SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “reporting”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Fermilab Report - Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Monthly Report, August 1983
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Fermilab Report - Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Monthly Report, June 1979
Fermilab is engaged in several new ventures building for the future of the Laboratory and for excursions into new energy ranges. At the same time, it should be remembered that Fermilab also carries out a vigorous program of particle physics at 400 GeV, or thereabouts, with experimenters from a host of different institutions and a number of different countries. This program, which will be the backbone of Fermilab until the era of TeV physics begins, depends completely on reliable operation of the Fermilab accelerator at the intensities and in the modes needed for experiments. There has not been a review of accelerator operation in these pages since August, 1976, and it seems appropriate to discuss the progress of the accelerator.
Final Scientific/Technical Report VTO STTR Phase I Project - NoMIS Power Report #: DOE-NOMIS-SC0024990
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Nevada National Security Site E-Tunnel Wastewater Discharge Permit NEV 96021 Quarterly Monitoring Report and Annual Summary Report Fourth Quarter and Calendar Year 2025
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC IDIQ Program: FY 2024
Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs)are a contractual mechanism that allow a federal agency to procure energy savings and facility improvements without upfront capital costs to reduce costs and resiliency. ESPCs are covered under FAR Part 23.2, and 42 USC § 8287. Section 8287(a)(2)(A) of Title 42 of the U.S. Code requires that each energy savings performance contract (ESPC) undergo an annual energy audit, resulting in a separate audit report for every project. The objective of the present report is to compile and analyze all annual ESPC audit reports issued between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024, for projects awarded under Generations 1, 2, and 3 of DOE’s ESPC IDIQ contracts. During this period, 205 measurement and verification (M&V) reports were produced for 200 projects; the total number of reports exceeds the number of projects because some projects generated more than one report(for example, a few projects measure savings twice per year and produce two audit reports annually, each covering a different six-month period). By aggregating the results from these individual audits, the report determines the portfolio-wide realization rate of energy and cost savings for all active ESPC projects awarded under DOE’s IDIQ program. For all 205audit reports, sufficient information was available to compare project-level estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. Reported cost savings accounted for ESCO verified savings per each project’s M&V plan. The total reported cost savings for the period addressed were $\$$647.8million,compared with the total guaranteed cost savings of $\$$601.6million. On average across the reported projects: •ESPC contractors guaranteed 92.8% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 100.0% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 107.7% of the guaranteed cost savings. The M&V performed for the period indicated adjustments for government operations and maintenance impacts to savings amount to$\$$43.9millionandcould be restored with the original operational parameters for impacted projects. Accounting for this potential cost savings impact, these projects still realized 100.4% of the guaranteed cost savings. The information on estimated and reported energy savings was collected and compared for all 205of the reports examined. Based on site energy, estimated savings totaled 14.88million MMBtu, and reported savings were 15.33million MMBtu; 3.1% greater than the estimated energy savings. All of the reports examined contained sufficient information to calculate source energy savings. Based on site-adjusted source energy, total estimated energy savings were 20.90 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 21.22million MMBtu, 101.5% of the estimated energy savings. For water savings, the estimated savings were 11,539,055 kGal and the reported savings were 13,315,930 kGal. This means 1,776,875 kGal more water was saved than estimated, which is about 15% higher than the estimate. These results indicate that, overall, the reported energy savings slightly exceeded the estimated values, while estimated water savings significantly exceeded estimated values, suggesting that the projects achieved greater cost savings than originally projected. The total annual expense for the ESCOs to perform annual M&V audits and reporting was $\$$10.02million. Through this effort, $\$$647.8 million in annual cost savings was verified. The M&V results indicated that $\$$43.9 million of these verified savings reflected adjustments due to government operations A-6and maintenance impacts, which could be restored under the original operational parameters for the affected projects. These findings show the value of M&V that only costs 1.7%of the guaranteed cost savings to ensure guarantees are met.
