SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Risk acceptability”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 181 records · Page 10

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2021

Computing Risk of Pyrotechnic Devices Using Lot Acceptance Testing

This paper presents an application of statistical engineering to solve the problem of determining the effects of reducing test sample sizes and environment levels in lot acceptance testing (LAT) of ordnance devices used by NASA and DoD space systems. Unlike environmental testing of dedicated qualification hardware, ordnance devices have a test-like-you-fly exception and use lot acceptance sampling or LAT. LAT is performed by randomly selecting a predefined number of devices from an individual lot and exposing them to a more severe dynamic shock and vibration testing environments than flight (sometimes as high as 6 decibels over flight environments) and then performing a destructive test on the device. Recent trends have been suggested to reduce LAT costs by reducing environment test levels or the number of devices per LAT, or both. A method is given here to compute flight risk, so the proposed methods can be compared by subject matter experts to the baseline LAT methods. In addition, this method can be used to determine the best methods to include in future LAT standards for pyrotechnic devices.

Computing Risk↗

NASA NTRS2003

A Subjective Assessment of Alternative Mission Architecture Operations Concepts for the Human Exploration of Mars at NASA Using a Three-Dimensional Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model

The primary driver for developing missions to send humans to other planets is to generate significant scientific return. NASA plans human planetary explorations with an acceptable level of risk consistent with other manned operations. Space exploration risks can not be completely eliminated. Therefore, an acceptable level of cost, technical, safety, schedule, and political risks and benefits must be established for exploratory missions. This study uses a three-dimensional multi-criteria decision making model to identify the risks and benefits associated with three alternative mission architecture operations concepts for the human exploration of Mars identified by the Mission Operations Directorate at Johnson Space Center. The three alternatives considered in this study include split, combo lander, and dual scenarios. The model considers the seven phases of the mission including: 1) Earth Vicinity/Departure; 2) Mars Transfer; 3) Mars Arrival; 4) Planetary Surface; 5) Mars Vicinity/Departure; 6) Earth Transfer; and 7) Earth Arrival. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and subjective probability estimation are used to captures the experts belief concerning the risks and benefits of the three alternative scenarios through a series of sequential, rational, and analytical processes.

Tavana, Madjid↗

NASA NTRS2019

Method for Tracking and Communicating Aggregate Risk Through the Use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Tools

Large, complex projects can identify a significant number and variety of risks, throughout the project life cycle. These risks are analyzed, mitigated, closed or accepted as independent uncertainties. Once closed or accepted, it is easy for projects to lose awareness of their impact. In reality, each of these risks contributes some amount to the overall risk posture of the project. The ability to track and effectively communicate this aggregate risk has represented a challenge to project management. There have been previous attempts to create a schema to communicate the aggregate effect of risks, without notable success. Most of these attempts have centered on some additive metric derived from the scoring of likelihood and consequence values. This, in and of itself, is a logical approach, but all too often the scores were then aggregated to a level where all context was lost. One weakness has been a lack of attempt to create linkages or logical groups of the risks upon which useful aggregation could then occur. The overall move to model-based (systems) engineering (MBSE) has opened up a vast frontier of opportunities to better integrate all project data. MBSE provides an underlying layer that links data items to each other. Objectives link to requirements, which then link to functions, functions to physical architecture items, and so on, as far down as projects want to model. While it started with a focus on modeling requirements based on things like use cases, efforts are now underway to integrate safety and mission assurance (S&MA) information and analyses, such as risks. This effort, called Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA), is yielding models that are more useful and are a more accurate representations of the systems. MBSE models, with this ability to link related items, provide a new means of tracking and communicating aggregate risks. In the proposed method, risks are added into the models as distinct items, having attributes that communicate a scoring derived from the likelihood and consequence values as charted on the standard NASA 5x5 risk matrix. Like earlier efforts, each box in the 5x5 has an associated scoring, which may include both a current score and potential post-mitigation/control score. The risk items are then linked to elements of the model, such as system objectives/goals, requirements, functions, or physical architecture items, with "Risk to" relationships. These risks will then be communicated by use of reports generated from the model, detailing all risks and/or hazards linked to model elements. These reports can include aggregate impacts, including a current scoring and potential future state scoring based on the planned mitigations and/or controls. These reports will show all risks, open, accepted, and closed, linked to project objectives or requirements. When run as part of an upcoming risk acceptance discussion, these reports will serve to remind the team of all previous risks that relate to the effected portion of the system. When included as part of periodic program or project reviews, risk reviews, and safety reviews, this method can improve the overall understanding of the system's true risk posture. This proposed method takes full advantage of the advances that modern modeling techniques provide, with a minimal investment of additional time. Utilizing the model environment also enables a near constant access to current state of aggregate risks.

