SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Safety”

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 253 records · Page 14

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2024

Survey of Methods for Assessing Safety Compliance of sUAS BVLOS Operations

To ensure the safety of small Unmanned Aircraft System (sUAS) Beyond Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS), the FAA offers a guideline on how sUAS operators can demonstrate compliance with FAA rules, including regulations, advisory circulars, policy statements, and acceptable means of compliance (AMOC), using a formal and top-down approach. According to FAA Advisory Circular 23.2010-1, the AMOC refers to “one method, but not the only method, to show compliance with a regulatory requirement.” It is common for regulations to include a performance and safety standard rather than a detailed design or operation requirement, which allows for flexibility in fulfilling the regulatory requirements while still achieving a predetermined level of safety. This technical report explores existing frameworks for sUAS BVLOS safety analysis. It begins by discussing how sUAS BVLOS operations can be strategically deconflicted and then discusses their hazards. The next step is to establish safety assessment methods commonly used by the aviation industry and the FAA, illustrate how these methods can be applied to several safety-critical air traffic systems, and list collision models that the FAA and industry use. This investigation documents the processes for assessing safety risks in sUAS BVLOS operations and will allow sUAS BVLOS operations to be assessed for safety compliance more efficiently.

sUAS BVLOS Operations↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An in-Time Aviation Safety Management System Concept of Operations and Modernization of the National Airspace System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is growing in complexity of aircraft, missions, and operations. In response, many organizations have published papers and concepts of operations (ConOps) for new and enhanced safety systems. The National Academies’ vision for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) is integral to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) modernization efforts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) System-Wide Safety (SWS) project is conducting safety research, exploring solutions, and defining the safety needs of future missions, such as Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) and autonomous aircraft operating in a more connected, flexible, and dynamic airspace. IASMS enables and provides a path for bringing FAA’s operational vision to fruition through increasingly automated safety systems that integrate services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs). These SFCs provide the necessary responsiveness to monitor, assess, and mitigate known hazards and emergent risks. This paper describes how safety in today’s air transportation system will need to evolve, identifies key points regarding in-time safety, and explores the criticality of IASMS in the future NAS.

IASMS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An In-time Aviation Safety Management System Concept of Operations and Modernization of the National Airspace System

Airspace↗

DOE OSTI1994

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 35, No. 1, January-June 1994]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. THE CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT: 1 Chernobyl Accident Management Actions, A. R Sich; GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 25 The IAEA-ASSET Approach to Avoiding Accidents is to Recognize the Precursors to Prevent Incidents, F. Reisch; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 36 A Review of the Available Information on the Triggering Stage of a Steam Explosion, D. F. Fletcher; 58 Analysis and Modeling of Flow-Blockage-Induced Steam Explosion Events in the High-Flux Isotope Reactor, R. P. Taleyarkhan, V. Georgevich, C. W. Nestor, U. Gat, B. L. Lepard, D. H. Cook, J. Freels, S. J. Chang, C. Luttrell, R. C. Gwaltney, and J. Kirkpatrick; 74 An Analysis of Disassembling the Radial Reflector of a Thermionic Space Nuclear Reactor Power System, M. S. El-Genk and D. V. Paramonov; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 86 Standards for High-Integrity Software, D. R. Wallace, D. R. Kuhn, L M. Ippolito, and L. Beltracchi; DESIGN FEATURES: 98 Adoption of New Design Features for the Next Generation Nuclear Power Reactors, L. S. Tong; 114 Review of Nuclear Piping Seismic Design Requirements, G. C. Slagis and S. E. Moore; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 128 PC-Based Probabilistic Safety Assessment Study for a Geological Waste Repository Placed in a Bedded Salt Formation, S. A. Khan; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 142 Managing Aging in Nuclear Power Plants: Insights from NRC’s Maintenance Team Inspection Reports, A. Fresco and M. Subudhi; 150 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 153 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 158 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 168 Proposed Rule Changes as of Dec. 31, 1993; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 177 Symposium on Radioactive and Mixed Waste—Risk as a Basis for Waste Classification; 177 1995 Incineration Conference 178 Ninth Power Plant Dynamics Control and Testing Symposium; 174 The Authors

