SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “technical standards”

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 235 records · Page 13

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2013

AeroMACS System Characterization and Demonstrations

This The Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications System (AeroMACS) is being developed to provide a new broadband wireless communications capability for safety critical communications in the airport surface domain, providing connectivity to aircraft and other ground vehicles as well as connections between other critical airport fixed assets. AeroMACS development has progressed from requirements definition through technology definition, prototype deployment and testing, and now into national and international standards development. The first prototype AeroMACS system has been deployed at the Cleveland Hopkins International Airport (CLE) and the adjacent NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). During the past 3 years, extensive technical testing has taken place to characterize the performance of the AeroMACS prototype and provide technical support for the standards development process. The testing has characterized AeroMACS link and network performance over a variety of conditions for both fixed and mobile data transmission and has included basic system performance testing and fixed and mobile applications testing. This paper provides a summary of the AeroMACS performance testing and the status of standardization activities that the testing supports.

Kerczewski, Robert J.↗

NASA NTRS2013

AeroMACS System Characterization and Demonstrations

The Aeronautical Mobile Airport Communications System (AeroMACS) is being developed to provide a new broadband wireless communications capability for safety critical communications in the airport surface domain, providing connectivity to aircraft and other ground vehicles as well as connections between other critical airport fixed assets. AeroMACS development has progressed from requirements definition through technology definition, prototype deployment and testing, and now into national and international standards development. The first prototype AeroMACS system has been deployed at the Cleveland Hopkins International Airport (CLE) and the adjacent NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). During the past three years, extensive technical testing has taken place to characterize the performance of the AeroMACS prototype and provide technical support for the standards development process. The testing has characterized AeroMACS link and network performance over a variety of conditions for both fixed and mobile data transmission and has included basic system performance testing and fixed and mobile applications testing. This paper provides a summary of the AeroMACS performance testing and the status of standardization activities that the testing supports.

Kerczewski, Robert J.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Interim Set of TNT Curves for LOX/LNG Explosions

Space launch companies are actively developing, or in some cases have already developed, new vehicles that use large quantities of liquid oxygen (LOX) and liquid natural gas (LNG) propellants. This propellant mixture currently lacks sound/verified LOX/LNG explosive safety standards for use in explosive siting and flight safety analysis. In the U.S., multiple government and commercial organizations have conducted limited testing, or are preparing to conduct tests, intended to provide a sound technical basis for explosive standards applicable to space launch vehicle ground and flight operations. The limited testing and analysis conducted so far indicates the potential to produce extremely energetic explosions due to the miscibility of LOX/LNG (methane), a unique feature relative to previously used propellant mixtures such as hydrogen/oxygen or kerosene/oxygen. MOX is a homogenous mixture of methane and oxygen that is possible because of methane’s 100% miscibility in LOX. Preliminary testing by N2L, Inc. described in this paper shows that it is possible to form MOX with a variety of mixing methods, and that MOX is a sensitive high explosive capable of producing overpressures greater than comparable masses of C-4. The limited amount and quality of large-scale LOX/LNG explosive test data, and the potential formation of high-explosive MOX, create significant unknowns in the determination of hazard areas (cleared of the public) for ground operations (such as a static fire test) and flights of launch vehicles with LOX/LNG propellant. This paper will review the methods used by NASA to develop and validate the LOX/LH2 blast model using large-scale explosive test programs such as Project PYRO, the Hydrogen-Oxygen Vertical Impact (HOVI), and the Large-Scale Hydrogen-Oxygen Explosion (LSHOE) tests. This paper will describe how the same process was used to prepare an interim LOX/LNG blast model that applies to various LV failure scenarios and conservatively accounts for potential MOX formation. This paper also summarizes past and future testing and modeling efforts funded by a consortium of NASA, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the US Space Force (USSF). These test programs should be concluded within the next 3 years and are intended to provide empirical data for model verification and validation.

