Results for “standard operating procedure” — Page 11

NASA NTRS2006

Functional Requirements Document for HALE UAS Operations in the NAS: Step 1. Version 3

The purpose of this Functional Requirements Document (FRD) is to compile the functional requirements needed to achieve the Access 5 Vision of "operating High Altitude, Long Endurance (HALE) Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) routinely, safely, and reliably in the national airspace system (NAS)" for Step 1. These functional requirements could support the development of a minimum set of policies, procedures and standards by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and various standards organizations. It is envisioned that this comprehensive body of work will enable the FAA to establish and approve regulations to govern safe operation of UAS in the NAS on a routine or daily "file and fly" basis. The approach used to derive the functional requirements found within this FRD was to decompose the operational requirements and objectives identified within the Access 5 Concept of Operations (CONOPS) into the functions needed to routinely and safely operate a HALE UAS in the NAS. As a result, four major functional areas evolved to enable routine and safe UAS operations for an on-demand basis in the NAS. These four major functions are: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, and Avoid Hazards. All of the functional requirements within this document can be directly traceable to one of these four major functions. Some functions, however, are traceable to several, or even all, of these four major functions. These cross-cutting functional requirements support the "Command / Control: function as well as the "Manage Contingencies" function. The requirements associated to these high-level functions and all of their supporting low-level functions are addressed in subsequent sections of this document.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2010

Cruise-Efficient Short Takeoff and Landing (CESTOL): Potential Impact on Air Traffic Operations

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is investigating technological and operational concepts for introducing Cruise-Efficient Short Takeoff and Landing (CESTOL) aircraft into a future US National Airspace System (NAS) civil aviation environment. CESTOL is an aircraft design concept for future use to increase capacity and reduce emissions. CESTOL provides very flexible takeoff, climb, descent and landing performance capabilities and a high-speed cruise capability. In support of NASA, this study is a preliminary examination of the potential operational impact of CESTOL on airport and airspace capacity and delay. The study examines operational impacts at a subject site, Newark Liberty Intemational Airport (KEWR), New Jersey. The study extends these KEWR results to estimate potential impacts on NAS-wide network traffic operations due to the introduction of CESTOL at selected major airports. These are the 34 domestic airports identified in the Federal Aviation Administration's Operational Evolution Plan (OEP). The analysis process uses two fast-time simulation tools to separately model local and NAS-wide air traffic operations using predicted flight schedules for a 24-hour study period in 2016. These tools are the Sen sis AvTerminal model and NASA's Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES). We use both to simulate conventional-aircraft-only and CESTOL-mixed-with-conventional-aircraft operations. Both tools apply 4-dimension trajectory modeling to simulate individual flight movement. The study applies AvTerminal to model traffic operations and procedures for en route and terminal arrival and departures to and from KEWR. These AvTerminal applications model existing arrival and departure routes and profiles and runway use configurations, with the assumption jet-powered, large-sized civil CESTOL aircraft use a short runway and standard turboprop arrival and departure procedures. With these rules, the conventional jet and CESTOL aircraft are procedurally separated from each other geographically and in altitude during tenninal airspace approach and departure operations, and each use a different arrival runway. AvTeminal implements its unique Focal-point Scheduling Process to sequence, space and delay aircraft to resolve spacing and overtake conflicts among flights in the airspace and airport system serving KEWR. This Process effectively models integrated arrival and departure operations. AvTerminal assesses acceptance rates and delay magnitude and causality at selected locations, including en route outer boundary fixes, tenninal airspace arrival and departure boundary fixes, terminal airspace arrival merge and departure diverge fixes, and runway landing and takeoff runways. The analysis compares the resulting capacity impacts, flight delays and delay sources between CESTOL and conventional KEWR operations. AvTerminal quantitative results showed that CESTOL has significant capability to increase airport arrival acceptance rates (35-40% at KEWR) by taking advantage of otherwise underused airspace and runways where available. The study extrapolates the AvTerminal-derived KEWR peak arrival and departure acceptance rates to estimate capacity parameter values for each of the OEP airports in the ACES modeling of traffic through the entire NAS network. The extrapolations of acceptance rates allow full, partial or no achievement of CESTOL capacity gains at an OEP airport as determined by assessments of the degree to which local procedures allow leveraging of CESTOL capabilities. These assessments consider each OEP airport's runway geometries, runway system configurations, airport and airspace operations, and potential CESTOL traffic loadings. The ACES modeling, simulates airport and airspace spacing constraints imposed by airport runway system, terminal and en route air traffic control and traffic flow management operations using airport acceptance rates representing conventional-aircraft-only and CESTOL-mixed operations. CEOL aircraft are assumed to have Mach 0.8, and alternatively Mach 0.7, cruise speeds to examine compatibility with conventional aircraft operations in common airspace. The ACES results provides estimates of CESTOL delay impact NAS-wide and at OEP airports due to changes in OEP airport acceptance rates and changes in en route airspace potential conflict rates. Preliminary results show meaningful nationwide delay reductions (20%) due to CESTOL operations at 34 major domestic airports.