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Draft Prototype Microreactor Transportation Safety Program

Microreactors are compact reactors capable of producing less than 50 megawatts of electrical energy. Typically, these reactors are factory-fabricated and designed to be easily transportable by truck, rail, vessel, or air. Microreactor designs often assume that the unit can be transported containing either unirradiated or irradiated fuel. The interest in microreactors is driven by several factors, including the need to generate power on at remote locations, at military installations, at facilities such as data centers, and in areas recovering from natural disasters. The U.S. Department of Defense is actively pursuing the microreactor concept to meet the increasing energy demands of military operations that require portable and dense power sources. Commercial vendors are also exploring microreactor concepts. The report Microreactor Transportation Emergency Planning Challenges (Maheras et al. 2024) outlined the emergency planning challenges associated with the transportation of microreactors by road, rail, and by barge/ship. The successful commercial deployment and redeployment of microreactors will also require the development of microreactor transportation safety programs. The elements in these safety programs are not specific to microreactors; however, the transport of microreactors may pose unique challenges in these areas. This report builds on the report Microreactor Transportation Emergency Planning Challenges (Maheras et al. 2024) and develops the elements of a prototype microreactor transportation safety program that describes the elements that should be contained vendor-developed microreactor transportation safety programs, identifying the unique elements associated with microreactor transport. This will provide vendors and their transportation contractors a basis for their transportation planning and will accelerate the commercial deployment and redeployment of microreactors by identifying those issues unique to microreactor transport. The emphasis of this report is on highway transport of microreactors. This is based on a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission transportation package approval strategy of crawl-walk-run, where transport by highway is evaluated first (Coles et al. 2021, 2024, Maheras et al. 2021), then other surface modes (rail and barge/ship), and finally air transport. Evaluation of maritime transport of microreactors was recently initiated (Rigato et al. 2024, Maheras et al. 2025). The report first discusses microreactors in general and microreactor transportation safety program planning assumptions. The report then provides a description of the transportation safety planning process and provides an extensive discussion of the elements of transportation safety programs. Specific elements examined included transportation roles and responsibilities, transportation planning, transportation mode and route selection, carrier selection, transportation packaging, advance notification of shipments, public information and communications, emergency response plans and procedures, inspections, security, safe parking, shipment tracking, weather and road conditions, medical preparedness, training and exercises, and program evaluation. The report then identifies the unique elements of a transportation safety program associated with microreactor transport. These unique elements were in the areas of: the unusual nature of microreactor designs, compensatory measures, increased radiation dose rates in the vicinity of microreactors, transportation package approval versus 10 CFR 50.59, and the use of a risk-informed transportation package approval process.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA NTRS2014

Industry Initiated Core Safety Attributes for Human Spaceflight for the 7th IAASS Conference

Now that the NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is beginning its full certification contract for crew transportation to the International Space Station (ISS), is it time for industry to embrace a minimum set of core safety attributes? Those attributes can then be evolved into an industry-led set of basic safety standards and requirements. After 50 years of human space travel sponsored by governments, there are two basic conditions that now exist within the international space industry. The first, there is enough of a space-faring history to encourage the space industry to design, develop and operate human spaceflight systems without government contracts for anything other than services. Second, industry is capable of defining and enforcing a set of industry-based safety attributes and standards for human spaceflight to low-Earth orbit (LEO). This paper will explore both of these basic conditions with a focus on the safety attributes and standards. In the United States, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is now starting to dialogue with industry about the basic safety principles and attributes needed for potential future regulatory oversight. This process is not yet formalized and will take a number of years once approval is given to move forward. Therefore, throughout the next few years, it is an excellent time and opportunity for industry to collaborate together and develop the core set of attributes and standards. As industry engages and embraces a common set of safety attributes, then government agencies, like the FAA and NASA can use that industry-based product to strengthen their efforts on a safe commercial spaceflight foundation for the future. As the commercial space industry takes the lead role in establishing core safety attributes, and then enforcing those attributes, the entire planet can move away from governmental control of design and development and let industry expand safe and successful space operations in LEO. At that point the governmental agencies can focus on oversight of the industries' defined standards and enforcement for common welfare of the space-faring populous and overall public safety.

