Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “office”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2004

Low Emissions Alternative Power (LEAP) Project Office Business Team of the Aeropropulsion Research Program Office (ARPO) Org. 0140

The program for which I am working at this summer is Propulsion and Power/Low Emissions Alternative Power (P&P/LEAP). It invests in a fundamental TRL 1-6 research and technology portfolio that will enable the future of: Alternative fuels and/or alternative propulsion systems, non-combustion (electric) propulsion systems. P&P/LEAP will identify and capitalize on the highest potential concepts generated both internal and external to the Agency. During my 2004 summer at NASA Glenn Research Center, I worked with my mentor Barbara Mader, in the Project Office with the Business Team completing various tasks for the project and personnel. The LEAP project is a highly matrixed organization. The Project Office is responsible for the goals advocacy and dollar (budget) of the LEAP project. The objectives of the LEAP Project are to discover new energy sources and develop unconventional engines and power systems directed towards greatly reduced emissions, enable new vehicle concepts for public mobility, new science missions and national security. The Propulsion and PowerLow Emissions Alternative Power directly supports the environmental, mobility, national security objectives of the Vehicle Systems Program and the Aeronautics Technology Theme. Technology deliverables include the demonstration through integrated ground tests, a constant volume combustor in an engine system, and UAV/small transport aircraft all electric power system. My mentor serves as a key member of the management team for the Aeropropulsion Research Program Office (ARPO). She has represented the office on numerous occasions, and is a member of a number of center-wide panels/teams, such as the Space management Committee and is chair to the Business Process Consolidation Team. She is responsible for the overall coordination of resources for the Propulsion and Power Project - from advocacy to implementation. The goal for my summer at NASA was to document processes and archive program documents from the past years. I used the computer and office machines, and also worked with personnel in setting up a Cost Estimation Plan. I gained office experience in Word, Excel, and Power Point, with the completion of a variety of tasks. I made spreadsheets that pertained to the budget plan for Journey to Tomorrow, to name a few I have supported the office by tracking resource information: including programmatic travel, project budget at the center level to budgets for individual research sub-projects and grants. I also assisted the Program Support Office in their duties including, representing the office on numerous occasions on center-wide team/panels, such as the Space management committee, IFMP Budget Formulation, Journey to Tomorrow Committee, and the Vehicle Systems Program Business Process Team.

Buttler, Jennifer A.↗
NASA NTRS2004

My Work in the NASA Glenn History Office and Records Management Office

This is my fourth summer working with my mentor, Kevin P. Coleman, who is the Center History Coordinator, Center Records Manager, and Center Forms Manager. I am working in the GRC History Office with some overlap in the Records Management Office. I have three major projects this summer. First, I am assisting in the documentation of historic facilities. Second, I am involved in a project to organize files and create an archives at Plum Brook Station. Third, I have helped the records management office with its inventory of stored records at Plum Brook. Also, I received an award this summer for research work I had done for NASA in the past. First, my primary project is to help assemble documentation for historic facilities at Glenn. This is somewhat of an extension of my project from last summer. Last summer, I worked to compile a complete list of all of NASA s historic sites and landmarks (as designated by the National Park Service, as well as several private organizations) throughout the country. Then, I briefly researched the significance of historic designation under federal law. Finally, I put my findings into a report which was submitted to NASA Headquarters. Upon review by the NASA History Office and several center-level history officials, it was decided that NASA should work to update its documentation of its historic sites and landmarks since some of the documentation was outdated or unavailable. Until recently, many project managers and facility managers working at historic facilities were not even aware that their surroundings had been designated as historic under federal law (most specifically, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and its amendments). Therefore, they were unaware of the legal obligations for historic preservation. This summer, my project is to research some of Glenn s historic sites and landmarks in more detail. The goal is to put together a template for documenting historic NASA facilities. The hope is that this template of requirements for historic documentation of facilities (which may include records, drawings, photos, film, interviews, and a Web site) can be used agency-wide to assist center history offices in documenting historic sites and landmarks. To this end, I am working with Bob Arrighi, an archivist from InDyne, Inc., and Anne Burke, a NASA co-op, to gather and assess the historic value of records from several facilities at Glenn and Plum Brook Station. We will also work to determine the costs of each part of the template.

