Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CONTRACT MANAGEMENT”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

NASA Glenn Research Center Support of the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator Project

A high-efficiency radioisotope power system was being developed for long-duration NASA space science missions. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) managed a flight contract with Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company to build Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generators (ASRGs), with support from NASA Glenn Research Center. DOE initiated termination of that contract in late 2013, primarily due to budget constraints. Sunpower, Inc., held two parallel contracts to produce Advanced Stirling Convertors (ASCs), one with Lockheed Martin to produce ASC-F flight units, and one with Glenn for the production of ASC-E3 engineering unit "pathfinders" that are built to the flight design. In support of those contracts, Glenn provided testing, materials expertise, Government-furnished equipment, inspection capabilities, and related data products to Lockheed Martin and Sunpower. The technical support included material evaluations, component tests, convertor characterization, and technology transfer. Material evaluations and component tests were performed on various ASC components in order to assess potential life-limiting mechanisms and provide data for reliability models. Convertor level tests were conducted to characterize performance under operating conditions that are representative of various mission conditions. Despite termination of the ASRG flight development contract, NASA continues to recognize the importance of high-efficiency ASC power conversion for Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) and continues investment in the technology, including the continuation of the ASC-E3 contract. This paper describes key Government support for the ASRG project and future tests to be used to provide data for ongoing reliability assessments.

Technology Transfer↗
NASA NTRS2017

Hardware Assessment in Support of the Dynamic Power Convertor Development Effort

Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are being developed by NASA's RPS Program in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Efforts ranging from 2001 to 2015 enabled development of the Technology Demonstration Convertor (TDC) for use in the 110-watt Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG-110) and the Advanced Stirling Convertor (ASC) for use in the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG). The DOE selected Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC) as the system integration contractor for both flight development efforts. The SRG-110 housed two TDCs fabricated by Infinia and resulted in the production of 16x demonstration units and 2x engineering units. The project was redirected in 2006 to make use of a more efficient and lower mass ASCs under development by Sunpower Inc. The DOE managed the flight contract with LMSSC and subcontractor Sunpower Inc. from 2007 to 2013 to build the ASRG, with support from NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). Sunpower Inc. held two parallel contracts to produce ASCs, one with Lockheed Martin to produce ASC-F flight units and one with GRC for the production of ASC-E3 engineering unit pathfinders that were used to refine the flight design and production processes. The DOE initiated termination of the ASRG contract in late 2013. After ASRG had ended, GRC completed characterization testing of the ASRG Engineering Unit #2 (EU2) and the GRC contract with Sunpower was also completed. The NASA RPS Program Office has recently initiated a new Dynamic Power Conversion development effort which includes the potential maturation of Stirling, Brayton, and Rankine power convertors for the next generation of RPS. The effort started with the request for proposal and review of submits. Contracts are anticipated for release in 2017 and will initially focus on a design phase prior to fabrication and testing. This new effort will focus on robustness in addition to high efficiency, specific power, and reliability. Also, some requirements introduced during the ASRG contract have also been included in the new effort, such as constant lateral loading. Due to the focus on robustness and new requirements relative to the older TDC design, the Stirling Cycle Development Project has initiated an assessment of government owned hardware to help inform requirements evolution and evaluation of future designs. While lessons learned from the ASRG flight development project have been taken into consideration, the evaluation of the TDC design had not been completed for some existing environments or relatively new requirements. To further assess the TDC design, a series of tasks were initiated to evaluate degradation for units that have operated unattended for over 105,000 hours, demonstrate robustness to a random vibration environment, characterize and evaluate performance for varying lateral load profiles. The status for each task are described.

