Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “checklists”

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
DOE OSTI2025

A critical review and meta-analysis of energy demand, carbon footprint, and other environmental impacts from carbon fiber manufacturing

The demand for carbon fibers and carbon fiber-reinforced polymers (CFRPs) is rapidly growing due to their outstanding mechanical properties and potential to enhance sustainability, particularly for lightweighting applications. However, carbon fibers are typically produced from fossil-based feedstocks, involve energy-intensive processes, and have limited options for sustainable end-of-life management or circularity. Despite these challenges, the energy demand and lifecycle environmental implications of their production remain poorly understood. Here, we conduct a critical literature review and meta-analysis of carbon fiber manufacturing, revealing significant variations in reported energy demand, carbon footprint, and lifecycle inventory data. Our analysis makes two novel contributions. First, we identify key underlying factors driving these variations. Second, we highlight that carbon fiber, far from being a homogeneous product, has grades varying substantially in mechanical properties, end-use markets, energy intensity of manufacturing processes, and therefore environmental impacts—an aspect often underrepresented in life cycle assessments. We assert that current data are insufficient for reliably evaluating environmental impacts, posing a risk of misleading decision-making. Addressing this gap requires new lifecycle inventory datasets clearly incorporating carbon fiber heterogeneity and key influencing factors identified in this study. Additionally, we propose actionable recommendations, including a checklist, to advance sustainability in the carbon fiber sector.

CED↗
DOE OSTI2025

STREAMS guidelines: standards for technical reporting in environmental and host-associated microbiome studies

The interdisciplinary nature of microbiome research, coupled with the generation of complex multi-omics data, makes knowledge sharing challenging. The Strengthening the Organization and Reporting of Microbiome Studies (STORMS) guidelines provide a checklist for the reporting of study information, experimental design and analytical methods within a scientific manuscript on human microbiome research. Here, in this Consensus Statement, we present the standards for technical reporting in environmental and host-associated microbiome studies (STREAMS) guidelines. The guidelines expand on STORMS and include 67 items to support the reporting and review of environmental (for example, terrestrial, aquatic, atmospheric and engineered), synthetic and non-human host-associated microbiome studies in a standardized and machine-actionable manner. Based on input from 248 researchers spanning 28 countries, we provide detailed guidance, including comparisons with STORMS, and case studies that demonstrate the usage of the STREAMS guidelines. In conclusion, STREAMS, like STORMS, will be a living community resource updated by the Consortium with consensus-building input of the broader community.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

The need for standardization and improved open (meta)data practices in metaproteomics

Metaproteomics enables functional insight into microbial communities by identifying and quantifying proteins in complex samples. Yet, heterogeneous analytical workflows and the lack of standardization across experimental and bioinformatics stages hinder reproducibility and comparability, limiting integration with other omics data. We here present a community-developed reporting checklist tailored to the specific needs of metaproteomics. We also outline current efforts to enable structured and interoperable metadata capture, drawing on standards from proteomics and microbiome research wherever possible. By promoting transparent reporting and advancing metadata practices, our recommendations aim to align metaproteomics more closely with FAIR principles and support reproducible and interoperable research practices.

Armengaud, Jean [Universite Paris-Saclay, France]↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Pan-Arctic Vegetation Cover (PAVC) database v1.1

