Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “report”

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.

At least 433 records · Page 24
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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.

ASRS↗
DOE OSTI2023

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.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-524: Web-Based Radiation Oncology Incident Reporting and Learning System (ROIRLS)

Purpose: Describe a Web-based Radiation Oncology Incident Reporting and Learning system that has the potential to improve quality of care for radiation therapy patients. This system is an important facet of continuing effort by our community to maintain and improve safety of radiotherapy.Material and Methods: The VA National Radiation Oncology Program office has embarked on a program to electronically collect adverse events and near miss data of radiation treatment of over 25,000 veterans treated with radiotherapy annually. Software used for this program is deployed on the VAs intranet as a Website. All data entry forms (adverse event or near miss reports, work product reports) utilize standard causal, RT process step taxonomies and data dictionaries defined in AAPM and ASTRO reports on error reporting (AAPM Work Group Report on Prevention of Errors and ASTROs safety is no accident report). All reported incidents are investigated by the radiation oncology domain experts. This system encompasses the entire feedback loop of reporting an incident, analyzing it for salient details, and developing interventions to prevent it from happening again. The operational workflow is similar to that of the Aviation Safety Reporting System. This system is also synergistic with ROSIS and SAFRON. Results: The ROIRLS facilitates the collection of data that help in tracking adverse events and near misses and develop new interventions to prevent such incidents. The ROIRLS electronic infrastructure is fully integrated with each registered facility profile data thus minimizing key strokes and multiple entries by the event reporters. Conclusions: OIRLS is expected to improve the quality and safety of a broad spectrum of radiation therapy patients treated in the VA and fulfills our goal of Effecting Quality While Treating Safely The Radiation Oncology Incident Reporting and Learning System software used for this program has been developed, conceptualized and maintained by TSG Innovations Inc. and is deployed on the VA intranet as a Website. The Radiation Oncology Incident Reporting and Learning System software used for this program has been developed, conceptualized and maintained by TSG Innovations Inc. and is deployed on the VA intranet as a Website.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-469: Implementation of VAs Web-Based Radiotherapy Incident Reporting and Analysis System (RIRAS)

Purpose: This Web-based Radiotherapy Incident Reporting and Analysis System (RIRAS) is a tool to improve quality of care for radiation therapy patients. This system is an important facet of continuing effort by our community to maintain and improve safety of radiotherapy.Material and Methods: VA’s National Radiation Oncology Program office has embarked on a program to electronically collect adverse events and good-catch data of radiation treatment of over 25,000 veterans treated with radiotherapy annually. This VA-Intranet based software design has made use of dataset taxonomies and data dictionaries defined in AAPM/ASTRO reports on error reporting. We used proven industrial and medical event reporting techniques to avoid several common problems faced in effective data collection such as incomplete data due to data entry fatigue by the reporters, missing data due to data difficult to obtain or not familiar to most reporters, missing reports due to fear of reprisal etc. This system encompasses the entire feedback loop of reporting an incident, analyzing it for salient details, and developing interventions to prevent it from happening again. The analysis reports with corrective, learning actions are shared with the reporter/facility and made public to the community (after deidentification) as part of the learning process. Results: Till date 50 incident/good catches have been reported in RIRAS and we have completed analysis on 100% of these reports. This is done due to the fact that each reported incidents is investigated and a complete analysis/patient-safety-work-product report is generated by radiation oncology domain-experts. Conclusions Because of the completeness of the data, the system has enabled us to analyze process steps and track trends of major errors which in the future will lead to implementing system wide process improvement steps and safe standard operating procedures for each radiotherapy treatment modality/technique and fulfills our goal of “Effecting Quality While Treating Safely”. RIRAS developed and copyrighted by TSG Innovations Inc.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-223: Radiotherapy Incident Reporting and Analysis System (RIRAS):Early Experience