Liquid Oxygen↗

NASA NTRS2007

Joint Test Report For Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) have similar missions and therefore similar facilities and structures in similar environments. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. The most common topcoats used in coating systems are polyurethanes that contain isocyanates. Isocyanates are classified as potential human carcinogens and are known to cause cancer in animals. The primary objective of this effort was to demonstrate and validate alternatives to aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes resulting in one or more isocyanate-free coatings qualified for use at AFSPC and NASA installations participating in this project. This joint Test Report (JTR) documents the results of the laboratory and field testing as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. The technical stakeholders agreed upon test procedure modifications documented in this document. This JTR is made available as a reference for future pollution prevention endeavors by other NASA centers, the Department of Defense and commercial users to minimize duplication of effort. All coating system candidates were tested using approved NASA and AFSPC standard coating systems as experimental controls. This study looked at eight alternative coating systems and two control coating systems and was divided into Phase I Screening Tests, Phase II Tests, and Field Testing. The Phase I Screening Tests were preliminary tests performed on all the selected candidate coating systems. Candidate coating systems that did not meet the acceptance criteria of the screening tests were eliminated from further testing. Phase I Screening Tests included: Ease of Application, Surface Appearance, Dry-To-Touch (Sanding), Accelerated Storage Stability, Pot Life (Viscosity), Cure Time (Solvent Rubs), Cleanability, Knife Test, Tensile (pull-off) Adhesion, and X-Cut Adhesion by Wet Tape After a review of the Phase I test results, four of the alternative coating systems showed substandard performance in relation to the Control Systems and were eliminated from the Phase II testing. Due to the interest of stakeholders and time constraints, however, all eight alternatives were subjected to the following Phase II tests, along with field testing at Stennis Space Center (SSC), Mississippi: Hypergol Compatibility, Liquid Oxygen Compatibility, 18-Month Marine Exposure (Gloss Retention, Color Retention, Blistering, Visual Corrosion, Creepage from Scribe, Heat Adhesion), and Field Exposure (6- and 12-month Evaluation for Coating Condition, Color Retention, Gloss Retention). The remaining four alternative coating systems determined to be the best viable alternatives were carried on to Phase II testing that included: Removability, Repairability, Abrasion Resistance, Gravelometer, Fungus Resistance, Accelerated Weathering, Mandrel Bend Flexibility, and Cyclic Corrosion Resistance. Of the systems that continued to Phase II, three (3) alternative coating systems meet the performance requirements as identified by stakeholders. Two (2) other systems, that were not included in Phase II testing, performed well enough on the 18-Month Marine Exposure, the primary requirement for NASA technical standard NASA-STD-5008, Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment, that they were also considered to be successful candidates. In total, five (5) alternative coating systems were approved for inclusion in the NASA-STD- 5008 Qualified Products List (QPL). The standard is intended to provide a common framework for consistent practices across NASA and is often used by other entities. The standard's QPL does not connote endorsement of the products by NASA, but lists those products that have been tested and meet the requirements as specified.

Lewis, Pattie↗

DOE OSTI2022

Next Generation System Analysis Model Recently Added Features and Future Plans - Abstract

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA 1982), established the federal government’s responsibility to accept spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) from waste owners and generators for ultimate disposition. SNF generated by the current fleet of commercial nuclear reactors is being stored at the reactor sites in spent fuel pools (SFPs) and in dry independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs). The US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) is developing an Integrated Waste Management Program (IWMP) comprising a suite of options and supporting analyses to enable future informed choices. The IWMP is applying integrated waste management system architecture analysis, system engineering, and decision analysis principles to inform potential future decisions regarding potential nuclear waste management system architectures. Architecture analyses of the IWM system are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive system for managing nuclear waste that considers all major aspects of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). The Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM) is an agent-based simulation software tool designed for the express purpose of modeling the IWM system. NGSAM imports data from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Unified Database (e.g., historic assembly information, thermal profiles for assembly heat, at-reactor dry storage loadings) to ensure that the simulation initializes with a realistic representation of the state of commercial SNF in the United States. Recent major enhancements that have been implemented into NGSAM since NGSAM was last presented at the WM2019 conference include: • Tracking of railroad escort and buffer car acquisition. • Addition of heavy haul and barge routes for some sites, as well as support for user-defined inter-modal routes. • Updates to the logic that checks the thermal maps prior to package transport. • Addition of an allocation method that predicts when reactor sites will pack assemblies from their pools for dry storage and allocates packages to those reactor sites in the preceding periods, favoring direct transport packages and reducing the number of packages that reactor sites pack for dry storage at their ISFSIs. • Addition of reactor site family operational limits, which are used to limit the number of loads from the pool and from dry storage at a given reactor site per year. • Support has been added for multiple canister loading maps and packages having multiple compatible transportation overpacks. • Updates in the handling of non-commercial fuel, including a new database containing data to support the updates. • Support for repackaging at reactor sites. • Implementing additional output reports or modifying existing reports. • User edits can now be created and edited via the NGSAM website. • Ability to load packages for dry storage at ISF pools. • Same-type package blending at DOE sites. • Support for multi-mode transloading at reactor sites. These new features have improved NGSAM capabilities and/or improve the user experience with the model and will be discussed in more detail. The initial NGSAM requirements for advanced reactor fuels, reprocessing, treatment, and conditioning are preliminary and are described at a high level in this paper: analysts will provide more specific requirements to the NGSAM team in the future. Additionally, there are many data needs associated with modeling advanced reactors in NGSAM, but many of the data or plans are still in progress and/or yet to be fully defined. However, this document describes an initial exploration of the data relevant to this program. Advanced reactor data will likely require revision as concepts evolve and new considerations are made. This is a technical paper that does not take into account contractual limitations or obligations under the Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (Standard Contract) (10 CFR Part 961). For example, under the provisions of the Standard Contract, spent nuclear fuel in multi-assembly canisters is not an acceptable waste form, absent a mutually agreed to contract amendment. To the extent discussions or recommendations in this paper conflict with the provisions of the Standard Contract, the Standard Contract governs the obligations of the parties, and this paper in no manner supersedes, overrides, or amends the Standard Contract. This paper reflects technical work which could support future decision making by DOE. No inferences should be drawn from this paper regarding future actions by DOE, which are limited both by the terms of the Standard Contract and Congressional appropriations for the Department to fulfill its obligations under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act including licensing and construction of a spent nuclear fuel repository.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI1995

