Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “community eligibility”

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.

13 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2023

Exploration Habitat (X-Hab) 2013-2014 Academic Innovation Challenge

Outreach activities were coordinated with OSU’s NASA Education Office and focused around the Space Habitat Innovation Challenge. Two challenges were developed for this year: the Rapidly Prototyped Tool Challenge (RaPTC) and the Space Habitat Airlock Challenge (SHAC). RaPTC was open to eligible high school student teams while SHAC was open to eligible community college student teams. Teams involved 3-6 students from 12 states across the country and submitted videos or virtual presentations.1 Entries were judged by the OSU XHab students and were provided with feedback on feasibility and design. Three groups in each challenge were selected as finalists for a final virtual presentation and interview with students and professors in the engineering program at Oklahoma State University. Three groups total were selected to present their design to engineers and astronauts at a NASA JSC. Judges included astronauts Joe Acaba, Nicole Stott, and Dottie Metcalf-Lindenburger.

Jamey D Jacob↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy Finance Training [Slides]

The Energy 101: Energy Financing Training presentation, developed for the Energy Technology Innovation Partnership Project (ETIPP), provides an overview of energy project financing. It covers fundamental concepts, technologies, considerations, case studies, and additional resources.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

RACEE: Community of Klawock Competition Project Summary

RACEE is a US Department of Energy (DOE) competition that challenged rural Alaskan communities to commit to saving 15% energy by 2020 (baseline 2010) which aligns with the State’s Energy Efficiency goal. In January 2016, 64 communities, including eight Southeast communities, submitted pledges to become energy champions and move to the next phase of the competition. In April, DOE announced that 13 communities would be eligible to apply for up to $3.4 million in funding to implement the community energy efficiency plans they develop in Phase II of the competition. Klawock is one of those 13 communities and the only eligible community in Southeast Alaska.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy Technology Innovation Partnership Project

An overview of the Energy Transitions Initiative Partnership Project (ETIPP), a U.S. Department of Energy program that provides technical assistance and cash awards to coastal, island, and remote communities. This fact sheet includes updated information about ETIPP eligibility requirements for communities; new program offerings, including cash awards; and the locations of communities in the program's first three cohorts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Community Microgrid Assistance Partnership (C-MAP) [Slides]

This informational webinar, held on Nov. 11, 2024, covered the structure, technical focus, and eligibility criteria for the first Request for Proposals (RFP) released by the Community Microgrid Assistance Partnership (C-MAP). Eligible communities are invited to propose a community-based microgrid development or improvement project for funding and/or technical assistance. C-MAP is a program led by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Electricity with management and coordination by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. C-MAP will bring together many of the organizations that are working to understand, improve, and implement advanced microgrid energy systems in underserved and Indigenous communities in remote areas, facilitating a new forum for engagement and collaboration. Wraparound services from regional organizations will support the participating communities in microgrid operations as it relates to advancing their energy goals.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Clean Energy Deployment Baseline for the Energy Community and Low-Income Tax Credit Bonuses [Slides]