Mate, Robert C.↗
DOE OSTI2021

The effect of building retrofit measures on CO2 emission reduction – A case study with U.S. Medium office buildings

Building retrofit has great potential to reduce CO2 emissions since buildings are responsible for 36% of emissions in the United States. Several existing studies have examined the effect of building retrofit measures on CO2 emission reduction. However, these studies oversimplified emission factors of electricity by adopting constant annual emission factors. This study uses hourly emission factors of electricity to analyze the effect of building retrofit measures on emission reduction using U.S. medium office buildings as an example. We analyzed CO2 emission reduction effects of eight building retrofit measures that related to envelop and mechanical system in five locations: Tampa, San Diego, Denver, Great Falls, and International Falls. The main findings are: (1) estimating CO2 emission reduction with constant emission factors overestimates the emission reduction for most measures in San Diego, while it underestimates the emission reduction for most measures in Denver and International Falls; (2) The same retrofit measure may have different effects in CO2 emission reduction depending on the climates. For instance, improving lighting efficiency and improving equipment efficiency have less impacts in emission reduction in cold climates than hot climates; and (3) The most energy efficient measure may not be the most emission efficient measure. For example, in Great Falls, the most energy efficient measure is improving equipment efficiency, but the most emission efficient measure is improving heating efficiency.

Lou, Yingli↗
DOE OSTI2023

ESnet Requirements Review Program Through the IRI Lens: A Meta-Analysis of Workflow Patterns Across DOE Office of Science Programs (Final Report)

The Department of Energy (DOE) ensures America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions. The DOE’s Office of Science (SC) delivers groundbreaking scientific discoveries and major scientific tools that transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic, and national security of the United States. The SC’s programs advance DOE mission science across a wide range of disciplines and have developed the research infrastructure needed to remain at the forefront of scientific discovery. The DOE SC’s world-class research infrastructure — exemplified by the 28 SC scientific user facilities — provides the research community with premier observational, experimental, computational, and network capabilities. Each user facility is designed to provide unique capabilities to advance core DOE mission science for its sponsor SC program and to stimulate a rich discovery and innovation ecosystem. Research communities gather and flourish around each user facility, bringing together diverse perspectives. A hallmark of many facilities is the large population of students, postdoctoral researchers, and early-career scientists who contribute as full-fledged users. These facility staff and users collaborate over years to devise new approaches to utilizing the user facility’s core capabilities. The history of the SC user facilities has many examples of wildly inventive researchers challenging operational orthodoxy to pioneer new vistas of discovery; for example, the use of the synchrotron X-ray light sources for study of proteins and other large biological molecules. This continual reinvention of the practice of science — as users and staff forge novel approaches expressed in research workflows — unlocks new discoveries and propels scientific progress. Within this research ecosystem, the high-performance computing (HPC) and networking user facilities stewarded by SC’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program play a dynamic cross-cutting role, enabling complex workflows demanding high performance data, networking, and computing solutions. The DOE SC’s three HPC user facilities and the Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) high-performance research network serve all of the SC’s programs as well as the global research community. Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF), the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), and Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) conceive, build, and provide access to a range of supercomputing, advanced computing, and large-scale data-infrastructure platforms, while ESnet interconnects DOE SC research infrastructure and enables seamless exchange of scientific data. All four facilities operate testbeds to expand the frontiers of computing and networking research. Together, the ASCR facilities enterprise seeks to understand and meet the needs and requirements across SC and DOE domain science programs and priority efforts, highlighted by the formal requirements reviews (RRs) methodology. In recent years, the research communities around the SC user facilities have begun experimenting with and demanding solutions integrated with HPC and data infrastructure. This rise of integrated-science approaches is documented in many community and high-level government reports. At the dawn of the era of exascale science and the acceleration of artificial intelligence (AI) innovation, there is a broad need for integrated computational, data, and networking solutions. In response to these drivers, DOE has developed a vision for an Integrated Research Infrastructure (IRI): To empower researchers to meld DOE’s world-class research tools, infrastructure, and user facilities seamlessly and securely in novel ways to radically accelerate discovery and innovation.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Amendment to Programmatic Agreement among the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos Field Office, the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on History Preservation Concerning Management of the Historic Properties of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico (AGREEMENT)