Background & Purpose: RIRAS is a web-based information system deployed on the Veterans Health Administration intranet in early 2014 to collect adverse events and good catch data; analyze the causes and contributing factors; and find ways to prevent future occurrences. Material and Methods: Incident learning consists of a feedback loop which starts with reporting an event, followed by analysis of contributing factors, and culminates in the development of a patient safety work product (PSWP) to prevent recurrence. RIRAS permits both anonymous and non-anonymous reporting. Each report is analyzed by a team of medical physicists who are independent of the reporting facility. The analysts usually contact the reporting facilities for additional information. We analyzed all reports and held telephonic interviews (when necessary) with the reporters. We then generated PSWPs with corrective/preventive and learning actions. Anonymous reporting is handled in the same manner, except without the ability to further interview the reporter. Results: In a significant number of reports, the causes and recommended preventive actions were considerably altered by the independent analysis and additional information from the facility. 130 reports have been entered in RIRAS; 9 misadministrations, 83 good catches, 3 anonymous good catches, and 35 earlier reported incidents from FY2005-14. 45% of the reported incidents occurred in the treatment delivery stages, 19% in on-treatment management, and 16% in pre-treatment verification. 80% of the good catches were found in the treatment delivery workflow. Majority of these incidents were due to inconsistent patient setup instructions or documentation, nonadherence to policies and procedures, lax time-out policy, distracted RTTs, and inadequate RTT staffing. Conclusion: RIRAS has identified many areas for improvement and elevated the quality and safety of radiation treatments in the VHA. We found that the ability to learn is significantly diminished when the analysts do not have the ability to request additional information.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC Program: FY 2014

The objective of this work was to determine the realization rate of energy and cost savings from the Department of Energy’s Energy Savings Performance Contract (ESPC) program based on information reported by the energy services companies (ESCOs) that are carrying out ESPC projects at federal sites. Information was extracted from 156 Measurement and Verification (M&V) reports to determine reported, estimated, and guaranteed cost savings and reported and estimated energy savings for the previous contract year. Because the quality of the reports varied, it was not possible to determine all of these parameters for each project. For all 156 projects, there was sufficient information to compare estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. For this group, the total estimated cost savings for the reporting periods addressed were $\$$210.6 million, total reported cost savings were $\$$215.1 million, and total guaranteed cost savings were $\$$$204.5 million. This means that on average: ESPC contractors guaranteed 97% of the estimated cost savings; projects reported achieving 102% of the estimated cost savings; and projects reported achieving 105% of the guaranteed cost savings. For 155 of the projects examined, there was sufficient information to compare estimated and reported energy savings. On the basis of site energy, estimated savings for those projects for the previous year totaled 11.938 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 12.138 million MMBtu, 101.7% of the estimated energy savings. On the basis of source energy, total estimated energy savings for the 155 projects were 19.052 million MMBtu, and reported saving were 19.516 million MMBtu, 102.4% of the estimated energy savings.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Evaluating the Role of Pre-Application Reports in Improving Distributed Generation Interconnection Processes

Several tools have emerged in recent years to increase data exchange and transparency in the distributed generation interconnection process with the goal of reducing interconnection costs. One example is pre-application reports. These reports are generated by a utility at the request of prospective interconnection applicants to provide technical information about a specific point of interconnection. Formal pre-application report processes have been established in 12 states at the distribution system level as well as at the transmission level by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. These reports are a relatively low-cost method of informing applicants of grid conditions and potential interconnection limitations early in the interconnection process. Thus, this information may encourage interconnection in locations with little to no detrimental impact to the grid and low interconnection costs. Increasing transparency of these grid conditions may also enable applicants to better plan for interconnection costs and requirements, such as system modifications and complex engineering studies. By providing these benefits, pre-application reports are expected to reduce the number of canceled interconnection applications. This report evaluates this hypothesis by quantifying the impact pre-application report processes have on application approval rate. To evaluate this hypothesis this analysis uses utility-reported distributed generation interconnection data from four utilities in Massachusetts. The analysis considers a four-year time period before and a five-year period after pre-application report process were implemented. The results indicate that once pre-application reports were required for projects 500 kilowatts and larger the approval rate of applications increased by 24%. This suggests that pre-application reports may decrease the percentage of canceled projects. However, due to data and other limitations, these results do not necessarily connote causation. This analysis is an important first step and a prerequisite for future analyses regarding the impact of pre-application reports. Other potential impacts also recognized during this analysis included reducing sunk costs and reducing the number of projects requiring a complex review. Collection of additional data would allow for forming more robust conclusions about these impacts in the future. Such data include circuit-level data, interconnection cost data, policy and regulatory background, national-level data, and utility and developer attributes. These data provide necessary context to account for interrelated factors while evaluating pre-application reports. Filling such knowledge gaps ultimately aids regulators in applying best practices within the industry. As more and more distributed energy resources are interconnected, these best practices will become an integral aspect of efficiently transitioning to an electric grid capable of meeting the needs of the 21st century.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1996

