Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Task Force”

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

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

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Barriers-An Analysis of Non-Technical Barriers to Geothermal Deployment and Potential Improvement Scenarios

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Thermal Applications-Quantifying Technical, Economic, and Market Potential of Geothermal District Heating Systems in the United States

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Impacts-The Employment Opportunities, Water Impacts, Emission Reductions, and Air Quality Improvements of Achieving High Penetrations of Geothermal Power in the United States

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS1998

Report of the Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force on the International Space Station

The Cost Assessment and Validation (CAV) Task Force was established for independent review and assessment of cost, schedule and partnership performance on the International Space Station (ISS) Program. The CAV Task Force has made the following key findings: The International Space Station Program has made notable and reasonable progress over the past four years in defining and executing a very challenging and technically complex effort. The Program size, complexity, and ambitious schedule goals were beyond that which could be reasonably achieved within the $2.1 billion annual cap or $17.4 billion total cap. A number of critical risk elements are likely to have an adverse impact on the International Space Station cost and schedule. The schedule uncertainty associated with Russian implementation of joint Partnership agreements is the major threat to the ISS Program. The Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget submission to Congress is not adequate to execute the baseline ISS Program, cover normal program growth, and address the known critical risks. Additional annual funding of between $130 million and $250 million will be required. Completion of ISS assembly is likely to be delayed from one to three years beyond December 2003.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1998

Cost Assessment and Validation Task Force on the International Space Station

The Cost Assessment and Validation (CAV) Task Force was established for independent review and assessment of cost, schedule and partnership performance on the International Space Station (ISS) Program. The CAV Task Force has made the following key findings: The International Space Station Program has made notable and reasonable progress over the past four years in defining and executing a very challenging and technically complex effort; The Program, size, complexity, and ambitious schedule goals were beyond that which could be reasonably achieved within the $2.1 billion annual cap or $17.4 billion total cap; A number of critical risk elements are likely to have an adverse impact on the International Space Station cost and schedule; The schedule uncertainty associated with Russian implementation of joint Partnership agreements is the major threat to the ISS Program; The Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget submission to Congress is not adequate to execute the baseline ISS Program, cover normal program, growth, and address the known critical risks. Additional annual funding of between $130 million and $250 million will be required; and Completion of ISS assembly is likely to be delayed from, one to three years beyond December 2003.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

The NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir rendezvous and docking convened on May 24 and 25, 1994. Based on the meetings, the Task Force made the following recommendations: at a minimum, the mission commander and payload commander for all subsequent Shuttle-Mir missions should be named at least 18 months in advance of the scheduled launch date; in order to derive early operational experience in advance of the first Mir docking mission, the primary objective of STS-63 should be Mir rendezvous and proximity operations; and if at all possible, the launch date for STS-63 should be moved forward.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

Wave scheduling - Decentralized scheduling of task forces in multicomputers

Decentralized operating systems that control large multicomputers need techniques to schedule competing parallel programs called task forces. Wave scheduling is a probabilistic technique that uses a hierarchical distributed virtual machine to schedule task forces by recursively subdividing and issuing wavefront-like commands to processing elements capable of executing individual tasks. Wave scheduling is highly resistant to processing element failures because it uses many distributed schedulers that dynamically assign scheduling responsibilities among themselves. The scheduling technique is trivially extensible as more processing elements join the host multicomputer. A simple model of scheduling cost is used by every scheduler node to distribute scheduling activity and minimize wasted processing capacity by using perceived workload to vary decentralized scheduling rules. At low to moderate levels of network activity, wave scheduling is only slightly less efficient than a central scheduler in its ability to direct processing elements to accomplish useful work.

Van Tilborg, A. M.↗
DOE OSTI2014

Sci—Fri PM: Topics — 03: The Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control: Core Investments

The Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) is a membership-based, non-governmental organization with a mandate to “…to unite the cancer community to reduce the global cancer burden, to promote greater equity, and to integrate cancer control into the world health and development agenda.” COMP is an associate member of the UICC. It is well recognized by the UICC that there are major gaps between high, and low and middle income countries, in terms of access to cancer services including access to radiation therapy. In this context, the UICC has developed a Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control with a charge to answer a single question: “What does it cost to close the gap between what exists today and reasonable access to radiotherapy globally?” The Task Force consists of leaders internationally recognized for their radiation treatment related expertise (radiation oncologists, medical physicists, radiation therapists) as well as those with global health and economics specialization. The Task Force has developed three working groups: (1) to look at the global burden of cancer; (2) to look at the infrastructure requirements (facilities, equipment, personnel); and (3) to consider outcomes in terms of numbers of lives saved and palliated patients. A report is due at the World Cancer Congress in December 2014. This presentation reviews the infrastructure considerations under analysis by the second work group. The infrastructure parameters being addressed include capital costs of buildings and equipment and operating costs, which include human resources, equipment servicing and quality control, and general overhead.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1992