crew transportation↗

NASA NTRS2014

Querying Safety Cases

Querying a safety case to show how the various stakeholders' concerns about system safety are addressed has been put forth as one of the benefits of argument-based assurance (in a recent study by the Health Foundation, UK, which reviewed the use of safety cases in safety-critical industries). However, neither the literature nor current practice offer much guidance on querying mechanisms appropriate for, or available within, a safety case paradigm. This paper presents a preliminary approach that uses a formal basis for querying safety cases, specifically Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) argument structures. Our approach semantically enriches GSN arguments with domain-specific metadata that the query language leverages, along with its inherent structure, to produce views. We have implemented the approach in our toolset AdvoCATE, and illustrate it by application to a fragment of the safety argument for an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) being developed at NASA Ames. We also discuss the potential practical utility of our query mechanism within the context of the existing framework for UAS safety assurance.

Safety Case↗

NASA NTRS2017

Technology and Tool Development to Support Safety and Mission Assurance

The Assurance Case approach is being adopted in a number of safety-mission-critical application domains in the U.S., e.g., medical devices, defense aviation, automotive systems, and, lately, civil aviation. This paradigm refocuses traditional, process-based approaches to assurance on demonstrating explicitly stated assurance goals, emphasizing the use of structured rationale, and concrete product-based evidence as the means for providing justified confidence that systems and software are fit for purpose in safely achieving mission objectives. NASA has also been embracing assurance cases through the concepts of Risk Informed Safety Cases (RISCs), as documented in the NASA System Safety Handbook, and Objective Hierarchies (OHs) as put forth by the Agency's Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA). This talk will give an overview of the work being performed by the SGT team located at NASA Ames Research Center, in developing technologies and tools to engineer and apply assurance cases in customer projects pertaining to aviation safety. We elaborate how our Assurance Case Automation Toolset (AdvoCATE) has not only extended the state-of-the-art in assurance case research, but also demonstrated its practical utility. We have successfully developed safety assurance cases for a number of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) operations, which underwent, and passed, scrutiny both by the aviation regulator, i.e., the FAA, as well as the applicable NASA boards for airworthiness and flight safety, flight readiness, and mission readiness. We discuss our efforts in expanding AdvoCATE capabilities to support RISCs and OHs under a project recently funded by OSMA under its Software Assurance Research Program. Finally, we speculate on the applicability of our innovations beyond aviation safety to such endeavors as robotic, and human spaceflight.

Mission Assuranc↗

NASA NTRS2018

Identification of Safety Metrics for Airport Surface Operations

A large fraction of safety incidents occurs on the ground during airport surface operations. Although these incidents are mostly non-fatal with a few exceptions, they are high profile incidents that remain a source of concern for the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), major airlines, and other stakeholders of the National Airspace System (NAS). These incidents have historically been mitigated by implementing changes to regulations, policies, and procedures over time. This approach has minimized but not eliminated the risk of occurrences. It is thus important to develop integrated techniques to assess, model, and prevent these incidents by analyzing the risk and likelihood of occurrence and communicating results of the analysis to decision-making personnel who can mitigate and prevent incidents in real time. The research presented in this report builds on prior work of researchers at the NASA Ames Research Center who developed an automated framework, Real-Time Safety Monitoring (RTSM), to enable monitoring and prediction of the safety of the NAS. In the RTSM framework, hazards to flight are translated to safety metrics such as wake vortex encounters or loss of separation, that can be modeled and analyzed offline and also predicted and monitored in real time (online). The intent of this report is to integrate predictable incidents that occur during surface and ground operations into the safety portfolio of the RTSM project by (i) identifying suitable information sources from which ground incidents can be studied, (ii) developing safety metrics correlated with surface operations, and (iii) recommending suitable data sources that can be quantified and used for the computation of pertinent safety metrics.