Characterization and Analysis of the Energy-Reporting Accuracy of Connected Devices
Emerging energy-efficient building systems increasingly exhibit greater functionality, often requiring multiple operating modes (e.g. white-tunability for lighting products and data traffic for devices with networked, integrated sensors). This increased functionality makes energy consumption estimates more complex. Given that these functions consume energy, the energy performance of such building systems is dependent on what operating modes they use and how much time they spend in each mode. Devices and systems that can report their own energy consumption mitigate this energy-performance uncertainty. This study explores the energy-reporting accuracy of market-available connected electrical outlets. The study considers two residential-market products (five units each, one outlet per unit) and three commercial-market products (two units each, 18 to 24 outlets per unit) with the ability to report power drawn and/or energy consumed by devices connected to their receptacles. The products were purchased through typical market channels. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducted testing in December 2018 at its Connected Lighting Test Bed (CLTB), using a custom-developed test setup and method adapted from industry standards. The setup collected energy-consumption data reported by the outlet devices under test (DUTs) at one-minute intervals and compared that data with measurements taken by a reference meter over a range of test conditions. The residential products reported power draw but not interval or cumulative energy consumption. The commercial products reported both power draw and cumulative energy consumption. Relative reporting error (RRE) was calculated for all measurements, and analysis of the results revealed variations across devices and test conditions. The total number of measurements (50 for each residential product, 60 for each commercial product) offers an appreciable comparison of performance at the make/model level. The average RRE of the residential products derived from reported power draw was -0.02% and -1.20%. The average RRE for two of the three the commercial products derived from reported power draw was worse than those of the residential products (-2.40%, -2.72%, -0.36%). The internal integration of power over time, used to calculate cumulative energy consumption, typically occurs at current and voltage sampling rates much higher than once per minute. This suggests that the average commercial-product RRE derived from reported energy consumption should be very consistent and better than performance based on reported power draw. However, the RRE derived from reported energy consumption varied significantly across the three makes of commercial-market products and was uniformly less accurate than performance based on reported power draw. Subsequent analysis identified a number of root causes for this decrease in performance, most of which were related to reporting resolution. The goals of this study are to generate awareness of building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption, further interest in the value of energy data for a variety of uses, draw attention to how the accuracy of reported metrics can be characterized, and quantify the performance variation found in marketavailable products. The results of this study and subsequent related work may be relevant to stakeholders in industry-specification and standards-development organizations. The methods this study employs could inform test and measurement procedures and performance classifications for connected outlets, lighting products, and other building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption. The study concludes with stakeholder recommendations, including the following: • Energy-reporting device and system manufacturers developing products that report energy consumption should characterize the accuracy of reported metrics using a reference meter calibrated by an independent laboratory that was accredited by an ILAC MRA signatory (and whose scope of accreditation explicitly covers energy measurement), and should include this information on product data sheets. • Standards and specification development organizations should develop application-specific performance classifications that end users can understand and relate to their energy-data use needs (e.g., 2% accuracy class for utility streetlight energy billing needs, or 10% accuracy class for ESCO performance verification needs). • Current or potential owners, operators, and specifiers of energy-reporting building systems should rigorously analyze the dependency of current and planned energy-data use cases on accuracy, noting in particular the dependence (or lack thereof) on relative vs. absolute accuracy, and on trueness vs. precision (i.e., repeatability), and should communicate use-case needs to industry standards and specification organizations.
Characterization and Analysis of the Energy-Reporting Accuracy of Connected Devices
Emerging energy-efficient building systems increasingly exhibit greater functionality, often requiring multiple operating modes (e.g. white-tunability for lighting products and data traffic for devices with networked, integrated sensors). This increased functionality makes energy consumption estimates more complex. Given that these functions consume energy, the energy performance of such building systems is dependent on what operating modes they use and how much time they spend in each mode. Devices and systems that can report their own energy consumption mitigate this energy-performance uncertainty. This study explores the energy-reporting accuracy of market-available connected electrical outlets. The study considers two residential-market products (five units each, one outlet per unit) and three commercial-market products (two units each, 18 to 24 outlets per unit) with the ability to report power drawn and/or energy consumed by devices connected to their receptacles. The products were purchased through typical market channels. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducted testing in December 2018 at its Connected Lighting Test Bed (CLTB), using a custom-developed test setup and method adapted from industry standards. The setup collected energy-consumption data reported by the outlet devices under test (DUTs) at one-minute intervals and compared that data with measurements taken by a reference meter over a range of test conditions. The residential products reported power draw but not interval or cumulative energy consumption. The commercial products reported both power draw and cumulative energy consumption. Relative reporting error (RRE) was calculated for all measurements, and analysis of the results revealed variations across devices and test conditions. The total number of measurements (50 for each residential product, 60 for each commercial product) offers an appreciable comparison of performance at the make/model level. The average RRE of the residential products derived from reported power draw was -0.02% and -1.20%. The average RRE for two of the three the commercial products derived from reported power draw was worse than those of the residential products (-2.40%, -2.72%, -0.36%). The internal integration of power over time, used to calculate cumulative energy consumption, typically occurs at current and voltage sampling rates much higher than once per minute. This suggests that the average commercial-product RRE derived from reported energy consumption should be very consistent and better than performance based on reported power draw. However, the RRE derived from reported energy consumption varied significantly across the three makes of commercial-market products and was uniformly less accurate than performance based on reported power draw. Subsequent analysis identified a number of root causes for this decrease in performance, most of which were related to reporting resolution. The goals of this study are to generate awareness of building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption, further interest in the value of energy data for a variety of uses, draw attention to how the accuracy of reported metrics can be characterized, and quantify the performance variation found in marketavailable products. The results of this study and subsequent related work may be relevant to stakeholders in industry-specification and standards-development organizations. The methods this study employs could inform test and measurement procedures and performance classifications for connected outlets, lighting products, and other building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption. The study concludes with stakeholder recommendations, including the following: • Energy-reporting device and system manufacturers developing products that report energy consumption should characterize the accuracy of reported metrics using a reference meter calibrated by an independent laboratory that was accredited by an ILAC MRA signatory (and whose scope of accreditation explicitly covers energy measurement), and should include this information on product data sheets. • Standards and specification development organizations should develop application-specific performance classifications that end users can understand and relate to their energy-data use needs (e.g., 2% accuracy class for utility streetlight energy billing needs, or 10% accuracy class for ESCO performance verification needs). • Current or potential owners, operators, and specifiers of energy-reporting building systems should rigorously analyze the dependency of current and planned energy-data use cases on accuracy, noting in particular the dependence (or lack thereof) on relative vs. absolute accuracy, and on trueness vs. precision (i.e., repeatability), and should communicate use-case needs to industry standards and specification organizations.
Review of NASA's Evidence Reports on Human Health Risks
NASA has requested a study from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to provide an independent review of more than 30 evidence reports on human health risks for long duration and exploration spaceflight. The evidence reports, which are publicly available, are categorized into five broad categories: (1) behavioral health and performance; (2) human health countermeasures (with a focus on bone metabolism and orthopedics, nutrition, immunology, and cardiac and pulmonary physiology); (3) radiation; (4) human factors issues; and (5) exploration medical capabilities. The reports are revised on an ongoing basis to incorporate new scientific information. In conducting this study, an IOM ad hoc committee will build on the 2008 IOM report Review of NASA's Human Research Program Evidence Books. That report provided an assessment of the process used for developing the evidence reports and provided an initial review of the evidence reports that had been completed at that time. Each year, NASA staff will identify a set of evidence reports for committee review. Over the course of the study all evidence reports will be reviewed. The committee will hold an annual scientific workshop to receive input on the evidence reports it is reviewing that year and an update on the recent literature. The committee will issue an annual letter report that addresses the following questions relevant to each evidence report: 1. Does the evidence report provide sufficient evidence, as well as sufficient risk context, that the risk is of concern for long-term space missions? 2. Does the evidence report make the case for the research gaps presented? 3. Are there any additional gaps in knowledge or areas of fundamental research that should be considered to enhance the basic understanding of this specific risk? 4. Does the evidence report address relevant interactions among risks? 5. Is input from additional disciplines needed? 6. Is the breadth of the cited literature sufficient? 7. What is the overall readability and quality? 8. Is the expertise of the authors sufficient to fully cover the scope of the given risk? 9. Has the evidence report addressed previous recommendations made by the IOM in the 2008 letter report?
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021
The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021 are to record Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report is distributed electronically and is available at https://saer.llnl.gov/, the website for the LLNL annual environmental report. Previous LLNL annual environmental reports beginning with 1994 are also on the website. Some references in the electronic report text are underlined, which indicates that they are clickable links. Clicking on one of these links will open the related document, data workbook, or website. Sampling location maps throughout this report were created using ArcGIS® software by Esri. The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2021: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A. The report uses Système International units, consistent with the federal Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and Executive Order 12770, “Metric Usage in Federal Government Programs” (1991). For ease of comparison to environmental reports issued prior to 1991, dose values and many radiological measurements are given in both metric and U.S. customary units. A conversion table is provided in the glossary. The report is the responsibility of LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Monitoring data were obtained through the combined efforts of the Environmental Functional Area; Environmental Restoration Department; Physical and Life Sciences Environmental Monitoring Radiological Laboratory; and the Radiation Protection Functional Area.