Couluris, G. J.↗

NASA NTRS1973

Medical operations: Crew surgeon's report

To assure the safety and well being of the Skylab environment simulation crewmembers it was necessary to develop a medical safety plan with emergency procedures. All medical and nonmedical test and operations personnel, except those specifically exempted, were required to meet the medical standards and proficiency levels as established. Implemented programs included health care of the test crew and their families, occupational medical services for chamber operating personnel, clinical laboratory support and hypobaric and other emergency support.

Ross, C. E.↗

NASA NTRS1979

Recent developments in the economic modeling of photovoltaic module manufacturing

Recent developments in the solar array manufacturing industry costing standards (SAMICS) are described. Consideration is given to the added capability to handle arbitrary operating schedules and the revised procedure for calculation of one-time costs. The results of an extensive validation study are summarized.

Chamberlain, R. G.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Safety and cryogenic wind tunnels

The Langley 0.3-Meter Transonic Cryogenic Tunnel (0.3-m TCT) was placed in operation at NASA's Langley Research Center in 1973 as the world's first cryogenic pressure tunnel. The 0.3-m TCT can operate from ambient to cryogenic temperatures over an absolute pressure range from about 1 to 6 atmospheres. Three major test section concepts were developed and refined in this unique facility. The 0.3-m TCT is a leader in the development of various cryogenic pressure wind tunnel experimental techniques, instrumentation, control, model technology and safety standards. The safety experience gained is examined. During this period of advanced research, new operating techniques, training policies, and procedures had to be established. The paper deals with the Do's and Don'ts of cryogenic wind tunnel testing. Hazards and safety requirements which are unique to cryogenic testing are discussed. Highlights of experience and lessons learned with the 0.3-m TCT are reviewed.

Ray, Edward J.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Tactical Separation and Safety Alerting System for Terminal Airspace

Provision of tactical alerts to aid air traffic controllers in providing separation assurance in terminal airspace is hindered by the complexity of the airspace, its operations, and flight procedures. A prototype automation system is studied that provides controllers with both separation and safety alerts based on or derived from the separation standard for terminal airspace. The system models flight trajectories heuristically, with use of merged intent information from readily available sources: area navigation departure procedures, flight-plan routes, and arrival nominal interior routes used in terminal automation systems. Flight vertical intent is modeled according to standard procedural restrictions except when superseded by controller-issued altitude clearances. Importantly, flight trajectories are modeled for all aircraft, including those conducting visual approaches. New safety-alert thresholds for aircraft conducting visual approaches are studied. Performance of the system is evaluated through fast-time playback of recorded air traffic data from high-fidelity Human-In-The-Loop simulations and real-world operations in two Terminal Radar Approach Control facilities. The prototype system is found to produce a false-alert rate of 8% for separation alerts. The number and validity of safety alerts are studied by comparing with the current Conflict Alert system, showing that the false alerts of Conflict Alert are at 85% and they are avoided in the prototype system.

Air Traffic Management↗

NASA NTRS1995

Accurate orbit determination strategies for the tracking and data relay satellites

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has developed the Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS) System (TDRSS) for tracking and communications support of low Earth-orbiting satellites. TDRSS has the operational capability of providing 85% coverage for TDRSS-user spacecraft. TDRSS currently consists of five geosynchronous spacecraft and the White Sands Complex (WSC) at White Sands, New Mexico. The Bilateration Ranging Transponder System (BRTS) provides range and Doppler measurements for each TDRS. The ground-based BRTS transponders are tracked as if they were TDRSS-user spacecraft. Since the positions of the BRTS transponders are known, their radiometric tracking measurements can be used to provide a well-determined ephemeris for the TDRS spacecraft. For high-accuracy orbit determination of a TDRSS user, such as the Ocean Topography Experiment (TOPEX)/Poseidon spacecraft, high-accuracy TDRS orbits are required. This paper reports on successive refinements in improved techniques and procedures leading to more accurate TDRS orbit determination strategies using the Goddard Trajectory Determination System (GTDS). These strategies range from the standard operational solution using only the BRTS tracking measurements to a sophisticated iterative process involving several successive simultaneous solutions for multiple TDRSs and a TDRSS-user spacecraft. Results are presented for GTDS-generated TDRS ephemerides produced in simultaneous solutions with the TOPEX/Poseidon spacecraft. Strategies with different user spacecraft, as well as schemes for recovering accurate TDRS orbits following a TDRS maneuver, are also presented. In addition, a comprehensive assessment and evaluation of alternative strategies for TDRS orbit determination, excluding BRTS tracking measurements, are presented.