Wilson, Scott D.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Hardware Assessment in Support of the Dynamic Power Convertor Development Effort

Stirling Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) are being developed by NASAs RPS Program in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Efforts ranging from 2001 to 2015 enabled development of the Technology Demonstration Convertor (TDC) for use in the 110-watt Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG-110) and the Advanced Stirling Convertor (ASC) for use in the Advanced Stirling Radioisotope Generator (ASRG). The DOE selected Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company (LMSSC) as the system integration contractor for both flight development efforts. The SRG-110 housed two TDCs fabricated by Infinia and resulted in the production of 16x demonstration units and 2x engineering units. The project was redirected in 2006 to make use of a more efficient and lower mass ASCs under development by Sunpower Inc. The DOE managed the flight contract with LMSSC and subcontractor Sunpower Inc. from 2007 to 2013 to build the ASRG, with support from NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC). Sunpower Inc. held two parallel contracts to produce ASCs, one with Lockheed Martin to produce ASC-F flight units and one with GRC for the production of ASC-E3 engineering unit pathfinders that were used to refine the flight design and production processes. The DOE initiated termination of the ASRG contract in late 2013. After ASRG had ended, GRC completed characterization testing of the ASRG Engineering Unit 2 (EU2) and the GRC contract with Sunpower was also completed. The NASA RPS Program Office has recently initiated a new Dynamic Power Conversion development effort which includes the potential maturation of Stirling, Brayton, and Rankine power convertors for the next generation of RPS. The effort started with the request for proposal and review of submits. Contracts are anticipated for release in 2017 and will initially focus on a design phase prior to fabrication and testing. This new effort will focus on robustness in addition to high efficiency, specific power, and reliability. Also, some requirements introduced during the ASRG contract have also been included in the new effort, such as constant lateral loading. Due to the focus on robustness and new requirements relative to the older TDC design, the Stirling Cycle Development Project has initiated an assessment of government owned hardware to help inform requirements evolution and evaluation of future designs. While lessons learned from the ASRG flight development project have been taken into consideration, the evaluation of the TDC design had not been completed for some existing environments or relatively new requirements. To further assess the TDC design, a series of tasks were initiated to evaluate degradation for units that have operated unattended for over 105,000 hours, demonstrate robustness to a random vibration environment, characterize and evaluate performance for varying lateral load profiles. The status for each task are described.

Wilson, Scott D.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Removing the Cloak of Secrecy from Legacy Cleanup at Los Alamos national Laboratory - 20395

With the establishment in 2018 of the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Contract, the Department of Energy's (DOE) Environmental Management Los Alamos Field Office (EM-LA) and its contractor Newport News Nuclear BWXT Los Alamos (N3B) embarked on an expansive program to engage a broad range of local and regional stakeholders in the decision-making process for cleanup of legacy wastes (pre-1999) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). From the inception of LANL during the Manhattan Project until the issuance of the new cleanup contract, the site was managed by a single management and operations (M and O) contactor whose main focus was national security. Segmenting from laboratory operations a separate cleanup contract managed by DoE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) brought new opportunities for the cleanup of legacy waste. That change likewise has opened new opportunities for engaging the community on legacy cleanup decisions. The new legacy cleanup contract - an unclassified contract - emphasizes public outreach, marking a cultural shift in how stakeholders in Los Alamos and throughout northern New Mexico are engaged. Without the constraints of classified work, EM-LA and N3B have increased the level of transparency with the public regarding cleanup activities. EM-LA and N3B have crafted an approach that best meets the values, priorities and needs of the neighboring communities by adapting the model successfully employed at Rocky Flats. Through enhanced stakeholder involvement, EM-LA will implement decisions that have considered broad input and deliver a safe and efficient cleanup of the site. EM-LA and N3B began the expanded stakeholder outreach program in January 2019, leading up to four Environmental Management Cleanup Forums held in the summer of 2019. EM-LA and N3B are now in the process of initiating a series of meetings with various stakeholder groups to determine their 'values' as they relate to cleanup using a novel approach that elicits and records values. The entire process is documented, ensuring that should questions arise about how, when and why decisions were made, they can be easily addressed. In addition to other public meetings to present cleanup scenarios and solicit active public involvement in cleanup decisions, the EM-LA and N3B approach involves discussions with stakeholders who want to explore specific technical issues and cleanup discussions in depth. EM-LA and N3B are also evaluating and implementing a variety of communications tools to help ensure the engagement plan sets the gold standard for transparency in legacy cleanup and stakeholder involvement. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2016