Identifying Emerging Safety Threats Through Topic Modeling in the Aviation Safety Reporting System: A Covid-19 Study
The NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) is a voluntary, confidential aviation safety reporting system. The ASRS receives reports from pilots, air traffic controllers, flight attendants, and others involved in aviation operations. The reports are de-identified and coded by ASRS expert safety analysts, and a short descriptive synopsis is written to describe the safety issue. The de-identified reports are then disseminated to the aviation community in many ways, including via an online database, Safety Alert Bulletins, For Your Information Notices, and the CALLBACK newsletter. In this work, we consider whether we can improve the grouping, linking, and understanding of safety concerns through topic modeling. Specifically, we use topic modeling as a building block to identify emerging safety threats over time. This unsupervised approach, we argue, offers the flexibility to identify new emerging themes in this large dataset by constructing different timelines based on the content similarity of ASRS report narratives. This method's unsupervised nature improves upon related research, which is limited to pre-defined labels and therefore can not fully capture emerging safety threats. We apply our method to all ASRS reports in 2020 to assess if the generated timelines can highlight COVID-19 as it is emerging as a safety threat in incoming ASRS reports. We perform both a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the automatically constructed timelines. The qualitative evaluation is performed by describing the evolution of top terms in the timelines, generated by our method, which we found explicitly convey the themes of COVID-19. Separately, we use a set of 1,213 COVID-19 reports from 2020 that were manually identified by ASRS analysts to quantitatively evaluate the COVID-19 reports distribution across the timelines. Our results have shown that COVID-19 emergence can be identified using the top terms that were generated by topic modeling. The top terms in topic modeling therefore can serve as a summary alternative to manually inspecting reports. Moreover, leveraging the manually identified COVID-19 reports, we found the manually identified timelines accounted for over 70% of the COVID-19 reports curated by the ASRS analysts, which demonstrates the potential of this approach for facilitating the understanding of safety concerns as they emerge and evolve. This method shows great potential to understand aerospace safety threats and other narrative- driven incident report databases.
Identifying Emerging Safety Threats Through Topic Modeling in the Aviation Safety Reporting System: A COVID-19 Study
The NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) is a voluntary, confidential aviation safety reporting system. The ASRS receives reports from pilots, air traffic controllers, flight attendants, and others involved in aviation operations. The reports are de-identified and coded by ASRS expert safety analysts, and a short descriptive synopsis is written to describe the safety issue. The de-identified reports are then disseminated to the aviation community in many ways, including via an online database, Safety Alert Bulletins, For Your Information Notices, and the CALLBACK newsletter. In this work, we consider whether we can improve the grouping, linking, and understanding of safety concerns through topic modeling. Specifically, we use topic modeling as a building block to identify emerging safety threats over time. This unsupervised approach, we argue, offers the flexibility to identify new emerging themes in this large dataset by constructing different timelines based on the content similarity of ASRS report narratives. This method's unsupervised nature improves upon related research, which is limited to pre-defined labels and therefore can not fully capture emerging safety threats. We apply our method to all ASRS reports in 2020 to assess if the generated timelines can highlight COVID-19 as it is emerging as a safety threat in incoming ASRS reports. We perform both a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the automatically constructed timelines. The qualitative evaluation is performed by describing the evolution of top terms in the timelines, generated by our method, which we found explicitly convey the themes of COVID-19. Separately, we use a set of 1,213 COVID-19 reports from 2020 that were manually identified by ASRS analysts to quantitatively evaluate the COVID-19 reports distribution across the timelines. Our results have shown that COVID-19 emergence can be identified using the top terms that were generated by topic modeling. The top terms in topic modeling therefore can serve as a summary alternative to manually inspecting reports. Moreover, leveraging the manually identified COVID-19 reports, we found the manually identified timelines accounted for over 70% of the COVID-19 reports curated by the ASRS analysts, which demonstrates the potential of this approach for facilitating the understanding of safety concerns as they emerge and evolve. This method shows great potential to understand aerospace safety threats and other narrative- driven incident report databases.
