Results for “Asset Management” — Page 46

DOE OSTI2014

Paperless Work Package Application

Paperless Work Package (PWP) System is a computer program process that takes information from Asset Suite, provides a platform for other electronic inputs, Processes the inputs into an electronic package that can be downloaded onto an electronic work tablet or laptop computer, provides a platform for electronic inputs into the work tablet, and then transposes those inputs back into Asset Suite and to permanent SRS records. The PWP System will basically eliminate paper requirements from the maintenance work control system. The program electronically relays the instructions given by the planner to work on a piece of equipment which is currently relayed via a printed work package. The program does not control/approve what is done. The planner will continue to plan the work package, the package will continue to be routed, approved, and scheduled. The supervisor reviews and approves the work to be performed and assigns work to individuals or to a work group. (The supervisor conducts pre job briefings with the workers involved in the job) The Operations Manager (Work Controlling Entity) approves the work package electronically for the work that will be done in his facility prior to work starting. The PWP System will provide the package in an electronic form. All the reviews, approvals, and safety measures taken by people outside the electronic package does not change from the paper driven work packages.

Kilgore, Jr., William R.↗

DOE OSTI2019

Evolution of Stakeholder Relations at the Mound Laboratory-End of DoE's Mission to the Present - 19551

In November 1989, the same month the Berlin Wall fell, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) placed the Mound Laboratory (Mound Plant or Mound site) in Ohio on the National Priorities List (NPL) due to volatile organic compound contamination in the groundwater. As a result of the Cold War ending, the United States sought to greatly reduce the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal, consolidate the US Department of Energy's (DOE) mission, and close many DOE facilities. In 1991, the City of Miamisburg learned that DOE was planning to close the Mound Laboratory. The city spent two years lobbying in Washington, DC, to keep the facility open; however, that effort was not successful. By 1993, DOE, EPA, and Ohio EPA had signed a Federal Facility Agreement that formalized EPA and Ohio EPA oversight of the DOE environmental cleanup of the Mound NPL site under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The decontamination and cleanup of the Mound site fell under two federal laws, CERCLA and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. DOE, EPA, Ohio EPA, the City of Miamisburg, and other local stakeholders all agreed that the Mound site should be cleaned up to an industrial/commercial land use standard. This would allow the site to transition into a privately owned business park. In 1994, the City of Miamisburg created the nonprofit Miamisburg Mound Community Improvement Corporation (MMCIC) that would own, market, and redevelop the site. The City also chartered the Mound Reuse Committee to act as an independent advisory organization, composed of representatives from the local community and business, government, education, and special interest groups. In 1994, DOE and the MMCIC entered into a lease agreement that facilitated immediate reuse of site buildings that were no longer required by DOE and did not require remediation. In 1995, DOE, EPA, and Ohio EPA developed the Mound 2000 Process to more effectively use CERCLA Removal Action authority to evaluate and remediate, as necessary, disparate areas of the Mound site. The Mound 2000 process divided the site into smaller, more manageable areas that accelerated cleanup and allowed areas to be reused more quickly. All areas of the Mound site were cleaned up to meet the EPA standard for industrial/commercial land use. The CERCLA process included opportunities for the public to review proposed cleanup strategies. Public input on cleanup and reuse included that from local citizens, businesses, Miamisburg City Council, local schools and financial institutions, Ohio EPA, Montgomery County, and the State of Ohio. In 1998, while site cleanup was still in process, DOE agreed to sell the entire Mound property to the MMCIC for $10.00. The site sales agreement accelerated reuse by allowing DOE to offer ownership of discrete land parcels to MMCIC as soon as EPA confirmed those areas met CERCLA standards for property transfer. This allowed the Mound site to become one of the first former DOE weapons sites to transition to reuse as a privately owned and operated community asset. Many other former DOE production facilities require continued federal ownership to protect the integrity of the environmental cleanup. In 2011, the MMCIC changed its name to the Mound Development Corporation (MDC) and continued to transition the site for reuse as part of the Mound Business Park. The MMCIC/MDC is a nonprofit economic development arm of the City of Miamisburg. DOE supported the economic development efforts with grants and matching funds. Individual land parcels were transferred from DOE to the MDC according to the DOE Mound Land Transfer Process. Ownership of parcels was transferred to the MDC via quitclaim deeds with no repair, replacements, or rebuild of areas. Each parcel's quitclaim deed contains the CERCLA institutional controls. To reduce the property tax burden, the Miamisburg City Council passed an ordinance that allowed the City to accept temporary ownership of specific parcels and hold ownership until the MDC could either lease or sell them. With the exception of one 23-acre parcel that includes the Operable Unit 1 area (site of former sanitary landfill), the entire site has been transferred to the MDC. Today, the former Mound Laboratory site is home to the vibrant Mound Business Park operated by the MDC. The site contains numerous buildings with active businesses and multiple areas suitable for new construction. Private companies continue cutting-edge work that carries forward the legacy of more than 50 years of DOE research, development, production, and inspiration from the former Mound Laboratory scientists, engineers, technicians, and support personnel. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Securing Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