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.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2013

Nevada National Security Site Environmental Report 2012

This report was prepared to meet the information needs of the public and the requirements and guidelines of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for annual site environmental reports. It was prepared by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), for the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) (formerly designated as the Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO]). The new field office designation occurred in March 2013. Published reports cited in this 2012 report, therefore, may bear the name or authorship of NNSA/NSO. This and previous years’ reports, called Annual Site Environmental Reports (ASERs), Nevada Test Site Environmental Reports (NTSERs), and, beginning in 2010, Nevada National Security Site Environmental Reports (NNSSERs), are posted on the NNSA/NFO website at http://www.nv.energy.gov/library/publications/aser.aspx. This NNSSER was prepared to satisfy DOE Order DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” Its purpose is to (1) report compliance status with environmental standards and requirements, (2) present results of environmental monitoring of radiological and nonradiological effluents, (3) report estimated radiological doses to the public from releases of radioactive material, (4) summarize environmental incidents of noncompliance and actions taken in response to them, (5) describe the NNSA/NFO Environmental Management System and characterize its performance, and (6) highlight significant environmental programs and efforts. This NNSSER summarizes data and compliance status for calendar year 2012 at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) (formerly the Nevada Test Site) and its two support facilities, the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) and the Remote Sensing Laboratory–Nellis (RSL-Nellis). It also addresses environmental restoration (ER) projects conducted at the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) and the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR). Through a Memorandum of Agreement, NNSA/NFO is responsible for the oversight of these ER projects, and the Sandia Site Office of NNSA (NNSA/SSO) has oversight of all other TTR and NTTR activities. NNSA/SSO produces the TTR annual environmental report available at http://www.sandia.gov/news/publications/environmental/index.html.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2000

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.

Vandenberg, N. R.↗
NASA NTRS2024

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.

groundwater remediation↗
DOE OSTI2022

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.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Task Order 22 – Engineering and Technical Support, Deep Borehole Field Test. AREVA Summary Review Report