model based mission assurance↗

NASA NTRS2007

Space Radiation Cancer Risks

Space radiation presents major challenges to astronauts on the International Space Station and for future missions to the Earth s moon or Mars. Methods used to project risks on Earth need to be modified because of the large uncertainties in projecting cancer risks from space radiation, and thus impact safety factors. We describe NASA s unique approach to radiation safety that applies uncertainty based criteria within the occupational health program for astronauts: The two terrestrial criteria of a point estimate of maximum acceptable level of risk and application of the principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) are supplemented by a third requirement that protects against risk projection uncertainties using the upper 95% confidence level (CL) in the radiation cancer projection model. NASA s acceptable level of risk for ISS and their new lunar program have been set at the point-estimate of a 3-percent risk of exposure induced death (REID). Tissue-averaged organ dose-equivalents are combined with age at exposure and gender-dependent risk coefficients to project the cumulative occupational radiation risks incurred by astronauts. The 95% CL criteria in practice is a stronger criterion than ALARA, but not an absolute cut-off as is applied to a point projection of a 3% REID. We describe the most recent astronaut dose limits, and present a historical review of astronaut organ doses estimates from the Mercury through the current ISS program, and future projections for lunar and Mars missions. NASA s 95% CL criteria is linked to a vibrant ground based radiobiology program investigating the radiobiology of high-energy protons and heavy ions. The near-term goal of research is new knowledge leading to the reduction of uncertainties in projection models. Risk projections involve a product of many biological and physical factors, each of which has a differential range of uncertainty due to lack of data and knowledge. The current model for projecting space radiation cancer risk relies on the three assumptions of linearity, additivity, and scaling along with the use of population averages. We describe uncertainty estimates for this model, and new experimental data that sheds light on the accuracy of the underlying assumptions. These methods make it possible to express risk management objectives in terms of quantitative metrics, i.e., the number of days in space without exceeding a given risk level within well defined confidence limits. The resulting methodology is applied to several human space exploration mission scenarios including lunar station, deep space outpost, and a Mars mission. Factors that dominate risk projection uncertainties and application of this approach to assess candidate mitigation approaches are described.

Cucinotta, Francis A.↗

NASA NTRS1997

Alternative Perspectives on Risk

The goal of the commercial air transport system is to provide air transportation to the flying public at an acceptable cost with minimal risk. in an ideal situation these three goals would support each other. In fact, it is sometimes the case that the goals conflict: getting passengers to their destinations on time may conflict with fixing a minor mechanical malfunction that may or may not impact safety; flying a route that will avoid turbulence, thereby providing passengers with a more comfortable ride, may consume more fuel; managing traffic density may mean aircraft are delayed or must use an approach that will result in a long taxi to their gates, costing time and fuel. Various players in the system--pilots, dispatchers, controllers, as well as managers in the airline carriers and traffic management system--make decisions every day that involve trade-offs of benefits and costs. The prospect of revisions in the air traffic management system, with shifts in responsibilities from controllers to users, including airline operations center personnel and pilots, means that individuals may be performing either new jobs or old jobs under new guidance. It will be essential to know how the various players (a) perceive the risks and benefits associated with the decisions they will make under the old and new control structures, and (b) how much risk they are willing to accept in making decisions. Risk is here defined as the probability and magnitude of negative events (after Slovic, 1987). Of primary interest are risks associated with traffic, weather, and operational factors such as schedule, fuel consumption, and passenger service. Previous research has documented differences between groups in perceptions of risks associated with both everyday and aviation related situations. Risk perception varies as a function of familiarity with the situation, degree to which one is potentially affected by the risk, the level of control one has over the situation, and one's level of experience and responsibility in the situation. In our presentation we will consider several factors that may influence differences in risk perception, risk tolerance and risk management among the three major categories of participants in the aviation system (pilots, dispatchers, and controllers). Primary factors that may affect risk attitudes (the collective term we will use for the three components of risk) include: expertise or job-specific knowledge or training, personal involvement or vulnerability to consequences, goals, time horizon (imminence of consequences), span of control and type of control, and information or technology support. These will be considered in the context of five different types of risk (physical threat, economic, social, legal, and ethical). A study designed to study differences between pilots and controllers in their perceptions and responses to traffic risks under the present and a user-preferred control situation will be described. Future studies involving dispatchers' risk perceptions regarding various types of risk will be discussed.

