the

Providers do not meet these expectations.

4.0 Operations Planning

Operations planning is a set of processes that result in operational products that support the launch preparation and countdown, launch and mission execution (including anomaly resolution, emergency response and crew safing) and post-flight recovery or disposal of the spacecraft. Operations products consist of plans and processes, analyses, procedures, process schedules, facilities, displays and supporting information developed prior to the execution of operations. This section defines the operations-related processes and data exchanges required to support joint operations across all elements of the Artemis programs, as well as requirements and standards for non-joint operations. To ensure safe, efficient crew operations across Artemis elements, Providers shall be familiar with, and adhere to, the products and processes discussed herein1. To satisfy the requirements in joint operations, some of the events will occur pre- and post-flight.

The content listed below shall be included in the operational products developed by the Provider2.

Specific standards for this content are documented in subsequent sections of this document. Those standards should be met in whatever set of products the Provider chooses to use in certifying and operating the vehicle. This list of content is not meant to be a formal list of deliverables, but is meant to convey to the Provider the typical artifacts that should be reviewed to evaluate proposed Provider operations products.

Artemis Programs Page 13 of 68

Table 5: Operations Products Operations Product Content Description and Purpose

Mission Manifesting Content that provides the following information about upcoming missions: expected launch date, assigned flight crew, high-level mission objectives, flight cargo complement, assigned hardware elements (such as

Spacecraft, engines, Launch Vehicle, flight suits), mission unique requirements, Government Furnished

Equipment (GFE), NASA-provided supplies, logistics, sample return, etc.

Flight Design Content that provides the detailed launch, on-orbit, orbital transfer, lunar descent and landing, lunar ascent, and re-entry or disposal trajectory, including planned maneuvers to achieve that desired trajectory. A process should also exist to allow for analyzing and changing the trajectory in near real-time based on off-nominal situations.

Nomenclature Definition Content that defines operational nomenclature of major spacecraft components and user interface elements to ensure consistent communications, both verbal and written, regarding the operation of the spacecraft.

Operations products and crew/ground displays utilize this nomenclature for components. This nomenclature is used in ground test procedures as well.

Operations Procedures Content that contains the detailed steps required to execute nominal and off-nominal activities during the pre-launch, launch, the on-orbit mission, and disposal or landing and crew/cargo recovery for use by both ground and/or crew.

Vehicle/Crew Timelines Content that provides schedule information about major activities, leading up to launch, during on-orbit and lunar surface operations, and during disposal operations.

Facilities and Ground Monitoring/Control Systems

Facilities needed to conduct pre-launch, flight, and post-landing operations and products that allow operations personnel to monitor vehicle data (e.g., telemetry displays, plots, event logging tools), issue control commands to the vehicle and plan and execute operations.

Flight Rules Content that defines operational authority, hardware design limits, and human limitations to which operations must adhere during terminal pre-launch operations, flight operations, post-flight recovery operations, including operational controls to hazards and pre-defined decisions for off-nominal or contingency situations.

Critical Phase Commit Criteria Content that defines operational authority and system

Artemis Programs Page 14 of 68 performance criteria of crewed vehicle (including interfacing ground systems) necessary to commit to the next critical phase (launch, docking, landing, etc.).

This content includes operational controls to hazards and pre-defined decisions for off nominal and contingency situations.

4.1 General Operations Standards

All of the operations content developed as part of the planning process shall follow these standards3:

a. Operations products shall be made readily available to operations personnel and flight crew during development, ground processing, training, mission execution, and recovery operations

(from the perspective of spacecraft configuration for rescue).

b. Operations products shall be configuration managed following the Flight Operations Review (see

Section 8.2 for more details). After validation and approval, operations products shall be controlled through the Provider’s approved configuration management to ensure the accuracy and currency of the products for mission use and for certification maintenance. Production, design changes, accumulated training and flight experience, or process improvements to the integrated space vehicle or other Artemis elements, may require changes to previously validated operations products. These changes may be flight-specific configuration changes or incremental, permanent changes.

c. A process shall be established to ensure that hardware/software design changes are clearly communicated to the operations team. The process shall also ensure that timely updates are made to timelines, procedures, training, and other operations products to account for these changes.

d. All operations products that involve flight hardware, software or facilities shall use a “test like you fly” approach as appropriate, and should consider defined off-nominal scenarios.

e. Operations products shall be text searchable and reference material should be linkable, as appropriate.

