Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “US Agency for International Development”

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.

137 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

MSRR Rack Materials Science Research Rack

The Materials Science Research Rack (MSRR) is a research facility developed under a cooperative research agreement between NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) for materials science investigations on the International Space Station (ISS). The MSRR is managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, AL. The MSRR facility subsystems were manufactured by Teledyne Brown Engineering (TBE) and integrated with the ESA/EADS-Astrium developed Materials Science Laboratory (MSL) at the MSFC Space Station Integration and Test Facility (SSITF) as part of the Systems Development Operations Support (SDOS) contract. MSRR was launched on STS-128 in August 2009, and is currently installed in the U. S. Destiny Laboratory Module on the ISS. Materials science is an integral part of developing new, safer, stronger, more durable materials for use throughout everyday life. The goal of studying materials processing in space is to develop a better understanding of the chemical and physical mechanisms involved, and how they differ in the microgravity environment of space. To that end, the MSRR accommodates advanced investigations in the microgravity environment of the ISS for basic materials science research in areas such as solidification of metals and alloys. MSRR allows for the study of a variety of materials including metals, ceramics, semiconductor crystals, and glasses. Materials science research benefits from the microgravity environment of space, where the researcher can better isolate chemical and thermal properties of materials from the effects of gravity. With this knowledge, reliable predictions can be made about the conditions required on Earth to achieve improved materials. MSRR is a highly automated facility with a modular design capable of supporting multiple types of investigations. Currently the NASA-provided Rack Support Subsystem provides services (power, thermal control, vacuum access, and command and data handling) to the ESA developed Materials Science Laboratory (MSL) which accommodates interchangeable Furnace Inserts (FI). Two ESA-developed FIs are presently available on the ISS: the Low Gradient Furnace (LGF) and the Solidification and Quenching Furnace (SQF). Sample-Cartridge Assemblies (SCAs), each containing one or more material samples, are installed in the FI by the crew and can be processed at temperatures up to 1400 C. Once an SCA is installed, the experiment can be run by automatic command or science conducted via telemetry commands from the ground. This facility is available to support materials science investigations through programs such as the US National Laboratory, Technology Development, NASA Research Announcements, and others. TBE and MSFC are currently developing NASA Sample Cartridge Assemblies (SCA's) with a planned availability for launch in 2017.

Reagan, Shawn↗
DOE OSTI2025

Radiation Accidents and Malicious Events – Scenarios and Scope of the Work of ICRP Task Group 120

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Task Group 120 (TG120) is developing ICRP recommendations for radiological protection for a wide range of radiation accidents and malicious events, complementing those given in ICRP Publication 146 (2020) for large nuclear accidents. The scope includes accidents involving criticalities, operating faults, and fires and explosions in nuclear facilities, inadvertent damage to sealed radiation sources, as well as malicious events, such as sabotage of nuclear facilities or materials, use of radiological dispersal devices, the contamination of food and drinking water supplies, and the deployment of nuclear weapons. A template has been designed to collate relevant information on a wide range of case studies and hypothetical malicious scenarios to ensure that the recommendations developed are broadly applicable and comprehensive. For all scenarios, a graded approach to protection is being taken, accepting that specific guidance may be required for some distinctive aspects, for example, protection during times of armed conflict. This paper provides an overview of the scenarios and scope of the work of TG120, including some of the radiological and non-radiological impacts of radiation emergencies, along the response and recovery timeline.

ICRP↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Systematic Evidence Based Performance Approach to Regulation of Nuclear Sites in England and Wales - 20058