The Pan-Arctic Vegetation Cover (PAVC) database contains synthesized field-data observations of vegetation cover from 978 Arctic Alaska plots with observations from 2010 to 2021. The cover datasets contain plot data at both the plant functional type (PFT) and species-level resolution, with standardized PFT definitions and species names. We synthesized publicly available point-intercept and visual estimate plots from the Arctic Vegetation Archive of Alaska, the Alaska Vegetation Plots Database, the North Slope Science Catalog, and the National Ecological Observatory Network; as well as previously unpublished data from the Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic).Users will find four synthesized datasets, 4 associated data descriptor (dd) files, and 1 metadata file in the PAVC database:synthesized_species_fcover.csv contains fractional cover (fcover) for unique accepted species names, where names include vegetation identified at the family, genus, species, subspecies, and variety levels, as well as general functional types across all 5 data sources. The synthesized_species_fcover_dd.csv accompanies this dataset with header information.synthesized_pft_fcover.csv contains fcover for the following PFTs: non-vascular plants with lichen and bryophyte subcategories, trees with deciduous and evergreen subcategories, shrubs with deciduous and evergreen subcategories, graminoids (grasses), and forbs (herbaceous flowering plants) measured as total cover. Litter and “other” cover are also included as total cover. Additional “types” include water and bare ground, which were measured as top cover. The synthesized_pft_fcover_dd.csv accompanies this dataset with header information.species_pft_checklist.csv is a lookup table containing the translation from a dataset species name to an accepted species name and to a PFT. This table can be used to clarify our species to PFT adjudications, and to aid users in assigning their own PFTs. Any issues found in this checklist should be reported in the Issues tab of our github.survey_unit_information.csv contains auxiliary information about the plots synthesized in this database. It contains useful information for filtering plots of interest based on temporal, geospatial, and contextual information about the plot surveys.flmd.csv contains metadata information about each file in the database.This research was performed as a part of the NGEE Arctic project. The NGEE Arctic project was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

SolarAPP+ Performance Review (2023 Data)

The Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+) platform is an online portal to facilitate and expedite rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage permitting processes. SolarAPP+ allows PV contractors to upload system specifications, have that information automatically reviewed for code compliance, and receive instant approval for code-compliant systems, reducing authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) staff time needed for review. SolarAPP+ also provides inspection checklists to verify installation practices and adherence to approved designs. SolarAPP+ is available to AHJs at no cost. This report is part of an ongoing series of reviews of SolarAPP+ performance. Consistent with previous performance reviews, we summarize SolarAPP+ adoption trends to date and compare various metrics for PV systems permitted through SolarAPP+ versus systems permitted through traditional AHJ permitting processes. As of the end of 2023, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) had contacted over 1,700 AHJs with significant solar permitting volume regarding SolarAPP+. Of those, 793 AHJs had expressed interest in the platform as of the end of 2023. 161 AHJs had begun piloting the platform and 97 of these had publicly launched the platform by the end of 2023. In 2023, 668 installers submitted 18,906 permits through the SolarAPP+ platform, including 4,834 permits submitted as part of a solar plus storage program. SolarAPP+ permits accounted for around 43% of all permits issued in participating AHJs. We compare permitting timelines through SolarAPP+ to traditional AHJ permitting processes to assess the platform's performance. Consistent with previous SolarAPP+ performance reviews, we find that permitting timelines are significantly shorter for SolarAPP+ projects. Based on median timelines, a typical SolarAPP+ project is permitted and inspected 14.5 business days sooner than traditional projects. We estimate that automatic SolarAPP+ permitting saved around 7,200 hours of AHJ staff time in 2023. Finally, we estimate that SolarAPP+ eliminated over 150,000 business days in permitting-related delays in 2023.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Tutorial Set to Prepare for Science with the Vera C. Rubin Observatory

In this poster the Rubin Observatory's Community Science team (CST) presents its current suite of tutorials, which are designed to help people make use of simulated data sets in preparation for the upcoming Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST). We will show examples of the tutorial contents, provide custom learning modules for different astronomical fields, and describe the online environment for data analysis (the Rubin Science Platform; RSP). We will also supply a checklist for how to obtain an RSP account and access the tutorials. All are welcome to drop by the poster or the Rubin booth in the exhibit hall with questions.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Kansas City, Missouri, Streetlight Electric Vehicle Charging: Strategies and challenges for site selection of streetlight electric vehicle infrastructure in Kansas City, Missouri (Final Report)