4.1.1 General Operations Standards Assessment

NASA will review the Provider’s configuration management process for operational products and related documentation that outlines standards for the development of operations products and processes.

NASA will also observe the implementation and use of these standards during ground assembly, integration & testing, training exercises such as simulations, and real-time operations. The emphasis of this review will be to ensure that there are adequate processes in place to generate and maintain a complete set of high-quality operations products that will ultimately provide for consistent and safe spaceflight operations. The Provider shall provide access to NASA for purposes of conducting operations product and process reviews4. Where sampling is used, NASA will select the appropriate number and types of examples needed for verification purposes; sampling may be repeated to review products at different levels of maturity during development. For process reviews, the assessment requires evidence that the process is repeatable and able to support multiple missions, as applicable.

4.2 Standards for Mission Manifesting

Mission manifesting decisions require close coordination with multiple external entities, including

NASA, launch/landing sites, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and others. It also may require coordination with other Artemis vehicles for missions involving multiple launches. A process should be developed to ensure that all mission manifesting decisions are coordinated with these external entities

Artemis Programs Page 15 of 68 and clearly communicated to all affected organizations and personnel. The process should integrate with existing NASA manifesting activities utilizing a timeframe consistent with those activities. Furthermore, changes to the flight’s cargo complement may be requested by NASA at a late date in response to real-time events. The mission manifesting process should:

a. Include expected launch/landing dates [mission phase-specific], assigned flight crew, high-level mission objectives, and mission requirements.

b. Ensure cargo mass properties, volume, power, and science objectives have been accommodated and the integrated vehicle complements for each mission have been verified to support this cargo throughout all vehicle manifest phases: launch, transfer, and return. [mission phase-specific]

c. Ensure additional assigned hardware elements (such as spacecraft, engines, launch/ascent vehicle, flight suits, crew specific items) have been accounted for through a configuration management system that identifies any changes from the baseline manifest.

d. Identify flight unique ground support requirements for the mission or cargo, cargo arrangement, GFE, NASA-provided supplies, and logistics.

e. Identify a disposal plan for the hardware and any packaging it comes in.

f. Include flexibility to accommodate late changes due to unforeseen events such as weather, on-orbit failures that require changing the cargo sent to or returned from Gateway or lunar surface, range scheduling issues or other such circumstances.

g. Integrate with the overall Artemis Inventory Management System (IMS) to enable real-time location tracking of all manifested items.

h. Ensure location and cargo labeling standards are consistent across all items and vehicle components.

The Provider shall adhere to the TBD Artemis IMS plan5.

4.2.1 Mission Manifesting Process Assessment

NASA will review the mission manifesting processes and audit the mission manifesting products.

Additional details are provided in Section 8.9 of this document.

4.3 Mission Design

This section covers the mission design process requirements that must be in place to: support Artemis mission operations; ensure Provider plans, process and operational products are consistent with the design of the flight/vehicle elements; and incorporate operational controls, limitations, and constraints of the integrated vehicle as it is intended to be operated.

4.3.1 Mission Trajectory Analyses Process

Pre-mission trajectory analysis shall be performed to ensure that mission requirements can be safely met6. These requirements include, but are not limited to, performance, constraint, and dispersion characteristics that influence or limit trajectory design and crew vehicle certification requirements. This process shall include7:

a. Design and analysis of the nominal and off-nominal trajectories flown by the integrated space vehicle, vehicle elements, and jettisoned or expended components during the ascent, lunar transit, rendezvous, lunar orbit, descent and lunar landing, ascent, re-rendezvous, and disposal or

Earth transit and re-entry phases of flight under nominal, dispersed, and pre-determined failure conditions. [mission phase-specific]

b. Satisfaction of mission, hardware, and software constraints.

c. Provisions for incorporating changes to mission requirements into revised analyses.