The Environment Agency for England has developed a systematic evidence-based approach to pursue our strategic environmental objectives for the regulation of nuclear sites. We use an annual evidence review process to ensure effective and efficient targeting of limited resources to achieve those objectives. Over the last 8 years, we have been developing and refining this approach to ensure risk-based and value driven regulation. The approach comprises nuclear site and nuclear sector review processes known as Site Environment Review (SER) and Nuclear Environment Review (NER). This approach complements our regulation of nuclear site permit holders under the Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR). We deliver our regulation of nuclear sites in England and Wales alongside the Office for Nuclear Regulation. The SER process involves the lead regulator for each nuclear site assessing the permit holder's environmental performance across 14 themes, set within the context of the site's main activities and associated waste disposals. Our themes include environmental leadership, resources and climate change, radioactive waste management, facility management and decommissioning, groundwater, and environmental radiological protection. We use evidence from site inspections and working within our subject matter groups to grade current and predicted future environmental performance. We are particularly interested in sustainability and the application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) to prevent the creation, and minimise the disposal, of radioactive wastes. We use risk analysis (strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities) to examine performance against our strategic environmental objectives, which are set out, in our 5-year Nuclear Delivery Plan (NDP). The output supports the targeting of our resources at each nuclear site. We consult the relevant permit holders on the SER priorities and use their feedback to refine our plans. We expect all permit holders to take account of our priorities when considering their own programmes of work, objectives and plans. The NER process brings together what we learn and achieve through regulation across the sector. It provides input to planning priorities, supported by qualitative and semi-quantitative evidence. It covers the 28 nuclear sites in England and Wales and spans the same 14 environmental themes. During the process we collate, compile and summarise evidence from the SERs and other sources such as inspection reports and evidence from our other nuclear work programmes. The output is the NER annual report. This provides a snapshot of the status of the nuclear sector and gives insights to enable us to regulate more efficiently and effectively. It also takes account of cross-cutting issues and risks such as changes in international standards, domestic policy, regulatory framework, domestic standards and guidance, learning from experience such as incidents, events and good practice, and innovation, research and development. It provides graphics that illustrate the grading of environmental performance for the nuclear sector across the fourteen environmental themes. This analysis allows benchmarking of nuclear site's environmental performance and the visualisation provides a convenient comparison of performance across themes, sites, and over time. We use this intelligence to inform our investment in training and development of our staff, and our cross-cutting engagement on strategic issues with government, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and other corporate organisations. Adopting this approach can provide benefits with organisational reputation, stakeholder participation and ensuring value from the public investment. This paper describes the history of the SER/NER process, a selection of outputs from the process and ideas for improvement. The paper will be of interest to other regulators and organisations across the world that are interested in supporting continuous improvement. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2009

NASA Lunar Mining and Construction Activities and Plans

The Space Exploration Policy enacted by the US Congress in 2005 calls for the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to implement a sustained and affordable human and robotic program to explore the solar system and beyond; Extend human presence across the solar system, starting with a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, in preparation for human exploration of Mars and other destinations; Develop the innovative technologies, knowledge, and infrastructures both to explore and to support decisions about the destinations for human exploration; and Promote international and commercial participation in exploration to further U.S. scientific, security, and economic interests. In 2006, NASA released the Lunar Architecture Study, which proposed establishing a lunar Outpost on the Moon with international participation to extend human presence beyond Earth's orbit, pursue scientific activities, use the Moon to prepare for future human missions to Mars, and expand Earth s economic sphere. The establishment of sustained human presence on the Moon for science and exploration combines the design, integration, and operation challenges experienced from both the short Apollo lunar missions and the build-up and sustained crew operations of the International Space Station (ISS). Apollo experience reminds developers and mission planners that hardware must operate under extremely harsh environmental and abrasive conditions and every kilogram of mass and payload must be critical to achieve the mission s objectives due to the difficulty and cost of reaching the lunar surface. Experience from the ISS reminds developers and mission planners that integration of all hardware must be designed and planned from the start of the program, operations and evolution of capabilities on a continuous basis are important, and long-term life-cycle costs and logistical needs are equally or more important than minimizing early development and test costs. Overarching all of this is the need to implement efforts that are sustainable and affordable. One area NASA is developing that can significantly change how systems required for sustained human presence are designed and integrated, as well as potentially break our reliance on Earth supplied logistics, is In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). ISRU, also known living off the land, involves the extraction and processing of local resources into useful products. In particular, the ability to make propellants, life support consumables, fuel cell reagents, and radiation shielding can significantly reduce the cost, mass, and risk of sustained human activities beyond Earth. Also, the ability to modify the lunar landscape for safer landing, transfer of payloads from the lander an outpost, dust generation mitigation, and infrastructure placement and buildup are also extremely important for long-term lunar operations. While extra-terrestrial excavation, material handling and processing, and site preparation and construction may be new to NASA and other space agencies, there is extensive terrestrial hardware and commercial experience that can be leveraged. This paper will provide an overview of current NASA activities in lunar ISRU mining and construction and how terrestrial experience in these areas are important to achieving the goal of affordable and sustainable human exploration.

