Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Congress:”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1986

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the space station and for the US economy

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Space Station. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the Law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the second in a series of progress updates and covers the period between October 4, 1985, and March 31, l986. NASA has accepted the basic recommendations of ATAC for its Space Station efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station Program and serve as a highly visible stimulator effecting the U.S. long-term economy. The progress report identifies the work of NASA and the Space Station study contractors, research in progress, and issues connected with the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Space Station.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1988

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the space station and for the US economy

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Space Station. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memo 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the sixth in a series of progress updates and covers the period between October 1, 1987 and March 1, 1988. NASA has accepted the basic recommendations of ATAC for its Space Station efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that the thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station program and serve as a highly visible stimulator affecting the U.S. long-term economy. The progress report identifies the work of NASA and the Space Station study contractors, research in progress, and issues connected with the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Space Station.

Nunamaker, Robert↗
NASA NTRS1989

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the space station Freedom and for the US economy

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Freedom space station. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the eighth in a series of progress updates and covers the period between October 1, 1988, and March 31, 1989. NASA has accepted the basic recommendations of ATAC for its Space Station Freedom efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that the thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station Freedom program and serve as a highly visible stimulator, affecting the U.S. long-term economy. The progress report identifies the work of NASA and the Freedom study contractors. It also describes research in progress, and it makes assessments of the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Freedom space station.

Robotics↗
NASA NTRS1988

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the US economy

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on the Freedom space station. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the seventh in a series of progress updates and covers the period between April 1, 1988 and September 30, 1988. NASA has accepted the basic recommendations of ATAC for its Space Station Freedom efforts. ATAC and NASA agree that the thrust of Congress is to build an advanced automation and robotics technology base that will support an evolutionary Space Station Freedom program and serve as a highly visible stimulator, affecting the U.S. long-term economy. The progress report identifies the work of NASA and the Freedom study contractors. It also describes research in progress, and it makes assessments of the advancement of automation and robotics technology on the Freedom space station.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1992

Introduction to Space Station Freedom

NASA field centers and contractors are organized to develop 'work packages' for Space Station Freedom. Marshall Space Flight Center and Boeing are building the U.S. laboratory and habitation modules, nodes, and environmental control and life support system; Johnson Space Center and McDonnell Douglas are responsible for truss structure, data management, propulsion systems, thermal control, and communications and guidance; Lewis Research Center and Rocketdyne are developing the power system. The Canadian Space Agency (CSA) is contributing a Mobile Servicing Center, Special Dextrous Manipulator, and Mobile Servicing Center Maintenance Depot. The National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA) is contributing a Japanese Experiment Module (JEM), which includes a pressurized module, logistics module, and exposed experiment facility. The European Space Agency (ESA) is contributing the Columbus laboratory module. NASA ground facilities, now in various stages of development to support Space Station Freedom, include: Marshall Space Flight Center's Payload Operations Integration Center and Payload Training Complex (Alabama), Johnson Space Center's Space Station Control Center and Space Station Training Facility (Texas), Lewis Research Center's Power System Facility (Ohio), and Kennedy Space Center's Space Station Processing Facility (Florida). Budget appropriations impact the development of the Space Station. In Fiscal Year 1988, Congress appropriated only half of the funds that NASA requested for the space station program ($393 million vs. $767 million). In FY 89, NASA sought $967 million for the program, and Congress appropriated $900 million. NASA's FY 90 request was $2.05 billion compared to an appropriation of $1.75 billion; the FY 91 request was $2.45 billion, and the appropriation was $1.9 billion. After NASA restructured the Space Station Freedom program in response to directions from Congress, the agency's full budget request of $2.029 billion for Space Station Freedom in FY 92 was appropriated. For FY 93, NASA is seeking $2.25 billion for the program; the planned budget for FY 94 is $2.5 billion. Further alterations to the hardware configuration for Freedom would be a serious setback; NASA intends 'to stick with the current baseline' and continue planning for utilization.

Kohrs, Richard↗
NASA NTRS2010

What the Heck is Going On at NASA?