Artemis Programs Page 16 of 68

d. Coordination as appropriate to meet all other regulatory requirements for launch and/or entry

[mission phase-specific].

e. Pre-launch Range clearance and orbital collision avoidance.

f. Assessments of availability of launch/landing periods and opportunities.

4.3.2 Mission Design Analyses

To ensure a mission is operated safely, mission design analyses shall8:

a. Assess separation from the launch vehicle and separation of jettisoned or expended components during all flight phases to ensure that recontact does not occur.

b. Analyze all operations within proximity of another spacecraft to ensure safety of relative motion, including off-nominal events, breakouts, etc.

c. Ensure that trajectory plans allow for converged orbit determination prior to targeting and executing subsequent maneuvers.

d. Assess nominal and backup deorbit and landing opportunities. [mission phase-specific]

e. Analyze the communication coverage and availability of ground and orbital assets.

f. Predict splashdown point or landing site, assess probable climatological conditions at the site, and determine the ability to dispatch rescue forces and rescue equipment for off-nominal landing locations. [mission phase-specific]

g. Determine public and mission essential personnel safety risks for launch, ascent, aborts, and re-entry, including disposal of non-recoverable elements and coordinate with appropriate responsible external entities (e.g., FAA, launch range, etc.).

h. Ensure the design provides continuous abort coverage throughout the mission.

i. Be performed with math models that include sufficient dispersions to assure that trajectory-driven mission objectives and safety constraints (e.g., rendezvous, re-entry, etc.) are not compromised.

j. Provide for the capability to assess trajectory changes and deviations that happen close to launch and in-flight and to develop alternate trajectory plans as required to ensure crew safety and/or mission success.

k. Ensure that vehicle design and structural limits do not result in operational constraints that severely limit key mission parameters (mission duration, launch/landing availability, etc.)

l. Include trajectory design analysis to assess trajectory plans to land at the selected lunar surface site and return from that site, including lunar descent, descent abort recovery, ascent, and ascent abort recovery.

m. Include the tools and processes needed to support real-time collision avoidance analysis and response around Earth and the Moon.

n. Analyze the external environment (thermal, static charge, radiation, etc.) in order to allow for safe landings and Extravehicular Activity (EVA) capability.

o. Ensure trajectories minimizes risk to lunar surface assets, and scientific points of interest.

p. Protect against lunar-space hazards such as radiation, lunar dust, Micrometeoroid/Orbital Debris

(MMOD), etc.

4.3.3 Consumables and Resources Analyses Process

Analyses should be generated for propulsive and non-propulsive consumables and onboard resources used by the integrated space vehicle and flight crew. The intent of these analyses is to:

a. Determine the minimum required on-orbit propellant, plus reserves, required to support all nominal and off-nominal trajectories flown by the integrated space vehicle during the ascent, lunar transit, rendezvous, lunar orbit, descent and lunar landing, ascent, re-rendezvous, and

Artemis Programs Page 17 of 68 disposal or Earth return and re-entry [mission phase-specific] phases of flight under nominal, dispersed, and pre-determined failure conditions, including dispersions deemed highly probable and/or critical to flight crew and integrated space vehicle safety or high-priority mission objectives.

b. Provide consumables loading profile and integrated space vehicle mass properties data to ensure the integrated space vehicle is operated within capability/certification limits for the duration of the mission.

c. Assess and manage propulsive consumables profile and integrated space vehicle mass properties with respect to nominal mission plan and abort execution assuming both the current state of the system as well as the next worst failure. Assess and manage on-orbit power and life support generation and resource demand for flight crew and vehicle systems based on mission profile, including intravehicle network resources such as data rate and storage availability, as well as external vehicle comm systems, as required.

d. Assess and manage crew provisions (waste management consumables, food, etc.) to maintain provisions to support nominal mission duration with planned operations plus reserves in case of extended mission.

e. For joint operations, track and update analyses based upon consumables and resources that are transferred to/from another docked spacecraft, if applicable.