ground operations↗

NASA NTRS2018

Real-Time Monitoring and Prediction of Airspace Safety

The U.S. National Airspace System (NAS) has reached an extremely high level of safety in recent years. However, it will only become more difficult to maintain the current level of safety with the forecasted increase in operations, and so the FAA has been making revolutionary changes to the NAS to both expand capacity and ensure safety. Our work complements these efforts by developing a novel model-based framework for real-time monitoring and prediction of the safety of the NAS. Our framework is divided into two parts: (offline) safety analysis and modeling part, and a real-time (online) monitoring and prediction of safety. The goal of the safety analysis task is to identify hazards to flight (distilled from several national databases) and to codify these hazards within our framework such that we can monitor and predict them. From these we define safety metrics that can be monitored and predicted using dynamic models of airspace operations, aircraft, and weather, along with a rigorous, mathematical treatment of uncertainty. We demonstrate our overall approach and highlight the advantages of this approach over the current state-of-the-art through simulated scenarios.

safety metrics↗

NASA NTRS2024

Assessment of Some IASMS-relevant Data Sources for Aviation Safety

An In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) [1,2] is a set of services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs) necessary for monitoring known hazards and emergent risks, assessing safety data for anomalies, precursors, and trends, mitigating hazards that reach safety thresholds, and assuring efficacy of controls in mitigating hazards. An IASMS will continually monitor the NAS to collect data on the status of aircraft, air traffic management systems, weather, and airports. Within the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) System-Wide Safety (SWS) project’s technical challenge called In-time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS) for Commercial Aviation Operations, which we often refer to as Technical Challenge 6 (TC-6), we have performed an assessment of several aviation data sources we have found that are relevant to assessing the safety of the National Airspace System (NAS) in the context of an IASMS. This assessment includes understanding the nature of the data themselves and using some data analytics tools on these data to show how they can be used to identify potential safety issues. We also describe how the data and analytics are part of a system that can allow for other data and analytics to be performed and for the results to be visualized for use by appropriate operators to identify potential safety issues and develop mitigations. This report is a step toward the ultimate goal of TC-6, which is to develop a prototype IASMS system that demonstrates the potential of an IASMS and inspire operators to build analogous systems to make the best possible use of the significant investments that they make in collecting, storing, and managingdata related to their operations.

aviation safety↗

DOE OSTI2022

Enhancing Worker Safety During Off-Site Construction of Energy-Efficient, Low-Carbon Exterior Envelope

The construction industry is not doing enough to embrace off-site modular construction. It is a missed opportunity for optimized energy efficiency because prefabricated exterior wall envelopes are lower in cost and faster and easier to install. Factory off-site construction offers improved safety for construction workers because work is done in a controlled environment, but lack of intent, understanding, and data is also a missed opportunity for enhancing worker safety. This research looks specifically at the prefabricated wall exterior envelope in the context of safety. The research question is "off-site factories build with ease of energy efficiency and lowered carbon emissions, but is the process safer?" This research was funded by NREL Student Training in Applied Research (STAR) program, University Partnerships Program, and Wells Fargo Bank. Key finding is that modular and prefabricated construction are perceived to be safer, but the accident rates are much higher than in the general construction and manufacturing industries. Proposed solutions to decrease accidents in off-site prefabricated construction includes safety training for workers, provide movable kiosks with PPE at workstations, ensure tools are well-maintained and place safety posters in visible locations. Future work includes improving worker safety to increase worker productivity, perform pilot demonstration, work with factory designers for new modular layout for worker safety, i.e., easy access to PPE kiosks, and work closely with OSHA so that they take notice of this safety niche.

drywall↗

DOE OSTI1975

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 16, No. 1, January-February 1975]