ESS-DIVE Unoccupied Aerial Systems (UAS) Reporting Format v1
Here we present documentation of the ESS-DIVE reporting format for Unoccupied Aerial System (UAS) data and metadata. This reporting format provides guidance to data contributors on how to store data to maximize their discoverability, facilitate their efficient reuse, and add value to individual datasets. For data users, the reporting format will better allow data repositories to optimize data search and extraction, and more readily integrate similar data into harmonized synthesis products. The reporting format provides templates and guidance for the reporting of metadata for UAS experimental campaigns, individual flights, platform and sensor description. To improve data access and discoverability, the reporting format proposes a data description scheme of Levels based on the degree of processing, where Level 0 includes raw data, through to Level 3 being derived data end products. A range of examples of data types for each Level are given, with suggested file naming schemes. The reporting format presented here is intended to form a foundation for future development that will accommodate new UAS technologies and approaches to data access and use in the future. The reporting format documentation is maintained and updated on the ESS-DIVE Community Space GitHub at https://github.com/ess-dive-community/essdive-uas. This data package is the first published version of this reporting format, and comprises a zip file of the complete content of https://github.com/ess-dive-community/essdive-uas v1.0. The zip contains the reporting format description, instructions and variable definitions in GitHub markdown language (*.md) and metadata templates in csv format. The reporting format is designed to be compatible with other ESS-DIVE formats, and it is specifically recommended that this reporting format be used in conjunction with the File-level metadata (FLMD) and comma separated values (csv) reporting formats for submission to the ESS-DIVE repository.
Space Studies Board Annual Report 1995
During 1995, the Space Studies Board and its committees and task groups gathered for a total of 40 meetings. Highlights of these meetings are presented. Formal study reports and short reports developed and approved during the meetings and issued during 1995 are represented in this annual report either by their executive summaries (for full-length reports), or by reproduction in full (for short reports). Nine full-length reports were distributed or delivered, including a congressionally mandated report by the Committee on the Future of Space Science and a comprehensive survey of Earth observation programs by the Committee on Earth Studies. Major research guidance reports were completed and published by the Committee on Microgravity Research and by the federated Committee on Solar and Space Physics/Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Research. Several significant assessment reports were also published, including an assessment of small missions by the Committee on Planetary and Lunar Exploration, a scientific evaluation of Gravity Probe B by the Task Group on Gravity Probe B, and an analysis of technologies for a 4-meter active optics telescope by the Task Group on BMDO New Technology Orbital Observatory. In addition, the Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics Panel on Ground-based Optical and Infrared Astronomy released its report, and the Task Group on Priorities in Space Research issued its second and final report. Five short reports were also prepared and released during 1995. They addressed such diverse topics as reflight of shuttle-borne synthetic aperture radars, the role of NASA centers and center scientists in scientific research, guidelines for establishment of NASA research institutes, and clarification of findings of the microgravity research opportunities report and of the Future of Space Science Committee's management study.
International VLBI Service for Geodesy and Astrometry 2000 Annual Report
This volume of reports is the 2000 Annual Report of the International Very Long Base Interferometry (VLBI) Service for Geodesy and Astrometry (IVS). The individual reports were contributed by VLBI groups in the international geodetic and astrometric community who constitute the permanent components of IVS. The IVS 2000 Annual Report documents the work of the IVS components for the period March 1, 1999 (the official inauguration date of IVS) through December 31, 2000. The reports document changes, activities, and progress of the IVS. The entire contents of this Annual Report also appear on the IVS web site at http://ivscc.gsfc.nasa.gov/publications/ar2000. This book and the web site are organized as follows: (1) The first section contains general information about IVS, a map showing the location of the components, information about the Directing Board members, and the report of the IVS Chair; (2) The second section of Special Reports contains a status report of the IVS Working Group on GPS phase center mapping, a reproduction of the resolution making IVS a Service of the International Astronomical Union (IAU), and a reprint of the VLBI Standard Interface (VSI); (3) The next seven sections hold the component reports from the Coordinators, Network Stations, Operation Centers, Correlators, Data Centers, Analysis Centers, and Technology Development Centers; and (4) The last section includes reference information about IVS: the Terms of Reference, the lists of Member and Affiliated organizations, the IVS Associate Member list, a complete list of IVS components, the list of institutions contributing to this report, and a list of acronyms. The 2000 Annual Report demonstrates the vitality of the IVS and the outstanding progress we have made during our first 22 months.