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 36, No. 1, January-June 1995]

Nuclear Safety is a journal that covers significant issues in the field of nuclear safety. Its primary scope is safety in the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power reactors worldwide and the research and analysis activities that promote this goal, but it also encompasses the safety aspects of the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing and handling, and nuclear waste disposal, the handling of fissionable materials and radioisotopes, and the environmental effects of all these activities. Table of Contents for this issue follows. THE CHORNOBYL ACCIDENT: 1 The Chornobyl Accident Revisited, Part II: The State of the Nuclear Fuel Located Within the Chornobyl Sarcophagus, A A. Borovoi and A. R. Sich; GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 33 Nuclear Power Safety in Central and Eastern Europe, R. Wilson; 46 Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors in the Former Eastern European Countries, S. Chakraborty; 53 Technical Note: On the Definition of Common-Cause Failures, H. Paula; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 58 Modeling and Analysis of Core-Debris Recriticality During Hypothetical Severe Accidents in the Advanced Neutron Source Reactor, S.-H. Kim, V. Georgevich, D. B. Simpson, C. O. Slater, and R. P. Taleyarkhan; 68 Ignitability of Hydrogen/Oxygen/Diluent Mixtures in the Presence of Hot Surfaces, R. K. Kumar and G. W. Koroll; 94 Coupled RELAP5 and CONTAIN Accident Analysis Using PVM, K. A. Smith, A. J. Baratta, and G. E. Robinson; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 109 Application of Fuzzy Logic in Nuclear Reactor Control Part I: An Assessment of State-of-the-Art, A. S. Heger, N. K. Alang-Rashid, and M. Jamshidi; DESIGN FEATURES: 122 Twenty-Third DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning and Treatment Conference, R. R. Bellamy, J. J. Hayes, and M. W. First; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 135 Atmospheric Dispersion and the Radiological Consequences of Normal Airborne Effluents from a Nuclear Power Plant, D. Fang, C. Z. Sun, and L. Yang; 142 Calculation of Distribution Coefficients for Radionuclides in Soils and Sediments, I. Puigdomenech and U. Bergstrom: OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 155 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 158 Operating Experience Feedback Report—Reliability of Safety-Related Steam Turbine-Driven Standby Pumps Used in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, J. R. Boardman; 166 Turbine Building Hazards, H. L Ornstein; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 169 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 175 Proposed Rule Changes as of Dec. 31,1994; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 32 Harvard School of Public Health In-Place Filter Testing Workshop; 134 International Conference on Advances in the Operational Safety of Nuclear Power Plants; 193 30th Tennessee Industries Week; 193 DOE Technical Standards Program 1995 Workshop; 194 Multiphase Flow Experiments and Instrumentation; 180 The Authors; 185 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volumes 34 and 35.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Elevating the Quality of Space Omics Sequencing Data: Innovations and Methodologies from NASA GeneLab Sample Processing Laboratory