Kennedy Space Center Five Year Sustainability Plan

The Federal Government is committed to following sustainable principles. At its heart, sustainability integrates environmental, societal and economic solutions for present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Building upon its pledge towards environmental stewardship, the Administration generated a vision of sustainability spanning ten goals mandated within Executive Order (EO) 13693, Planning for Federal Sustainability in the Next Decade. In November 2015, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) responded to this EO by incorporating it into a new release of the NASA Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan (SSPP). The SSPP recognizes the importance of aligning environmental practices in a manner that preserves, enhances and strengthens NASA's ability to perform its mission indefinitely. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) is following suit with KSC's Sustainability Plan (SP) by promoting, maintaining and pioneering green practices in all aspects of our mission. KSC's SP recognizes that the best sustainable solutions use an interdisciplinary, collaborative approach spanning civil servant and contractor personnel from across the Center. This approach relies on the participation of all employees to develop and implement sustainability endeavors connected with the following ten goals: Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Design, build and maintain sustainable buildings, facilities and infrastructure. Leverage clean and renewable energy. Increase water conservation. Improve fleet and vehicle efficiency and management. Purchase sustainable products and services. Minimize waste and prevent pollution. Implement performance contracts for Federal buildings. Manage electronic equipment and data centers responsibly. Pursue climate change resilience. The KSC SP details the strategies and actions that address the following objectives: Reduce Center costs. center dot Increase energy and water efficiencies. Promote smart buying practices. Increase reuse and recycling while decreasing waste. Benefit the community. Meet or exceed the EO and NASA SSPP sustainability goals.

Sustainability↗
DOE OSTI2023

Supplement to M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Performance-Based Contracts Version 4.0

Measurement and verification (M&V) are key to determining and confirming the continued operation of, and savings associated with, performance-based contracts. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) updates these guidelines to reflect the evolution of M&V to incorporate industry best practices and ensure that savings from these performance-based projects are properly planned, communicated, and realized. FEMP released M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Projects Version 3.0 in 2008. This document was developed with input from industry-government working groups, previous M&V guideline authors, and national laboratory subject matter experts. The document provided the methods and guidelines, with a focus on federal energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). When FEMP released M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Performance-Based Contracts Version 4.0 in 2015, FEMP expanded the intended audience to include anyone (energy managers, procurement officers, and contractors) involved in implementing performance-based contracts. The streamlined M&V Guidelines Version 4.0 provided the procedures and guidelines needed to quantify savings resulting from installing energy-efficient equipment, water conservation, improved operation and maintenance (O&M), renewable energy, and cogeneration projects with a performance-based contract; however, it removed some of the associated details on topics such as developing regression models and sampling plans. The details and information provided in M&V Guidelines v. 3.0 are still pertinent to M&V for performance-based contracts. The objective is to keep FEMP M&V version 4.0 condensed, providing the reference document for specifying M&V methods and procedures and a resource for developing project-specific M&V plans; this supplement provides additional details. The content of this supplement has been updated to include pertinent revisions between M&V version 3.0 and M&V version 4.0 by providing details and updating the content to ensure relevancy.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Best Practices for Enhancing Performance Contracts with Monitoring-Based Commissioning

Fact sheet highlights best practices for incorporating monitoring-based commissioning (MBCx), a type of energy management information system (EMIS), in performance contracts. It draws from the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) report, Enhancing Performance Contracts Using Monitoring-based Commissioning. MBCx is commercially available, yet is underutilized in performance contracts. MBCx can result in significant benefits for both a federal facility and the performance contractor.