Under Task Order 22 of the industry Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) Contract to the Department of Energy (DOE) DE-NE0000291, AREVA has been tasked with providing assistance with engineering, analysis, cost estimating, and design support of a system for disposal of radioactive wastes in deep boreholes (without the use of radioactive waste). As part of this task order, AREVA was requested, through a letter of technical direction, to evaluate Sandia National Laboratory’s (SNL’s) waste package borehole emplacement system concept recommendation using input from DOE and SNL. This summary review report (SRR) documents this evaluation, with its focus on the primary input document titled: “Deep Borehole Field Test Specifications/M2FT-15SN0817091” Rev. 1 [1], hereafter referred to as the “M2 report.” The M2 report focuses on the conceptual design development for the Deep Borehole Field Test (DBFT), mainly the test waste packages (WPs) and the system for demonstrating emplacement and retrieval of those packages in the Field Test Borehole (FTB). This SRR follows the same outline as the M2 report, which allows for easy correlation between AREVA’s review comments, discussion, potential proposed alternatives, and path forward with information established in the M2 report. AREVA’s assessment focused on three primary elements of the M2 report: the conceptual design of the WPs proposed for deep borehole disposal (DBD), the mode of emplacement of the WP into DBD, and the conceptual design of the DBFT. AREVA concurs with the M2 report’s selection of the wireline emplacement mode specifically over the drill-string emplacement mode and generically over alternative emplacement modes. Table 5-1 of this SRR compares the pros and cons of each emplacement mode considered viable for DBD. The primary positive characteristics of the wireline emplacement mode include: (1) considered a mature technology; (2) operations are relatively simple; (3) probability of a radiological release due to off-normal events are relatively low; (4) costs are relatively low; and (5) maintenance activities are relatively simple. The primary drawback associated with the wireline emplacement mode for DBD is the number of emplacement trips-in to the borehole, which results in a relatively higher probability for a drop event. Fortunately, the WPs can be engineered with impact limiters that will minimize the likelihood of a breach of the WP due to a drop. The WP designs presented in the M2 report appear to be focused on compatibility with the drill-string emplacement mode (e.g., the threaded connections). With the recommendation that the wireline emplacement mode be utilized for the DBFT, some changes may be warranted to these WPs. For example, the development of a WP release connection that is more reliable than the currently credited connection, which is considered to have a high failure probability, and the integration of an impact limiter into its design. The M2 report states the engineering demonstration of the DBFT will occur in the FTB over a 4-year period. AREVA recommends development and testing of the WP emplacement handling equipment occur separately (but concurrently, if not earlier) from the FTB at a mock-up facility. The separation of this activity would prevent schedule interference between the science and engineering thrusts of the project. Performing tests in a mock-up facility would allow additional control and observation compared to the FTB. The mock-up facility could also be utilized as a training facility for future operations. Terminal velocity and impact limiter testing would require the FTB for testing, since these areas would be difficult to reproduce in a limited depth mock-up. Although only at the end of the conceptual stage of design development, DBD appears to be a viable solution for some waste forms produced by the nuclear industry. However, regulatory requirements have yet to be established for pre- and post-closure performance of DBD and should be established as soon as possible. Some of the main areas of focus from a regulatory perspective include: (1) establishing acceptable performance requirements for the long-term behavior of DBD; (2) determining acceptable borehole abandonment criteria; (3) establishing retrievability requirements; (4) developing a consensus on the factor of safety (FoS) for the emplacement mode and WP; and (5) establishing safety and safeguards performance requirements for DBD. Although conservative requirements have been utilized to provide the foundation for the conceptual design of DBD, regulatory requirements and feedback are necessary to confirm recommendations made herein and to ensure the long-term performance of DBD is acceptable. The combination of the M2 report and this SRR is intended to facilitate the completion of the conceptual design for DBD for the Cs and Sr capsules and calcined waste forms. Using the conceptual design, preliminary design activities (the second stage of a three-stage process described in the M2 report) can proceed and the DBFT utilized to support, demonstrate, and confirm engineering elements of this design.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS1962

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

FLIGHT OPTIMIZATION↗
NASA NTRS1996

NASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project: Survey of Reader Preferences Concerning the Format of NASA Langley-Authored Technical Reports - Paper 58

The U.S. government technical report is a primary means by which the results of federally funded research and development (R&D) are transferred to the U.S. aerospace industry. However, little is known about this information product in terms of its actual use, importance, and value in the transfer of federally funded R&D. Little is also known about the intermediary-based system that is used to transfer the results of federally funded R&D to the U.S. aerospace industry. To help establish a body of knowledge, the U.S. government technical report is being investigated as part of the NASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. In this paper, we summarize the literature on the U.S. government technical report and present the results of a survey of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists that solicited their opinions concerning the format of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC)-authored technical reports. To learn more about the preferences of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists concerning the format of NASA LaRC-authored technical reports, we surveyed 133 report producers (i.e., authors) and 137 report users in March-April 1996. Questions covered such topics as (1) the order in which report components are read, (2) components used to determine if a report would be read, (3) those components that could be deleted, (4) the placement of such components as the symbols list, (e) the de-sirability of a table of contents, (5) the format of reference citations, (6) column layout and right margin treatment, and (7) and person and voice. Mail (self-reported) surveys were used to collect the data. The response rates for report producers (i.e., authors) was 68% and for users was 62%.