As the US electrifies the transportation sector, cyber attacks targeting vehicle charging could bring consequences to electrical system infrastructure. This is a growing area of concern as charging stations increase power delivery and must communicate to a range of entities to authorize charging, sequence the charging process, and manage load (grid operators, vehicles, OEM vendors, charging network operators, etc.). The research challenges are numerous and are complicated because there are many end users, stakeholders, and software and equipment vendors interests involved. Poorly implemented electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), electric vehicle (EV), or grid communication system cybersecurity could be a significant risk to EV adoption because the political, social, and financial impact of cyberattacks - or public perception of such - ripples across the industry and has lasting and devastating effects. Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive EVSE cybersecurity approach and limited best practices have been adopted by the EV/EVSE industry. There is an incomplete industry understanding of the attack surface, interconnected assets, and unsecured interfaces. Thus, comprehensive cybersecurity recommendations founded on sound research are necessary to secure EV charging infrastructure. This project is providing the power, security, and automotive industry with a strong technical basis for securing this infrastructure by developing threat models, determining technology gaps, and identifying or developing effective countermeasures. Specifically, the team is creating a cybersecurity threat model and performing a technical risk assessment of EVSE assets, so that automotive, charging, and utility stakeholders can better protect customers, vehicles, and power systems in the face of new cyber threats.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Delay Tolerant Networks: Operational, Evolving, an Ready for Expansion