4.3.4 Aborts Planning

Aborts are highly integrated events that may involve the launch/ascent vehicle, spacecraft, flight crew, operations personnel, ground facilities, and external entities. Aborts are a response to credible, life-threatening hazards which occur or could occur despite design mitigations and preventative measures and preclude continuance of the current mission plan. Abort planning shall9:

a. Account for abort execution in all mission phases, including post abort recovery operations for subsequent mission continuation or mission termination and safe crew return.

b. Address roles and responsibilities of the flight crew and operations personnel.

c. Provide for coordination of rescue and recovery assets, including joint development of contingency plans and operations protocols with external entities (e.g., NASA, FAA, State

Department, DOD, Local Emergency Responders, etc.).

d. Identify any flight or ground hardware or software failure modes that could inadvertently initiate an abort.

e. Identify any manual or automatic aborts and abort thresholds or limits that can be changed, initiated, or inhibited manually by the flight crew or remotely by operations personnel.

f. Identify any flight or ground hardware or software failure modes that could inhibit, interfere with, or unintentionally prevent an abort.

g. Identify the operations required to recover from an aborted rendezvous and subsequent actions needed to re-attempt the rendezvous or salvage mission objectives.

h. Define the failure modes, systems configurations and dispersion protection levels, or other relevant criteria against which abort performance is analyzed for purposes of certifying the abort system operation.

i. Identify the operations required to recover from an aborted lunar landing and subsequent plan to return crew safely.

j. Identify the operations required to recover from a lunar surface abort (such as EVA terminate/abort and surface stay aborts).

Artemis Programs Page 18 of 68

4.3.5 Flight Design Standards Assessment

NASA will review the flight design processes, software tools, analyses, the consumables budgeting process, and the abort planning. NASA will also review any software tools used in real-time or near real-time to assess or alter vehicle trajectory. NASA will also observe simulations to verify operations personnel and flight crew have adequate situational awareness and capability to safely and accurately fly nominal and off-nominal trajectories and make changes to the trajectory as needed to account for perturbations, dispersions, off-nominal situations, and other events.

4.4 Nomenclature Definition

In order to provide consistent terminology across the Artemis vehicles/elements for operational use, a standard operational nomenclature shall be developed and followed10.

4.4.1 Nomenclature Definition

The Provider vehicle/element should identify how spacecraft components will be labeled and referred to in operational documentation, including procedures. This operational nomenclature should be consistent in ground test procedures to minimize confusion across various phases of ground processing, launch, and mission phases. In some cases, this nomenclature may already be defined by existing components

(e.g., existing launch vehicle nomenclature). The intent is not to change this existing nomenclature. The

Provider should still list these in the nomenclature definition to ensure operations personnel use the same terminology and to ensure it does not conflict with other vehicle terminology and avoid future conflicts. The nomenclature list should be easily accessible to operations personnel who develop operational documentation. The list should also take into consideration the nomenclature used by other

Artemis elements and attempt to avoid conflicts with this existing nomenclature as much as possible.

The Artemis operations nomenclature standards and process can be found in MPCV-72524 Cross-

Program Operations Nomenclature (OpNom) Plan and GP 10116 Gateway Operations Nomenclature

(OpNom) Plan. NASA will provide access to the operations nomenclature database at https://fod2cf.ndc.nasa.gov/CO/CO7/OpNom/CCOpNom/Reports/search.cfm.

4.4.2 Nomenclature Definition Assessment

NASA will review the Provider’s process for development of an operational nomenclature standard and audit the documentation or database that stores the standard nomenclature. NASA will also observe the

Provider’s use of the approved operations nomenclature and adherence to their standards during training, simulations, and other activities.