NASA’s GeneLab, part of the NASA Open Science Data Repository, is a space-related database that hosts a diverse range of transcriptomics, proteomics, epigenomics and genomics data. The NASA GeneLab Sample Processing Laboratory (SPL) generates omics data from biological experiments conducted aboard the International Space Station, Space Shuttle and space related ground experiments, this omics data then hosted on the GeneLab repository. Samples generated such experiments pose numerous technical challenges such as small experimental sample size, variance in dissection times, limited tissue preservation methods, prolonged storage time, and more. GeneLab SPL team had developed specialized expertise in nucleic acid extraction, library preparation and sequencing of such biological samples via extensive training and years of experience. In order to ensure data accuracy and consistency across experiments, SPL has developed standardized protocols for each species and tissue type. These protocols in conjunction with quality control metrics and data standards are crucial in generating of high-quality data. SPL protocols and standards have been developed in collaboration with the scientific community and had been made publicly available on the GeneLab portal, guaranteeing comparability of datasets across spaceflight experiments. To ensure reliability of data generation, SPL leverages cutting-edge innovations in laboratory automation for sample processing. By leveraging these state-of-the-art platforms, SPL achieves high levels of data reproducibility while significantly minimizing sources of bias and variability, especially across experiments with large numbers of samples. Over the past few years, the space biology investigator community has accessed SPL-generated data from the Open Science Data Repository for a myriad of data re-analysis and re-use studies. We observe a trend that in-house SPL-generated data consistently outperforms outsourced sequencing data in terms of technical standards, quality control metrics, timeliness of data delivery, and sequencing and reagent efficiency. Superior data generation has and will continue to enable discoveries in disease, diagnostic tools, and the biological effects of long duration spaceflight.

GeneLab↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Elevating the Quality of Space Omics Sequencing Data: Innovations and Methodologies from NASA GeneLab Sample Processing Laboratory

GeneLab↗

NASA NTRS1993

Definition of spacecraft standard interfaces by the NASA Space Assembly and Servicing Working Group (SASWG)

The purpose of the NASA Space Assembly and Servicing Working Group (SASWG) is to study enabling technologies for on-orbit spacecraft maintenance and servicing. One key technology required for effective space logistics activity is the development of standard spacecraft interfaces, including the 'Basic Set' defined by NASA, the U.S. Space Command, and industry panelists to be the following: (1) navigation aids; (2) grasping, berthing, and docking; and (3) utility connections for power, data, and fluids. Draft standards have been prepared and referred to professional standards organizations, including the AIAA, EIA, and SAE space standards committee. The objective of the SASWG is to support these committees with the technical expertise required to prepare standards, guidelines, and recommended practices which will be accepted by the ANSI and international standards organizations, including the ISO, IEC, and PASC.

Radtke, Robert↗

DOE OSTI2020

Status Report on ASME Code Development for Nonmetallic Core Components in 2020

The purpose of this report is to provide a status update on the progress and ongoing activities of the current ASME Boiler Pressure Vessel (BPV) Code Section III, Division 5, on nonmetallic core components and assemblies which includes the design rules for graphite and ceramic composite materials. Section III is concerned with the design and construction of nuclear reactor components and Division 5 focuses on high temperature reactors (HTR). The ASME Section III Committee’s function for nuclear items other than pressure-retaining components, is to establish rules of safety related to structural integrity. The term “construction” refers to the all-inclusive effort comprising of materials, design, fabrication, examination, inspection, testing, certification, and pressure relief. The Department of Energy (DOE) supports industry codes and standards development through focused research providing the technical basis for new or modified codes and standards and the participation of subject matter experts in codes and standards committees. The activities for the nonmetallic core components and assemblies committees are the pursuit of two working groups that meet quarterly during ASME BPV Code Week meetings. The two working groups are General Requirements for Graphite and Ceramic Composite Core Components and Assemblies (GR GCCCCA) and Nonmetallic Design and Materials (NDM). The rules on general requirements for nonmetallic core components are discussed in the articles of Subsection HA subpart B. Ceramic composites were recently incorporated within the rules, and the GR GCCCCA working group is now in the process of aligning the requirements with the subsections and articles of ASME BPV Code Section III NCA, the general requirements for Division 1 and 2 of the code. The NDM working group is concerned with the design rules for graphite and composite materials for core components and assemblies discussed in Subsection HH (Class SN Nonmetallic Core Components) subpart A and subpart B which reference graphite and composite materials respectively. The bulk of the progress and work is done within this working group. A significant undertaking, with discussion that started in 2015, is to gain endorsement of ASME Section III, Division 5, by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In June 2018, ASME formally recommended endorsement to the NRC. The NRC has since initiated the endorsement review process, which is to be concluded early in 2021. ASME task groups on metallic structures and components, as well as non-metallic core support structures, have been formed to define potential pathways and schedules for NRC endorsement of Division 5. NRC determined to perform a review on the 2017 edition of Section III Division 5 as a baseline. As a result, the use of graphite as nonmetallic core components formed part of the review, but it excluded composite materials (which were first introduced in the 2019 edition). This report documents progress in FY 2020 directed toward ASME’s efforts to develop design codes for graphite and composites. Progress includes a major code review by NRC, the first code enquiry, and its solution, an overhaul of the treatment of Weibull Statistics, and the addition of Nonmandatory Appendices to the composites code relating to carbon-carbon composite materials.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2020