The Field Office has a cultural resources program manager. The LANL Management and Operating Contractor has a staff of cultural resource specialists who meet the qualifications set forth in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Professional Qualifications (36 CFR Part 61), or work under the supervision of individuals who meet these qualifications. Any future Management and Operating Contractor will have a staff of Secretary of the Interior-qualified cultural resource specialists.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS1995

Marshall Space Flight Center solid waste characterization and recycling improvement study: General office and laboratory waste, scrap metal, office and flight surplus

The primary objectives of the study were to characterize the solid waste stream for MSFC facilities in Huntsville, Alabama, and to evaluate their present recycling program. The purpose of the study was to determine if improvements could be made in terms of increasing quantities of the present commodities collected, adding more recyclables to the program, and streamlining or improving operational efficiency. In conducting the study, various elements were implemented. These included sampling and sorting representative samples of the waste stream; visually inspecting each refuse bin, recycle bin, and roll-off; interviewing employees and recycling coordinators of other companies; touring local material recycling facilities; contacting experts in the field; and performing a literature search.

Eley, Michael H.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Ombuds Office 2023 Biennial Report

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Ombuds Charter requires the Ombuds Office to issue a report every two years to the Laboratory Director. The prior Ombuds Biennial Report was published in July of 2021, celebrating 25 years of Ombuds history at the Lab. This 2023 report details office transitions and new initiatives over the past two years, along with our ongoing conflict resolution work of one-on-one discussions, classes, presentations, workshops, and facilitations. The Ombuds Office supports the mission of LANL in myriad ways. We champion the LANL culture statement of “ How we do work is as important as What we do,” and we reinforce LANL’s values of integrity, service, excellence, and teamwork. Accordingly, the mission of the Ombuds Office is to support employees in their work, enhance communication, mitigate conflict, and encourage a positive working environment. The Ombuds Office adheres to the International Ombuds Association’s (IOA) Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics (see Appendix). As such, the Ombuds Office is informal, confidential, impartial, and independent. We do not advocate for managers or employees. We don’t tell people what to do; we don’t give advice. All of our services are voluntary. LANL employees seek out the Ombuds Office as a neutral place where they can collect their thoughts, whether in person, on the phone, or online. We help individuals explore and navigate tough issues. Employees expand their understanding of their options, assess what is within their control, and decide what is in their best interest. The Ombuds Office promotes smart, professional conflict management. This report highlights the work of the Ombuds Office and provides a closer look at both quantitative and qualitative data, including anecdotal information and endorsements. It concludes with a discussion of further opportunities to expand the reach of the Ombuds Office to more LANL employees.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

The False Dilemma: Rethinking AF Science and Technology Officer Talent Management