The future of humanity’s presence beyond Earth depends on the successful commercialization of space. For commercialization to succeed, companies need cost-efficient architectures to support their business models and minimize risks for human capital, design, development, and operations. An ongoing challenge to any space enterprise is the reality that terrestrial network technologies are insufficient to provide reliable communications between assets in space. Whether you need to ensure your valuable data is safely transmitted to the ground or reliably delivered between platforms in orbit, ensuring data integrity over intermittent communication links is a necessity. Current solutions to space communications rely heavily on manual recording, storing, and retrieval of data from spacecraft. The current standard in space communication protocols, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Packet standard, is reliant on inflexible network architectures based around mission-critical infrastructure to ensure data delivery. However, by automating the recording, storing, retrieval, and verification of data with Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN), the operator is freed from the dependence on manual data management and expensive mission critical infrastructure. NASA has been developing delay tolerant systems since the late 1990’s. Multiple DTN implementations have been established during that time, each suited to different use cases. Most notably, the DTN deployment for the International Space Station (ISS) includes demonstration of two DTN technologies: Interplanetary Overlay Network (ION) and Delay Tolerant Network Marshall Enterprise (DTNME). Beyond ISS, there are even more NASA DTN deployments being considered. Now that DTN implementations are maturing, it is appropriate to reflect upon these decades of work, review the integration and performance of the existing ISS deployment, and explore the future possibilities for DTN deployment industry-wide. The ISS DTN deployment is a complex architecture consisting of different DTN implementations for the onboard and ground network environments. The ION DTN implementation is being used in the on-board network. The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) DTN implementation, DTNME, is used by the ground network supporting ISS and will soon be a second onboard gateway too. The two implementations work cooperatively to provide high fidelity data services to flight operations users and payload developers across the globe. Though the two implementations yield a quality service, limitations are evident. Data rate, data storage, and device management are constrained by the services themselves and the complex nature of the deployment. Evolution of operations concepts will improve system capabilities and stability, but significant improvement will require additional development to the implementations themselves and to the overall deployment architecture. Taking advantage of the ongoing development and operation of the ISS DTN service will be central to the success of the future evolutions of NASA DTN deployments while demonstrating the benefits of DTN’s low-cost reliable data communication protocols for the growing commercial space industry. A broad effort on DTN integration and support is necessary to promote expansion beyond existing applications. NASA is developing several useful DTN implementations across a number of different systems: ION, DTNME, High-Rate DTN (HDTN), Bundle Protocol Library (BPLib), and others. To prevent fragmentation, DTN implementation teams need to communicate, collaborate, and integrate with one another to build a solid operational foundation for new DTN deployments. The establishment of a group that can assist new DTN users with understanding the purpose of each DTN implementation, provide best practices, and serve as a general knowledge base is paramount. Potential use of DTN on Gateway and other future NASA missions further drives the need for streamlined communication between DTN implementation teams. A well-integrated and highly engaged NASA DTN working group should help provide system architects the best DTN solutions for future commercial space efforts. This paper will first review the history of DTN implementations, explore the shortcoming of current space networking solutions given available limits in technology, and therefore establish the need for Delay Tolerant Networking in space communications. Secondly, the authors will explore NASA’s array of DTN implementations and highlight their usefulness to space applications. Thirdly, this paper will establish general DTN implementation distinguishing factors. Fourthly, the authors will discuss attempts to create a generic DTN comparison matrix, and the authors will review potential future topics in DTN innovation and collaboration, highlighting several key future efforts. Finally, this paper will describe how the institution of a NASA DTN Working Group will benefit DTN adoption across the governmental and commercial space sector. The goal of this paper is to encourage enthusiasm for DTN, share strategies for improving DTN on both current and future applications, promote the collaboration of DTN implementation groups within the international space operations community, and open the conversations about DTN, priorities, complexities, and innovation to the wider spaceflight industry.

DTN↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Delay Tolerant Networks: Operational, Evolving, an Ready for Expansion