EMIS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Summary of Analytical Services for the Hanford Site Radionuclide NESHAP Program

This document is a summary of the point source analytical requirements used to demonstrate compliance for the Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site operations with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,” (NESHAP) Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities,” and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-247, “Radiation Protection – Air Emissions.” This reference collects information from multiple source documents and is not intended to create, supersede, replace or over-ride any existing contractual, DOE, federal or state statutes, regulations, compliance agreements, orders, permits, licenses or other requirements. The requirement source document governs where any difference may exist. The Hanford Mission Integration Solutions (HMIS) Environmental organization has been contracted by DOE to manage and report data collected from the sampling and monitoring of radioactive air emissions point sources, colloquially called stacks. The Environmental organization coordinates the analyses and reporting of samples collected at various facilities across the Hanford Site. These facilities operate approximately 52 stacks that require sampling, monitoring or estimating radioactive air emissions. The stacks are operated by Bechtel National, Inc. (BNI), Central Plateau Cleanup Company (CPCCo), Hanford Tank Waste Operations & Closure (H2C), Hanford Laboratory Management and Integration (HLMI), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). Stack samples from CPCCo, HLMI and H2C facilities are collected by the operating contractor staff, delivered to HMIS, and then shipped to an offsite contracted laboratory for analyses. The field and laboratory sample data uploaded into the Sample Management and Analytical Results Tracking (SMART) database are used to calculate sample volumes and concentrations. Sample concentrations are evaluated for compliance with federal and state regulations, permits, and license requirements. The SMART database also calculates total curies released for sampled point sources and stacks. Point source effluent concentrations and releases are published annually in publicly available reports. The BNI and PNNL operate several DOE-Hanford Field Office (HFO) stacks subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subpart H and WAC 246-247. The concentrations, curies released and dose modeling evaluation for these stacks are included in the DOE-HFO annual radionuclide NESHAP report. The sample collection, analyses and emissions estimates for these stacks are outside the scope of HMIS contracted responsibilities and not addressed further in this document.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1993

Development of a naming convention and data ma nagement system

This contract covered work in data management, acquisition, and analysis for the Earth Science and Applications Division (ESAD) of the Space Science Laboratory of MSFC. Under this contract, a naming convention and data management system were developed for ESAD data sets, data visualization, and standard data format issues were investigated, and specific data analysis and management needs were addressed for several ESAD projects and data sets. In the following sections, details of the research performed over the duration of this contract are summarized.

Mcnider, Richard T.↗
NASA NTRS1991

An integrated decision support system for TRAC: A proposal

Optimal allocation and usage of resources is a key to effective management. Resources of concern to TRAC are: Manpower (PSY), Money (Travel, contracts), Computing, Data, Models, etc. Management activities of TRAC include: Planning, Programming, Tasking, Monitoring, Updating, and Coordinating. Existing systems are insufficient, not completely automated, manpower intensive, and has the potential for data inconsistency exists. A system is proposed which suggests a means to integrate all project management activities of TRAC through the development of a sophisticated software and by utilizing the existing computing systems and network resources. The systems integration proposal is examined in detail.

Mukkamala, Ravi↗
NASA NTRS2010

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Handbook

The purpose of this document is to provide program/project teams necessary instruction and guidance in the best practices for Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS dictionary development and use for project implementation and management control. This handbook can be used for all types of NASA projects and work activities including research, development, construction, test and evaluation, and operations. The products of these work efforts may be hardware, software, data, or service elements (alone or in combination). The aim of this document is to assist project teams in the development of effective work breakdown structures that provide a framework of common reference for all project elements. The WBS and WBS dictionary are effective management processes for planning, organizing, and administering NASA programs and projects. The guidance contained in this document is applicable to both in-house, NASA-led effort and contracted effort. It assists management teams from both entities in fulfilling necessary responsibilities for successful accomplishment of project cost, schedule, and technical goals. Benefits resulting from the use of an effective WBS include, but are not limited to: providing a basis for assigned project responsibilities, providing a basis for project schedule development, simplifying a project by dividing the total work scope into manageable units, and providing a common reference for all project communication.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Handbook

