SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Stakeholders Meeting”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Activities of the NASA Urban Air Mobility Noise Working Group (UNWG)

The NASA-led Urban Air Mobility Noise Working Group was established in 2018 following an exploratory meeting of stakeholders from traditional and emerging aviation sectors across industry, government agencies, academia, and community groups. Its mission is to create and support a diverse community of acoustics experts to identify, discuss, and address noise issues associated with UAM vehicles and their operations. The UNWG is comprised of four subgroups including Tools and Technologies, Ground and Flight Testing, Human Response and Metrics, and Regulation and Policy. In 2020, NASA published the white paper entitled “Urban Air Mobility Noise: Current Practice, Gaps, and Recommendations,” that presents a set of high-level goals and makes recommendations to address gaps in the current practice. This presentation is about recent activities of each of the subgroups to address those recommendations, including work towards establishment of an aeroacoustic test database for model validation, development of a set of measurement guidelines to quantify vehicle acoustic emission, a remotely administered human response study for quantifying annoyance to UAM operations, and status on noise standard, regulation, policy, and community engagement developments.

Urban air mobility↗

DOE OSTI2020

Human & Technology Integration Presentation Slides

Human and Technology Integration Presentation Slides

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2021

Multicriterion Benefit Evaluation of Deploying New Battery Technology with Increased Capacity at a Generic Nuclear Power Plant

This presentation is prepared for the DOE LWRS RISA Pathway Stakeholder Engagement Meeting on October 13-14, 2021. Nuclear power plant (NPP) safety improvements are routinely made by plant licensees and regulators. Examples of plant improvements include accident-tolerant fuel, diverse and flexible coping strategies, passive cooling systems, and increased battery capacity. A combined use of these plant improvements could lead to plant designs with enhanced resilience, allowing NPPs to better cope with both internal and external hazards and keep the plant operating safely, efficiently, and economically. This presentation focuses on increased battery capacity and evaluates the potential costs and benefits of deploying batteries with increased capacities at a generic boiling water reactor (BWR) NPP. A multicriterion benefit evaluation methodology is used for the cost-benefit analysis. Ten alternatives for extending battery capacity are developed, including eight alternatives to provide additional direct-current power and one alternative to provide additional alternating-current power. Potential benefits of reducing plant risk are quantified through incorporating the alternatives into loss-of-offsite-power scenarios of the generic BWR probabilistic risk assessment model. Potential costs of implementing the alternatives are qualitatively discussed and ranked. The alternatives are then compared based on their impacts on plant risk and economics.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Heat Pipe Modeling Capabilities in Sockeye

Presentation to be given in a meeting with stakeholders of the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation program for modeling related to microreactors. This presentation gives an overview of the capabilities and status of the heat pipe code Sockeye.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS2023

Information and Best Practices Related to NASA Nuclear Flight Safety for Space Flights Involving Space Nuclear Systems

The purpose of this handbook is to facilitate a repeatable and robust process that promotes clear and effective interfaces between activities and stakeholders focused on meeting nuclear flight safety requirements for missions utilizing space nuclear systems (SNS), within the context of NASA’s broader nuclear-related activities and interfaces. NPR 8715.26, Nuclear Flight Safety, requires that the NASA project manager “incorporate nuclear flight safety considerations starting with program or project formulation through the point at which the SNS or other radioactive material no longer has the potential to affect Earth’s biosphere.” NASA’s use of SNS inherently involves partnering with other stakeholders to conduct a range of related activities that interface with nuclear flight safety. From a categorical perspective these include: (i) meeting the authorities and licensing requirements for possession and use of nuclear material, as governed by other Federal authorities; (ii) conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities for nuclear-enabled missions; (iii) meeting Federal nuclear launch authorization requirements; (iv) conducting radiological contingency planning activities, including those associated with international commitments; (v) performing risk communication and public outreach activities; and (vi) ensuring decommissioning and disposal strategies reflect National policies and interests. It is the intent of this handbook to promote an effective interface between nuclear flight safety and these interrelated categorical activities. In addition to activities undertaken with partnering agencies, there are individual nuclear-related activities and programs that have a nexus to nuclear flight safety, and these include: (i) applicable NASA Standing Review Boards; (ii) the US Department of Energy nuclear safety activities conducted in partnership with NASA under Memoranda of Understanding; (iii) the Department of Defense’s Range Safety activities; (iv) NASA’s general involvement in interagency and international dialogues regarding nuclear safety; (v) the NASA-administered Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board; (vi) NASA’s program and project governance activities and nuclear-specific Technical Discipline Team activities under the Office of the Chief Engineer; and others. It is the intent of this handbook to promote effective leveraging of these additional interrelated organizational activities, as appropriate.