4.5 Operations Procedures

Validated operations procedures are fundamental for successful operations. Defective procedures can lead to errors or omissions that can endanger the mission or the crew’s safety. The generation and maintenance of validated procedures is critical to ensuring ground and flight operations consistently occur with the highest safety and quality.

4.5.1 General Procedures

All procedures, whether developed for ground operations (including testing and training), in-flight operations, recovery or support of rescue shall follow these general standards11:

a. Procedures shall be validated using a method with fidelity appropriate to the procedure or change prior to use in operations. Validation of procedures may include human-in-the-loop testing, real or simulated flight or ground hardware or software, operational or programmatic

Artemis Programs Page 19 of 68 simulations, peer review, etc. Validation of procedures involving software should utilize real flight (or ground) software to the greatest extent practical. A record of the validation shall be generated and maintained.

b. Procedures shall address nominal operations, as well as off-nominal and emergency scenarios and operational responses to identified hazards, which have been identified by test, analysis, or system experience, or which are determined to be safety critical based on likelihood or resulting consequence.

c. Procedures shall include placards, cautions, warnings when a hazardous operation or procedure affects or could affect a safety-critical system or the safety of personnel, the public, or the environment.

d. Procedures shall explicitly state when Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is required to perform an operation, task, or procedure.

e. Procedures shall be written in a NASA-defined standard format (defined in the Flight Data File

Standards) for all Joint Operations mission phases, and can be a Provider-defined format for all other phases that must be accepted by the NASA provided electronic procedure viewing tool.

f. Procedures shall include a list of equipment, tools, and materials required to perform an operation, task, or procedure.

g. Procedures shall verify hardware is within the life cycle and/or shelf-life limits and will remain so throughout ground processing and mission execution (e.g., ordnance, batteries, paints, soft goods, sealants, desiccants, etc.).

h. Procedures shall verify constraints prior to performing a task.

i. Procedure configuration management process(es) shall support real-time procedure changes prior to and during a mission, for both ground and crew.

4.5.2 Ground Operations Procedures

Ground operations procedures are designed to protect personnel, flight hardware, and facilities during the assembly/integration/test, launch preparation, launch countdown, post-launch, and post-landing phases of a mission. All ground operations procedures should:

a. Verify critical skills/certifications and task team readiness of personnel required to perform tasks, which may include medical support for hazardous testing with NASA crew.

b. Maintain/verify the integrity of the flight hardware preserved within Artemis vehicle/element certification while interfacing with all Ground Support Equipment (GSE) and facility systems, and account for natural and induced environments encountered throughout the handling/transportation operations, assembly/integration/testing, pre-launch processing, launch operations phases, and post-landing (if flight hardware is planned to be reused).

c. Include instructions for the reconfiguration of flight hardware (e.g., rotating orientation).

d. Include instructions for installation and removal of non-flight hardware on or into the launch vehicle or spacecraft (e.g., platforms, protective covers, remove before flight tagged items, non-flight switch covers, etc.).

e. Verify ground hardware readiness prior to continuing into subsequent phases of processing.

f. Support processes for metrology and other critical support activities and ground related records.

g. Include instructions for power on/off, test, checkout, and monitoring.

h. Include instructions for handling, storing, sampling/testing, and servicing of commodities of the Provider vehicle/element (e.g., fuel, oxidizer, helium, nitrogen, etc.).

i. Configuration accounting and verification of requirements and procedures

j. Photograph closed-out areas and final configuration.

Artemis Programs Page 20 of 68

k. Include emergency instructions for spacecraft safing for any hazardous operation or emergency power down procedures for all applicable phases of flight.

l. Include vendor specific support and maintenance plans.

m. Include sufficient reference to engineering drawings and photographs where drawings/photographs are needed for clarification or orientation.

n. Identify and account for ground and flight crew access and handling (e.g., protective covers, guards, etc.)

o. Include adverse weather plans (e.g., lightning retest, hail, high winds).

p. Define rules governing handoff of authority or control from one Artemis vehicle/element to another that:

1) Clearly identify roles and responsibilities of each party involved in the handoff.

2) For the receiving party, clearly…