Group Task Force on Satellite Rescue and Repair

The Group Task Force was chartered by the Administrator of NASA to recommend 'a policy outlining the criteria, the design standards, and the pricing model to guide NASA in assessing the responsibilities for government and nongovernment Satellite Rescue and Repair Missions.' Criteria for accepting such missions, risks, and benefits to all sectors of our economy involved in satellite services, adequacy of planning and training, and the impact on NASA's primary mission were reviewed. The Group began by asking a more fundamental question; is satellite rescue and repair a logical element of NASA's mission? Factors considered were: (1) the probability of rescue or repair opportunities arising; (2) the economic justification for such attempts; (3) the benefits to NASA, both from such ad hoc learning experiences in space operations and the impact on the public perception of NASA; (4) the effect of such unanticipated missions on NASA's scheduled activities; (5) any potential effect on NASA's technical capability to work in space; and (6) any potential effect on U.S. economic competitiveness.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1995

Fourth Report of the Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions

On December 6, 1994, the NASA Administrator, Mr. Daniel Goldin, requested that Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Stafford, in his role as the Chairman of the NASA Advisory Council Task Force on the Shuttle-Mir Rendezvous and Docking Missions, lead a team composed of several Task Force members and technical advisors' to Russia with the goal of reviewing preparations and readiness for the upcoming international Space Station Phase 1 missions. In his directions to Gen. Stafford, Mr. Goldin requested that the review team focus its initial efforts on safety of flight issues for the following Phase 1A missions: the Soyuz TM-21 mission which will carry U.S. astronaut Dr. Norman Thagard and cosmonauts Lt. Col. Vladimir Dezhurov and Mr. Gennady Strekalov aboard a Soyuz spacecraft to the Mir Station; the Mir 18 Main Expedition during which Thagard and his fellow cosmonauts, Dezhurov and Strokalov, will spend approximately three months aboard the Mir Station; the STS-71 Space Shuttle mission which will perform the first Shuttle-Mir docking, carry cosmonauts Col. Anatoly SoloViev and Mr. Nikolai Budarin to the Mir Station, and return Thagard, Dezhurov, and Strekalov to Earth.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

Research priorities and plans for the International Space Station-results of the 'REMAP' Task Force

Recent events in the International Space Station (ISS) Program have resulted in the necessity to re-examine the research priorities and research plans for future years. Due to both technical and fiscal resource constraints expected on the International Space Station, it is imperative that research priorities be carefully reviewed and clearly articulated. In consultation with OSTP and the Office of Management and budget (OMB), NASA's Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) assembled an ad-hoc external advisory committee, the Biological and Physical Research Maximization and Prioritization (REMAP) Task Force. This paper describes the outcome of the Task Force and how it is being used to define a roadmap for near and long-term Biological and Physical Research objectives that supports NASA's Vision and Mission. Additionally, the paper discusses further prioritizations that were necessitated by budget and ISS resource constraints in order to maximize utilization of the International Space Station. Finally, a process has been developed to integrate the requirements for this prioritized research with other agency requirements to develop an integrated ISS assembly and utilization plan that maximizes scientific output. c2003 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

NASA Center HQS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Testing and the Joint Task Force System

During the 1940s, 50s, and early 60s, the United States conducted eight nuclear test operations in the far reaches of the Pacific Ocean. These operations were possible only because of a military command and control organization, the joint task force. Commanded by the Army Navy, and Air Force on a rotating basis, each of the seven JTFs provided the means by which the thousands of ships, planes, material, and personnel were moved over thousands of miles of ocean. The first task force, JTF-1, was created to test the destructive effects of the Fat Man bomb on Naval vessels at Bikini Atoll in the summer of 1946. Commanded by Vice Admiral William “Spike” Blandy, JTF-1 was a purely military operation supported by the MED. Never meant to be a permanent organization, JTF-1 was dissolved soon after completing its mission.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS1987

Space station operations task force summary report

A companion to the Space Stations Operation Task Force Panels' Reports, this document summarizes all space station program goals, operations, and the characteristics of the expected user community. Strategies for operation and recommendations for implementation are included.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2016