Sanders, Gerald B.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Approach to Quality Assurance for Complex Environmental Modeling - 20407

A strong Quality Assurance (QA) program for complex environmental modeling is essential for regulatory and public acceptance and trust, but it does not have to be onerous. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) has developed a strong QA program that improves transparency, traceability, reproducibility, and therefore, defensibility and trust. Neptune's QA program has evolved over the past 27 years, transitioning from an ad hoc QA program, to a program that is currently Nuclear Quality Assurance-1 (NQA-1) compliant, and will soon be NQA-1/DOE approved for DOE EM modeling work. In addition, Neptune is a qualified laboratory assessor and qualified auditor for reference materials, a proficiency testing provider, and fully complies with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QA program. Neptune's President and CEO, Kelly Black, was recently named the Chairperson of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee 69, Application of Statistical Methods. A strong QA program has been developed for Neptune's radiological performance assessment (PA) program. Although pieces of their QA program are currently in development, their current program includes document control using Subversion, issue tracking and work flow tracking using JIRA, and transparency and traceability via a system of 'calc sheets' for documentation of all data analysis and modeling combined with 'check print' documentation of QA checking, and rigorous model testing and configuration control. All work is reviewed by an independent subject matter expert who is not associated with the collection and assembly of information, for an internal peer review. The program is enforced with a handful of Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs), Work Instructions, QA Project Plans (QAPPs), and Quality Management Plans (QMPs) that are updated frequently, with required annual training and acknowledgment. In addition, effective communication of modeling approaches and results to clients and stakeholders are integral to their QA program. Many of their models are built using the GoldSim modeling platform, for which their models are well-known for their level of transparency, documentation, and QA traceability. This level of QA is also applied to their process-level models. Neptune has taken some lessons learned from the extremely rigorous QA program required for the Yucca Mountain Project (YMP), and imposed the YMP requirements of complete traceability, transparency, and reproducibility, but avoided the inflexibility of a QA program that likely contributed to the suspect e-mails in 2005 that resulted in loss of trust in the YMP, and in nuclear waste disposal (and nuclear power) in general. There are far too many examples of loss of public trust due to poor QA that could have been easily avoided with a simple and straight-forward QA program combined with stakeholder engagement. The purpose of this paper is to share features of Neptune's Radiological Performance Assessment program QA program, and some of their QA related lessons learned over the past 27 years of QA for complex environmental modeling. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2004

Records Management: Preserving the Past to Make the Future

As an intern in the Records Management Office at NASA, I have learned the importance of records management and teamwork. I work in building 60 with Kevin Coleman, the Records and Forms Manager and History Officer, and Deborah Demaline, the senior records specialist. Prior to my internship, I had never paid attention to records and their role in operating a business. However, after my first assignment of identifying files and filling out a C-277 form, I realized the importance of preserving each file. Since NASA is a government agency, keeping our records in a safe and easily accessible area is a major priority. As the records have accumulated over the years, and the destruction of records has been put on hold due to the fairly recent tobacco litigation; the amount of NASA s records has been quickly accumulating. Currently, our records are stored at Plum Brook in Sandusky, Ohio. Recently, rain has leaked through the bunkers and caused damage to some of our records boxes. Plum Brook has been experiencing difficulty in finding the funds to repair the damage. NASA Glenn is reluctant to give Plum Brook more money because the staff at the Sandusky site has not shown us a detailed summary of what they are doing with the funds we give them annually. Even though storing our records at Plum Brook comes with little cost, there are plenty other companies that offer a records storage area and a special software database for easy record retrieval. My assignment is to do a feasibility study on these companies to see how they compare in providing the appropriate criteria for NASA Glenn's needs. Other research I am doing is on which companies will allow us to convert our physical records into an electronic database for quicker retrieval and to eliminate the cost of storing our records in a facility altogether. The two studies have required me to not only work closely with the Records Management Department, but also the Information Technology staff. It has been important for me to thoroughly understand the criteria both departments here at NASA Glenn need in order to make the system effective for the entire organization. The interaction that I am experiencing with different organizations within NASA Glenn and the various companies we are looking at has enhanced my communication skills. Without proficient communication skills, it is difficult to seek how each company meets all of NASA's standards. This includes webx conferences, teleconferences, face-to-face meetings, knowing the appropriate time to ask questions, knowing what those appropriate questions are, and most importantly, being a good listener. During the meetings and conferences I attend, I ensure that I understand where each party is coming from and listen carefully to the points people make. In addition to working with the feasibility study, I will later work on a marketing plan to encourage employees to take care in storing their records and learn the importance of the History Office. Also, the department is trying to develop a special presentation for new employees during their orientation. Assisting Deborah Demaline in taking inventory at Plum Brook is another task that must be done to ensure that the records have been properly placed.