The purpose of this document is to provide program/project teams necessary instruction and guidance in the best practices for Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS dictionary development and use for project implementation and management control. This handbook can be used for all types of NASA projects and work activities including research, development, construction, test and evaluation, and operations. The products of these work efforts may be hardware, software, data, or service elements (alone or in combination). The aim of this document is to assist project teams in the development of effective work breakdown structures that provide a framework of common reference for all project elements. The WBS and WBS dictionary are effective management processes for planning, organizing, and administering NASA programs and projects. The guidance contained in this document is applicable to both in-house, NASA-led effort and contracted effort. It assists management teams from both entities in fulfilling necessary responsibilities for successful accomplishment of project cost, schedule, and technical goals. Benefits resulting from the use of an effective WBS include, but are not limited to: providing a basis for assigned project responsibilities, providing a basis for project schedule and budget development, simplifying a project by dividing the total work scope into manageable units, and providing a common reference for all project communication.

Planning↗
NASA NTRS2021

NASA Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Handbook

The purpose of this document is to provide program/project teams necessary instruction and guidance in the best practices for WBS and WBS dictionary development and use for project implementation and management control. This handbook can be used for all types of NASA projects and work activities including research, development, construction, test and evaluation, and operations. The products of these work efforts may be hardware, software, data, or service elements (alone or in combination). The aim of this document is to assist project teams in the development of effective work breakdown structures that provide a framework of common reference for all project elements. The WBS and WBS dictionary are effective management processes for planning, organizing, and administering NASA programs and projects. The guidance contained in this document is applicable to both in-house, NASA-led effort and contracted effort. It assists management teams from both entities in fulfilling necessary responsibilities for successful accomplishment of project cost, schedule, and technical goals. Benefits resulting from the use of an effective WBS include, but are not limited to: providing a basis for assigned project responsibilities, providing a basis for project schedule and budget development, simplifying a project by dividing the total work scope into manageable units, and providing a common reference for all project communication.

Christopher Lewis Sadler↗
DOE OSTI2021

Money Matters: A Three-Step Process for Using Budget Data in Program Evaluation to Assess the Design and Management of a Novel Public Health Program

We applied a three-step process, abstracting and analyzing program budgets to examine how Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) awardees are structuring their programs and to assess the fidelity of program design to the CRCCP public health model. We reviewed 23 state, one tribal organization, and six university awardee budgets. We assessed resource allocations, staffing structures, and contracted partners and their activities. Awardees allocated 83% of all funds to contracts and personnel. Program managers were the most budgeted personnel type across three measures: number of people, full-time equivalency, and personnel costs. Awardees not only contracted with health care systems and clinics (39% of all contracts) but also contracted other partner types. Contractors were mainly funded to implement evidence-based interventions (25%) and conduct evaluation (24%). Program design varied among awardees in the number of staff (0–22), number of full-time equivalencies (0–5.4), and the number of contracts (1–11) budgeted. State awardees budgeted more resources to contracts, compared with university awardees (57% vs. 31%), while universities budgeted more for total personnel costs (41% vs. 30%). We learned that awardees designed their programs with fidelity to the CRCCP model. Although implementation approaches varied, overall results suggest implementation requires a combination of internal capacities and contracted partners. Budgets provide opportunities to use already existing program data to evaluate program design, partnerships, and planned activities.

Uhd, Justin↗
NASA NTRS1974

Management approach recommendations. Earth Observatory Satellite system definition study (EOS)

Management analyses and tradeoffs were performed to determine the most cost effective management approach for the Earth Observatory Satellite (EOS) Phase C/D. The basic objectives of the management approach are identified. Some of the subjects considered are as follows: (1) contract startup phase, (2) project management control system, (3) configuration management, (4) quality control and reliability engineering requirements, and (5) the parts procurement program.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1980

Management. A continuing bibliography with indexes

This bibliography cites 604 reports, articles, and other documents introduced into the NASA scientific and technical information system in 1979 covering the management of research and development, contracts, production, logistics, personnel, safety, reliability and quality control. Program, project, and systems management; management policy, philosophy, tools, and techniques; decision making processes for managers; technology assessment; management of urban problems; and information for managers on Federal resources, expenditures, financing, and budgeting are also covered. Abstracts are provided as well as subject, personal author, and corporate source indexes.

Source record↗