Oza, D. H.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Integrated Test and Evaluation Flight Test 3 Flight Test Plan

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.

Unmanned↗

NASA NTRS2015

UAS Integration in the NAS Project: Integrated Test and Evaluation (IT&E) Flight Test 3

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.

interoperability↗

NASA NTRS2016

UAS-NAS Flight Test Series 3: Test Environment Report

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration in the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability (SSI), Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communications (Comm), and Certification to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Detect and Avoid (DAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project is conducting a series of human-in-the-loop (HITL) and flight test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity, and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS. The integrated events started with two initial flight test used to develop and test early integrations and components of the test environment. Test subjects and a relevant test environment were brought in for the integrated HITL (or IHITL) conducted in 2014. The IHITL collected data to evaluate the effectiveness of DAA Well Clear (DWC) algorithms and the acceptability of UAS concepts integrated into the NAS. The first integrated flight test (and the subject of this report) followed the IHITL by replacing the simulation components with live aircraft. The project finishes the integrated events with a final flight test to be conducted in 2016 that provides the researchers with an opportunity to collect DWC and Collision Avoidance (CA) interoperability data during flight encounters.

flight test↗

NASA NTRS1986

Some computational techniques for estimating human operator describing functions

Computational procedures for improving the reliability of human operator describing functions are described. Special attention is given to the estimation of standard errors associated with mean operator gain and phase shift as computed from an ensemble of experimental trials. This analysis pertains to experiments using sum-of-sines forcing functions. Both open-loop and closed-loop measurement environments are considered.

Levison, W. H.↗

NASA NTRS2022

Natural Language Understanding and Extraction of Flight Constraints Recorded in Letters of Agreement

This paper presents an automated information extraction and inference technique using natural language processing for extracting flight operational procedures and constraints embedded in heritage air traffic management documents. The extracted flight constraints can be digitized and fit into existing airspace information exchange models such as the Aeronautical Information Exchange Model (AIXM). This approach offers a digitized solution to disseminate airspace operating conditions to diverse air users and stakeholders in the National Airspace System (NAS). Furthermore, the digitized flight procedures can provide operational flexibility for emerging advanced air mobility providers and reduce traffic controller workload while maintaining current safety standards. To demonstrate this process, 1,972 Letters of Agreement (LOAs) have been selected for processing, named entity extraction, constraint identification and extraction. This dataset is derived from a subset of documents related to Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) operations. We experimented with various traditional information extraction techniques, state-of-the-art machine learning and deep learning models to perform named entity recognition and pattern recognition on our dataset. We present the results from our experiments and demonstrate 99.0% F-1 score for named entity recognition, and a 96.6% accuracy for our entire workflow up to named entity recognition. We also discuss constraint definitions using generic patterned templates and extensions to this work in applying entity linking to digitally extracting relevant constraints.

Natural Language Processing↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Natural Language Understanding and Extraction of Flight Constraints Recorded in Letters of Agreement

This paper presents an automated information extraction and inference technique using natural language processing for extracting flight operational procedures and constraints embedded in heritage air traffic management documents. The extracted flight constraints can be digitized and fit into existing airspace information exchange models such as the Aeronautical Information Exchange Model (AIXM). This approach offers a digitized solution to disseminate airspace operating conditions to diverse air users and stakeholders in the National Airspace System (NAS). Furthermore, the digitized flight procedures can provide operational flexibility for emerging advanced air mobility providers and reduce traffic controller workload while maintaining current safety standards. To demonstrate this process, 1,972 Letters of Agreement (LOAs) have been selected for processing, named entity extraction, constraint identification and extraction. This dataset is derived from a subset of documents related to Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) operations. We experimented with various traditional information extraction techniques, state-of-the-art machine learning and deep learning models to perform named entity recognition and pattern recognition on our dataset. We present the results from our experiments and demonstrate 99.0% F-1 score for named entity recognition, and a 96.6% accuracy for our entire workflow up to named entity recognition. We also discuss constraint definitions using generic patterned templates and extensions to this work in applying entity linking to digitally extracting relevant constraints.

Natural Language Processing↗

NASA NTRS2005

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space flight Center (MSFC) for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing testing standardization. To be discussed are: 1. Neutral pressures, neutral gases, and vacuum chamber sizes. 2. Electron and ion densities, plasma uniformity, sample sizes, and Debye lengths. 3. Biasing samples versus self-generated voltages. Floating samples versus grounded. 4. Power supplies and current limits. Isolation of samples from power supplies during arcs. Arc circuits. Capacitance during biased arc-threshold tests. Capacitance during sustained arcing and damage tests. Arc detection. Preventing sustained discharges during testing. 5. Real array or structure samples versus idealized samples. 6. Validity of LEO tests for GEO samples. 7. Extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests. 8 . Snapover and current collection at positive sample bias. Glows at positive bias. Kapton pyrolization. 9. Trigger arc thresholds. Sustained arc thresholds. Paschen discharge during sustained arcing. 10. Testing for Paschen discharge thresholds. Testing for dielectric breakdown thresholds. Testing for tether arcing. 11. Testing in very dense plasmas (ie thruster plumes). 12. Arc mitigation strategies. Charging mitigation strategies. Models. 13. Analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.a↗

