Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “contractors”

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 1,621 records · Page 90
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

KSC Tech Transfer News, Volume 3, No. 1

Kennedy Tech Transfer News is the semiannual magazine of the Innovative Partnerships Program at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida. This magazine seeks to inform and educate civil servant and contractor personnel at Kennedy about actively participating in achieving NASA's technology transfer and partnership goals. The contents include: 1) About IPP; 2) NTR corner; 3) Innovator Insights; 4) Licensing Success; 5) Partnership Success; 6) SBIR/STTR Success; 7) Events; 8) Trands in Innovation; 9) Q&A: Data Rights; and 10) Awards.

Dunn, Carol↗
NASA NTRS2010

The Applied Meteorology Unit: Nineteen Years Successfully Transitioning Research into Operations for America's Space Program

The Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) provides technology transition and technique development to improve operational weather support to the Space Shuttle and the entire American space program. The AMU is funded and managed by NASA and operated by a contractor that provides five meteorologists with a diverse mix of advanced degrees, operational experience, and associated skills including data processing, statistics, and the development of graphical user interfaces. The AMU's primary customers are the U.S. Air Force 45th Weather Squadron at Patrick Air Force Base, the National Weather Service Spaceflight Meteorology Group at NASA Johnson Space Center, and the National Weather Service Melbourne FL Forecast Office. The AMU has transitioned research into operations for nineteen years and worked on a wide range of topics, including new forecasting techniques for lightning probability, synoptic peak winds,.convective winds, and summer severe weather; satellite tools to predict anvil cloud trajectories and evaluate camera line of sight for Space Shuttle launch; optimized radar scan strategies; evaluated and implemented local numerical models; evaluated weather sensors; and many more. The AMU has completed 113 projects with 5 more scheduled to be completed by the end of 2010. During this rich history, the AMU and its customers have learned many lessons on how to effectively transition research into operations. Some of these lessons learned include collocating with the operational customer and periodically visiting geographically separated customers, operator submitted projects, consensus tasking process, use of operator primary advocates for each project, customer AMU liaisons with experience in both operations and research, flexibility in adapting the project plan based on lessons learned during the project, and incorporating training and other transition assistance into the project plans. Operator involvement has been critical to the AMU's remarkable success and many awards from NASA, the National Weather Association, and two citations from the Navy's Center of Excellence for Best Manufacturing Practices. This paper will present the AMU's proven methods and explain how they may be applied by other organizations to effectively transition research into operations.

Madura, John T.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Asbestos Exposure Assessment Database

Exposure to particular hazardous materials in a work environment is dangerous to the employees who work directly with or around the materials as well as those who come in contact with them indirectly. In order to maintain a national standard for safe working environments and protect worker health, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set forth numerous precautionary regulations. NASA has been proactive in adhering to these regulations by implementing standards which are often stricter than regulation limits and administering frequent health risk assessments. The primary objective of this project is to create the infrastructure for an Asbestos Exposure Assessment Database specific to NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) which will compile all of the exposure assessment data into a well-organized, navigable format. The data includes Sample Types, Samples Durations, Crafts of those from whom samples were collected, Job Performance Requirements (JPR) numbers, Phased Contrast Microscopy (PCM) and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) results and qualifiers, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), and names of industrial hygienists who performed the monitoring. This database will allow NASA to provide OSHA with specific information demonstrating that JSC s work procedures are protective enough to minimize the risk of future disease from the exposures. The data has been collected by the NASA contractors Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) and Wyle Laboratories. The personal exposure samples were collected from devices worn by laborers working at JSC and by building occupants located in asbestos-containing buildings.

Arcot, Divya K.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Workmanship Challenges for NASA Mission Hardware

This slide presentation reviews several challenges in workmanship for NASA mission hardware development. Several standards for NASA workmanship exist, that are required for all programs, projects, contracts and subcontracts. These Standards contain our best known methods for avoiding past assembly problems and defects. These best practices may not be available if suppliers are used who are not compliant with them. Compliance includes having certified operators and inspectors. Some examples of problems that have occured from the lack of requirements flow-down to contractors are reviewed. The presentation contains a detailed example of the challenge in regards to The Packaging "Design" Dilemma.