On February 1, 2010, the federal budget for Fiscal Year 2011 was released. NASA received an increase, unlike almost any other federal agency. At the same time, the budget revealed that the Constellation Program would be cancelled and that NASA would look to private sector providers for transportation of cargo, and eventually crew members, to the International Space Station. The Constellation Program had included a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, and the program plans called for a permanent surface facility capable of supporting human explorers. In the FY2011 announcement, the prescription of a lunar objective was replaced by a concept called flexible path that was advertised to open possibilities of other types of human missions beyond low Earth orbit. The policy direction has polarized the U.S. space community, where the reactions have been swift and polemical. The new policy has been described both as the death knell of human space exploration and as the only hope to save human space exploration. Some members of Congress have threatened legal action based on the current law regarding appropriation of funds to NASA, which states that Constellation cannot be cancelled without prior consultation with Congress. As might be expected, some of the reaction is directly related to losses or gains of jobs in districts associated with NASA facilities. However, various statements show high emotional content, suggesting that personal belief systems have been challenged. Meanwhile, many details of the new policy are not yet clear; and some aspects seem to be shifting in response to political reaction. The final direction for NASA will not be known until the FY2011 budget has been passed by Congress and signed by the President. I will draw upon my 28 years of studying, writing, and speaking on the topic of future human exploration beyond low Earth orbit to discuss the various issues at stake and the historical context for the debate. My own work has had a central theme of lunar exploration and development, but I have also come to believe that human exploration will never be more than a political sideshow until a significant economic sector can be created in space off of the Earth. Disclaimer: The views presented will be my own and in no way reflect official policies of the NASA.

Mendell, Wendell↗
NASA NTRS2005

Space Studies Board Annual Report, 2005

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) was chartered by Congress, under the leadership of President Abraham Lincoln, to provide scientific and technical advice to the government of the United States. Over the years, the advisory program of the institution has expanded, leading to the establishment of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and the Institute of Medicine, and of the National Research Council (NRC), the operational arm of the National Academies. The original charter of the Space Science Board was established in June 1958, three months before NASA opened its doors. The Space Science Board and its successor, the Space Studies Board (SSB), have provided expert external and independent scientific and programmatic advice to NASA on a continuous basis from NASA's inception until the present. The Board has also provided such advice to other agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Department of Defense, and responds to requests from Congress. Early in 2005, the leadership of NASA changed, and with it new emphases emerged. Some of the early interpretations of the 2004 Vision for Space Exploration, in which only certain aspects of space science were encouraged, disappeared and a broader mandate for science emerged. But what also emerged was fiscal reality, which precluded many of the exciting activities that were planned for NASA's science programs. In this environment of change, there has been a continuing need to evaluate NASA's plans against the strategies for science that have been laid down in the various NRC decadal surveys, and to assist NASA in determining how best to proceed given the reduced level of resources it will have. Coupled with this has been a continuing need to provide Congress with the assessments of NASA's plans that it requests.

National Research Council (NRC)↗
NASA NTRS1961

Chemical and Thermodynamic Properties at High Temperatures: A Symposium

This book contains the program and all available abstracts of the 90' invited and contributed papers to be presented at the TUPAC Symposium on Chemical and Thermodynamic Properties at High Temperatures. The Symposium will be held in conjunction with the XVIIIth IUPAC Congress, Montreal, August 6 - 12, 1961. It has been organized, by the Subcommissions on Condensed States and on Gaseous States of the Commission on High Temperatures and Refractories and by the Subcommission on Experimental Thermodynamics of the Commission on Chemical Thermodynamics, acting in conjunction with the Organizing Committee of the IUPAC Congress. All inquiries concerning participation In the Symposium should be directed to: Secretary, XVIIIth International Congress of Pure and Applied Chemistry, National Research Council, Ottawa, 'Canada. Owing to the limited time and facilities available for the preparation and printing of the book, it has not been possible to refer the proofs of the abstracts to the authors for checking. Furthermore, it has not been possible to subject the manuscripts to a very thorough editorial examination. Some obvious errors in the manuscripts have been corrected; other errors undoubtedly have been introduced. Figures have been redrawn only when such a step was essential for reproduction purposes. Sincere apologies are offered to authors and readers for any errors which remain; however, in the circumstances neither the IUPAC Commissions who organized the Symposium, nor the U. S. Government Agencies who assisted in the preparation of this book can accept responsibility for the errors.