The future of humanity’s presence beyond Earth depends on the successful commercialization of space. For commercialization to succeed, companies need cost-efficient architectures to support their business models and minimize risks for human capital, design, development, and operations. An ongoing challenge to any space enterprise is the reality that terrestrial network technologies are insufficient to provide reliable communications between assets in space. Whether you need to ensure your valuable data is safely transmitted to the ground or reliably delivered between platforms in orbit, ensuring data integrity over intermittent communication links is a necessity. Current solutions to space communications rely heavily on manual recording, storing, and retrieval of data from spacecraft. The current standard in space communication protocols, Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) Space Packet standard, is reliant on inflexible network architectures based around mission-critical infrastructure to ensure data delivery. However, by automating the recording, storing, retrieval, and verification of data with Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN), the operator is freed from the dependence on manual data management and expensive mission critical infrastructure. NASA has been developing delay tolerant systems since the late 1990’s. Multiple DTN implementations have been established during that time, each suited to different use cases. Most notably, the DTN deployment for the International Space Station (ISS) includes demonstration of two DTN technologies: Interplanetary Overlay Network (ION) and Delay Tolerant Network Marshall Enterprise (DTNME). Beyond ISS, there are even more NASA DTN deployments being considered. Now that DTN implementations are maturing, it is appropriate to reflect upon these decades of work, review the integration and performance of the existing ISS deployment, and explore the future possibilities for DTN deployment industry-wide. The ISS DTN deployment is a complex architecture consisting of different DTN implementations for the onboard and ground network environments. The ION DTN implementation is being used in the on-board network. The Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) DTN implementation, DTNME, is used by the ground network supporting ISS and will soon be a second onboard gateway too. The two implementations work cooperatively to provide high fidelity data services to flight operations users and payload developers across the globe. Though the two implementations yield a quality service, limitations are evident. Data rate, data storage, and device management are constrained by the services themselves and the complex nature of the deployment. Evolution of operations concepts will improve system capabilities and stability, but significant improvement will require additional development to the implementations themselves and to the overall deployment architecture. Taking advantage of the ongoing development and operation of the ISS DTN service will be central to the success of the future evolutions of NASA DTN deployments while demonstrating the benefits of DTN’s low-cost reliable data communication protocols for the growing commercial space industry. A broad effort on DTN integration and support is necessary to promote expansion beyond existing applications. NASA is developing several useful DTN implementations across a number of different systems: ION, DTNME, High-Rate DTN (HDTN), Bundle Protocol Library (BPLib), and others. To prevent fragmentation, DTN implementation teams need to communicate, collaborate, and integrate with one another to build a solid operational foundation for new DTN deployments. The establishment of a group that can assist new DTN users with understanding the purpose of each DTN implementation, provide best practices, and serve as a general knowledge base is paramount. Potential use of DTN on Gateway and other future NASA missions further drives the need for streamlined communication between DTN implementation teams. A well-integrated and highly engaged NASA DTN working group should help provide system architects the best DTN solutions for future commercial space efforts. This paper will first review the history of DTN implementations, explore the shortcoming of current space networking solutions given available limits in technology, and therefore establish the need for Delay Tolerant Networking in space communications. Secondly, the authors will explore NASA’s array of DTN implementations and highlight their usefulness to space applications. Thirdly, this paper will establish general DTN implementation distinguishing factors. Fourthly, the authors will discuss attempts to create a generic DTN comparison matrix, and the authors will review potential future topics in DTN innovation and collaboration, highlighting several key future efforts. Finally, this paper will describe how the institution of a NASA DTN Working Group will benefit DTN adoption across the governmental and commercial space sector. The goal of this paper is to encourage enthusiasm for DTN, share strategies for improving DTN on both current and future applications, promote the collaboration of DTN implementation groups within the international space operations community, and open the conversations about DTN, priorities, complexities, and innovation to the wider spaceflight industry.

DTN↗

DOE OSTI2024

Distributed Energy Resources as an Equity Asset: Lessons Learned from Deployments in Disadvantaged Communities

For an Energy System to be truly equitable, it should provide affordable and reliable energy services to disadvantaged and underserved populations. Disadvantaged communities often face a combination of economic, social, health, and environmental burdens and may be geographically isolated (e.g., rural communities), which systematically limits their opportunity to fully participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

NASA NTRS2011

Spectral Bio-indicator Simulations for Tracking Photosynthetic Activities in a Corn Field

Accurate assessment of vegetation canopy optical properties plays a critical role in monitoring natural and managed ecosystems under environmental changes. In this context, radiative transfer (RT) models simulating vegetation canopy reflectance have been demonstrated to be a powerful tool for understanding and estimating spectral bio-indicators. In this study, two narrow band spectroradiometers were utilized to acquire observations over corn canopies for two summers. These in situ spectral data were then used to validate a two-layer Markov chain-based canopy reflectance model for simulating the Photochemical Reflectance Index (PRI), which has been widely used in recent vegetation photosynthetic light use efficiency (LUE) studies. The in situ PRI derived from narrow band hyperspectral reflectance exhibited clear responses to: 1) viewing geometry which affects the asset of light environment; and 2) seasonal variation corresponding to the growth stage. The RT model (ACRM) successfully simulated the responses to the variable viewing geometry. The best simulations were obtained when the model was set to run in the two layer mode using the sunlit leaves as the upper layer and shaded leaves as the lower layer. Simulated PRI values yielded much better correlations to in situ observations when the cornfield was dominated by green foliage during the early growth, vegetative and reproductive stages (r = 0.78 to 0.86) than in the later senescent stage (r = 0.65). Further sensitivity analyses were conducted to show the important influences of leaf area index (LAI) and the sunlit/shaded ratio on PRI observations.