Launch Complex 34, SWMU CC054 2023 DNAPL Source Zone Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring, Site-Wide Long-Term Monitoring, and Hot Spot 6 Air Sparge System Annual Performance Monitoring and Phase Two Expansion Construction Completion Report Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida
This Annual Performance Monitoring Report (PMR) for the Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) Source Zone (DSZ), Site-Wide Long-Term Monitoring (LTM), and Hot Spot 6 (HS 6) Air Sparge (AS) System presents the results of Year 14 operations and performance monitoring of the hydraulic containment (HC) Interim Measure (IM), details associated with construction and implementation of the HS 6 AS system expansion (Phase Two), and the results of operations and performance sampling of the HS 6 AS IM at Launch Complex 34 (LC34), located at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS), Florida. The timeframe for activities documented in this PMR extends from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024. LC34 has been designated Solid Waste Management Unit CC054 under the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Program. The objective of the HC IM at LC34 is to contain the shallow and deep DSZ and surrounding dissolved-phase trichloroethene (TCE) high concentration plume via operation of a hydraulic containment system (HCS). The pre-IM design 300 micrograms per liter (μg/L) TCE groundwater contour was used to establish the deep zone capture area for deep recovery wells, and the shallow zone capture area was defined by the DSZ. The system began operating in 2010, and in 2015, the system was expanded to provide HC for areas within the 300 μg/L TCE groundwater isocontours of HS 3 and 4. In 2018 and 2019, an investigation was conducted to recharacterize the DSZ, which included investigating TCE mass in Layer 7. This data was subsequently used to optimize the pumping rates of the HCS and install additional recovery wells in Layer 7 to more adequately capture residual contaminant mass. The operational period for Year 14 of the HCS was from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024. Operational runtime for the system was 94 percent during Year 14, with downtime events attributed to planned maintenance, system repairs, and power outages. As of March 31, 2024, a total of 344,849,634 cumulative gallons of groundwater containing 94,656 pounds of chlorinated volatile organic compounds (CVOCs) have been removed by the HCS. During the reporting period covered under this report, the HCS recovered 31,176,393 gallons and approximately 6,319 pounds of CVOC mass. Total combined influent concentrations of TCE have decreased since startup from approximately 280,000 µg/L (January 2010) to 25,000 µg/L (March 2024). During the reporting period, all effluent concentrations from the HCS (aqueous and vapor) were below regulatory reporting limits, indicating the system continues to operate as intended. Performance monitoring was conducted in January 2024 within the DSZ to evaluate TCE contamination. Groundwater samples were collected via DPT at nine locations, consistent with previous events between 2017 and 2022. Full vertical profile sampling was completed at each DPT from 8 to 98 feet below land surface (bls), at 5-foot intervals. The DPT performance monitoring results are summarized in this PMR. The results revealed TCE remains at concentrations greater than 11,000 µg/L in the DSZ (1-percent solubility, indicative of DNAPL) at eight of the nine DPT locations and at depths ranging from 28 to 98 feet bls. An overall decreasing trend of TCE concentrations was observed in DPT samples during this reporting period, which is a reduction from the previous event (December 2022) and the peak event in December 2021, where TCE percentages appeared to increase in all depth zones because several recovery wells were turned off during the AS pilot study in the DSZ. The maximum TCE concentration in January 2024 was 1,600,000 µg/L in the 53 feet bls depth interval at DPT594 (previous maximum result in 2022 was 1,800,000 µg/L in the 48 feet bls depth interval at DPT599). This maximum concentration in the 53 feet bls depth interval is in the deep capture zone. During the January 2024 DPT event, the largest portion of TCE mass was observed in the 48 feet bls interval above/within Layer 4. This trend remains consistent with previous years and appears to indicate continued mass discharge from Layer 4 (fine-grained unit). In addition to DPT sampling, annual groundwater samples were collected from 11 deep monitoring wells in the DSZ area (Layers 7 and 8) in December 2023 to verify vertical and horizontal delineation. Three of the wells were also sampled biweekly to evaluate operations of recovery well RW21D (screened 86 to 106 feet bls), which was installed in January 2023. Of the Layer 7/8 monitoring sampled only annually, results were non-detect or less than groundwater cleanup target levels GCTLs in December 2023, with the exception of one well, IW45D2, which had a cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cDCE), detection greater than the GCTL. Of the three wells sampled biweekly during the operational period, the well located closest to Layer 7 recovery well RW21D (IW44D2, screened 105 to 115 feet bls) had concentrations of TCE, cDCE and vinyl chloride (VC) greater than GCTLs throughout the operational period, but displayed a decreasing trend since the peak concentrations in September 2023. The maximum TCE concentration during this operational period was 190,000 µg/L at