National Cost-effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 2016). Standard 90.1 is developed by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. It is the model energy standard for commercial and multi-family residential buildings over three floors (42 USC 6833). PNNL analyzed the cost-effectiveness of changes in Standard 90.1 from 90.1-2013 to 90.1-2016, as applied in commercial buildings across the United States. During the development of new editions of Standard 90.1, the cost-effectiveness of individual changes (addenda) is often calculated to support the deliberations of ASHRAE Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. The ASHRAE process, however, does not include analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the entire package of addenda from one edition of the standard to the next, which is of particular interest to adopting State and local governments. Providing States with an analysis of cost-effectiveness may encourage more rapid adoption of newer editions of energy codes based on Standard 90.1. This information may also inform the development of future editions of Standard 90.1. To establish the cost-effectiveness of Standard 90.1-2016, three main tasks were addressed: (1) Identification of building elements impacted by the updated standard; (2) Allocation of associated installation, maintenance, and replacement costs; and (3) Cost-effectiveness analysis of required changes In addition to installation, maintenance, and replacement costs, energy cost differences were needed to determine cost-effectiveness. The energy costs for each edition of Standard 90.1 were determined previously under the development of Standard 90.1-2016, as described below. The current analysis builds on the previous PNNL analysis (as outlined in Section 5.2) of the energy use and energy cost saving impacts of Standard 90.1-2016 compared to previous editions. The overall energy savings analysis of Standard 90.1 utilized a suite of 16 prototype EnergyPlus building models in 15 climate locations representing all eight U.S. climate zones. Detailed methodology and overall energy saving results from Standard 90.1-2016 are documented in the DOE technical report titled Energy Savings Analysis: ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (DOE. 2018b).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

NASA NTRS1980

Military standards and SCATHA program update of MIL-STD-1541

The elctromagnetic compatability requirements for space systems, 15 October 1973, to be met by industry contractors for spacecraft launch vehicles and other special space systems, are considered. Deficiencies in the existing standard with respect to spacecraft charge and discharge phenomena, the technical ramifications for generating a new standard, and the upgrading of MIL-STD-1541 with requirements supplied as a result of the SCATHA program are discussed.