"FACILS 2014: Microbially-driven facilitation systems in environmental biotechnology" (hereafter "FACILS") presented here by the European Commission (EC)-United States (US) Task Force on Biotechnology Research

As we enter the 21st century, the sustainability of the biosphere is a global challenge that can best be met with a global response. This includes how we train and promote our next generation of research scientists in the emerging arenas of genome-enabled biology and a bio-based economy. It is this fundamental issue that formed the motivation for designing and conducting a shortcourse entitled “FACILIS 2014: Microbially-driven facilitation systems in environmental biotechnology” (hereafter “FACILIS”) presented here by the European Commission (EC)-United States (US) Task Force on Biotechnology Research. This WG was established in 1994 under the umbrella of the US-EC Task Force on Biotechnology Research, a transatlantic collaborative group overseen by the US Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the EC. The Environmental Biotechnology Working Group maintains several goals, including establishing research links between scientists in EU countries and the US and fostering the careers of junior scientists from both sides of the Atlantic to the global nature of scientific cooperation. To that end, a shortcourse was held at the University of Milan in Italy on July 12-25 2014 organized around cross-cutting themes of genomic science and designed to attract a stellar group of interdisciplinary early carrier researchers. A total of 22 students, 10 from the US and 12 from the EU participated. The course provided them with hands-on experience with the latest scientific methods in genomics and bioinformatics; using a format that combines lectures, laboratory research and field work with the final goal to enable researchers to finally turn data into knowledge.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Current Status and Recommendations for the Future of Research, Teaching, and Testing in the Biological Sciences of Radiation Oncology: Report of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force, Executive Summary

In early 2011, a dialogue was initiated within the Board of Directors (BOD) of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) regarding the future of the basic sciences of the specialty, primarily focused on the current state and potential future direction of basic research within radiation oncology. After consideration of the complexity of the issues involved and the precise nature of the undertaking, in August 2011, the BOD empanelled a Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force (TF). The TF was charged with developing an accurate snapshot of the current state of basic (preclinical) research in radiation oncology from the perspective of relevance to the modern clinical practice of radiation oncology as well as the education of our trainees and attending physicians in the biological sciences. The TF was further charged with making suggestions as to critical areas of biological basic research investigation that might be most likely to maintain and build further the scientific foundation and vitality of radiation oncology as an independent and vibrant medical specialty. It was not within the scope of service of the TF to consider the quality of ongoing research efforts within the broader radiation oncology space, to presume to consider their future potential, or to discourage in any way the investigators committed to areas of interest other than those targeted. The TF charge specifically precluded consideration of research issues related to technology, physics, or clinical investigations. This document represents an Executive Summary of the Task Force report.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision: Barriers Task Force

This presentation summarizes the NREL technical report, GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Barriers An Analysis of Non-Technical Barriers to Geothermal Deployment and Potential Improvement Scenarios (https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/71641.pdf).

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2015

MO-FG-BRB-02: Uniform Access to Radiation Therapy by 2035: Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control

The global burden of cancer is growing rapidly with an estimated 15 million new cases per year worldwide in 2015, growing to 19 million by 2025 and 24 million by 2035. The largest component of this growth will occur in low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). About half of these cases will require radiation treatment. The gap for available cancer treatment, including radiation therapy, between high-income countries (HICs) and LMICs is enormous. Accurate data and quantitative models to project the needs and the benefits of cancer treatment are a critical first step in closing the large cancer divide between LMICs and HICs. In this context, the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) has developed a Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control (GTFRCC) with a charge to answer the question as to what it will take to close the gap between what exists today and reasonable access to radiation therapy globally by 2035 and what the potential clinical and economic benefits are for doing this. The Task Force has determined the projections of cancer incidence and the infrastructure required to provide access to radiation therapy globally. Furthermore it has shown that appropriate investment not only yields improved clinical outcomes for millions of patients but that it also provides an overall economic gain throughout all the income settings where this investment is made. This symposium will summarize the facets associated with this global cancer challenge by reviewing the cancer burden, looking at the requirements for radiation therapy, reviewing the benefits of providing such therapy both from a clinical and economic perspective and finally by looking at what approaches can be used to aid in the alleviation of this global cancer challenge. The speakers are world renowned experts in global public health issues (R. Atun), medical physics (D. Jaffray) and radiation oncology (N. Coleman). Learning Objectives: To describe the global cancer challenge and the corresponding potential benefits of addressing this challenge. To describe what radiation therapy infrastructure, in terms of facilities, equipment and personnel, will be required to address this challenge. To describe models of addressing personnel and infrastructure mobilization and capacity building within regions where significant cancer treatment disparities exist.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