Plante, Jeannette↗
NASA NTRS2010

Orion FSW V and V and Kedalion Engineering Lab Insight

NASA, along with its prime Orion contractor and its subcontractor s are adapting an avionics system paradigm borrowed from the manned commercial aircraft industry for use in manned space flight systems. Integrated Modular Avionics (IMA) techniques have been proven as a robust avionics solution for manned commercial aircraft (B737/777/787, MD 10/90). This presentation will outline current approaches to adapt IMA, along with its heritage FSW V&V paradigms, into NASA's manned space flight program for Orion. NASA's Kedalion engineering analysis lab is on the forefront of validating many of these contemporary IMA based techniques. Kedalion has already validated many of the proposed Orion FSW V&V paradigms using Orion's precursory Flight Test Article (FTA) Pad Abort 1 (PA-1) program. The Kedalion lab will evolve its architectures, tools, and techniques in parallel with the evolving Orion program.

Mangieri, Mark L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

The X-38 Spacecraft Fault-Tolerant Avionics System

In 1995 NASA began an experimental program to develop a reusable crew return vehicle (CRV) for the International Space Station. The purpose of the CRV was threefold: (i) to bring home an injured or ill crewmember; (ii) to bring home the entire crew if the Shuttle fleet was grounded; and (iii) to evacuate the crew in the case of an imminent Station threat (i.e., fire, decompression, etc). Built at the Johnson Space Center, were two approach and landing prototypes and one spacecraft demonstrator (called V201). A series of increasingly complex ground subsystem tests were completed, and eight successful high-altitude drop tests were achieved to prove the design concept. In this program, an unprecedented amount of commercial-off-the-shelf technology was utilized in this first crewed spacecraft NASA has built since the Shuttle program. Unfortunately, in 2002 the program was canceled due to changing Agency priorities. The vehicle was 80% complete and the program was shut down in such a manner as to preserve design, development, test and engineering data. This paper describes the X-38 V201 fault-tolerant avionics system. Based on Draper Laboratory's Byzantine-resilient fault-tolerant parallel processing system and their "network element" hardware, each flight computer exchanges information on a strict timescale to process input data, compare results, and issue voted vehicle output commands. Major accomplishments achieved in this development include: (i) a space qualified two-fault tolerant design using mostly COTS (hardware and operating system); (ii) a single event upset tolerant network element board, (iii) on-the-fly recovery of a failed processor; (iv) use of synched cache; (v) realignment of memory to bring back a failed channel; (vi) flight code automatically generated from the master measurement list; and (vii) built in-house by a team of civil servants and support contractors. This paper will present an overview of the avionics system and the hardware implementation, as well as the system software and vehicle command & telemetry functions. Potential improvements and lessons learned on this program are also discussed.

Kouba,Coy↗
NASA NTRS1999

Decal Process Document and Catalog

The Decal Process Document and Catalog, JSC 27260 is the standard flight decal catalog, complete with illustrations and part numbers. As hardware developers identify labels that have common applicability across end items, these labels can be evaluated for "standard decal classification" and entered into the decal catalog for general use. The hardware developer must have a label design that meets current, applicable labeling requirements, and submit to the Decal Design and Production Facility (DDPF) as a standard label candidate. Upon approval, the label will be added to the decal catalog. The Decal Process Document and Catalog provides a selection of decals from which the NASA and NASA contractor customers can easily order. The decals shown in the catalog have been previously produced and have released engineering/fabrication drawings on file in the (DDPF). A released drawing is required before a decal can be produced or placed into the catalog. Some decals included in the catalog have a common applicability and are used in various NASA vehicles/habitats. It is the intent of the DDPF to maintain this catalog as a "living document" to which decals/placards can be added as they are repeatedly used. The advantage of identifYing flight decals in this catalog is that a released drawing is already in place, and the products will be flight certified.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