Cheng, Yen-Ben↗

DOE OSTI2025

Repurposing Offshore Infrastructure for Clean Energy (ROICE) vs. Decommissioning – Commercial Considerations

Abstract The Repurposing Offshore Infrastructure for Clean Energy (ROICE) Program, a collaboration of the energy industry and University of Houston, proposes extending the life of up to 1,500 oil and gas platforms in the Outer Continental Shelf of the Gulf of Mexico, USA. Rather than decommissioning or converting them to underwater reefs at the end of their oil and gas production phase, the platforms could be transformed for 10–20+ years of renewable energy development, such as green hydrogen production or carbon dioxide injection and storage, resulting in significant economic, environmental, and social benefits. ROICE has already published papers on the technical and regulatory considerations for such repurposing projects. This paper focuses on the commercial considerations needed to ensure ROICE projects are economically viable and sustainable for all involved. There are potentially many entities that can come together to progress a repurposing project, including oil and gas asset owners, operators, investors, developers, contractors, manufacturers, and regulators. This paper looks at possible combinations of these entities in a ROICE project team and the various commercial agreements that will be needed to ensure a mutually successful outcome. The paper proposes adapting existing industry agreements and templates to suit, including asset transfer agreements (ATA), asset purchase agreements (APA) and joint purchasing agreements (JOA). An ATA or APA can be drafted to address the obligations and issues involved in the sale or transfer of an existing oil and gas facility to the developer, operator, non-operating interests, and financial investors in a ROICE project, while a JOA can be drafted to govern the rights, obligations, and financial requirements of the parties involved in the development and operation.

Legge, G. [Endeavor Management, USA]↗

DOE OSTI2024

Dynamic CCS-EJ-SJ Database and Web Application - What's New

At the 2024 FECM/NETL Carbon Management Research Project Review Meeting, within the Carbon Transport and Storage Breakout Session 3, the presentation "Dynamic CCS-EJ-SJ Database and Web Application - What's New" highlights the critical tool designed to integrate environmental and social justice considerations into Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects. Key features include an interactive dashboard for data access and visualization, which supports stakeholders in making informed decisions regarding CCS implementation, and updated data layers. The latest version enhances data integration and usability, providing a comprehensive resource for assessing the social and environmental impacts of CCS projects. There are 7 categories in the CCS EJSJ v2 database (released 03/31/2024): environmental justice, energy justice, economic justice, social justice, ecosystem assets, clean energy, and infrastructure. Most of the layers within each category have been updated in this version. As compared to the old database, there are 3 new categories in the v2 database: ecosystem assets, clean energy, and infrastructure.

Sharma, Maneesh↗

NASA NTRS2008

Designing the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Element and Integrating the Stack at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center

Fielding an integrated launch vehicle system entails many challenges, not the least of which is the fact that it has been over 30 years since the United States has developed a human-rated vehicle - the venerable Space Shuttle. Over time, whole generations of rocket scientists have passed through the aerospace community without the opportunity to perform such exacting, demanding, and rewarding work. However, with almost 50 years of experience leading the design, development, and end-to-end systems engineering and integration of complex launch vehicles, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Marshall Space Flight Center offers the in-house talent - both junior- and senior-level personnel - to shape a new national asset to meet the requirements for safe, reliable, and affordable space exploration solutions. The technical personnel are housed primarily in Marshall's Engineering Directorate and are matrixed into the programs and projects that reside at the rocket center. Fortunately, many Apollo-era and Shuttle engineers, as well as those who gained valuable hands-on experience in the 1990s by conducting technology demonstrator projects such as the Delta-Clipper Experimental Advanced, X-33, X-34, and X-37, as well as the short-lived Orbital Space Plane, work closely with industry partners to advance the nation's strategic capability for human access to space. The Ares Projects Office, resident at Marshall, is managing the design and development of America's new space fleet, including the Ares I, which will loft the Orion crew capsule for its first test flight in the 2013 timeframe, as well as the heavy-lift Ares V, which will round out the capability to leave low-Earth orbit once again, when it delivers the Altair lunar lander to orbit late next decade. This paper provides information about the approach to integrating the Ares I stack and designing the upper stage in house, using unique facilities and an expert workforce to revitalize the nation's space exploration resources.