Petro, Kathryn↗
DOE OSTI2026

A U.S. scientific community review of carbon cycle science gaps and opportunities to better support earth system science and carbon management

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions continue to grow, while natural carbon reservoirs are becoming increasingly vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures, climate extremes, and disturbance. These changes are impacting humans, ecosystems, and natural resources worldwide. Tracking and mitigating GHG emissions require a pivot to operational monitoring of regional carbon flux and stock changes. The current GHG observing system is addressing needs at two distinct scales: 1) Local scale (< 1 km), related to anthropogenic point source emissions, and 2) global scales (> 1000 km), related to land and ocean carbon sinks. More focus on intermediate (10–1000 km) scales is needed to more effectively monitor progress in reducing carbon emissions, enhancing removals, and maintaining sinks. Representatives from carbon cycle biomass and flux communities across United States government agencies and academic institutions met in September 2024 to discuss the rationale and scientific context for more effectively implementing an operational system for GHG monitoring in support of urban and national carbon management needs. To guide development of this system, we propose a multi-tiered global spaceborne observing framework for carbon flux and stock, prioritizing: 1) frequent GHG partial columns for carbon emissions and removals; 2) continuous time series and data fusion of biomass from Lidar and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) for carbon stocks, and 3) expanded coverage of tropical, high latitude, and oceanic regions to monitor carbon cycle tipping points and feedbacks. This system should be complemented by expanded surface and airborne networks for oceanic and terrestrial/aquatic ecosystems for calibration, ground truthing, and study of under-sampled regions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Earth Observing System (EOS)

The Earth Observing System is a US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) program consisting of a science segment, a data system, and a space segment made up of a series of polar-orbiting and mid-inclination satellites for long-term monitoring of the Earth as an integrated system, including observations of the land surface, biosphere, atmosphere, cryosphere, and oceans. Initially conceived in the mid-late 1980s, it was implemented as a series of large "flagship" missions and smaller focused satellites, often in partnership with instruments and sometimes spacecraft from other nations. In 1984 NASA formed several instrument panels to develop concepts for “facility instruments” that would provide comprehensive support to the scientific and applications’ communities, each with a supporting science team competitively selected via peer-review. An Announcement of Opportunity was released in 1988 and proposals were solicited for three types of proposals: (i) instrument investigations that would include the provision of instrumentation for flight on a polar platform, including non-Earth science payloads requiring polar orbits (PI instruments), (ii) research facility instrument team member and team leader investigations for facility instruments, and (iii) interdisciplinary science investigations to provide data analysis and modeling, preparing to use data acquired from the space platforms. The initial selections made in 1989 included support for 24 instrument investigations, 6 research facility instrument investigations, and 28 interdisciplinary investigations. Although considerable changes were made over the years in the structure and orbital configuration of the various instruments and platforms, a total of 10 different missions were eventually flown, as shown in Fig. 1. These included three multiinstrument flagship platforms known as Terra (launched in 1999), Aqua (launched in 2002), and Aura (launched in 2004), where the Terra mission emphasis was primarily on land processes, Aqua on the hydrological cycle, and Aura on atmospheric chemistry. In addition to these flagship missions the EOS missions included Landsat 7 (land cover classification and change), QuikScat (wind speed and direction over the oceans), Jason-1 (ocean surface topography and sea level), ACRIMSAT (total solar irradiance (TSI)), SAGE III (stratospheric aerosol and ozone levels), ICESat (ice, cloud, and land elevation), and SORCE (Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment; total and spectral solar irradiance). In addition EOS supported CERES (an Earth radiation budget sensor) and LIS (a lightning sensor), that flew as part of the NASA/JAXA Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (1997), and SeaWinds (wind speed and direction), that flew as part of the short-lived ADEOS II (Midori II, 2002) mission of JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency). The EOS contributions are too numerous to present in detail in this article, but can be viewed for convenience as a means of obtaining global measurements (with appropriate characteristics) of the 24 variables and variable groups listed in Table 1. This table was created by the EOS community in the late 1990s as a way to succinctly indicate which instruments on the various EOS platforms were expected to contribute to each of the specified variables in primary (bold), secondary (bold italics), or contributing (roman) roles. All of the science data products produced by these space missions are available without charge throughout the world, and are thus highly valued for their many contributions to applications such as air quality, fires, land cover change, and the state of the oceans, as well as for science and monitoring of the state of the Earth system and its changes over time. These and other international satellites have played a crucial role in understanding and documenting global change, including (i) global surface temperature and atmospheric temperature and water vapor profiles, (ii) glacial retreat, (iii) sea ice extent and change, (iv) solar radiation into and out of the Earth-atmosphere system, (v) atmospheric aerosol and cloud properties, (vi) sources and sinks of