Hydrogen Fire in a Storage Vessel

On October 23, 2007, the operations team began a procedure to sample the Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) storage vessels ("tanks"), and associated transfer system. This procedure was being performed to determine the conditions within the system, and if necessary, to purge the system of any excess Gaseous Hydrogen (GH2) in preparation for reactivation of the system. The system had not been used since 2003. The LH2 storage system contains two (2) spherical pressure vessels of 225,000 gallons in volume, with a maximum working pressure (MAWP) of 50 psig. Eight inch transfer piping connects them to the usage point. Operations began with activation of the burnstack for the LH2 storage area. Pneumatic (GN2) systems in the storage area were then activated and checked. Pressurization of storage tank number 1 with gaseous nitrogen (GN2) was initiated, with a target pressure of 10 psig, at which point samples were planned to be taken. At 5 psig, a loud noise was heard in the upper area of tank number 2. Smoke was seen exiting the burnstack and from the insulation on vent lines for both tanks. At this time tank number 1 was vented and the pressurization system was secured. The mishap resulted in physical damage to both storage tanks, as well as to some of the piping for both tanks. Corrective action included repair of the damaged hardware by a qualified contractor. Preventive action included documented organizational policy and procedures for establishing standby and mothball conditions for facilities and equipment, including provisions as detailed in the investigation report recommendations: Recommendation 1: The using organization should define necessary activities in order to place hydrogen systems in long term periods of inactivity. The defined activities should address requirements for rendering inert, isolation (i.e., physical disconnect, double block and bleed, etc.) and periodic monitoring. Recommendation 2: The using organization should develop a process to periodically monitor hazardous systems for proper configuration (i.e., a daily/weekly/monthly check sheet to verify critical purges are active).

Hester, Zena M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

L-Band Digital Aeronautical Communications System Engineering - Concepts of Use, Systems Performance, Requirements, and Architectures

This NASA Contractor Report summarizes and documents the work performed to develop concepts of use (ConUse) and high-level system requirements and architecture for the proposed L-band (960 to 1164 MHz) terrestrial en route communications system. This work was completed as a follow-on to the technology assessment conducted by NASA Glenn Research Center and ITT for the Future Communications Study (FCS). ITT assessed air-to-ground (A/G) communications concepts of use and operations presented in relevant NAS-level, international, and NAS-system-level documents to derive the appropriate ConUse relevant to potential A/G communications applications and services for domestic continental airspace. ITT also leveraged prior concepts of use developed during the earlier phases of the FCS. A middle-out functional architecture was adopted by merging the functional system requirements identified in the bottom-up assessment of existing requirements with those derived as a result of the top-down analysis of ConUse and higher level functional requirements. Initial end-to-end system performance requirements were derived to define system capabilities based on the functional requirements and on NAS-SR-1000 and the Operational Performance Assessment conducted as part of the COCR. A high-level notional architecture of the L-DACS supporting A/G communication was derived from the functional architecture and requirements.

Zelkin, Natalie↗
NASA NTRS2002

Factors in International Space Station Integration Feasibility Assessments

The International Space Station, ISS, is a growing vehicle. The ISS configuration changes internally and externally with each ISS flight. Each flight adds resources and capabilities such as docking/berthing ports, power, stowage volume, heat rejection, and data processing capability. The configuration, capabilities and performance characteristics of the vehicle will be in flux until assembly complete. At the same time the knowledge about what is required to support humans involved in long duration space flight is also being greatly expanded. In addition to the changes occurring on-orbit, the situation on the ground is also very dynamic. Proposals for new ISS elements, proposed deletions of elements, changes to the ISS requirements, and changes to the planned configuration are always under evaluation. Furthermore, budgetary issues have driven the need to explore alternative options for the ISS . This environment has made the role of the technical integrator in the ISS program unique in that the baseline against which proposals are evaluated is always changing. The nature of the International Space Station Program adds another dimension to the integrators task. ISS program activities are spread across several centers: KSC, MSFC, GRC, DFRC, ARC and JSc. There are six International Partners/participants each with their own unique organizations. The prime contractor is in Texas, California and Alabama. And, the Space Shuttle Program as the launch vehicle provider is another major interface. In spite of the fluidity of the technical baseline, projections and organizational complexity, in the course of evaluating proposals and producing feasibility assessments there are factors, which frequently emerge as significant. These factors tend to be the limiting conditions when they come into play. The finite resources, which tend to limit the options for ISS are: upmass, life support and crew rescue capability, crew time, utilities, exercise equipment, and docking/berthing ports. Upmass requirements need to be developed for each option proposed. Short term and long term impacts to upmass are the result of the implementation and long term operations. The upmass requirements need to be met by the existing launch vehicles and any change in flight rate will be a significant cost driver. In addition, when any item is brought to the ISS careful consideration must be given to the on-board stowage and crew time available to unpack, transfer, stow and use these items. If stowage is not available then something must be returned, use of non-standard stowage negotiated or the item in question stays on the ground. Additional crew time requirements will impact available utilization time or crew off-duty time. When the human element is affected, such as, by increasing the number of crew members or changing the duration of the crew stay (longer or shorter) there is an additional set of factors that come into play. The main considerations are: rescue capability, exercise requirements and availability of equipment, resupply, and life support capability.