Donald Helton↗

DOE OSTI2026

Alternative Fuels for Public and Private Vehicle Fleets in Rural Areas

This fact sheet identifies opportunities for integration of alternative fuel vehicles in public and private fleets in rural areas, and was developed through the U.S. Department of Energy's Communities Local Energy Action Program (Communities LEAP). The project engaged community stakeholders, fleet operators, and local officials across ten rural counties in western Alabama to explore opportunities for expanding access to alternative transportation fuels. Guided by a regional coalition and supported by the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR), the effort emphasized challenges and related potential technical solutions. The fact sheet highlights different applications of alternative fuel vehicles and provides a framework for selecting the vehicle technology that meets a given stakeholder's needs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Updates to Nek5000: RANS wall functions, NRC support, and documentation

As a key part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation program (NEAMS), the next generation of tools for nuclear reactor design are being developed. A primary metric for success of this program is the adoption of those tools by industry stakeholders. To help meet this metric for Nek5000, development efforts this year have focused on the expansion of the available Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) turbulence models to include wall function models, continued support of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in simulating a hydrogen mitigation benchmark experiment, and expansion of the Nek5000 documentation to enhance the code’s usability. The implementation of wall functions is intended to significantly decrease time to-solution for a wide range of problems and it has been identified as an important feature by stakeholders across the nuclear community. The initial implementation of standard and pressure corrected wall functions has been tested in Nek5000 on the classical problems of channel flow and a backward facing step. It has also been tested on a 2D molten salt fast reactor core and a T-junction. The recommended formulation of choosing y + = 30 as a boundary value combined with a Neumann-Neumann formulation of the boundary condition for k and τ produces the most consistent results compared to a wall resolved approach. The collaboration with the NRC is a continuing exercise that has been ongoing for multiple years. This year we have concluded investigations into appropriate inlet conditions, showing that fully developed turbulent conditions are adequate for the full PANDA domain. We have also concluded simulations for an unobstructed jet and are now refocusing to the original obstructed jet case. The expansion of the code documentation has also been an ongoing effort over the past few years to address feedback from the various stakeholders. The documentation now more fully covers many of the available features and closes identified SQA gaps. Finally we report on three training sessions that were offered over the past year in an effort to expand the Nek5000 user base.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Policy Framework to Improve Mobility Efficiency and Electrify Transportation in Tonga

The Kingdom of Tonga, like many small island developing states, is heavily dependent on imported fossil fuels to meet its current energy needs, especially for transportation. The Kingdom has requested a policy framework that benefits its land transportation sector by saving cost and time, increasing resilience, and reducing petroleum and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This framework was developed by building on past work, namely the Tonga Energy Efficiency Master Plan 2020-2030 (TEEMP), the Tonga Energy Road Map 2021-2035 (TERMPLUS), and the Regional Electric Mobility Policy for Pacific Island Countries and Territories developed by the Pacific Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (PCREEE). The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to Tonga's land transportation system were identified at stakeholder working group meetings in Tonga in June 2023. A set of appropriate policies that have been effective in relevant jurisdictions were then discussed and refined by the working group. The resulting 27 policies are defined according to intended outcomes, relationship to other proposed policies, applications in other relevant jurisdictions, hurdles to implementation, resilience impact, equity impact, and government revenue impact. Some of the policies are also accompanied by implementation recommendations.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Establishing a Technical Assistance Network to Build Capacity in Southwest Alaska (Southwest Alaska Energy Network - Final Report)

The Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference (SWAMC) is a non-profit regional membership economic development organization that represents the Aleutian/Pribilof Islands, Bristol Bay, and Kodiak regions of southwest Alaska. SWAMC applied for the DOE-OIE Establishment of an Inter-Tribal Technical Assistance Energy Providers Network grant FOA to work with our partners to provide energy planning and project development technical assistance. The project team was made up of SWAMC, three regional organizations, a management consulting firm, and a panel of technical consultants. SWAMC sub-contracted with the three Alaska Native regional non-profit organizations – Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association (APIA), Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA), and Kodiak Area Native Association (KANA) – to fund full or partial Regional Energy Coordinator (REC) positions. The project period ran from September 2016 to March 2020. The project goal was to help southwest Alaska regional tribal partners and communities to develop efficient and financially sustainable structures for identifying and developing energy projects that enhance community resiliency and energy sustainability. This project established energy coordinators and management structures in the Aleutian, Bristol Bay, and Kodiak regions to expand technical assistance capacity of regional residents; demonstrate this capacity by advancing energy efficiency, heat, and power supply projects; and secure long-term funding commitments to establish a sustained technical assistance structure. The project team expanded technical assistance capacity of energy coordinators and regional stakeholders in several ways: by providing funding for the SWAMC project manager to attend three Office of Indian Energy trainings; for energy coordinators to attend numerous energy conferences; for utility clerks from several villages to receive one-on-one reporting training on Alaska’s Power Cost Equalization electric subsidy program; and for the Kodiak REC to complete the Arctic Remote Energy Networks Academy and NREL’s Executive Energy Leadership Academy. The energy coordinators demonstrated and shared their increased capacity by hosting several public events: SWAMC hosted two full-day energy workshops in February 2017 and 2018; the Kodiak REC hosted seven Energy Committee meetings for Kodiak stakeholders and gave several presentations at other events; and SWAMC and BBNA organized a Bristol Bay Regional Energy Visioning Session in May 2019. The project team created platforms to both share and request information to involve energy stakeholders in this project, including an energy website, a Facebook group, a periodic newsletter, surveys, mass emails, and paper mailers. An increase in regional capacity was demonstrated through several grant awards, including a $1.2 million USDA grant for Akhiok for an electric distribution infrastructure replacement; an AHFC Kickstarter grant for Aleknagik to audit 2 Tribal and 3 City buildings; and installation of an Air Source Heat Pump demonstration project in Atka. Two communities and one region – Ouzinkie (May 2017), Ugashik (July 2017), and the Bristol Bay region (May 2019) – utilized DOE’s technical assistance services to hold Strategic Energy Planning sessions with NREL and DOE facilitation assistance. And in early 2018, SWAMC established a parallel program, funded through a USDA Energy Audit and Renewable Energy Development grant to provide subsidized energy audits for small businesses in the region. SWAMC and partners have now completed energy audits of over 60 businesses (buildings and fishing vessels) and are currently operating a third round of the USDA program. Fifteen of those business owners have now received additional grant funding to cover 25% of the cost of the energy efficiency upgrades identified in the audit. This technical assistance structure will be sustained beyond DOE grant funding in several forms. As a sign of increased grant writing and project management capacity, the Kodiak Regional Energy Coordinator applied for and received a USDA Community Facilities Technical Assistance and Training grant to continue work begun under this program. Energy coordination tasks have been folded into existing economic development positions at SWAMC and at BBNA, ensuring long-term outreach and support in the region.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

A Microreactor Program Plan for The Department of Energy

The DOE Microreactor Program was established in FY 2019 to support research and development (R&D) of technologies related to the development, demonstration, and deployment of low-power, transportable reactors to provide power and heat for decentralized generation in civilian, industrial, and defense energy sectors. The program conducts both fundamental and applied R&D to de-risk technology performance and manufacturability readiness of microreactors. R&D projects and work packages are selected to support concept-neutral technology maturation. The intent is to ensure those concepts can be licensed and deployed by commercial entities to meet specific use case requirements. At the same time, the program will also support R&D specific to certain reactor technology groups (e.g., heat pipe reactors and gas-cooled reactors) to ensure relevancy and address the technology needs of commercial developers. The program will ensure coordination of work and activities across participating laboratories and universities, establish, and manage stakeholder interactions, and support program meetings. These stakeholders include, but are not limited to, industry developers, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of Energy, policymakers, and end users. This document provides an overview of the overall Microreactor Program, including its vision, key technical objectives, and scope of the current and proposed R&D portfolio. It covers a 5-year rolling currently from Fiscal year 2025 through Fiscal year 2030. This document will be revised at least biennially to reflect changing priorities.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Georgetown University – SYSM 5630 Systems Integration Verification and Validation : Todd Noste

At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the National Ignition Facility Optics Group, we use the systems engineering approach for project management and as a design tool. Systems engineering is used in a graded approach to design and project management that is based on risk, informing how much rigor to apply. The tools and techniques from systems engineering offer a framework to organize projects with everyone speaking the same language to provide consistent and repeatable project success that satisfies the stakeholders’ needs and meets the mission. The classes have provided a framework with tools for communicating system design, requirements, verification and validation, and an operational context.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS2006

NASA Exploration Launch Projects Overview: The Crew Launch Vehicle and the Cargo Launch Vehicle Systems