Nuclear Safety covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. The scope is limited to topics relevant to the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, safety considerations in regard to the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 AEC Working Paper on Population Density Around Nuclear Power-Plant Sites Adapted by J. Ft. Buchanan, 8 Water-Reactor Safety-Research Information Meeting by Wm. B. Cottrell, D. O. Hobson, and G. D. Whitman; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 29 Burnout in Boiling Heat Transfer. Part I: Pool-Boiling Systems by A. E. Bergles; PLANT SAFETY FEATURES: 43 Radionuclide Behavior During Normal Operation of Liquid-Metal-Cooled Fast Breeder Reactors. Part 1: Production by C. A. Erdman and A. B. Reynolds; CONSEQUENCES OF EFFLUENT RELEASE: 60 The Control, Monitoring, and Reporting of Radioactivity in Effluents. Part 1: AEC-Owned Facilities by M. B. Biles and F. E. Coffman, 71 The Control, Monitoring, and Reporting of Radioactivity in Effluents. Part 2: AEC-Licensed Facilities by L. B. Higginbotham and J. T. Collins; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 76 Incident at the Lucens Reactor by J. M. Miller, 79 IAEA Symposium on Experience from Operating and Fueling of Nuclear Power Reactors by William A. Pryor, 87 Recent Occurrences at Nuclear Reactors and Their Causes Compiled by William R. Casto, 98 Summary of Operating U. S. Power Reactors as of Nov. 1. 1974, 101 Selected Safety-Related Occurrences Reported in September and October 1974 Compiled by William R. Casto; CURRENT EVENTS: 104 General Administrative Activities Compiled by Wm. B. Cottrell, 110 Action on Power-Reactor Projects Undergoing Regulatory Review or Consideration Compiled by Wm. B. Cottrell, 119 Action on Nonreactor Projects Undergoing Regulatory Review or Consideration Compiled by Wm. B. Cottrell, 121 Proposed Rule Changes as of Oct. 31, 1974; MISCELLANY: 97 ASTM—Euratom Symposium on Radiation Dosimetry: Developments and Standardization (Announcement), 118 Workshops on In-Pile Filter Testing (Announcement), 119 IAEA Symposium on Radiological Impacts from Releases from Nuclear Facilities into Aquatic Environments (Announcement).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI1996

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 37, No. 3, July-September 1996]

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. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS 181 Attitudes and Practices Regarding Disposal of Liquid Nuclear Waste at Clinton Laboratories in the Very Early Years: A Historical Analysis, S. H. Stow; 202 Off-Site Nuclear Emergency Management in Germany Under the Auspices of the Federal Structure, A. Bayer, S. Bittner, and H. Korn; DESIGN FEATURES: 211 Twenty-Fourth DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning and Treatment Conference, R. R. Bellamy, J. J. Hayes, R. D. Porco, and M. W. First; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 222 Explosion in the Tomsk-7 Reprocessing Plant on April 6, 1993, M. L. Hyder, W. G. Lussie, and F. E. Witmer; 234 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 237 Assessment of Spent Fuel Cooling, J. G. Ibarra, W. R. Jones, G. F. Lanik, H. L. Ornstein, and S. V. Pullani; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 256 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 260 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1996; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 210 Tennessee Industries Week; 221 21st International Symposium on The Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management; 259 IAEA Programme of Scientific Meetings for 1997; 270 PSAM 4 (International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management); 265 The Authors; 268 Errata.

05 NUCLEAR FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Safety Analysis of FeCrAl Accident-Tolerant Fuels with Increased Enrichment and Extended Burnup

The U.S. nuclear industry is facing a strong challenge to maintain regulatory-required levels of safety while ensuring economic competitiveness to stay in business. Safety remains a key parameter for all aspects related to the operation of light water reactor nuclear power plants (NPPs), and it can be achieved more economically by using a risk-informed ecosystem, such as that being developed by the Risk-Informed Systems Analysis Pathway under the U.S. Department of Energy Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program. This program is promoting a wide range of research and development activities to maximize both the safety and economically efficient performance of NPPs through improved scientific understanding, especially given that many plants are considering a second license renewal. The Risk-Informed Systems Analysis Pathway has two main goals: (1) The deployment of methodologies and technologies that enable a better representation of the safety margins and factors that contribute to cost and safety, and (2) The development of advanced applications that enable cost-effective plant operation. As part of this pathway, the Enhanced Resilient Plant project refers to an NPP where safety is improved by implementing various measures, such as accident-tolerant fuels, diverse and flexible coping strategies, enhancements to plant components and systems, incorporation of augmented or new passive cooling systems, and utilization of advanced battery technologies. The objective of the Enhanced Resilient Plant project is to use novel methods and computational tools to enhance existing reactors’ safety while reducing operational costs. This report documents research and development conducted in support of deployment of accident-tolerant fuels. This project performed safety analyses for the steady-state normal operation, anticipated operational occurrences, and design-basis accidents of a representative four-loop pressurized water reactor model with Zr and FeCrAl accident-tolerant fuel clad with higher enrichment and burnup supporting plant refueling cycles of 18 and 24 months. The source terms and environmental impacts were studied for a large-break loss of coolant accident, including uncertainty analyses.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