Davison, Jeannie↗

NASA NTRS2010

Design for Minimum Risk

Design for Minimum Risk (DFMR) is a term used by NASA programs as an expansion of the general hazard reduction process where if an identified hazard cannot be eliminated, the design is modified to reduce the associated mishap risk to an acceptable level. DFMR is a set of specific requirements to minimize risk. DFMR is not well understood and there are many misconceptions concerning the meaning and use. This paper will provide insight into the use of DFMR for space applications; it s comparison to other hazard mitigation strategies and examples of how the approach has been used in the past. It will also highlight documents used by NASA on various programs to determine DFMR.

Wetherholt, Jon↗

NASA NTRS2011

Biological Based Risk Assessment for Space Exploration

Exposures from galactic cosmic rays (GCR) - made up of high-energy protons and high-energy and charge (HZE) nuclei, and solar particle events (SPEs) - comprised largely of low- to medium-energy protons are the primary health concern for astronauts for long-term space missions. Experimental studies have shown that HZE nuclei produce both qualitative and quantitative differences in biological effects compared to terrestrial radiation, making risk assessments for cancer and degenerative risks, such as central nervous system effects and heart disease, highly uncertain. The goal for space radiation protection at NASA is to be able to reduce the uncertainties in risk assessments for Mars exploration to be small enough to ensure acceptable levels of risks are not exceeded and to adequately assess the efficacy of mitigation measures such as shielding or biological countermeasures. We review the recent BEIR VII and UNSCEAR-2006 models of cancer risks and their uncertainties. These models are shown to have an inherent 2-fold uncertainty as defined by ratio of the 95% percent confidence level to the mean projection, even before radiation quality is considered. In order to overcome the uncertainties in these models, new approaches to risk assessment are warranted. We consider new computational biology approaches to modeling cancer risks. A basic program of research that includes stochastic descriptions of the physics and chemistry of radiation tracks and biochemistry of metabolic pathways, to emerging biological understanding of cellular and tissue modifications leading to cancer is described.

Cucinotta, Francis A.↗

DOE OSTI2024

On the compatibility of established methods with emerging artificial intelligence and machine learning methods for disaster risk analysis

Abstract There is growing interest in leveraging advanced analytics, including artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), for disaster risk analysis (RA) applications. These emerging methods offer unprecedented abilities to assess risk in settings where threats can emerge and transform quickly by relying on “learning” through datasets. There is a need to understand these emerging methods in comparison to the more established set of risk assessment methods commonly used in practice. These existing methods are generally accepted by the risk community and are grounded in use across various risk application areas. The next frontier in RA with emerging methods is to develop insights for evaluating the compatibility of those risk methods with more recent advancements in AI/ML, particularly with consideration of usefulness, trust, explainability, and other factors. This article leverages inputs from RA and AI experts to investigate the compatibility of various risk assessment methods, including both established methods and an example of a commonly used AI‐based method for disaster RA applications. This article utilizes empirical evidence from expert perspectives to support key insights on those methods and the compatibility of those methods. This article will be of interest to researchers and practitioners in risk‐analytics disciplines who leverage AI/ML methods.