The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration (January 2004) serves as the foundation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. As the NASA Administrator outlined during his confirmation hearing in April 2005, these include: 1) Flying the Space Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human space flight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. In spring 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The ESAS team performed in-depth evaluations of a number of space transportation architectures and provided recommendations based on their findings? The ESAS analysis focused on a human-rated Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) for astronaut transport and a heavy lift Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) to carry equipment, materials, and supplies for lunar missions and, later, the first human journeys to Mars. After several months of intense study utilizing safety and reliability, technical performance, budget, and schedule figures of merit in relation to design reference missions, the ESAS design options were unveiled in summer 2005. As part of NASA's systems engineering approach, these point of departure architectures have been refined through trade studies during the ongoing design phase leading to the development phase that begins in 2008. Comprehensive reviews of engineering data and business assessments by both internal and independent reviewers serve as decision gates to ensure that systems can fully meet customer and stakeholder requirements. This paper provides the current CLV and CaLV configuration designs and gives examples of the progress being made during the first year of this significant effort. Safe, reliable, cost-effective space transportation systems are a foundational piece of America s future in space and the next step in realizing the plan for revitalizing lunar capabilities on the passageway to the human exploration of Mars. While building on legacy knowledge and heritage hardware for risk reduction, NASA will apply lessons learned from developing these new launch vehicles to the growth path for future missions. The elements for mission success and continued U.S. leadership in space have been assembled over the past year. As NASA designs and develops these two new systems over the next dozen years, visible progress, such as that reported in this paper, may sustain the national will to stay the course across political administrations and weather the inevitable trials that will be experienced during this challenging endeavor.

Snoddy, Jimmy R.↗

NASA NTRS2007

From ESAS to Ares: A Chronology

Throughout my career, I have observed many launch vehicle efforts come and go. Although it may appear on the surface that those were dead-end streets, the knowledge we gained through them actually informs the work in progress. Following the tragic loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia's crew, the administration took the Columbia Accident Investigation Board's findings to heart and united the Agency behind the Vision for Space Exploration, with clear goals and objectives, including fielding a new generation of safe, reliable, and affordable space transportation. The genesis of the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle and Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle activities now under way by a nationwide Government and industry team was the confirmation of the current NASA Administrator in April 2005. Shortly thereafter, he commissioned a team of aerospace experts to conduct the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), which gave shape to launch vehicles that will empower America's resurgence in scientific discovery through human and robotic space exploration. In October 2005, I was asked to lead this effort, building the team and forming the partnerships that will, in turn, build America's next human-rated space transportation system. In November 2006, the Ares I team began conducting the System Requirements Review milestone, just 1 year after its formation. We are gaining momentum toward the first test flight of the integrated vehicle system in 2009, just a few short years away. The Agency is now poised to deliver on the commitment this nation has made to advance our interests in space. In its inaugural year, the Ares team has conducted the first human-rated launch vehicle major milestone in over 30 years. Using the Exploration Systems Architecture Study recommendations as a starting point, the vehicle designs have been evolved to best meet customer and stakeholder requirements to fulfill the strategic goals outlined in the Vision for Space Exploration.

Cook, Stephen A.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Communicating Risk to Program Managers

Program Managers (PM) can protect program resources and improve chances of success by anticipating, understanding and managing risks. Understanding the range of potential risks helps one to avoid or manage the risks. A PM must choose which risks to accept to reduce fire fighting, must meet the expectations of stakeholders consistently, and avoid falling into costly "black holes" that may open. A good risk management process provides the PM more confidence to seize opportunities save money, meet schedule, even improve relationships with people important to the program. Evidence of managing risk and sound internal controls can mean better support from superiors for the program by building a trust and reputation from being on top of issues. Risk managers have an obligation to provide the PM with the best information possible to allow the benefits to be realized (Small Business Consortium, 2004). The Institute for Chartered Accountants in England and Wales sees very important benefits for companies in providing better information about what they do to assess and manage key business risks. Such information will: a) provide practical forward-looking information; b) reduce the cost of capital; c) encourage better risk management; and d) improve accountability for stewardship, investor protection and the usefulness of financial reporting. We are particularly convinced that enhanced risk reporting will help listed companies obtain capital at the lowest possible cost (The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England &Wales, June 2002). Risk managers can take a significant role in quantifying the success of their department and communicating those figures to executive (program) management levels while pushing for a broader risk management role. Overall, risk managers must show that risk management work matters in the most crucial place-the bottom line- as they prove risk management can be a profit center (Sullivan, 2004).