Otte, Neil E.↗

DOE OSTI2017

Regulatory Incentives and Disincentives for Utility Investments in Grid Modernization

Electric power is America's most capital-intensive industry, with more than $100 billion invested each year in energy infrastructure. Investment needs are likely to grow as electric utilities make power systems more reliable and resilient, deploy advanced digital technologies, and facilitate new services to meet some consumers' expectations for greater choice and control. But do current regulatory approaches provide the appropriate incentives for grid modernization investments? This report presents three perspectives: -Financial analyst Steve Kihm begins by explaining that any major investor-owned electric utility that wants to raise capital today can do so at a reasonable cost. The question is whether utility managers want to raise capital for grid modernization. Specifically, they look for investments that create the most value for their existing shareholders. In cases where grid modernization investments are not the best choice in terms of shareholder value, Kihm describes shareholder incentive mechanisms that regulators could consider to encourage such investments when they are in the public interest. -From an institutional perspective, Dr. Janice Beecher finds that the traditional rate-base/rate of return regulatory model provides powerful incentives for utilities to pursue investments, cost control, efficiency and even innovation, and it is well suited to the policy objectives of grid modernization. Prudence of grid modernization investments (fair returns) depends on careful evaluation of the specific asset, and any special incentives (bonus returns) should be used only if they promote economic efficiency consistent with the core goals of economic regulation. According to Beecher, realizing the promises of grid modernization depends on effective implementation of the traditional regulatory model and ratemaking tools to serve the public interest. -Conversely, former commissioner and clean energy consultant Ron Lehr says that rapid electric industry changes require a better alignment of utility investment incentives with changes challenging the electricity sector, emerging grid modernization options and benefits, and public policies. For example, investor-owned utilities typically have an incentive to make capital investments, but rarely to employ expense-based solutions, since utilities do not earn profits on expenses. Further, Lehr cites a variety of factors that stand in the way of creating well targeted and well aligned utility incentives, including litigated regulatory processes. These may be a poor choice for finding the right balance among competing interests, establishing rules of prospective application, justifying demonstrations of new technologies and approaches to meeting emerging consumer demands, and keeping pace with rapid change.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRS2010

Jake Garn Mission Simulator and Training Facility, Building 5, Historical Documentation

In response to President George W. Bush's announcement in January 2004 that the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) would end in 2010, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) completed a nation-wide historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned facilities and properties (real property assets) at all its Centers and component facilities. The buildings and structures which supported the SSP were inventoried and assessed as per the criteria of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in the context of this program. This study was performed in compliance with Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (Public Law 89-665), as amended; the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (Public Law 91-190); Executive Order (EO) 11593: Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment; EO 13287, Preserve America, and other relevant legislation. As part of this nation-wide study, in September 2006, historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned and managed facilities at was conducted by NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. The results of this study are presented in a report entitled, "Survey and Evaluation of NASA-owned Historic Facilities and Properties in the Context of the U.S. Space Shuttle Program, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas," prepared in November 2007 by NASA JSC's contractor, Archaeological Consultants, Inc. As a result of this survey, the Jake Gam Mission Simulator and Training Facility (Building 5) was determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, with concurrence by the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The survey concluded that Building 5 is eligible for the NRHP under Criteria A and C in the context of the U.S. Space Shuttle program (1969-2010). Because it has achieved significance within the past 50 years, Criteria Consideration G applies. At the time of this documentation, Building 5 was still used to support the SSP as an astronaut training facility. This documentation package precedes any undertaking as defined by Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and implemented in 36 CFR Part 800, as NASA JSC has decided to proactively pursue efforts to mitigate the potential adverse affects of any future modifications to the facility. It includes a historical summary of the Space Shuttle program; the history of JSC in relation to the SSP; a narrative of the history of Building 5 and how it supported the SSP; and a physical description of the structure. In addition, photographs documenting the construction and historical use of Building 5 in support of the SSP, as well as photographs of the facility documenting the existing conditions, special technological features, and engineering details, are included. A contact sheet printed on archival paper, and an electronic copy of the work product on CD, are also provided.