Mathematical Methods In Social Sciences↗

NASA NTRS2000

Microbial Impact on Success of Human Exploration Missions

The purpose of this study is to identify microbiological risks associated with space exploration and identify potential countermeasures available. Identification of microbial risks associated with space habitation requires knowledge of the sources and expected types of microbial agents. Crew data along with environmental data from water, surfaces, air, and free condensate are utilized in risk examination. Data from terrestrial models are also used. Microbial risks to crew health include bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and viruses. Adverse effects of microbes include: infections, allergic reactions, toxin production, release of volatiles, food spoilage, plant disease, material degradation, and environmental contamination. Risk is difficult to assess because of unknown potential changes in microbes (e.g., mutation) and the human host (e.g., immune changes). Prevention of adverse microbial impacts is preferred over remediation. Preventative measures include engineering measures (e.g., air filtration), crew microbial screening, acceptability standards, and active verification by onboard monitoring. Microbiological agents are important risks to human health and performance during space flight and risks increase with mission duration. Acceptable risk level must be defined. Prevention must be given high priority. Careful screening of crewmembers and payloads is an important element of any risk mitigation plan. Improved quantitation of microbiological risks is a high priority.

Pierson, Duane L.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Risk Assessment Metrics for NASA Fission Reactor Applications

Risk assessment is an important part of many NASA activities. In August 2019, the White House issued NSPM-20, which defines acceptable levels of risk for nuclear launches, but does not prescribe the particular methodologies or metrics that are to be used for comparison to the defined acceptance criteria. There are a variety of metrics that are possible and can be readily generated by a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). This paper will explore alternative metrics that can be provided, along with some discussion of their characteristics and important factors to consider during a space fission reactor risk analysis.

Probabilistic Risk Assessment↗

NASA NTRS2011

Implementation of Enhanced Propulsion Control Modes for Emergency Flight Operation

Aircraft engines can be effective actuators to help pilots avert or recover from emergency situations. Emergency control modes are being developed to enhance the engines performance to increase the probability of recovery under these circumstances. This paper discusses a proposed implementation of an architecture that requests emergency propulsion control modes, allowing the engines to deliver additional performance in emergency situations while still ensuring a specified safety level. In order to determine the appropriate level of engine performance enhancement, information regarding the current emergency scenario (including severity) and current engine health must be known. This enables the engine to operate beyond its nominal range while minimizing overall risk to the aircraft. In this architecture, the flight controller is responsible for determining the severity of the event and the level of engine risk that is acceptable, while the engine controller is responsible for delivering the desired performance within the specified risk range. A control mode selector specifies an appropriate situation-specific enhanced mode, which the engine controller then implements. The enhanced control modes described in this paper provide additional engine thrust or response capabilities through the modification of gains, limits, and the control algorithm, but increase the risk of engine failure. The modifications made to the engine controller to enable the use of the enhanced control modes are described, as are the interaction between the various subsystems and importantly, the interaction between the flight controller/pilot and the propulsion control system. Simulation results demonstrate how the system responds to requests for enhanced operation and the corresponding increase in performance.

Csank, Jeffrey T.↗

NASA NTRS1982

Need for, and financial feasibility of, satellite-aided land mobile communications

Questions regarding the role of a mobile-satellite system in augmenting the terrestrial communications system are considered, and a market assessment study is discussed. Aspects of an investment analysis are examined, taking into account a three phase financial study of four postulated land Mobile Satellite Service (LMSS) systems, project profitability evaluation methods, risk analysis methods, financial projections, potential investor acceptance standards, and a risk analysis. It is concluded that a satellite augmented terrestrial mobile service appears to be economically and technically superior to a service depending exclusively on terrestrial systems. The interest in the Mobile Satellite Service is found to be worldwide, and the ground equipment market is potentially large.

Castruccio, P. A.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Managing Small Spacecraft Projects: Less is Not Easier

Managing small, low cost missions (class C or D) is not necessarily easier than managing a full flagship mission. Yet, small missions are typically considered easier to manage and used as a training ground for developing the next generation of project managers. While limited resources can be a problem for small missions, in reality most of the issues inherent in managing small projects are not the direct result of limited resources. Instead, problems encountered by managers of small spacecraft missions often derive from 1) the perception that managing small projects is easier if something is easier it needs less rigor and formality in execution, 2) the perception that limited resources necessitate or validate omitting standard management practices, 3) less stringent or unclear guidelines or policies for small projects, and 4) stakeholder expectations that are not consistent with the size and nature of the project. For example, the size of a project is sometimes used to justify not building a full, detailed integrated master schedule. However, while a small schedule slip may not be a problem for a large mission, it can indicate a serious problem for a small mission with a short development phase, highlighting the importance of the schedule for early identification of potential issues. Likewise, stakeholders may accept a higher risk posture early in the definition of a low-cost mission, but as launch approaches this acceptance may change. This presentation discusses these common misconceptions about managing small, low cost missions, the problems that can result, and possible solutions.