Shivers, C. Herbert↗

DOE OSTI2025

Illinois Storage Corridor CarbonSAFE Phase III: Stakeholder Engagement and Outreach Plan

The Stakeholder Engagement and Outreach Plan provides a comprehensive framework for engaging stakeholders of the Illinois Storage Corridor (ISC) project. The ISC project is a CarbonSAFE Phase III project designed to facilitate commercial deployment of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) in Illinois. The project aims to establish a multi-industry carbon storage corridor through development of storage sites near the One Earth Energy (OEE) ethanol production facility in north-central Illinois and the Prairie State Generating Company (PSGC) coal-fired power plant in south-central Illinois, with combined annual CO 2 capture ultimately exceeding 8.6 million tons per year. Stakeholder engagement is recognized as a critical component for successful CCUS deployment, alongside technical and economic considerations. As an emerging technology, CCUS may not be well understood by the general population, and lack of public awareness can lead to opposition that poses significant barriers to project development. This plan addresses this challenge through systematic stakeholder identification, analysis, planning, and implementation of engagement actions. The plan is structured around four main sections: Communication, Stakeholder Analysis, Stakeholder Engagement, and Environmental Justice. Activities will be conducted under Tasks 1 and 4 of the project's Statement of Project Objectives, with two key subtasks: (1) developing a stakeholder analysis and engagement plan through face-to-face meetings, facilitated discussions, and surveys; and (2) implementing stakeholder engagement and public outreach activities including meetings, open houses, and permit hearings. The Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) will manage engagement activities following DOE-NETL best practices, focusing on providing objective, fact-based information about CCUS and the ISC project. A comprehensive Communication Plan establishes protocols for media contacts, site visits, and crisis communications. The stakeholder analysis follows a structured workflow process divided into Pre-feasibility and Feasibility phases, incorporating contextual understanding, assessment, data collection, and analysis. Key stakeholder groups include government bodies, educational organizations, conservation and environmental groups, agricultural communities, and religious organizations. The plan addresses common stakeholder questions regarding project risks, benefits, safety, property values, liability, and environmental impacts. Recommendations emphasize developing clear messaging, creating informational materials, and preparing to address both project-specific and broader environmental concerns to ensure transparent communication and build stakeholder support throughout project implementation.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

NASA NTRS2009

Review of the Constellation Level II Safety, Reliability, and Quality Assurance (SR&QA) Requirements Documents during Participation in the Constellation Level II SR&QA Forum

At the request of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) and the Constellation Program (CxP) Safety, Reliability; and Quality Assurance (SR&QA) Requirements Director, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) participated in the Cx SR&QA Requirements forum. The Requirements Forum was held June 24-26; 2008, at GRC's Plum Brook Facility. The forums purpose was to gather all stakeholders into a focused meeting to help complete the process of refining the CxP to refine its Level II SR&QA requirements or defining project-specific requirements tailoring. Element prime contractors had raised specific questions about the wording and intent of many requirements in areas they felt were driving costs without adding commensurate value. NESC was asked to provide an independent and thorough review of requirements that contractors believed were driving Program costs, by active participation in the forum. This document contains information from the forum.

Cameron, Kenneth D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned With Risk Management: A Systems Engineer's Perspective

Risk management is a communications device that, when executed as an essential task, enables systems engineering to effectively balance risk across the project. Developing and baselining risks is an essential continuous task to ensure top project concerns both from bottom up and top down are being mitigated. Risk management provides the opportunity to avoid the consequence of the risk when mitigation steps start early enough. Just discussing risk with all the project flight elements during development, even if no risks are open, provides an excellent communication opportunity between systems engineering and those elements, ensuring concerns and worries have a platform for discussion. A well-managed risk identification process will identify concerns that are serious but not being clearly communicated, and it will enable mitigation of those potential problems before they cause a failure. Effective risk management requires considerable time and effort, but that effort will save time and money across the development. Risk management must be frequent enough to be useful and in depth enough to bring out emerging issues. It also requires a trusting relationship between the lead systems engineer and element and/or subsystem leads. The discussions need to be with the right number of individuals (typically a handful) and the right duration in time (typically an hour a month). Outside of these risk working groups, there is a formal management process to input, status, and disposition risks, and a monthly Risk Management Board meeting where key project stakeholders are informed. This paper provides good guidance on effective risk management from a systems engineering perspective and provides project lessons learned from the NASA spaceflight missions NICER, Landsat 9, LRO, and OSIRIS-REx to demonstrate the effectiveness of risk management.

Lessons Learned↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned With Risk Management: A Systems Engineer’s Perspective

Lessons Learned↗