IW44D2 in September 2023, but reduced to 700 µg/L in March 2024, indicating the HCS is still effectively removing mass from the source area. Expansion of the HCS and addition of new recovery wells is ongoing and will continue to be evaluated as the groundwater recovery scheme is optimized. Details of the expansion and optimization will be provided in a future PMR. The HS 6 AS IM was initiated in 2018 with 160 AS wells and expanded in 2019 with another 140 AS wells. An additional expansion of the HS 6 AS IM was completed during the reporting period covered under this report and details of the construction implementation and startup of the expansion are detailed in Section III of this report. The new expansion, referred to as Phase Two, was implemented between August 17, 2022 and August 28, 2023, and included the installation of 190 air sparge wells to treat an additional 11.2 acres. The original configuration (referred to as Phase One) operated until Phase Two came online, then all but 52 AS wells were turned off so the components could be moved and utilized in the Phase Two area. The 52 AS wells that remain on are in a barrier configuration preventing contaminated groundwater from impacting the treated area. The HS 6 AS system (both Phase One and Two) operated normally during the reporting period covered under this report. Semi-annual performance monitoring of the Phase One configuration was conducted in April and November 2023, consistent with previous years. For the Phase Two configuration, 21 new monitoring wells were installed and sampled quarterly, with a baseline event in July 2023, and quarterly events in November 2023 and February 2024 summarized in this report. Semi-annual monitoring results collected in April and October 2023 show concentrations of contaminants of concern (cDCE, trans-1,2-dichloroethene, and VC) have decreased to less than GCTLs in nearly all wells and not impacting the surface water drainage canal, indicating the HS 6 IM continues to meet objectives. The baseline and quarterly sampling for the Phase Two configuration indicate generally decreasing concentrations in wells within and around the perimeter of the treatment area. At least two more quarters of monitoring will be conducted and once those results are evaluated a reduced the sampling frequency may be considered. Overall, the tasks associated with Year 14 operation of the HC IM and operation of the HS 6 AS IM were performed in accordance with recommendations included in the previous 2022 LC34 (Year 13) PMR. Evaluation of results from the HC IM and HS 6 IM show that these systems are operating as designed and meeting performance objectives.
Addressing delayed case reporting in infectious disease forecast modeling
Infectious disease forecasting is of great interest to the public health community and policymakers, since forecasts can provide insight into disease dynamics in the near future and inform interventions. Due to delays in case reporting, however, forecasting models may often underestimate the current and future disease burden. In this paper, we propose a general framework for addressing reporting delay in disease forecasting efforts with the goal of improving forecasts. We propose strategies for leveraging either historical data on case reporting or external internet-based data to estimate the amount of reporting error. We then describe several approaches for adapting general forecasting pipelines to account for under- or over-reporting of cases. We apply these methods to address reporting delay in data on dengue fever cases in Puerto Rico from 1990 to 2009 and to reports of influenza-like illness (ILI) in the United States between 2010 and 2019. Through a simulation study, we compare method performance and evaluate robustness to assumption violations. Our results show that forecasting accuracy and prediction coverage almost always increase when correction methods are implemented to address reporting delay. Some of these methods required knowledge about the reporting error or high quality external data, which may not always be available. Provided alternatives include excluding recently-reported data and performing sensitivity analysis. This work provides intuition and guidance for handling delay in disease case reporting and may serve as a useful resource to inform practical infectious disease forecasting efforts.
Studies in the Fields of Space Flight and Guidance Theory: Progress Report - No. 2
Compiled in this paper are 11 progress papers from 7 of the agencies working under contract to MSFC in the areas of guidance theory and space flight theory. This is the second paper of the "Progress Reports" and covers the period from December 1, 1961 to June 15, 1962. Extensive references are made to "Progress Report No. 1." This second progress report is referred to as "report" and "Progress Report No. 1" will be referred to as the "first report" in this introduction. Information given in the first report is not repeated herein. The reports of the various contractors will be referred to by index number as papers. There are two parallel series of publications covering the over-all activities at MSFC in the areas of guidance theory and space flight theory. One is the series of progress reports of which this paper is the second in the series. The other is the series of "Status Reports on Theory of Space Flight and Adaptive Guidance." These series along with a few other special reports, give a complete picture of the immediate objectives, accomplishments, and final goals of Aeroballistics Division and associated contr