NASA NTRS1977

System safety in manned spaceflight

System safety in manned spaceflight is discussed with attention to the organization of the NASA safety effort, hazard identification and resolution, safety program integration, risk management visibility, and space transportation system payload safety. Key ingredients of the safety program, including concepts such as a distinct and appropriate level of responsibility for safety, and comprehensive and appropriate safety requirements from the policy level to the system level, are summarized. Program safety interrelationships are indicated.

Hammack, J. B.↗

NASA NTRS1989

Space Station Freedom Safety Program

The renewed emphasis within NASA on the incorporation of firmly established safety design requirements and evolving new safety analysis techniques, including quantitative safety risk assessment methods, is discussed with particular reference to the Space Station Freedom Safety Program. The program provides for integration of the partial safety analysis performed by numerous NASA Centers and International Partners into a Programmatic Safety Assessment for each of the launch increments and the complete Space Station Freedom on orbit. Communication in the safety program will utilize state-of-the-art software and computers, which will provide broad accessibility to safety information among the NASA and International Partners.

Griggs, John G., III↗

NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

This report covers the activities of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) for calendar year 1998-a year of sharp contrasts and significant successes at NASA. The year opened with the announcement of large workforce cutbacks. The slip in the schedule for launching the International Space Station (ISS) created a five-month hiatus in Space Shuttle launches. This slack period ended with the successful and highly publicized launch of the STS-95 mission. As the year closed, ISS assembly began with the successful orbiting and joining of the Functional Cargo Block (FGB), Zarya, from Russia and the Unity Node from the United States. Throughout the year, the Panel maintained its scrutiny of NASA's safety processes. Of particular interest were the potential effects on safety of workforce reductions and the continued transition of functions to the Space Flight Operations Contractor. Attention was also given to the risk management plans of the Aero-Space Technology programs, including the X-33, X-34, and X-38. Overall, the Panel concluded that safety is well served for the present. The picture is not as clear for the future. Cutbacks have limited the depth of talent available. In many cases, technical specialties are 'one deep.' The extended hiring freeze has resulted in an older workforce that will inevitably suffer significant departures from retirements in the near future. The resulting 'brain drain' could represent a future safety risk unless appropriate succession planning is started expeditiously. This and other topics are covered in the section addressing workforce. The major NASA programs are also limited in their ability to plan property for the future. This is of particular concern for the Space Shuttle and ISS because these programs are scheduled to operate well into the next century. In the case of the Space Shuttle, beneficial and mandatory safety and operational upgrades are being delayed because of a lack of sufficient present funding. Likewise, the ISS has little flexibility to begin long lead-time items for upgrades or contingency planning. For example, the section on computer hardware and software contains specific findings related to required longer range safety-related actions. NASA can be proud of its accomplishments this past year, but must remain ever vigilant, particularly as ISS assembly begins to accelerate. The Panel will continue to focus on both the short- and long-term aspects of risk management and safety planning. This task continues to be made manageable and productive by the excellent cooperation the Panel receives from both NASA and its contractors. Particular emphasis will continue to be directed to longer term workforce and program planning issues as well as the immediate risks associated with ISS assembly and the initial flights of the X-33 and X-34. Section 2 of this report presents specific findings and recommendations generated by ASAP activities during 1998. Section 3 contains more detailed information in support of these findings and recommendations. Appendix A is a current roster of Panel members, consultants, and staff. Appendix B contains NASA's response to the findings and recommendations from the 1997 ASAP Annual Report. Appendix C details the fact-finding activities of the Panel in 1998. During the year, Mr. Richard D. Blomberg was elected chair of the Panel and Vice Admiral (VADM) Robert F Dunn was elected deputy chair. VADM Bernard M. Kauderer moved from consultant to member. Mr. Charles J. Donlan retired from the Panel after many years of meritorious service. Ms. Shirley C. McCarty and Mr. Robert L. ('Hoot') Gibson joined the Panel as consultants.

Source record↗