In 2019, Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) Heather Wilson launched the 2030 Science and Technology (S&T) Strategy by stating, “The advantage will go to those who create the best technologies and who integrate and field them in creative operational ways that provide military advantages.” In 2021, 15% of Air Force general officers responsible for creating and integrating this technological edge had a science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) graduate degree, and less than 1% of generals had a STEM doctorate. As one point of comparison, at least 32% and 13% of founding CEOs of Fortune 500 technology companies had a master’s and doctoral STEM degree, respectively. The gulf is larger when you consider that these CEOs used their technical degrees throughout their careers whereas most general officers do not. In large organizations, if the leader does not possess technical knowledge, it is difficult to drive innovation systems and connect ideas to reality. The evidence for this disconnect is abundant in acquisition challenges for high-tech systems, significant pushback to the “revolution in military affairs”, and failure of the “Third Offset” to take hold and deliver capabilities to offset Chinese and Russian capabilities. Indeed, when the former Air Force and Space Force Chief Software Officer, Nicolas M. Chaillan, offered his resignation, one of the main reasons for leaving was “the failure of OSD and the Joint Staff to deliver on their own alleged top ‘priority’, JADC2 – they couldn’t ‘walk the walk.’” Senior leaders have recognized this disconnect, and several inquiries and studies regarding STEM competency have been conducted. Many have posed a false dilemma: a large, STEM-cognizant or small, STEM-expert force. However, current and future STEM human capital needs are managed at the unit and functional area level. This leads to “silos” and the tactical “needs of the present” dominating the strategic “needs of the future”, highlighted by only two functional areas systematically tracking future STEM needs. Therefore, the decision on force structure appears to have been historically made by default through these and other perceived structural realities, and a vast majority of recommendations have focused on the small STEM community – an exercise in diminishing returns. In essence, the solution often boils down to finding unicorns – officers that have chartered the unforgiving pathway through the traditional “gates” to general officer while obtaining sufficient STEM proficiency along the way. Fortunately for the Air Force, these officers exist, albeit at a rate below what the evidence would suggest is necessary. However, this approach fundamentally limits the ability to develop a deep pool of officers with the ability to create and integrate technologies and ensures the Dunning-Kruger effect is prevalent. The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where those with limited knowledge in an area lack the expertise necessary to recognize their lack of expertise and consequently are prone to overestimate their knowledge and performance. In short, we need less leaders overestimating their STEM knowledge and more with hard-earned STEM competency required to “walk the walk” to create and integrate technologies for military advantage. This will not be accomplished by restricting the emphasis to the traditional scientists and engineering (S&E) career fields – the pool, only 10% of line officers, and general officer progression is just too small. Fortunately, the recent SECAF’s Management Initiatives and Chief of Staff’s (CSAF) Action Orders, both containing emphasis on organic expertise to “accrue advantage in military-technological competition,” present an opportunity to truly develop a framework for the force of the future.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS2004

Office of Equal Opportunity Programs

The NASA Glenn Office of Equal Opportunity Programs works to provide quality service for all programs and/or to assist the Center in becoming a model workplace. During the summer of 2004, I worked with Deborah Cotleur along with other staff members to create and modify customer satisfaction surveys. This office aims to assist in developing a model workplace by providing functions as a change agent to the center by serving as an advisor to management to ensure equity throughout the Center. In addition, the office serves as a mediator for the Center in addressing issues and concerns. Lastly, the office provides assistance to employees to enable attainment of personal and organizational goals. The Office of Equal Opportunities is a staff office which reports and provides advice to the Center Director and Executive Leadership, implements laws, regulations, and presidential executive orders, and provides center wide leadership and assistance to NASA GRC employees. Some of the major responsibilities of the office include working with the discrimination complaints program, special emphasis programs (advisory groups), management support, monitoring and evaluation, contract compliance, and community outreach. During my internship in this office, my main objective was to create four customer satisfaction surveys based on EO retreats, EO observances, EO advisory boards, and EO mediation/counseling. I created these surveys after conducting research on past events and surveys as well as similar survey research created and conducted by other NASA centers, program for EO Advisory group members, leadership training sessions for supervisors, preventing sexual harassment training sessions, and observance events. I also conducted research on the style and format from feedback surveys from the Marshall Equal Opportunity website, the Goddard website, and the main NASA website. Using the material from the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs at Glenn Research Center along with my previous research, I created four customer satisfaction surveys. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.