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 introduced, for the first time, place-based federal tax incentives for projects sited in “Energy Communities,” potentially changing the economic calculus of where projects are best sited. Storage projects can qualify for a 10-percentage-point bonus to the Investment Tax Credit (e.g., from 30% to 40%), while wind and solar projects may qualify for either the ITC bonus or a 10% bonus to the Production Tax Credit (e.g., from $\$27.5$ to $\$30.25$/MWh). Energy Communities are areas with historical ties to fossil fuel industries and above average unemployment levels (FFEU), with closed coal mines or power plants, or contaminated properties. They seek to identify locations across the US that could especially benefit from economic revitalization. This report explores how the new federal tax credit incentives are impacting clean energy deployment patterns and establishes historical baselines against which future changes can be compared. We include a few case studies of clean energy projects going specifically to areas that were recently impacted by coal power plant closures to provide concrete examples of investments in Energy Communities. However, this publication does not assess how much of the incentive benefits pass from clean energy developers to hosting communities, nor does it offer a comprehensive view of the economic effects of clean energy deployment on Energy Communities. Key highlights include: - As clean energy projects take multiple years to conceptualize and develop, it is likely too early to see shifts towards Energy Community locations either among newly built projects or those that entered interconnection queues in 2023. - Approximately 35% of onshore wind, 50% of solar, and 60% of storage capacity built in 2023 and the first half of 2024 are located in Energy Communities, making them likely eligible for bonus incentives. While these bonus incentives were not available to projects coming online before 2023, we used 2023 Energy Community definitions to classify whether past projects were built in what is now considered an Energy Community. The deployment levels for 2023-2024 are similar to recent years (2020-2022) for solar and storage but slightly lower for wind. - Clean energy capacity has surged in the interconnection queues over the last few years, with about 45-50% of both recently proposed and total queued capacity being located in Energy Communities. While the amount of capacity in Energy Communities has also grown, its relative share is either stable (solar and storage) or slightly lower (wind) among projects that entered the queue in 2023. - Clean energy projects can be built at lower costs in Energy Communities. The levelized cost of energy after incentives was on average $\$9$/MWh (24%) lower for solar projects and $\$2$/MWh (6%) lower for wind projects built in 2023, relative to projects not located in Energy Communities. Wholesale electricity values at Energy Community locations relative to the rest of the market vary by region. The average value was often higher for wind projects (-$\$3$ to $\$11$/MWh) but lower for solar projects (-$\$6$ to 0/MWh). - Distributed solar that is owned by commercial entities is eligible for the Energy Community bonus and also, potentially, a Low-Income Community bonus. Residential solar installations in qualifying Energy Communities that are third-party owned represent about 10% of the total residential market. Larger commercial and industrial solar installations in Energy Communities make up 17% of the total market in 2023. Nearly 2 GW of distributed solar was built in areas qualifying as Low-Income Communities in 2023, exceeding the available annual program cap of 700 MW. Continued tracking of these trends will be important for system planners, investors, and local communities.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Income Verification Strategies for Income-Based Solar Programs

The Inflation Reduction Act has created substantial new programs that support adoption of solar power by low-income households, including the $7 billion Solar For All program and the Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program, which increases the investment tax credit for certain types of deployment. In addition, a growing number of states are using solar programs to reduce energy burdens and create energy justice opportunities for low-income households and disadvantaged communities. Verifying the income of participating customers is an important component of these programs. Program managers are seeking strategies to verify a large number of subscribing customers in an accurate, timely, and cost-efficient manner. To help inform program managers, Berkeley Lab investigated how a number of energy and non-energy programs manage income verification. The most common approach is to require proof through tax documents, pay stubs, or other formal income documentation, which can pose an impediment to enrolling eligible customers and create a paperwork burden for administrators. In order to reduce the burden for both the applicant and the program manager, some programs use alternative methods. We identify three common alternative verification methods: -Categorical eligibility: Customers enrolled in other, similar income-verified assistance programs are automatically eligible for enrollment in other income-qualified programs. -Geographic eligibility: Eligibility is based on the customer’s location within a specified area, typically a low-income or disadvantaged community or census tract, and; -“Self-attestation”: The participant claims eligibility with or without further documentation. We describe these options, their pros and cons, give examples of how they are used, and explore how some low-income programs address administrative issues, audits, or other quality control measures. Finally, we explore the risk of mistaken verifications (finding a participant eligible when they are not) in the different strategies. While this memo was initiated by a request relating to income-based community solar programs, the methods are applicable to any program with income eligibility requirements in the energy or non-energy sector. Funding was provided for this research by the Solar Energy Technologies Office of the US Department of Energy, through the National Community Solar Partnership.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1996

1997 Graduate Student Researchers Program

In 1980, NASA initiated the Graduate Student Research Program (GSRP) to cultivate additional research ties to the academic community and to support a culturally diverse group of students pursuing advanced degrees in science and engineering. Eligibility requirements for this program are described, and program administrators are listed. Research areas are detailed for NASA Headquarters and all Research and Flight Centers.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2019

Field Evaluations of Sampling, Interviewing, and Flight Tracking of NASA's Low Boom Flight Demonstrator Aircraft