Watson, Patricia M.↗
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↗
NASA NTRS2010

Integrated Evaluation of Closed Loop Air Revitalization System Components

NASA s vision and mission statements include an emphasis on human exploration of space, which requires environmental control and life support technologies. This Contractor Report (CR) describes the development and evaluation of an Air Revitalization System, modeling and simulation of the components, and integrated hardware testing with the goal of better understanding the inherent capabilities and limitations of this closed loop system. Major components integrated and tested included a 4-Bed Modular Sieve, Mechanical Compressor Engineering Development Unit, Temperature Swing Adsorption Compressor, and a Sabatier Engineering and Development Unit. The requisite methodolgy and technical results are contained in this CR.

Murdock, K.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Summary of the Large Civil Tiltrotor (LCTR2) Engine Gearbox Study

In support of the Fundamental Aeronautics Program, Subsonic Rotary Wing Project, NASA is continuing to study the Large Civil Tiltrotor (LCTR) concept to help define/refine vehicle, system and subsystem attributes. These attributes can then be used to define performance requirements and identify new or advanced technologies to achieve an operational vehicle class. As part of this goal, NASA contracted with The Boeing Company and its subcontractor Rolls-Royce to perform an investigation of different combinations of engine and gearbox variability to achieve a maximum of 50 percent rotor tip speed reduction from hover to cruise conditions. Previous NASA studies identified the 50 percent rotor speed reduction minimized vehicle gross weight and fuel burn. The LCTR2 (LCTR-iteration 2) was the contracted study baseline for initial sizing. Rotor tip speed ratios (cruise to hover) of 100, 77, and 54 percent were analyzed for each combination of engine and gearbox speed reduction to achieve the chosen rotor tip speed ratio. Three different engine and gearbox technology levels were assumed; commercial off-the-shelf (COTS), entry-in-service (EIS) in 2025 and EIS in 2035. These technology levels were applied to determine each particular effect on vehicle gross weight and fuel burn, while other vehicle technologies were assumed constant. This report summarizes the work performed that is being put together into a comprehensive NASA contractor report. Some background on the LCTR concept and baseline vehicle will be given and then a discussion concerning the technical approach utilized. Major study assumptions and results will be presented and discussed. Finally conclusions will be drawn as well as suggestions provided for future efforts.

Snyder, Christopher A.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Hardware Development Process for Human Research Facility Applications

The simple goal of the Human Research Facility (HRF) is to conduct human research experiments on the International Space Station (ISS) astronauts during long-duration missions. This is accomplished by providing integration and operation of the necessary hardware and software capabilities. A typical hardware development flow consists of five stages: functional inputs and requirements definition, market research, design life cycle through hardware delivery, crew training, and mission support. The purpose of this presentation is to guide the audience through the early hardware development process: requirement definition through selecting a development path. Specific HRF equipment is used to illustrate the hardware development paths. The source of hardware requirements is the science community and HRF program. The HRF Science Working Group, consisting of SCientists from various medical disciplines, defined a basic set of equipment with functional requirements. This established the performance requirements of the hardware. HRF program requirements focus on making the hardware safe and operational in a space environment. This includes structural, thermal, human factors, and material requirements. Science and HRF program requirements are defined in a hardware requirements document which includes verification methods. Once the hardware is fabricated, requirements are verified by inspection, test, analysis, or demonstration. All data is compiled and reviewed to certify the hardware for flight. Obviously, the basis for all hardware development activities is requirement definition. Full and complete requirement definition is ideal prior to initiating the hardware development. However, this is generally not the case, but the hardware team typically has functional inputs as a guide. The first step is for engineers to conduct market research based on the functional inputs provided by scientists. CommerCially available products are evaluated against the science requirements as well as modifications needed to meet program requirements. Options are consolidated and the hardware development team reaches a hardware development decision point. Within budget and schedule constraints, the team must decide whether or not to complete the hardware as an in-house, subcontract with vendor, or commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) development. An in-house development indicates NASA personnel or a contractor builds the hardware at a NASA site. A subcontract development is completed off-site by a commercial company. A COTS item is a vendor product available by ordering a specific part number. The team evaluates the pros and cons of each development path. For example, in-bouse developments utilize existing corporate knowledge regarding bow to build equipment for use in space. However, technical expertise would be required to fully understand the medical equipment capabilities, such as for an ultrasound system. It may require additional time and funding to gain the expertise that commercially exists. The major benefit of subcontracting a hardware development is the product is delivered as an end-item and commercial expertise is utilized. On the other hand, NASA has limited control over schedule delays. The final option of COTS or modified COTS equipment is a compromise between in-house and subcontracts. A vendor product may exist that meets all functional requirements but req uires in-house modifications for successful operation in a space environment. The HRF utilizes equipment developed using all of the paths described: inhouse, subcontract, and modified COTS.