Walker, Raymond F.↗
DOE OSTI2024

The Feasibility of Incorporating Engineering within SWAC and OTEC That Would Enhance Open-Ocean Aquaculture

The U.S. Department of Energy transmits to Congress the following Report to Congress on the Feasibility of Incorporating Engineering within Sea Water Air Conditioning (SWAC) and Ocean Thermal Energy Conversation (OTEC) that would Enhance Open-Ocean Aquaculture, as requested in the 2022 House Committee on Appropriations Report 117-98, an update to the previously requested Report on Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) and Sea Water Air Conditioning (SWAC) systems in noncontiguous states and U.S. territories, as requested in the 2021 House Committee on Appropriations Report 116-449, and more recently requested again in the 2023 House Committee on Appropriations Report 117-394.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2021

Proceedings of the 2021 Airborne Wind Energy Workshop

On March 2-3, 2021, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted a virtual workshop to evaluate the status, potential development, and technical viability of AWE systems as a source of energy in the United States. Stakeholder input provided at the workshop will contribute to the report to Congress. This report summarizes key workshop findings, current technology research and development activities in the United States, and opportunities and potential modes of collaboration and coordination for future technology research and development activities. The workshop focused on U.S. stakeholders in AWE, with approximately 100 experts and industry stakeholders from AWE technology developers, operators, engineering firms, consultants, government, national laboratories, and university researchers. The workshop began with an explanation from DOE's Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) Technology Manager, Ben Hallissy, of the context and purpose of the workshop, including a request from Congress that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) deliver a "report on the potential for, and technical viability of, airborne wind energy systems to provide a significant source of energy in the United States, including a summary of research, development, demonstration, and commercialization needs, including an estimate of Federal funding requirements, to further examine and validate the technical and economic viability of airborne wind energy concepts over the 10-year period." The workshop began with brief introductions from attendees who explained their interest in AWE. Nicolas El Hayek of Planair summarized the proceedings from the AWE workshop held in September 2020 by the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Task 11. This was followed by a presentation by Roland Schmehl of TU-Delft summarizing European AWE R&D efforts. Chris Vermillion of North Carolina State University and Jason Jonkman of NREL presented an overview of U.S. R&D efforts. Then five panelists discussed AWE markets, sizes of AWE systems, challenges, and opportunities. Panelists included: Cristina Archer, professor at the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment and associate director at the Center for Research in Wind (CReW) at the University of Delaware; Stephan Brabeck, chief technology officer at SkySails; Thierry Delahave, innovation and technology development lead at Saipem; Rob Creighton, founder and chief executive officer at WindLift; and David Schaefer, founder and chief executive officer at eWind Solutions. The second day of the workshop began with a brief overview of five key topics that are crucial to enabling AWE in the United States. These topics range from estimates of the U.S. wind resource, technical generation potential, economic analysis, environmental challenges, status of current technology and R&D activities, and needed activities to enable commercialization of AWE. This set the stage for a robust discussion in breakout groups where individuals could offer their opinions on the potential opportunities for AWE in the United States. The following topics were discussed in the breakout groups: resource potential and energy output, technical potential, social and environmental impacts, and permitting, techno-economic analysis and markets, technology assessment and upscaling and demonstration and commercialization needs. The second day concluded with reports by the NREL research team, communicating the key themes and outcomes from each of the breakout group discussions.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Marshall Islands Dose Assessment and Radioecology Program: Report on the (i) 2018 Visual Study of Exterior Concrete of the Cactus Crater Containment Structure (ii) Periodic Monitoring of Groundwater on Runit Island and (iii) Initial Health Risk Assessment from Contaminants in the Cactus Crater Containment Structure