Barley, Bryan↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

NASA is developing a “Standard for Assurance of Space Flight Safety and Mission Success” that implements an objectives-driven, risk-informed, and case-assured approach to safety and mission success (S&MS) for NASA space flight programs and projects. The standard aligns with the philosophy of risk leadership that has recently been established in NASA policy to assure acceptable levels of flight crew safety and mission success risk. It is consistent with existing NASA risk management requirements and is compatible with NASA program management and systems engineering requirements. The methodology described in the standard is presented in terms of an S&MS assurance framework that is designed to allow substantial flexibility in the specific means by which programs and projects achieve acceptable mission S&MS risk. Such flexibility is necessary to accommodate the increasingly broad range of acquisition strategies employed by NASA, including commercial transportation services, as well as to accommodate the increasingly rapid evolution of space flight-related technologies and practices. A key feature of the S&MS assurance framework is the specification of S&MS success criteria for each life-cycle review (LCR). The S&MS assurance case is structured around these criteria, the satisfaction of which indicates that the program/project is adhering to the S&MS risk posture. This enables the evolving S&MS assurance case to be used as a fundamental program/project submittal at each LCR, where its inherent structure of argument, supported by evidence, directly supports the evaluation of the program/project with respect to the S&MS success criteria, and by extension, the S&MS risk posture. As such, the S&MS assurance case is integral to program/project systems engineering, risk management, and S&MS oversight activities, and provides the principal basis for S&MS risk acceptance by the Decision Authority throughout the program/project life cycle.

Risk Posture↗

DOE OSTI2024

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS2008

Science Goals in Radiation Protection for Exploration

Space radiation presents major challenges to future missions to the Earth s moon or Mars. Health risks of concern include cancer, degenerative and performance risks to the central nervous system, heart and lens, and the acute radiation syndromes. The galactic cosmic rays (GCR) contain high energy and charge (HZE) nuclei, which have been shown to cause qualitatively distinct biological damage compared to terresterial radiation, such as X-rays or gamma-rays, causing risk estimates to be highly uncertain. The biological effects of solar particle events (SPE) are similar to terresterial radiation except for their biological dose-rate modifiers; however the onset and size of SPEs are difficult to predict. The high energies of GCR reduce the effectiveness of shielding, while SPE s can be shielded however the current gap in radiobiological knowledge hinders optimization. Methods used to project risks on Earth must be modified because of the large uncertainties in projecting health risks from space radiation, and thus impact mission requirements and costs. We describe NASA s unique approach to radiation safety that applies probabilistic risk assessments and uncertainty based criteria within the occupational health program for astronauts and to mission design. The two terrestrial criteria of a point estimate of maximum acceptable level of risk and application of the principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) are supplemented by a third requirement that protects against risk projection uncertainties using the upper 95% confidence level (CL) in radiation risk projection models. Exploration science goals in radiation protection are centered on ground-based research to achieve the necessary biological knowledge, and in the development of new technologies to improve SPE monitoring and optimize shielding. Radiobiology research is centered on a ground based program investigating the radiobiology of high-energy protons and HZE nuclei at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) located at DoE s Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, NY. We describe recent NSRL results that are closing the knowledge gap in HZE radiobiology and improving exploration risk estimates. Linking probabilistic risk assessment to research goals makes it possible to express risk management objectives in terms of quantitative metrics, which include the number of days in space without exceeding a given risk level within well defined confidence limits, and probabilistic assessments of the effectiveness of design trade spaces such as material type, mass, solar cycle, crew selection criteria, and biological countermeasures. New research in SPE alert and risk assessment, individual radiation sensitivity, and biological countermeasure development are described.