NASA NTRS2005

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing-testing standardization. To be discussed are: 1.Neutral pressures, neutral gases, and vacuum chamber sizes. 2. Electron and ion densities, plasma uniformity, sample sizes, and Debuy lengths. 3. Biasing samples versus self-generated voltages. Floating samples versus grounded. 4. Power supplies and current limits. Isolation of samples from power supplies during arcs. 5. Arc circuits. Capacitance during biased arc-threshold tests. Capacitance during sustained arcing and damage tests. Arc detection. Prevention sustained discharges during testing. 6. Real array or structure samples versus idealized samples. 7. Validity of LEO tests for GEO samples. 8. Extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests. 9. Snapover and current collection at positive sample bias. Glows at positive bias. Kapon (R) pyrolisis. 10. Trigger arc thresholds. Sustained arc thresholds. Paschen discharge during sustained arcing. 11. Testing for Paschen discharge threshold. Testing for dielectric breakdown thresholds. Testing for tether arcing. 12. Testing in very dense plasmas (ie thruster plumes). 13. Arc mitigation strategies. Charging mitigation strategies. Models. 14. Analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗

NASA NTRS2007

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing-testing standardization. Discussed herein are neutral gas conditions, plasma densities and uniformity, vacuum chamber sizes, sample sizes and Debye lengths, biasing samples versus self-generated voltages, floating samples versus grounded samples, test electrical conditions, arc detection, preventing sustained discharges during testing, real samples versus idealized samples, validity of LEO tests for GEO samples, extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests, snapover, current collection, and glows at positive sample bias, Kapton pyrolysis, thresholds for trigger arcs, sustained arcs, dielectric breakdown and Paschen discharge, tether arcing and testing in very dense plasmas (i.e. thruster plumes), arc mitigation strategies, charging mitigation strategies, models, and analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Oak Ridge National Laboratory EPA Approval Letters and Historical Documentation for a Modification in Applying 40 CFR Part 61 Appendix D

Appendix D of Title 40 Part 61, “Methods for Estimating Radionuclide Emissions,” of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) provides a procedure that US Department of Energy (DOE) facility owners and operators can use to estimate radionuclide emissions to the atmosphere for dose calculations instead of measuring emissions for minor sources under 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities.” The procedure assumes that any radioactive material heated above 100°C is completely vaporized and emitted to the atmosphere. In 1991, the DOE Oak Ridge Reservation (DOE-ORR) requested approval to use different release fractions (RFs) for uranium because of its high melting and boiling points (1,132°C and 3,818°C, respectively). In response to the request, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IV approved the use of modified RFs for elemental uranium provided no reaction had taken place to alter its chemical form. In 2015, DOE-ORR requested approval to use different RFs for radioactive tungsten, also because of its high melting and boiling points (3,410°C and 5,660°C, respectively). EPA Region IV approved the use of modified RFs for heated radioactive tungsten metal. In accordance with the two precedents set for heating uranium and radioactive tungsten metals, in 2016, DOE-ORR requested approval to use modified RFs in similar fashion for other radioactive solid metals and compounds with melting and boiling points above 500°C that might be heated above 100°C in future research projects and experiments, and again, the EPA Region IV granted approval to use modified RFs for the list of compounds. This document contains the EPA approval letters and historical documentation used in the process to obtain approval for the use of alternative Appendix D emission factors. The approval to DOE-ORR allows modifying the existing regulatory RFs to 1 when radioactive solid metals and compounds are heated to temperatures greater than or equal to the boiling point of the solid, to 10 -3 when radioactive solid metals and compounds are heated to temperatures greater than or equal to 90% of the melting point and less than the boiling point of the solid, and to 10 -6 when radioactive solid materials are heated to temperatures above ambient air temperature but below 90% of the melting point of the solid.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1983

Optimizing a remote sensing instrument to measure atmospheric surface pressure

Atmospheric surface pressure can be remotely sensed from a satellite by an active instrument which measures return echoes from the ocean at frequencies near the 60 GHz oxygen absorption band. The instrument is optimized by selecting its frequencies of operation, transmitter powers and antenna size through a new procedure baesd on numerical simulation which maximizes the retrieval accuracy. The predicted standard deviation error in the retrieved surface pressure is 1 mb. In addition the measurements can be used to retrieve water vapor, cloud liquid water and sea state, which is related to wind speed.

Peckham, G. E.↗