Frankos, D. T.↗

NASA NTRS2004

NASA's Geospatial Interoperability Office(GIO)Program

NASA produces vast amounts of information about the Earth from satellites, supercomputer models, and other sources. These data are most useful when made easily accessible to NASA researchers and scientists, to NASA's partner Federal Agencies, and to society as a whole. A NASA goal is to apply its data for knowledge gain, decision support and understanding of Earth, and other planetary systems. The NASA Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) Geospatial Interoperability Office (GIO) Program leads the development, promotion and implementation of information technology standards that accelerate and expand the delivery of NASA's Earth system science research through integrated systems solutions. Our overarching goal is to make it easy for decision-makers, scientists and citizens to use NASA's science information. NASA's Federal partners currently participate with NASA and one another in the development and implementation of geospatial standards to ensure the most efficient and effective access to one another's data. Through the GIO, NASA participates with its Federal partners in implementing interoperability standards in support of E-Gov and the associated President's Management Agenda initiatives by collaborating on standards development. Through partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities the GIO works towards enhancing the ESE Applications Division in the area of National Applications and decision support systems. The GIO provides geospatial standards leadership within NASA, represents NASA on the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Coordination Working Group and chairs the FGDC's Geospatial Applications and Interoperability Working Group (GAI) and supports development and implementation efforts such as Earth Science Gateway (ESG), Space Time Tool Kit and Web Map Services (WMS) Global Mosaic. The GIO supports NASA in the collection and dissemination of geospatial interoperability standards needs and progress throughout the agency including areas such as ESE Applications, the SEEDS Working Groups, the Facilities Engineering Division (Code JX) and NASA's Chief Information Offices (CIO). With these agency level requirements GIO leads, brokers and facilitates efforts to, develop, implement, influence and fully participate in standards development internationally, federally and locally. The GIO also represents NASA in the OpenGIS Consortium and ISO TC211. The OGC has made considerable progress in regards to relations with other open standards bodies; namely ISO, W3C and OASIS. ISO TC211 is the Geographic and Geomatics Information technical committee that works towards standardization in the field of digital geographic information. The GIO focuses on seamless access to data, applications of data, and enabling technologies furthering the interoperability of distributed data. Through teaming within the Applications Directorate and partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities, GIO works towards the data application goals of NASA, the ESE Applications Directorate, and our Federal partners by managing projects in four categories: Geospatial Standards and Leadership, Geospatial One Stop, Standards Development and Implementation, and National and NASA Activities.

Weir, Patricia↗

NASA NTRS2011

Integrated Procedures for Flight and Ground Operations Using International Standards

Imagine astronauts using the same Interactive Electronic Technical Manuals (IETM's) as the ground personnel who assemble or maintain their flight hardware, and having all of that data interoperable with design, logistics, reliability analysis, and training. Modern international standards and their corresponding COTS tools already used in other industries provide a good foundation for streamlined technical publications in the space industry. These standards cover everything from data exchange to product breakdown structure to business rules flexibility. Full Product Lifecycle Support (PLCS) is supported. The concept is to organize, build once, reuse many ways, and integrate. This should apply to all future and some current launch vehicles, payloads, space stations/habitats, spacecraft, facilities, support equipment, and retrieval ships.

Ingalls, John↗

DOE OSTI2023

43-0434 Bridge Inspection Report 2022

This report covers the inspection findings for the Routine Inspection of the Omega Bridge conducted on September 23-25, 2022 and the Fracture Critical Member (FCM) Inspection conducted on June 26-27, 2021. Note that due to complications with the under-bridge access unit, portions of the Routine Inspection and the entire FCM Inspection could not be completed in 2022. As a result, the superstructure condition reported herein is based on the 2021 inspection whereas the deck and substructure conditions are based on the 2022 inspection. The superstructure condition will be updated when the inspection is completed in 2023. The inspections were completed according to the standards referenced in EXHIBIT “D” SCOPE OF WORK AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS including the National Bridge Inspection Standards (23 CFR Part 650, dated 12/14/2004) and other FHWA, NMDOT, and AASHTO codes and standards.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2021

EFA Soil Project Work Order: 554001

Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) Standard Operating Procedures. Any technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical case narratives in the enclosed data package. The enclosed data package contains the following sections: General Narrative, Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation, and data from the following fractions: General Chemistry, Metals and Radiochemistry. This package, to the best of my knowledge, is in compliance with technical and administrative requirements.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

EFA Soil Project Work Order: 555820

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Digital Assurance for Grid Reliability in the Era of Large Load Growth

The rapid expansion of large electric loads is reshaping the operational and regulatory landscape of the U.S. electric grid. These facilities are reaching new scales of expansion, now exceeding a gigawatt per site, and their highly sensitive, digitally driven behaviors introduce new reliability risks. Recent grid events, including large load losses following routine transmission disturbances, highlight the consequences of limited ride-through capability, inconsistent protection settings, inadequate modeling, and lack of behind-the-meter visibility. Parallels to earlier integration challenges of new grid technologies suggest that the grid’s existing processes, standards, and interconnection frameworks are no longer adequate for emerging large loads. This brief synthesizes lessons from the evolution of inverter-based resource regulation and applies them to large-load integration. It identifies critical gaps in modeling accuracy, interconnection processes, performance standards, and compliance mechanisms. Technical recommendations emphasize advanced monitoring, improved modeling, coordinated communication protocols, modernized substations, and structured behind-the-meter control schemes. Collectively, these measures provide a roadmap to maintain bulk power system reliability while enabling the continued growth of large, electrified digital infrastructure.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