Chin, Jennifer L.↗
DOE OSTI2021

National and Regional Initiatives to Promote Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Through State Energy Offices

The National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) worked with the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs Office (WIP) over a ten year period to provide technical assistance, research and analyses, and enhanced coordination between DOE and the State and Territory Energy Offices. Over the life of the agreement, NASEO worked with WIP and the states to provide statewide strategic energy plan analyses and recommendations, including customized technical assistance to the states; peer to peer financing assistance via NASEO’s Financing Committee and supporting activities; training on core energy policies and programs, including dialogues and resources to support energy-air coordination, a training for new State Energy Office Directors, peer to peer exchange via a rural energy taskforce, and support to states to enhance buildings efficiency, home energy labeling, and technology deployment opportunities; support for State Energy Program metrics; and regional coordination via regional coordinators and peer exchange opportunities both in-person and online. Over the life of the project, the position and role of State Energy Offices within state government has changed, with now 80 percent of State Energy Office Directors serving as their Governor’s energy advisor, or reporting directly to their Governor’s energy advisor. This shift in stature has made it ever more crucial for State Energy Offices to receive timely and relevant technical assistance across a range of energy issue areas. NASEO, in collaboration with WIP, was able to deliver this technical assistance, and energy efficiency and renewable energy deployment has accelerated across the country. The State Energy Office Directors and their staff continue to engage in NASEO’s Committees – many of which were supported through this agreement – and have provided formal and informal feedback on the value of the programs supported through this award (e.g., reporting via survey increased understanding of their roles and technical assistance offerings provided by WIP and NASEO following the New Director Trainings). Moreover, resources developed through this award (e.g., Comprehensive State Energy Planning Guidelines, State Energy Loan Fund Database, Rural Data Resources for State Energy Planning and Programs, The Value of Adding home Energy Score to Low-Income Energy Efficiency Programs, etc.) have been cited by states as instrumental to their understanding of specific energy issue areas and in many cases led directly to enhanced program design within a state (e.g. Iowa citing their review of NASEO’s Comprehensive State Energy Planning Guidelines as a necessary first step in their planning process, later following may of the steps outlined in the guidelines). The priorities of the states and federal government have evolved over the last decade, with an increasing focus on climate mitigation and adaptation, equity impacts and considerations, energy security and resilience, and enhanced energy efficiency and renewable energy technology deployment, but the roots of these new priorities are based in the state and federal policies and programs, and research and analyses, that were supported in part through this award and other complementary initiatives. NASEO looks forward to continuing to support the states, and collaborate and coordinate with DOE, as we build on this important foundation in the years ahead.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Offices’ Engagement in Electric Distribution Planning to Meet State Policy Goals

NASEO and Berkeley Lab released a new publication on State Energy Offices’ Engagement in Electric Distribution Planning to Meet State Policy Goals. State and Territory Energy Offices develop plans, programs, policies, and projects that have a substantial impact on electric distribution systems. They also can participate in distribution system planning (DSP) processes to help ensure that utilities – consumer- and investor-owned – meet the state’s future energy needs. This paper recognizes the wide spectrum of roles that State Energy Offices can play in DSP processes, including planning for distributed energy resources and grid modernization. It highlights various examples of non-regulatory activities by State Energy Offices including planning, conducting studies, convening stakeholder processes, and implementing programs that inform and contribute to distribution system planning. It also provides examples of State Energy Offices’ engagement in proceedings before their respective public utility commissions. As State Energy Offices face myriad challenges associated with meeting state policy goals, preparing for anticipated rates of distributed energy resource deployment, addressing concerns regarding grid reliability and resilience, and recommending and making long-term investment decisions, the examples provided through this guide can serve as a resource in navigating those challenges.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRS1994

Reliability analysis in the Office of Safety, Environmental, and Mission Assurance (OSEMA)