The first year’s effort identified sampling and interviewing as the principal risks to assessment of prompt reactions to overflights producing low-amplitude sonic booms. It also 1) established the utility of geo-information system-based route planning for LBFD flight missions, 2) developed and demonstrated a prototype of a geographically-distributed, Internet-enabled instrumentation system capable of wide-area tracking of LBFD aircraft in near-real time. The latter system permits synchronizing the conduct of interviews in multiple overflown communities with arrival times of shock waves at interviewing sites; and of measuring, archiving, and processing their acoustic signatures. Means were also recommended for constructing representative, telephone-based samples of eligible respondents living in households within carpet boom corridors adjacent to LBFD flight tracks, and for conducting interviews with cross-sectional (independent) samples of such respondents about their prompt reactions to exposure to low-amplitude sonic booms. A detailed study design was prepared and accepted by NASA for a set of single-contact attempt telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of households. The study design focused on testing automated and live agent interview completion rates obtainable without callbacks. A minimal (two monitoring station) version of the aircraft tracking system was built and installed near a civil airport in a successful demonstration of the system’s ability to detect and track aircraft movements. The field exercise also demonstrated the ability of the system to capture the acoustic emissions of departing aircraft, and to serve aircraft position and sound level information to remote, geographically-distributed analysts in near-real time. Upon approval of OMB and IRB of the detailed study plan, a stratified, nationally representative sample of landline and wireless telephone-subscribing households was constructed. A total of 12,734 telephone interview contact attempts of the sort required by a straightforward cross-sectional study design were then made. These contact attempts demonstrated the impracticality of conducting a time-critical, cross-sectional study of prompt community response to low-amplitude sonic booms by means of “independent” (single contact attempt per respondent for each LBFD flight mission) telephone samples of respondents. The observed interview completion rates for these single telephone contact attempts were so low (~ 1% to 3% for automated and live agent interviews, respectively) that: 1) the representativeness of collected opinions would be susceptible to intuitive challenge as inadequate, even absent conclusive evidence of non-representativeness. Refuting challenges to representativeness would have to demonstrate that the composition of the actual sample did not differ from that of the target population, a task that is tantamount to proving a negative; 2) the information required to refute allegations of non-representativeness would require a questionnaire considerably lengthier than that required simply to determine the prevalence of boom-induced startle and annoyance. Such a questionnaire would have to inquire about potentially sensitive and intrusive matters, including respondents’ age, gender, education, employment, home ownership, income, ethnicity, family size, and other demographic factors; and 3) unreasonable numbers of attempts would be required to re-contact households with unsuccessful initial contact attempts, given the limited time available for doing so. For example, if about 500 completed interviews were desired in a supersonically overflown community, approximately 50,000 automated interview attempts would have to be made within ten to fifteen minutes of each LBFD overflight. Such large numbers of contact attempts could well exceed the numbers of households available for interview in areas of similar boom exposure levels in some communities near LBFD flight tracks. Such large numbers of interviews could be cost-effectively undertaken only by means of automated (i.e., outgoing interactive voice response) interviewing, a data collection method ill-suited for complex and sensitive questionnaire items. The infeasibility of independent sampling for evaluating prompt responses to LBFD overflights in a cross-sectional study is due in large part to simple non-response: that is, potential respondents – particularly those contacted on wireless telephones – refusing to answer calls with unfamiliar caller IDs. It is also due in part, however, to 1) the lack of time to attempt to contact the same respondent more than once within a few minutes after the arrival of a shock wave at the respondent’s location; and 2) the need to place calls during weekday/daytime hours, when response rates are notably lower than during evenings and weekends. Despite the poor interview completion rates achieved under the above constraints, cross sectional assessments of delayed reactions to LBFD overflights could still be feasible, if multiple attempts could be made to contact respondents during evening and weekend time periods, over extended time periods. Detailed plans for a longitudinal (panel) sample were developed as an alternative to a cross sectional sample design.

Fidell, Sanford↗
DOE OSTI2024

U.S. Department of Energy Collegiate Wind Competition 2025: Rules - Phases 2 and 3

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Wind Energy Technologies Office's (WETO) Collegiate Wind Competition (CWC, also referred to as the "competition" in this rules document) invites interdisciplinary teams of undergraduate students from a variety of academic programs to solve complex wind energy challenges. Through the competition, WETO intends to offer students direct industry experience, valuable exposure to wind energy career pathways, and greater knowledge of wind energy's potential to contribute to a clean energy future. The competition will select up to 35 teams to start, making them eligible to compete for a cash prize pool of up to $280,000. Each year, the competition identifies a new challenge and set of activities that address real-world research questions, thus demonstrating skills that students will need to work in the wind or wider renewable energy industries. The Collegiate Wind Competition 2025 challenge requires participants to compete simultaneously in four contests: 1) Turbine Design Contest: Design, build, and present a unique, wind-driven power system. 2) Turbine Testing Contest: Test the wind turbine in a competition wind tunnel at the final event. 3) Project Development Contest: Research wind resource data, transmission infrastructure, and environmental factors to create a site plan and financial analysis for a hypothetical wind farm. 4) Connection Creation Contest: Partner with wind industry professionals, raise awareness of wind energy in your local community, and work with local media to promote your team's accomplishments. The competition does not prescribe a power system market or wind regime. It is expected that each team will participate in all four contests.