In 2012, Congress passed P.L. 112-149, Insular Areas Act of 2011, which amended the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 by assigning Cactus Crater containment monitoring and reporting requirements to the Secretary of Energy (Secretary). Effective January 1, 2012, the Secretary was required to “periodically (but not less frequently than every 4 years) conduct -- (I) a visual study of the concrete exterior of the Cactus Crater Containment Structure on Runit Island; and (II) a radiochemical analysis of the groundwater surrounding and in the Cactus Crater Containment Structure on Runit Island.” 48 U.S.C. 1921b(f)(1)(B)(i). The Secretary was also directed to submit to Congress a report describing the results of each visual survey and the radiochemical analysis and “a determination on whether the surveys and analyses indicate any significant change in the health risks to the people of Enewetak from the contaminants within the Cactus Crater Containment Structure.” 48 U.S.C. 1921b(f)(1)(B)(ii)(II).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1967

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1966

At the opening of the tenth year in the era of man’s mobility in outer space, we can look back on 1966 as offering convincing evidence that the United States had gained great competence. This evidence included: five orbital space flights by ten Gemini astronauts; four lunar missions undertaking the orbiting of and soft landing on the moon; numerous contributions to scientific knowledge by unmanned spacecraft and sounding rockets; and further demonstrations of the practical utility of operational space systems, including weather and communications satellites. During 1966, a record 100 American spacecraft were placed into earth orbit or on escape trajectories. Thousands of revealing and useful pictures of the earth were taken from space and of the moon from lunar orbit and on its surface. The Gemini program ended with rendezvous and docking experiments and extravehicular activity by the Gemini test pilots as the Apollo R&D test flights leading to the manned lunar mission came into the schedule. Thirty-five major scientific, technological, and operational milestones were cited for 1966 by the President in his Report to the Congress on aeronautical and space activities of the United States. This was one measure of the American commitment to share in the peaceful exploration of space for all mankind. Another was our support of the final steps toward a United Nations space treaty, undertaken to ensure that the peaceful exploitation of space had juridical basis in international law. Spectacular as some events in the space venture were in 1966, they nonetheless came to have diminished novelty in the eyes of many laymen. The multitude of both important and unspectacular space activities attained almost an accepted and routine place. This volume, as well as its predecessor chronicles, offers a ready reference on the major as well as the less-well known events. Beyond the welter of documented details on the complex nature of aeronautical and space related events and their impact, this volume helps to provide a better perspective upon today as we contemplate tomorrow. Such intent also serves future historians and analysts who cannot be unmindful of what is herein presented. When the Congress created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1958, it charged NASA with the responsibility to “contribute materially to . . . the expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space’’ and to “provide for the widest practical and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and results thereof.” NASA has attempted to do this and to include documentation for the historical record. The relating of NASA history begins with this day-by day chronicle and leads to more specialized studies and histories of the unprecedented task of extending man’s mobility and understanding beyond his planet. While a chronology cannot in itself serve as a full-fledged history, the size of this annual volume alone is illustrative of the scope and complexity of the historical task yet to be completed as memories fade and the records disappear.

SPACE PROBE↗
NASA NTRS1972

The adversary process in technology assessment

An Agency which would act as a responsible technological ombudsman is proposed for inclusion in the technology assessment mechanism. The agency would be charged solely with the function and responsibility to probe and identify the negative factors and present them to Congress and the public. It is felt that in the development of technology in private sectors there are assessments and controls exerted by the public. However, in governmental technology, the agencies involved tend to emphasize the useful and beneficial aspects, and it is pointed out that the administrative agencies also tend to develop unwholesome affinities to the industries they regulate. It is also felt that scientific and engineering experts have a bias in favor of accomplishing what they think can be accomplished. The proposed devil's advocate agency would investigate the areas of hazards and potential hazards, and would subject Congress to the pressures of public opinion.