ICESat↗
NASA NTRS2017

Landsat at 45: How it Changed the Way We See the Earth

On October 24, 1946, more than 10 years before the launch of the first artificial satellite Sputnik, scientists at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico placed a camera on top of a captured German V-2 ballistic missile. As the rocket flew to an altitude of about 65 miles - just above the generally recognized border of outer space - the 35-millimeter motion picture camera snapped a frame every one and a half seconds. Minutes later, the missile came crashing back down and slammed into the ground at more than 340 mph, but the film survived and gave us our first glimpse of Earth from space. Earth Resources Technology Satellite aka Landsat It was images like those first grainy black and white pictures and later those taken by America's first astronauts in the 1960's that inspired the development of the Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS). From the unique vantage point of space, we could now observe Earth using a variety of different instruments to monitor changes over time. The ERTS-1 satellite, wisely renamed Landsat-1, was launched aboard a Delta rocket on July 23, 1972, into a Sun-synchronous polar orbit at an altitude of about 560 miles. In this unique orbit, Landsat could observe the same point on the Earth every 18 days, always with the same solar illumination, allowing for precise monitoring of changes on the ground over time. Landsat-1, derived from the highly successful Nimbus weather satellites, carried two instruments that allowed it to take images not only in visible light but also in infrared, well-suited to track changes in vegetation over time. Designed to last only one year, Landsat-1 actually operated for nearly three years, by which time it had been joined in space by Landsat-2, a near identical copy of the original. Since then, ever more sophisticated instruments were flown aboard Landsat-3 through -8, with Landsat-9 planned for launch in 2020, acquiring millions of images of Earth over more than four decades. At first, images from Landsat were processed by NASA and hardcopies sold to users for a fee, a somewhat tedious process. Since 2008, images have been made available to all interested users by the US Geological Survey (USGS) at no cost via the Internet in near real time. So, how can Landsat help? In short, Landsat looks. And looks. And proves Yogi right. Space-based images from Landsat and other similar satellites offer a unique and critical capability to observe land use over time by providing repetitive observations of the Earth otherwise unavailable. The data provided by the images can be used by scientists and politicians to inform wise decisions in areas such as agriculture, climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, energy, forest management, human health, fire, natural disasters, urban growth and water management. This overview article doesn't allow for examples from each of these disciplines, but details can be found at the following website: https://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/how_landsat_helps/. One third of the US economy is influenced by climate, weather and natural hazards, providing strong economic incentives to sustain a healthy space-based Earth observation program. One example, however, may be illustrative of how Landsat and other space-based observations can be helpful in monitoring and documenting some effects of global climate change. It had been noted since the 1970's that permafrost in subarctic areas like Siberia was melting at an accelerating rate. It also became apparent that this led to the formation of hundreds of melt lakes and the liberation of large quantities of methane, a gas that in the short-term has more potent greenhouse effects than carbon dioxide. The methane turned the water in these lakes blue, making them easy to track over time by satellite. Additionally, the newly released methane has been carbon dated to tens of thousands of years ago, meaning that it had remained frozen since the last Ice Age and therefore hadn't been accounted for in models of the Earth's overall carbon balance. Release of sufficient methane by an increasingly warming climate could actually cause a positive feedback loop in global warming, melting more permafrost and releasing yet more methane. Further monitoring by Landsat and other platforms will reveal whether this process is reversible or whether we've passed the tipping point. In addition to the highly successful Landsat series of satellites, NASA and other agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) operate a fleet of other Earth observing platforms, many with more specific research goals such as monitoring sea ice levels or atmospheric carbon content. Several instruments aboard the International Space Station also contribute to this overall effort to better understand short- and long-term changes to the Earth. Many of these missions are guided by the 2009 Decadal Survey published by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences. Europe, Russia and China all see the value of space-based Earth observation by deploying their own fleet of satellites.