Slovinac, Trish↗

DOE OSTI2018

DES science portal: Creating science-ready catalogs

We present a novel approach for creating science-ready catalogs through a software infrastructure developed for the Dark Energy Survey (DES). We integrate the data products released by the DES Data Management and additional products created by the DES collaboration in an environment known as DES Science Portal. Each step involved in the creation of a science-ready catalog is recorded in a relational database and can be recovered at any time. We describe how the DES Science Portal automates the creation and characterization of lightweight catalogs for DES Year 1 Annual Release, and show its flexibility in creating multiple catalogs with different inputs and configurations. Finally, we discuss the advantages of this infrastructure for large surveys such as DES and the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope. The capability of creating science-ready catalogs efficiently and with full control of the inputs and configurations used is an important asset for supporting science analysis using data from large astronomical surveys.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

NASA NTRS1991

Analysis of methods

Information is one of an organization's most important assets. For this reason the development and maintenance of an integrated information system environment is one of the most important functions within a large organization. The Integrated Information Systems Evolution Environment (IISEE) project has as one of its primary goals a computerized solution to the difficulties involved in the development of integrated information systems. To develop such an environment a thorough understanding of the enterprise's information needs and requirements is of paramount importance. This document is the current release of the research performed by the Integrated Development Support Environment (IDSE) Research Team in support of the IISEE project. Research indicates that an integral part of any information system environment would be multiple modeling methods to support the management of the organization's information. Automated tool support for these methods is necessary to facilitate their use in an integrated environment. An integrated environment makes it necessary to maintain an integrated database which contains the different kinds of models developed under the various methodologies. In addition, to speed the process of development of models, a procedure or technique is needed to allow automatic translation from one methodology's representation to another while maintaining the integrity of both. The purpose for the analysis of the modeling methods included in this document is to examine these methods with the goal being to include them in an integrated development support environment. To accomplish this and to develop a method for allowing intra-methodology and inter-methodology model element reuse, a thorough understanding of multiple modeling methodologies is necessary. Currently the IDSE Research Team is investigating the family of Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing (ICAM) DEFinition (IDEF) languages IDEF(0), IDEF(1), and IDEF(1x), as well as ENALIM, Entity Relationship, Data Flow Diagrams, and Structure Charts, for inclusion in an integrated development support environment.

Mayer, Richard J.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Employee Assistance Program Issues

Employee Assistance Program (EAP) officers, as well as personnel in other disciplines from eight NASA Centers, attended this breakout session. Ms. Brenda Blair, MA, CEAP, a guest speaker at the conference, also attended as a consultant. Representatives from the NASA Centers introduced themselves and spoke briefly about their programs. In a discussion related to the conference theme on benchmarking, quality control issues within the EAP community and adequate documentation of cases were addressed. Disposition and provision for quality assurance checks for EAP providers in single person offices were also discussed. Ms. Blair presented methods for consulting with other NASA personnel in single person EAP offices as a quality control measure. EAP intervention in critical incidents was discussed. The question of whether EAP assistance is an asset or a potential liability in those situations was addressed. Suggestions were made of topics for future EAP video-teleconference topics. A program on EAP ethics was planned for a September video teleconference. Each person was asked to provide intake forms they use to Mr. Gettleman or Ms. Blair. Ms. Blair said she would review the forms to ensure that adequate notification is provided to the client for confidentiality. She would also review them to ensure they have adequate limits of confidentiality--a topic for future video teleconferencing. Mr. Gettleman described the NASA initiative to reduce stresses in the workplace, and the activities of an ad-hoc EAP group that will make recommendations to NASA senior management. Alternative training methods were discussed for reaching target audiences such as employees at risk, supervisors, and others. Pfc. David A. Pendleton, Victim Assistance Coordinator, U.S. Capitol Police. U.S. House of Representatives made a special presentation. Pfc. Pendleton was on duty during the tragic shooting of two Federal guards at the U.S. Capitol. He related the events immediately after the incident. He described the nature and structure of the EAP's and the separate nature of the House and Senate programs. This episode was a particularly difficult situation as large numbers of tourists were involved. William S. Barry, MD, the new Manager of the NASA Occupational Health Program Office was introduced to those attending the breakout session.