Green, H. P.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Aeronautics research and technology. A review of proposed reductions in the FY 1983 NASA program

Reductions in the Fiscal Year 1983 program from the original proposal to the levels of the appropriation request submitted to Congress are reviewed. The request asked for an assessment of the national criticality of the excluded programs and, for each one, the risk (probability of success) associated with achieving the objectives sought and the degree to which it might be assumed by the private sector. Based on this request, a charge comprising an assessment of those aeronautics projects excluded from the FY 1983 budget request to Congress, the likelihood that industry would undertake them, the impact of their not being done, and the more general question of the need for government to bridge the gap between the aeronautics research and technology base and early application was developed. The charge further specifies that the assessment is to encompass considerations of safety, national defense, efficient transport, and the national economy.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1986

Space Shuttle development

The technical-planning and decision-making processes involved in the initiation of the NASA Space Shuttle program in 1970-1972 are briefly discussed, responding to the critical evaluation of Logsdon (1986). The complex nature of the interactions among White House, OMB, DOD, and NASA; the difficulty of making long-term commitments under the U.S. system; the positive technological achievements of the program; and the need for unemotional evaluation of the policy options available after the loss of the Challenger are stressed. In a reply by Logsdon, it is argued that the structuring of the policy process itself and the presentation of the Shuttle to Congress as a relatively inexpensive routine launch system for virtually all government needs were directly related to its failure to gain continuing full funding from Administrations and Congress. It is suggested that a strong proposal of bold scientific and exploratory objectives for the space program could be more successful in gaining such long-term support.

Fletcher, J. C.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Present state of knowledge of the upper atmosphere 1988: An assessment report

This document was issued in response to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, Public Law 95-95, mandating that NASA and other key agencies submit biennial reports to Congress and EPA. NASA is to report on the state of our knowledge of the upper atmosphere, particularly the stratosphere. This is the sixth ozone assessment report submitted to Congress and the concerned regulatory agencies. Part 1 contains an outline of the NASA Upper Atmosphere Research Program and summaries of the research efforts supported during the last two years. An assessment is presented of the state of knowledge as of March 15, 1988 when the Ozone Trends Panel, organized by NASA and co-sponsored by the World Meteorological Organization, NOAA, FAA and the United Nations Environment Program released an executive summary of its findings from a critical in-depth study involving over 100 scientists from 12 countries. Chapter summaries of the International Ozone Trends Panel Report form the major part of this report. Two other sections are Model Predictions of Future Ozone Change and Chemical Kinetics and Photochemical Data for Use in Stratospheric Modeling. Each of these sections and the report in its entirety were peer reviewed.

Watson, R. T.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Shuttle Rocket Motor Program: NASA should delay awarding some construction contracts. Report to the Chair, Subcommittee on Government Activities and Transportation, Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives

Even though the executive branch has proposed terminating the Advanced Solid Rocket Motor (ASRM) program, NASA is proceeding with all construction activity planned for FY 1992 to avoid schedule slippage if the program is reinstated by Congress. However, NASA could delay some construction activities for at least a few months without affecting the current launch data schedule. For example, NASA could delay Yellow Creek's motor storage and dock projects, Stennis' dock project, and Kennedy's rotation processing and surge facility and dock projects. Starting all construction activities as originally planned could result in unnecessarily incurring additional costs and termination liability if the funding for FY 1993 is not provided. If Congress decides to continue the program, construction could still be completed in time to avoid schedule slippage.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1992

Advancing automation and robotics technology for the Space Station Freedom and for the U.S. economy

In April 1985, as required by Public Law 98-371, the NASA Advanced Technology Advisory Committee (ATAC) reported to Congress the results of its studies on advanced automation and robotics technology for use on Space Station Freedom. This material was documented in the initial report (NASA Technical Memorandum 87566). A further requirement of the law was that ATAC follow NASA's progress in this area and report to Congress semiannually. This report is the fifteenth in a series of progress updates and covers the period between 27 Feb. - 17 Sep. 1992. The progress made by Levels 1, 2, and 3 of the Space Station Freedom in developing and applying advanced automation and robotics technology is described. Emphasis was placed upon the Space Station Freedom program responses to specific recommendations made in ATAC Progress Report 14. Assessments are presented for these and other areas as they apply to the advancement of automation and robotics technology for Space Station Freedom.

Lum, Henry, Jr.↗