The technical personnel in the SEMA office are working to provide the highest degree of value-added activities to their support of the NASA Langley Research Center mission. Management perceives that reliability analysis tools and an understanding of a comprehensive systems approach to reliability will be a foundation of this change process. Since the office is involved in a broad range of activities supporting space mission projects and operating activities (such as wind tunnels and facilities), it was not clear what reliability tools the office should be familiar with and how these tools could serve as a flexible knowledge base for organizational growth. Interviews and discussions with the office personnel (both technicians and engineers) revealed that job responsibilities ranged from incoming inspection to component or system analysis to safety and risk. It was apparent that a broad base in applied probability and reliability along with tools for practical application was required by the office. A series of ten class sessions with a duration of two hours each was organized and scheduled. Hand-out materials were developed and practical examples based on the type of work performed by the office personnel were included. Topics covered were: Reliability Systems - a broad system oriented approach to reliability; Probability Distributions - discrete and continuous distributions; Sampling and Confidence Intervals - random sampling and sampling plans; Data Analysis and Estimation - Model selection and parameter estimates; and Reliability Tools - block diagrams, fault trees, event trees, FMEA. In the future, this information will be used to review and assess existing equipment and processes from a reliability system perspective. An analysis of incoming materials sampling plans was also completed. This study looked at the issues associated with Mil Std 105 and changes for a zero defect acceptance sampling plan.

Kauffmann, Paul J.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Studying Response to Light in Offices: A Literature Review and Pilot Study

Researchers have been exploring the influence of light on health in office settings for over two decades; however, a greater understanding of physiological responses and technology advancements are shifting the way researchers study the influence of light in realistic environments. New technologies paired with Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) administered via smartphones provide ways to collect information about individual light exposure and occupant response throughout the day. The study aims to document occupant response to tunable lighting in a real office environment, including potential beneficial or adverse health and well-being effects. Twenty-three office employees agreed to participate in a twelve-week study examining occupant response to two lighting conditions (static vs. dynamic). No significant differences were observed for any of the measures, highlighting the importance and complexity of in-situ studies conducted in realistic environments. While prior office studies have shown a significant influence on daytime sleepiness and sleep quality, research has not shown mood or stress to be significantly impacted by lighting conditions. Correlation analyses regarding lighting satisfaction, environmental satisfaction, and visual comfort demonstrate a significant relationship between certain items that may inform future studies. Further, the high correlation means it is reasonable to assume that many environmental factors in offices can influence occupant behavior and well-being.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Evaluation of Building 23-620, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory J-3 Office, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to demolish Building 23-620, the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL) J-3 Office Building (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15283) at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada. The NNSA/NFO is implementing a long-term project to modernize the town of Mercury for future mission needs. The project is considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 of United States Code (USC) § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 USC § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR) Part 800. In 2018, Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of the town of Mercury. This effort resulted in the identification, recordation, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230), including the identification of its contributing elements (Reno et al. 2018). The MHD was recommended eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP, National Register) under the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Significance Criteria A and C, as defined in 36 CFR Part 60.4, as a significant concentration of buildings and structures with a direct and important association with Cold War-era nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. It has not been evaluated under Criteria B and D to date. As part of a larger modernization program for Mercury, the NNSA/NFO and the SHPO executed the 2018 Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site, at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada (Mercury PA). The Mercury PA includes streamlined Section 106 procedures for undertakings in the MHD based on contributing element categories. Building 23-620 is identified in Appendix C of the Mercury PA as a Category I contributing element, indicating that it might be individually eligible for the NRHP. It is a historic property for the purposes of Section 106 compliance and subject to the stipulations of the Mercury PA. Per Stipulation VI of the Mercury PA, when the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for an undertaking includes Category I elements, the NNSA/NFO must evaluate the Category I elements for individual NRHP eligibility under all of the SOI Significance Criteria prior to initiating any activity that may affect the elements. The purpose of this report is to evaluate Building 23-620 as a potential individually eligible historic property in fulfillment of Stipulation VI of the Mercury PA. The evaluation detailed herein concludes that Building 23-620 is not individually eligible for listing in the NRHP. Although it retains aspects of integrity and continues to contribute to the MHD, it is not individually significant under any of the SOI Significance Criteria.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's Astronant Family Support Office