Collegiate Wind Competition↗
DOE OSTI2025

Initial Mobility Analysis for ORNL VA-EDH Synthetic Populations

Travel burdens are a major barrier to healthcare access among US Veteran patient populations, particularly those residing in rural areas. Spatial accessibility to points of care for US Veteran populations is commonly assessed in two ways. The first approach uses open data from the US Census to represent collective travel burdens, for example the distance between population-weighted census tract centroids and VHA points of care. The second approach uses restricted-access VHA patient data to measure travel costs (e.g., distance, time) for accessing points of care with respect to geolocated patient addresses and real or approximated transportation networks. While the advantage of the open data approach lies in its reproducibility, it has notable limitations in its tendency to infer individual travel behavior from aggregate population characteristics, a problem known as ecological fallacy. Conversely, while the patient data approach is able to account for individual travel behavior, its ability to account for localized access disparities (e.g., a neighborhood with exceptionally high transportation costs) and patient demographics is limited as protecting individual patient data requires their storage in closed systems with limited capacity for adequately modeling real-world travel patterns or for supplementing patient attributes. Additionally, the patient data approach cannot account for veterans who are not enrolled in the VHA system but who may be eligible for care. These challenges limit the ability to perform “what if” analyses on the effects of place-specific interventions on veteran populations with high access barriers to healthcare. To address these challenges, we explore the application of realistic synthetic populations to examine travel burdens and spatial accessibility issues among veteran patient populations. Synthetic populations provide a virtual, individually-resolved and cross-sectional representation of the veteran patient population that enables investigation of spatial access to points of care in ways in which aggregate data and patient data do not. First, synthetic populations allow one to directly assess how individuals access points of care, from synthesized residential locations to outpatient facilities on real-world transportation networks. Modeling access to points of care at the individual scale addresses the ecological fallacy problem associated with using aggregated census data to represent veteran populations and patterns of movement. Second, synthetic populations provide a means of completely representing an area’s veteran population using only publicly available, anonymized census microdata from the American Community Survey (ACS) to ensure the privacy of real-world individuals. Generating synthetic populations from the ACS also expands descriptive characteristics beyond what patient data typically offers to include socio-demographic, economic, housing, and mobility attributes. More detailed profiles of both VHA patient populations and veterans not enrolled in the VA system will provide a comprehensive picture of groups that may benefit from interventions or outreach. As an initial exercise for using synthetic populations to measure veteran travel burdens to VA care, we apply Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) UrbanPop capability to generate a series of synthetic VHA patient populations for 9 Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISN) market areas in 9 Census Divisions across the continental United States, which are listed in Table 1. We use UrbanPop to produce synthetic populations for the VISN markets selected for each US Census Division, then assign VA outpatient clinic destinations to synthetic VHA patients based on travel about each VISN market’s road network. To demonstrate using the synthetic populations to evaluate healthcare travel burdens, we compare the time-based impedance between simulated home locations and VA outpatient clinics in each VISN market. We then perform validation exercises on the synthetic populations with respect to neighborhood (block group) demographic composition as well as patient mobility, comparing aggregate origin-destination statistics for the synthetic population to outpatient visits available in restricted patient data from the VA’s Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW) database.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

DOE Zero Energy Ready Manufactured Housing: Subject Matter Expert Technical Assistance Summary