Cucinotta, Francs A.↗

DOE OSTI2025

Application of Cyber-Informed Engineering for Protecting BESS

This white paper synthesizes an array of crucial grid services provided by BESS technology, assesses its architecture and communications, and presents a case study for analysis against the principles introduced by Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE). Furthermore, in walking through the analysis, this paper presents a framework to evaluate risks and solutions when considering BESS components. Asset owners and buyers could perform this analysis to assess their BESS product implementations, alternative inverter-based resources (IBR), and energy management systems (EMS). Battery systems fulfill various roles contingent on the unique market demands and the specific challenges presented by regional grid infrastructures. These roles also vary due to the differing utility models for ownership and operation, which are adapted to meet regional and local capabilities and requirements. Concerns have been raised regarding the potential for adversaries to exploit knowledge of battery operational patterns to orchestrate decisive attacks. However, the security of operational data for these systems may not be the primary vulnerability, as much of this information is already well-understood within the community. Applying a modest degree of subject matter expertise can often yield valuable predictions regarding how a battery will respond under certain conditions, such as grid emergencies, high or low-temperature days, Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events, and outages. The operational characteristics of batteries are well-documented, and their capabilities, including the risks associated with misoperation and the resulting consequences, are published and understood within the industry. CIE practices represent the next step in gaining functional assurance and providing an acceptable level of risk, regardless of whether a battery vendor can support a trusted and validated supply chain. While this issue has exacerbated supply chain challenges, it is not an isolated condition. This foreign supply route is the primary source of BESS for the U.S. market. Significant efforts are underway through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) to change that. Still, strategic short-term operational mitigations are needed to ensure the security of our operational technology (OT) systems, which are enhanced by instilling trust and are separate from vendors implementing CIE principles.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

NASA NTRS2009

Microbial Risk Assessment

Historically, microbiological spaceflight requirements have been established in a subjective manner based upon expert opinion of both environmental and clinical monitoring results and the incidence of disease. The limited amount of data, especially from long-duration missions, has created very conservative requirements based primarily on the concentration of microorganisms. Periodic reevaluations of new data from later missions have allowed some relaxation of these stringent requirements. However, the requirements remain very conservative and subjective in nature, and the risk of crew illness due to infectious microorganisms is not well defined. The use of modeling techniques for microbial risk has been applied in the food and potable water industries and has exceptional potential for spaceflight applications. From a productivity standpoint, this type of modeling can (1) decrease unnecessary costs and resource usage and (2) prevent inadequate or inappropriate data for health assessment. In addition, a quantitative model has several advantages for risk management and communication. By identifying the variable components of the model and the knowledge associated with each component, this type of modeling can: (1) Systematically identify and close knowledge gaps, (2) Systematically identify acceptable and unacceptable risks, (3) Improve communication with stakeholders as to the reasons for resource use, and (4) Facilitate external scientific approval of the NASA requirements. The modeling of microbial risk involves the evaluation of several key factors including hazard identification, crew exposure assessment, dose-response assessment, and risk characterization. Many of these factors are similar to conditions found on Earth; however, the spaceflight environment is very specialized as the inhabitants live in a small, semi-closed environment that is often dependent on regenerative life support systems. To further complicate modeling efforts, microbial dose-response characteristics may be affected by a potentially dysfunctional crew immune system during a mission. In addition, microbial virulence has been shown to change under certain conditions during spaceflight, further complicating dose-response characterization. An initial study of the applicability of microbial risk assessment techniques was performed using Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) operational data from the International Space Station potable water systems. The risk of infection from potable water was selected as the flight systems and microbial ecology are well defined. This initial study confirmed the feasibility of using microbial risk assessment modeling for spaceflight systems. While no immediate threat was detected, the study identified several medically significant microorganisms that could pose a health risk if uncontrolled. The study also identified several specific knowledge gaps in making a risk assessment and noted that filling these knowledge gaps is essential as the risk estimates may change by orders of magnitude depending on the answers. The current phase of the microbial risk assessment studies focuses on the dose-response relationship of specific infectious agents, focusing on Salmonella enterica Typhimurium, Pseudomonas spp., and Escherichia coli, as their evaluation will provide a better baseline for determining the overall hazard characterization. The organisms were chosen as they either have been isolated on spacecraft or have an identified route of infection during a mission. The characterization will utilize dose-response models selected either from the peer-reviewed literature and/or by using statistical approaches. Development of these modeling and risk assessment techniques will help to optimize flight requirements and to protect the safety, health, and performance of the crew.

Ott, C. M.↗