During the NASA‐Mir program of the 1990s and due to the challenges inherent in the International Space Station training schedule and operations tempo, it was clear that a special focus on supporting families was a key to overall mission success for the ISS crewmembers pre‐, in‐ and post‐flight. To that end, in January 2001 the first Family Services Coordinator was hired by the Behavioral Health and Performance group at NASA JSC and matrixed from Medical Operations into the Astronaut Office's organization. The initial roles and responsibilities were driven by critical needs, including facilitating family communication during training deployments, providing mission‐specific and other relevant trainings for spouses, serving as liaison for families with NASA organizations such as Medical Operations, NASA management and the Astronaut Office, and providing assistance to ensure success of an Astronaut Spouses Group. The role of the Family Support Office (FSO) has modified as the ISS Program matured and the needs of families changed. The FSO is currently an integral part of the Astronaut Office's ISS Operations Branch. It still serves the critical function of providing information to families, as well as being the primary contact for US and international partner families with resources at JSC. Since crews launch and return on Russian vehicles, the FSO has the added responsibility for coordinating with Flight Crew Operations, the families, and their guests for Soyuz launches, landings, and Direct Return to Houston post‐flight. This presentation will provide a summary of the family support services provided for astronauts, and how they have changed with the Program and families the FSO serves. Considerations for future FSO services will be discussed briefly as NASA proposes one year missions and beyond ISS missions. Learning Objective: 1) Obtain an understanding of the reasons a Family Support Office was important for NASA. 2) Become familiar with the services provided for astronauts and their families and how they changed with the Program and family needs.

Beven, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2014

Human Exploration Science Office (KX) Overview

The Human Exploration Science Office supports human spaceflight, conducts research, and develops technology in the areas of space orbital debris, hypervelocity impact technology, image science and analysis, remote sensing, imagery integration, and human and robotic exploration science. NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office (ODPO) resides in the Human Exploration Science Office. ODPO provides leadership in orbital debris research and the development of national and international space policy on orbital debris. The office is recognized internationally for its measurement and modeling of the debris environment. It takes the lead in developing technical consensus across U.S. agencies and other space agencies on debris mitigation measures to protect users of the orbital environment. The Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) project evaluates the risks to spacecraft posed by micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD). HVIT facilities at JSC and White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) use light gas guns, diagnostic tools, and high-speed imagery to quantify the response of spacecraft materials to MMOD impacts. Impact tests, with debris environment data provided by ODPO, are used by HVIT to predict risks to NASA and commercial spacecraft. HVIT directly serves NASA crew safety with MMOD risk assessments for each crewed mission and research into advanced shielding design for future missions. The Image Science and Analysis Group (ISAG) supports the International Space Station (ISS) and commercial spaceflight through the design of imagery acquisition schemes (ground- and vehicle-based) and imagery analyses for vehicle performance assessments and mission anomaly resolution. ISAG assists the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Program in the development of camera systems for the Orion spacecraft that will serve as data sources for flight test objectives that lead to crewed missions. The multi-center Imagery Integration Team is led by the Human Exploration Science Office and provides expertise in the application of engineering imagery to spaceflight. The team links NASA programs and private industry with imagery capabilities developed and honed through decades of human spaceflight, including imagery integration, imaging assets, imagery data management, and photogrammetric analysis. The team is currently supporting several NASA programs, including commercial demonstration missions. The Earth Science and Remote Sensing Team is responsible for integrating the scientific use of Earth-observation assets onboard the ISS, which consist of externally mounted sensors and crew photography capabilities. This team facilitates collaboration on remote sensing and participates in research with academic organizations and other Government agencies, not only in conjunction with ISS science, but also for planetary exploration and regional environmental/geological studies. Human exploration science focuses on science strategies for future human exploration missions to the Moon, Mars, asteroids, and beyond. This function provides communication and coordination between the science community and mission planners. ARES scientists support the operation of robotic missions (i.e., Mars Exploration Rovers and the Mars Science Laboratory), contribute to the interpretation of returned mission data, and translate robotic mission technologies and techniques to human spaceflight.

Calhoun, Tracy A.↗