Public streetlight charging, whether on streets in central business districts or residential areas, provides easy charging access for apartment residents and homeowners alike. While most electric vehicle (EV) drivers charge at home, they do so in garages or on driveways they own. For renters and residents of multifamily housing (MFH), however, this may not be an option. EVs have a lower cost of ownership compared to conventional vehicles, and a used EV may be an affordable option for a lower-income household. But without easy access to charging, even a low-cost used EV may not be an option for a prospective buyer. An affordable curbside charging network has the potential to expand EV adoption into neighborhoods that have to date seen minimal interest and uptake of the technology and associated charging infrastructure. Streetlight charging networks can provide an economical, scalable, and effective approach to providing equitable and convenient charging. Metropolitan Energy Center (MEC) is dedicated to the mission of creating resource efficiency, environmental health, and economic vitality in the Kansas City region and beyond. Since 1983, MEC has provided resources, outreach, and training to make alternative fuels and energy efficiency commonplace. MEC led a streetlight charging pilot project that installed limited EV charging infrastructure on the streetlight system in Kansas City, Missouri, to demonstrate and test the benefits of curbside charging for EVs at existing on-street parking locations. The project aimed to cost-effectively expand the charging network in Kansas City to support residential charging and provide infrastructure in one or more charging deserts throughout the city. This pilot evaluates the impact and overall success of streetlight charging based on community feedback, utilization of charging infrastructure, technical feasibility, and cost. The project has pursued a data- and community-driven site selection process designed to identify sites with high demand and high opportunity for EV charging. This project was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and awarded to MEC through a competitive proposal process. The novelty and complexity of this project required an organization that could facilitate collaboration across levels of government, community members, and industry partners. For the past 25 years, through Kansas City Regional Clean Cities, MEC has worked with numerous public and private fleets on a variety of projects to improve the environmental performance and efficiency of the regional vehicle fleet. To advance affordable, efficient, and clean transportation efforts, DOE Clean Cities and Communities coalitions create local networks of public and private sector stakeholders and engage communities. Rooted within their local communities, the coalitions serve as experts and ambassadors, bringing to bear the collective knowledge, experience, and practical know-how of the entire network from within DOE, its national laboratories, and diverse stakeholders in the field. MEC and its project partners made in-kind contributions to leverage federal dollars for the benefit of the Kansas City community. Findings from this project will help determine the best applications for streetlight charging technologies to maximize funding impact and serve community needs. The team evaluated locations based on expected charging demand, technical feasibility, safety considerations, and enhanced charging network siting needs. Throughout the project, the team gathered feedback and evaluated ways to make public charging for EVs available to all community members. The insights will help Kansas City and other communities streamline future efforts to support EV drivers through public charging in the city right-of-way. Furthermore, this project will inform citywide guidance for future installations. MEC is committed to a transparent and publicly accessible approach that encourages the collaborative evaluation of streetlight charging. The project has engaged the community to proactively identify and evaluate the benefits and impacts of streetlight charging. It was a priority for the project to ensure the benefits of this pilot are distributed equitably to all members of the Kansas City community and that new charging opportunities and associated resources are available in diverse neighborhoods across the city. The charging infrastructure supports an affordable curbside charging network that will enable more drivers to choose EVs and provide easy charging access for all community members interested in driving an EV. The community feedback received through this project informed future resources and opportunities to make EVs more accessible to all members of the Kansas City community. MEC worked with several community partners on this project, including Missouri University of Science and Technology (MST), Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL); the city of Kansas City, Missouri; Evergy; Black and McDonald (B&M); LilyPad EV; EVNoire; and Westside Housing Organization (WHO). Project partners contributed to the cost match required for DOE grants through capital expenditures, personnel, and other in-kind contributions. Detailed descriptions of project team organizations can be found in Appendix A. Project Partners. Analysts at NREL and MST/PennState developed site maps based on demand and equity considerations. MEC conducted outreach to community members to garner input on project design and site selection, and received approval from the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC) for Evergy’s EV charging station ownership. MEC worked with all partners to gather additional siting criteria and developed a site selection evaluation checklist, and partners conducted site visits to proposed installation sites. Next, B&M, Evergy, and the city executed all site agreements, conducted site-specific engineering design, acquired associated permits, and issued notices to proceed site by site or in small batches. Finally, from January to April 2023, the project team installed 23 EV charging stations built on Kansas City’s streetlight system in six council districts. Evergy will own, operate, and monitor the stations for 10 years, sharing charging data with MEC for at least 1 year.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Enhancing Cloud Cybersecurity: Prescriptive Controls for Operational Technology