Bauer, Liz↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X Range Safety Simulation Verification and Analysis IV and V

NASA s ARES I-X vehicle launched on a suborbital test flight from the Eastern Range in Florida on October 28, 2009. NASA generated a Range Safety (RS) flight data package to meet the RS trajectory data requirements defined in the Air Force Space Command Manual 91-710. Some products included in the flight data package were a nominal ascent trajectory, ascent flight envelope trajectories, and malfunction turn trajectories. These data are used by the Air Force s 45th Space Wing (45SW) to ensure Eastern Range public safety and to make flight termination decisions on launch day. Due to the criticality of the RS data in regards to public safety and mission success, an independent validation and verification (IV&V) effort was undertaken to accompany the data generation analyses to ensure utmost data quality and correct adherence to requirements. Multiple NASA centers and contractor organizations were assigned specific products to IV&V. The data generation and IV&V work was coordinated through the Launch Constellation Range Safety Panel s Trajectory Working Group, which included members from the prime and IV&V organizations as well as the 45SW. As a result of the IV&V efforts, the RS product package was delivered with confidence that two independent organizations using separate simulation software generated data to meet the range requirements and yielded similar results. This document captures ARES I-X RS product IV&V analysis, including the methodology used to verify inputs, simulation, and output data for an RS product. Additionally a discussion of lessons learned is presented to capture advantages and disadvantages to the IV&V processes used.

Tarpley, Ashley↗
NASA NTRS2009

Designing Struts for the Low-Fidelity Orion Cockpit Mockup

The objective of the project was to design and construct nine struts to be installed in the low-fidelity Orion cockpit mockup (Rev F; located at NASA s Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX) as simplified representations of the existing flight designed struts designed by engineers at Lockheed Martin (the primary contractor of the Orion). The project design included: researching the existing flight designs, brainstorming design upgrades, developing three unrelated three-dimensional (3D) strut designs using Pro/Engineer Wildfire 3.0, choosing the best fit design, locating materials and their sources, implementing the chosen design, and making design modifications. The project resulted in making simple modifications to the existing struts used in the last Orion cockpit mockup. The project is relevant to NASA, because upgrades to the low-fidelity Orion cockpit mockup progresses NASA s goals of developing and testing a new spacecraft, conducting the spacecraft's first crewed mission by 2015, returning to the moon by 2020, and exploring Mars and other planets in the future.

Lucienne, Runa A.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Avionics Systems Laboratory/Building 16. Historical Documentation

As part of this nation-wide study, in September 2006, historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned and managed facilities that 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 Avionics Systems Laboratory (Building 16) 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 16 was still used to support the SSP as an engineering research facility, which is also sometimes used for astronaut training. 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 16 and how it supported the SSP; and a physical description of the structure. In addition, photographs documenting the construction and historical use of Building 16 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, Patricia↗
NASA NTRS2011

Communications and Tracking Development Laboratory/Building 44. Historical Documentation

As part of this nation-wide study, in September 2006, historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned and managed facilities 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 Communications and Tracking Development Laboratory (Building 44) was determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, with concurrence by the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The survey concluded that Building 44 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 44 was still used to support the SSP as an engineering research facility, which is also sometimes used for astronaut training. This documentation package precedes any undertaking as defined by Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and implemented by 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 44 and how it supported the SSP; and a physical description of the building. In addition, photographs documenting the construction and historical use of Building 44 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, Patricia↗