Manufactured homes offer American consumers an affordable option for decent single-family detached housing. For working-class American families in many U.S. markets, manufactured homes are the first step toward home ownership. They now make up 10% of all new homes constructed in the United States, with higher percentages in the south and in rural communities. To help encourage the production of homes that are more durable, healthy, efficient, and disaster resistant, the U.S. Department of Energy is bringing its building science research to the manufactured housing industry through DOE’s Zero Energy Ready Manufactured Home (ZER-MH) program, which provides technical assistance and voluntary guidelines to manufactured home builders. Homes built to these guidelines are better able to handle power outages and less likely to experience moisture issues, offering a better product option for American families. This higher quality is evidenced by energy modeling which shows homes manufactured to these voluntary guidelines will typically use half the energy of manufactured homes built to the current minimum requirements of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s Manufactured Housing and Construction Safety Standard (MHCSS). These homes can also reduce critical energy demand during the busiest hours of the day, typically late afternoon and early evening in the summer when air conditioning demand is highest and mornings in the winter when furnaces and heaters are heating up. Reducing electricity demand during these peak periods when electricity rates are at their highest reduces costs for American families while freeing up capacity on overburdened energy distribution networks. Builders participating in the DOE ZER-MH program are eligible for a tax incentive via the 45L tax credit, which helps to offset the costs of ZER-MH upgrades, enabling builders to offer these certified homes at no additional cost. Together these factors enable manufactured homes to offer home buyers a housing option that is both affordable to finance and affordable to operate, with lower monthly mortgage payments and lower monthly energy bills.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS2004

A Summer Research Program of NASA/Faculty Fellowships at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory

The NASA Faculty Fellowship Program (NFFP) is designed to give college and university faculty members a rewarding personal as well as enriching professional experience. Fellowships are awarded to engineering and science faculty for work on collaborative research projects of mutual interest to the fellow and his or her JPL host colleague. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) have participated in the NASA Faculty Fellowship Program for more than 25 years. Administrative offices are maintained both at the Caltech Campus and at JPL; however, most of the activity takes place at JPL. The Campus handles all fiscal matters. The duration of the program is ten continuous weeks. Fellows are required to conduct their research on-site. To be eligible to participate in the program, fellows must be a U.S. citizen and hold a teaching or research appointment at a U.S. university or college. The American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) contracts with NASA and manages program recruitment. Over the past several years, we have made attempts to increase the diversity of the participants in the NFFP Program. A great deal of attention has been given to candidates from minority-serving institutions. There were approximately 100 applicants for the 34 positions in 2002. JPL was the first-choice location for more than half of them. Faculty from 16 minority-serving institutions participated as well as four women. The summer began with an orientation meeting that included introduction of key program personnel, and introduction of the fellows to each other. During this welcome, the fellows were briefed on their obligations to the program and to their JPL colleagues. They were also given a short historical perspective on JPL and its relationship to Caltech and NASA. All fellows received a package, which included information on administrative procedures, roster of fellows, seminar program, housing questionnaire, directions to JPL, maps of the local area, and a copy of the JPL Universe (a JPL newsletter). A calendar of events for the 2002 NFFP Program was designed to expose the fellows to the full range of JPL activities, seminars, tours, and trips to NASA Dryden, Goldstone, and Palomar Observatory. Weekly brown-bag lunches were also scheduled. The lunches provided a time for airing problems that may have arisen during the previous week, soliciting suggestions for program enhancement, announcements, and general socializing. Professor and Mrs. Albee also hosted the annual Summer Faculty Welcome Party at their home. During their ten-week tenure at JPL, the visiting faculty carried out projects in a wide variety of JPL's science, engineering, and technology disciplines, including communication, planetary science, materials research, reliability and quality assurance, astronomy, guidance and control, and micro-sensors. At the end of the NFFP Program, all fellows were required to complete a one-page summary of their summer s work. This was in addition to any documentation required by their host organization. Distribution of the final paycheck was dependent upon submission of this one-page summary and completion of NASA's NFFP evaluation in the EdCATS system. Fellows were also asked to complete a questionnaire for JPL, which enables the program administrators to make any appropriate changes to make the program more beneficial and effective for all involved. The 2002 NFFP Program at JPUCaltech was considered unanimously highly successful by both fellows and JPL colleagues. It provided a significant experience to most faculty members and fresh ideas to JPL researchers. Each year, suggestions for improvement include expansion of the program, longer terms, larger stipends, funds to support graduate students, and funds to continue collaborative research. The NASA Faculty Fellowship Program continues to occupy a significant place in JPL programs and serves to strengthen the ties between NASA, JPL, Caltech, and t academic community. This program is an important part of NASA's commitment to education. No inventions or patents were created during this program.

Albee, Arden↗