Uri, John↗
NASA NTRS2021

NASA Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) Aircraft Technology for Public Services – A White Paper

History has shown that our personal life is highly dependent on the technology that people have developed. A strategic scan of the aerospace environment at the beginning of the 21st century strongly suggests that the world might be approaching a new age of airpower—the era of electrified/hybrid aircraft propulsion. Undeniably, starting from the Montgolfier Brothers balloon flight in 1783, to the Wright Brothers piston engine flight in 1903, and the jet engine of the 1960s, or the space age of today, one can say that leaps in propulsion technology have marked the different ages of human flight. The technological advancements, brought at the beginning of 21st century by the revolution in data exchange, computational power, sensors, wireless communication, internet, and autonomy, contributed to the vision of this new age of propulsion we are approaching. Historically, conventional vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft have been equipped with propulsion units relying on complex internal combustion machines (turbines, piston engines, for example), and complex mechanical arrangements (gearboxes, shafts, variable pitch propeller). By contrast, electric VTOL aircraft (eVTOL)1 rely on simpler propulsion units (electric motors and in some cases fixed-pitch propellers). This promotes redundancy and improves tolerance to failures, in turn improving safety. The use of simpler electric propulsion units should also allow significant acquisition and operating cost reductions. Whether full-electric (relying solely on batteries) or hybrid-electric (relying on a combination of batteries, fuel-powered engines, and generators.), eVTOLs are also expected to generate less noise and air pollution than conventional aircraft with similar payloads. According to the 2019 Annual Review of IATA (International Air Transport Association) [ref.1], due to an expected increase in air transport traffic by 5% every year and a doubling of air transport passenger numbers to 8.2 billion by 2037 significant challenges are posed to the aviation industry. Furthermore, this report does not factor in the expected demand for short-range (intra-city) air transportation, which is in development and yet to be operational. The increased demand to fly creates a responsibility to expand in a sustainable manner and an endeavor to develop more environmentally-friendly aircraft. eVTOL aircraft, either piloted or autonomous, is gathering considerable interest worldwide. Modern and novel full-electric or hybrid-electric eVTOL configurations enable a new paradigm shift in air transportation as the aviation industry remains committed to its goals of carbon-neutral growth from 2020 onwards and cutting CO2 emissions to half 2005 levels by 2050. While electric power has been used for decades, recent developments in mobile electric/hybrid propulsion coupled with advanced materials and autonomous systems may create the possibility to transition into the next age of air mobility propelled by electric/hybrid VTOL aircraft technology. Although eVTOL aircraft might seem like an incremental improvement or even a counterintuitive regression with regard to past VTOL development, it has in fact the potential to transform air mobility across a wide range of government applications. Previous transformations in aviation generated dramatic leaps in performance, but the cost was commensurate with performance, limiting quantity produced. This next age appears to take a different approach. Performance may not increase, but at this moment technology is poised for future urban mobility that will spawn commercial passenger drone services, that is, autonomous (pilotless) air taxis and thereby add a new dimension to the urban transportation mix of the future [ref. 2]. Advances in electric propulsion, autonomous flight technology, and 5G communication networks will enable this fast new-growing market to become a reality. It is now time to envision the introduction of electric/hybrid eVTOL aircraft for Public Services2. We believe that in the next decades eVTOL aircraft will have the potential to become an essential tool to Public Service agencies around the world in applications such as firefighting, public safety, search and rescue, disaster relief and law enforcement. This is due to several major factors. • First, with the increasing popularity of small, unmanned aircraft vehicles (UAVs) or drones, many companies today are focusing on the development of passenger UAVs designed to accommodate up to five passengers or equivalent cargo payload. Many such configurations are electric or hybrid-electric designs with VTOL capabilities. Several of these projects have started a flight test program and many more are expected to be in