This whitepaper provides strategic insights and recommendations into security cloud-based solutions for electric utilities, encompassing operational technology (OT), virtual power plants (VPP), distributed energy resources (DERs), applications, networks, and data storage as they transition to and leverage cloud infrastructure through managed service providers (MSPs) and cloud service providers (CSPs). Principles derived from established frameworks serve as a foundation for best practices across cybersecurity projects and remove the constraints of settling on a single framework. For organizations that prefer not to integrate a specific framework altogether, elements of the proposed approach could be adopted or tailored to best fit defined requirements and expected functionalities. The Cirrus assessment, a utility cloud feasibility tool, and the roadmap it provides serve as a precursor to this paper, which seeks to be a valuable resource for defining next steps following cloud technology integration feasibility appraisal. With its comprehensive approach to adoption, the Cirrus framework offers strategic guidance on responsibly preparing for or deploying a utility cloud solution. The previously published whitepaper, “Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration,” details the guiding strategy, research, and deployment of cloud solutions within electric and interconnected grid systems. Before implementing the controls suggested in this document, it is recommended that stakeholders complete Cirrus's cloud integration assessment and pair the results with their unique cybersecurity controls to form a comprehensive cloud-based utility cybersecurity plan. The Cirrus outcome will consider a series of future architectures for the grid before and after the energy transition and evaluate the arguments for and against cloud applications for each electric and interconnected grid layer. This document is a companion to the original whitepaper, "Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration" to further identify and recommend security controls based on Cirrus’s cloud integration assessment output. The following whitepaper outlines the cybersecurity controls that secure cloud-service models pertinent to the electric sector using the predefined categories identify, protect, detect, and respond and recover. The objective is to outline prescriptive security controls based on the type of architecture and data stored in the cloud. The focus includes dissecting the shared responsibility model and elucidating what on-premises Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) entail. A pivotal consideration in this context is allocating responsibility for foundational cybersecurity aspects—having used Cirrus for the cloud integration assessment. The ensuing controls detailed herein also represent a checklist of controls necessary for a secure cloud transition, equipping utilities with the knowledge to navigate this digital transformation with confidence and strategic foresight in a safe and responsible manner.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Economic Evaluation of Modernization Expenditures for Electric Utility Distribution Systems: A Guide for Utility Regulators

Cost-effectiveness evaluation of potential grid modernization solutions is integral to integrated distribution system planning (IDSP). This report synthesizes and updates prior cost-effectiveness approaches identified by the U.S. Department of Energy for grid modernization investments, incorporating multi-objective decision-making. The structure of the report follows the IDSP process, from identifying objectives and priorities to prioritizing grid solutions. The report details two methods for conducting initial cost-effectiveness screening of individual and interdependent grid components: (1) Lowest Reasonable Cost and (2) Benefit-Cost Analysis. Drawing on solutions that passed the initial cost-effectiveness screen, the utility prioritizes grid solutions based on policy objectives and priorities, regulatory compliance, operational efficiencies, and other factors to develop a portfolio of distribution solutions. The utility uses multi-objective decision-making to assess each proposed expenditure against each objective and respective metric. The utility applies a weighting factor, reflecting the priority ranking of the objective, to the total numerical “score” based on the contribution of the proposed solution to addressing each objective. Ultimately, the utility ranks each expenditure from highest to lowest priority using the final score for each solution as well as its cost. The report includes examples of emerging best practices for states and utilities and a cost-effectiveness process checklist.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