Gettleman, Alan G.↗

DOE OSTI2021

SQL and NoSQL Databases for Cyber Physical Production Systems in Internet of Things for Manufacturing (IoTfM)

Abstract In this paper, the design and performance differences between Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS) and NoSQL Database Systems are examined, with attention to their applicability for real-world Internet of Things for manufacturing (IoTfM) data. While previous work has extensively compared SQL and NoSQL for both generalized and IoT uses, this work specifically examines the tradeoffs and performance differences for manufacturing applications by using a high-fidelity data set collected from a large US manufacturing firm. Growing an IoT system beyond the pilot stage requires scalable data storage; this work seeks to determine the impact of selected database systems on data write performance at scale. Payload size and message frequency were used as the primary characteristics to maintain model fidelity in simulated clients. As the number of simulated asset clients grow, the data write latency was calculated to determine how both database systems’ performance were affected. To isolate the RDBMS and NoSQL differences, a cloud environment was created using Amazon Web Services (AWS) with two identical data ingestion pipelines: writing data to an RDMBS (1) using AWS Aurora MySQL, and (2) using AWS DynamoDB NoSQL. The findings may provide guidance for further experimentation in large-scale manufacturing IoT implementations.

Gamero, David↗

NASA NTRS2021

Modernizing NASA’s Space Flight Safety and Mission Success (S&MS) Assurance Framework In Line With Evolving Acquisition Strategies and Systems Engineering Practices

This paper presents the objectives-driven, case-based safety and mission success (S&MS) assurance framework being developed by the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), including its motivations and its implementation via a S&MS Assurance Standard that is under development, supplemented by supporting standards including an S&MS Analysis Management Standard that is also under development. A need to evolve NASA’s S&MS assurance framework has emerged in recent years, resulting from the need to accommodate new acquisition models; the need to accommodate evolving systems engineering (SE) practices; the need to stipulate acceptable levels of S&MS risk; the need for improved integration of S&MS into SE; and the need for clearer risk acceptance accountability. The objectives-driven, case-based S&MS assurance framework proposed here is responsive to that need. Its key features include: • The establishment, by NASA Acquirers, of fundamental S&MS performance objectives that define limits of acceptability for the likelihoods that mission technical objectives will be accomplished and that people, assets, and environments put at risk by the mission will not be adversely affected; • The development and approval of Providers’ S&MS plans for meeting Acquirers’ S&MS performance objectives, including commitments to support Acquirer audit, investigation, and reporting needs; • The development, by Providers, of S&MS assurance cases that argue, supported by evidence, that the Provider has met, or is on track to meeting, the fundamental S&MS objectives; • The evaluation, throughout the program/project life cycle, of Provider S&MS assurance cases as the primary S&MS-related technical basis for Acquirer risk acceptance and the granting to the Provider of authority to proceed through the program/project life cycle. This proposed S&MS assurance framework is notable for its lack of prescription of traditional S&MS requirements and strategies such as defined failure tolerances, margins, or analysis requirements. Instead, Providers are given latitude to propose their own strategies for meeting the fundamental S&MS performance objectives, subject to independent review and Acquirer approval. The result is a framework for S&MS assurance that is at once both rigorous and flexible.

Assurance Case↗

DOE OSTI2013

Enterprise SRS: leveraging ongoing operations to advance nuclear fuel cycles research and development programs

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is re-purposing its vast array of assets (including H Canyon - a nuclear chemical separation plant) to solve issues regarding advanced nuclear fuel cycle technologies, nuclear materials processing, packaging, storage and disposition. The vehicle for this transformation is Enterprise SRS which presents a new, radical view of SRS as a united endeavor for 'all things nuclear' as opposed to a group of distinct and separate entities with individual missions and organizations. Key among the Enterprise SRS strategic initiatives is the integration of research into SRS facilities but also in other facilities in conjunction with on-going missions to provide researchers from other national laboratories, academic institutions, and commercial entities the opportunity to demonstrate their technologies in a relevant environment and scale prior to deployment. To manage that integration of research demonstrations into site facilities, a center for applied nuclear materials processing and engineering research has been established in SRS.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