the experimental and development phase in 2020. Such revolutionary vehicles could be in commercial operations by 2030. These eVTOL systems could be ready for selected Public Services missions even sooner. • Second, although these advanced eVTOL vehicles under development still need access to fuel (hybrid) and/or electric charging capability, they can take off and land from almost anywhere. Therefore, such vehicles, both manned and unmanned can be successfully integrated for the critical missions of the Public Services with extra deployment flexibilities. • Third, advancement in electric propulsion systems in the automotive industry together with NASA’s leading efforts in electrification of aircraft propulsion systems, FAA’s ongoing active eVTOL certification programs, and EASA’s proposed framework for the certification of electric/hybrid small category VTOL aircraft in Europe [ref. 3] will help accelerate industry electric propulsion system development and integration. • Finally, eVTOL vehicles could be deployed for Public Services sooner than air taxi or other commercial applications, since Public Services missions may be more easily approved based on specific mission criteria, localized airworthiness authority for public-use aircraft3, and are normally operating under centralized airspace management and control by the theater command. Moreover, public perception and acceptance are generally less of a concern when operations save lives and benefit the wider community. The prioritized introduction of eVTOL aircraft in Public Services is ambitious, but we believe it is achievable in the coming decades if fundamental enablers (people and technologies) are engaged in defining the objectives and needs of these missions. The revolution that is currently taking place in eVTOL aircraft represents an unprecedented opportunity to develop a safer, more affordable, more available and more environmentally friendly future of vertical flight. To ensure that these novel aircraft meet the future expectations of Public Services, it is essential to take a collaborative and multi-disciplinary approach to their development, across engineering disciplines, policy-making, program management, business case development, manufacturing, and flight demonstrations. It should be noted that the term eVTOL (in the near term) used throughout this publication implies aircraft capable of transporting up to 5 persons which may or may not include a pilot if operated fully autonomously, assuming an average of 200 pounds (91 kg) per person or equivalent payload and a range up to 60 miles plus a suitable reserve. Hybrid or hydrogen powered eVTOLs would have greater range. For example, a “3-seat” eVTOL aircraft may only be able to carry two fully equipped firemen, and payload capacity is more relevant when used for the supply mission. Moreover, this paper concentrates on the “last-mile” solutions with a deployment time of no more than 6 hours. Although not specifically discussed in this document, it is understood that the future of Transformative Vertical Flight in general and Public Services, in particular, will also involve smaller UAVs that will undoubtedly play a crucial role in future aerial operations. For example, smaller unmanned aircraft may be used to dispatch medical supplies, portable filtration systems or perform the Search task of future Search and Rescue (SAR) operations. Close collaboration between the aircraft industry, the Civil Aviation Authorities (CAA), e.g., Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) and the Department of Defense (DoD) certifiers, will help identify Public Services requirements, define expectations and limit development cost and timescales. Take the US Air Force Agility Prime as an example, the majority of the eVTOL application opportunities and mission elements identified are in line with the NASA TVF WG-4 objectives and use cases. Together, it forms a strong partnership to accelerate the development, certification, and practical deployment for public service missions. The US Air Force Agility Prime has been a collaboration partner on this white paper, and provided valuable input and recommendations. Most of the eVTOL public service mission elements discussed in this paper and additional use cases envisioned by the NASA TVF WG-4 team are shared by the Agility Prime program. The focus and efforts of the Agility Prime in product and system development, industry and government partnership, accelerated certifications as well as early test and deployment are totally in sync with the path forward recommended by this white paper. This kind of collaboration and partnership will help enable the practical use of the eVTOL for public service missions, benefit the eVTOL public acceptance, and accelerate the eVTOL industry revolution.

Johnny T. Doo↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