EMPOWERED Distributed Energy Resources Permit Accelerator Pilot

This report summarizes the EMPOWERED Distributed Energy Resources (DER) Permit Accelerator Pilot project. Its primary objective was to streamline the design, installation, permitting, and inspections of targeted Distributed Energy Resource (DER) solutions. Streamlining these processes is critical to strengthening and accelerating the adoption of DER solutions nationwide. Moreover, streamlined processes help expedite the clean energy transition and expand energy resilience by improving understanding and capability among key stakeholders like property owners, code officials, and the general workforce. The project team accomplished this by developing and deploying a set of design and permitting guides for simple DER solutions, which they rolled out via a permitting pilot program. The project team developed nine permitting and inspection guides for simple DER solutions, as follows: 1. Single-Family and Duplex: Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE), and Storage, Solar + Storage (each in two code cycles) 2. Multi-family and Office: EVSE, Storage, Solar + Storage (each in two code cycles) 3. A permitting process guide to support the implementation of the permitting guides. The guides cover key code requirements via plan review and field inspection checklists for code officials and building owners to follow to streamline the permitting and inspections process for DER solutions. Following the development of the initial set of guides, the project team formed two cohorts, each made up of four jurisdictions, to participate in the Permit Accelerator Pilot. Each cohort received training and technical assistance to support them in incorporating the guides into use. The project successfully engaged jurisdictions in two disparate US regions: Chelsea, Somerville, Natick, and Norwood in metro Boston; and Pima County, Town of Gilbert, Flagstaff, and Sedona in Arizona. Feedback gathered from the project was valuable in refining the guides to better address jurisdictional needs. After the pilot period, the project team developed final versions of the guides based on extensive feedback from the cohorts and from external technical peer review. Feedback included needs and barriers related to implementation, as well as detailed technical improvements from external peer review. The final guides were presented in a series of webinars with a national reach, with 192 attendees from 35 states in the live session of the final webinar, and the final guides are posted online and available for use nationwide. Key findings: • The most receptive jurisdictions were those adjacent to other jurisdictions that had already adopted similar initiatives. The least receptive jurisdictions were those in the midst of adopting new code cycles. • The most common barrier to jurisdictional adoption of new guidelines were internal administrative and process delays, more so than technical barriers. • The main technical barrier to adoption proved to be the concern of fire hazard risks posed by energy storage systems. There is some apprehension in the code enforcement community about the safety of the batteries. Education coordinated with fire and safety services will help alleviate concerns and increase confidence in the acceptance of innovative technologies. • Opportunities to further leverage and advance the guides and related resources include outreach, education, and jurisdictional support; updates to the resources to align with code cycle changes and local requirements; and advancements supporting emerging technologies.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Connectivity Troubleshooting Guide for Advanced Electricity Meters

This guide is designed to walk users through a troubleshooting process for disconnected advanced electricity meters. The guide centers on two connectivity troubleshooting decision trees related to power issues and network connectivity issues, respectively. Additionally, it contains additional background information such as definitions, diagrams, and checklists that can help a user prepare to troubleshoot meter connectivity issues.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

SolarAPP+ Performance Review (2024 Data)

The Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+) platform is an online portal to facilitate and expedite rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage permitting processes. SolarAPP+ allows PV contractors to upload system specifications, have that information automatically reviewed for code compliance, and receive instant approval for code-compliant systems, reducing authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) staff time needed for review. SolarAPP+ also provides inspection checklists to verify installation practices and adherence to approved designs. This report is part of an ongoing series of reviews of SolarAPP+ performance. Consistent with previous performance reviews, we summarize SolarAPP+ adoption trends to date and compare various metrics for PV systems permitted through SolarAPP+ versus systems permitted through traditional AHJ permitting processes. As of the end of 2024, 799 AHJs had expressed interest in the platform, with 264 fully adopting (215) or piloting (49) the platform. In 2024, 861 installers submitted 37,393 permits through the SolarAPP+ platform, including 27,375 permits for PV+storage systems. SolarAPP+ permits accounted for around 43% of all permits issued in all participating AHJs, and more than 60% of all permits in several participating AHJs. We compare permitting timelines through SolarAPP+ to traditional AHJ permitting processes to assess the platform's performance. Consistent with previous SolarAPP+ performance reviews, we find that permitting timelines are significantly shorter for SolarAPP+ projects. Based on median timelines, a typical SolarAPP+ project is permitted and inspected 12 business days sooner than traditional projects. We estimate that automatic SolarAPP+ permitting saved around 18,400 hours of AHJ staff time in 2024. Finally, we estimate that SolarAPP+ eliminated over 100,000 business days in permitting-related delays in 2024.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Cyber-Informed Engineering: Standards Development Organization Quick Start Guide

Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE) is an emerging methodology focused on identifying and reducing high-consequence events that may affect physical critical infrastructure systems as a result of their dependence on digital technology. CIE, developed by National Laboratories and promoted by the Department of Energy (DOE), incorporates consequence-focused planning into the design and engineering process from the earliest stages of a project. This guide provides a concise overview of CIE and offers practical insight into how Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) can interpret CIE principles and apply those concepts in updates to various standards. It is important to remember that CIE extends beyond a compliance checklist, emphasizing a broader, interpretive approach. Instead, it encourages an interpretive mindset - a "turning of 'what if' to 'even if'" approach that anticipates and engineers out high-consequence events. The authors encourage SDOs to establish and promote CIE principles as enhancements for more resilient-by-design outcomes across critical infrastructure energy sectors. The 12 core principles of CIE outline specific behaviors and actions that SDOs and engineers may adopt to enhance system resilience. This guide applies these principles in a manner intended to be relevant across various technologies and threat landscapes. We welcome institutions and vendors to identify new or different framework alignments and mappings as we collectively work towards a safer and more reliable digital landscape.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1964

Inflight crew activities.

In flight crew activities covering detailed flight plan, activities and procedures, checklists and summary

ASTRONAUT PERFORMANCE↗
NASA NTRS1972

In-space propellant systems safety. Volume 2: System safety guidelines and requirements

Detailed system safety guidelines/requirements were developed. Each one describes a safety measure which is suggested as a means of eliminating or reducing a particular hazard, or group of hazards, to an acceptable level, and which, if followed would tend to increase the level of safety in supplying propellants to a user in orbit. The first goal was to identify those actions that should be taken to make propellant logistics operations as safe as possible. The second was to serve as a checklist to verify that these actions had been taken in the design and operation of this and similar programs, or that they had been considered and rejected. The safety measures described in the GLR's are directed toward the prevention of hazards, the avoidance of undesired events, and the protection of the crew.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1972

Formulation of an effective safety design review for the Skylab Program.

The Skylab Program is presenting a unique set of requirements by extending the capabilities of both men and equipment to withstand extended periods of time in space. The progression of space programs which preceded Skylab have provided a set of building blocks of knowledge and experience coupled with an extensive ground test program which makes it possible to plan its flight program without earlier, unmanned test flights. This approach, however, makes it mandatory that to the maximum extent possible, we factor into the design review process all the 'lessons learned' which are applicable. It is this conscious review of the Skylab design, based on checklists prepared from design criteria, gleaned from a variety of sources and experiences, which is the subject of this paper. A brief description of the Skylab Program, its objectives, and the missions planned for it are presented briefly to better understand the degree of extrapolation of hardware development from previous programs.

Cohen, H.↗