Pinelli, Thomas E.↗
NASA NTRS1997

NASA/DOD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Paper 65: Survey of Reader Preferences Concerning the Format of NASA Langley-Authored Technical Reports

The U.S. government technical report is a primary means by which the results of federally funded research and development (R&D) are transferred to the U.S. aerospace industry. However, little is known about this information product in terms of its actual use, importance, and value in the transfer of federally funded R&D. Little is also known about the intermediary-based system that is used to transfer the results of federally funded R&D to the U.S. aerospace industry. To help establish a body of knowledge, the U.S. government technical report is being investigated as part of the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. In this article, we summarize the literature on the U.S. government technical report and present the results of a survey of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists that solicited their opinions concerning the format of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC)-authored technical reports. To learn more about the preferences of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists concerning the format of NASA LaRC-authored technical reports, we surveyed 133 report producers (i.e., authors) and 137 report users in March-April 1996. Questions covered such topics as: (a) the order in which report components are read; (b) components used to determine if a report would be read; (c) those components that could be deleted; (d) the placement of such components as the symbols list; (e) the desirability of a table of contents; (f) the format of reference citations; (g) column layout and right margin treatment; and (h) writing style in terms of person and voice. Mail (self-reported) surveys were used to collect the data. The response rates for report producers (i.e., authors) was 68% and for users was 62%.

Pinelli, Thomas E.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Technology Development Report: CDDF, Dual Use Partnerships, SBIR/STTR: Fiscal Year 2003 Activities

The FY2003 NASA John C. Stennis Stennis Space Center (SSC) Technology Development Report provides an integrated report of all technology development activities at SSC. This report actually combines three annual reports: the Center Director's Discretionary Fund (CDDF) Program Report, Dual Use Program Report, and the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program Report. These reports are integrated in one document to summarize all technology development activities underway in support of the NASA missions assigned to SSC. The Dual Use Program Report provides a summary review of the results and status of the nine (9) Dual Use technology development partnership projects funded and managed at SSC during FY2003. The objective of these partnership projects is to develop or enhance technologies that will meet the technology needs of the two NASA SSC Mission Areas: Propulsion Test and Earth Science Applications. During FY2003, the TDTO managed twenty (20) SBIR Phase II Projects and two (2) STTR Phase II Projects. The SBIR contracts support low TRL technology development that supports both the Propulsion Test and the Earth Science Application missions. These projects are shown in the SBIR/STTR Report. In addition to the Phase II contracts, the TDTO managed ten (10) SBIR Phase I contracts which are fixed price, six month feasibility study contracts. These are not listed in this report. Together, the Dual Use Projects and the SBIR/STTR Projects constitute a technology development partnership approach that has demonstrated that success can be achieved through the identification of the technical needs of the NASA mission and using various available partnership techniques to maximize resource utilization to achieve mutual technology goals. Greater use of these partnership techniques and the resource leveraging they provide, is a goal of the TDTO, providing more support to meet the technology development needs of the mission areas at SSC.

Bailey, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2005

International VLBI Service for Geodesy and Astrometry 2004 Annual Report

Contents include the following: Combination Studies using the Cont02 Campaign. Coordinating Center report. Analysis coordinator report. Network coordinator report. IVS Technology coordinator report. Algonquin Radio observatory. Fortaleza Station report for 2004. Gilmore Creek Geophysical Observatory. Goddard Geophysical and Astronomical observatory. Hartebeesthoek Radio Astronomy Observatory (HartRAO). Hbart, Mt Pleasant, station report for 2004. Kashima 34m Radio Telescope. Kashima and Koganei 11-m VLBI Stations. Kokee Park Geophysical Observatory. Matera GGS VLBI Station. The Medicina Station status report. Report of the Mizusawa 10m Telescope. Noto Station Activity. NYAL Ny-Alesund 20 metre Antenna. German Antarctic receiving Station (GARS) O'higgins. The IVS network station Onsala space Observatory. Sheshan VLBI Station report for 2004. 10 Years of Geodetic Experiments at the Simeiz VLBI Station. Svetloe RAdio Astronomical Observatory. JARE Syowa Station 11-m Antenna, Antarctica. Geodetic Observatory TIGO in Concepcion. Tsukuba 32-m VLBI Station. Nanshan VLBI Station Report. Westford Antenna. Fundamental-station Wettzell 20m Radiotelescope. Observatorio Astroonomico Nacional Yebes. Yellowknife Observatory. The Bonn Geodetic VLBI Operation Center. CORE Operation Center Report. U.S. Naval Observatory Operation Center. The Bonn Astro/Geo Mark IV Correlator.

Behrend, Dirk↗