Overview of environmental requirements programs
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
environmental requirements↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “environmental requirements program”
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.
Project environmental requirements program overview
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
environmental requirements program↗
Highlights of the Mars 2020 Environmental Test Program
Environmental requirements for Mars 2020 (M2020) were established early in the program (due to inheritance from Mars Science Laboratory [MSL]), and a comprehensive test implementation program was developed as the spacecraft design matured. Several design scope changes happened during development (for example, addition of a helicopter), and the test program expanded accordingly. The environmental test program included hundreds of assembly-level mission-qualifying tests, which fed into the system-level environmental test program. This paper describes the highlights of selected portions of the assembly and system level test program.
Dodge, Randy↗
Analysis of Data in Accordance with Space Flight Mission Environmental Requirements
The Environmental Assurance Program sets forth standards to ensure that all flight hardware is compatible with the environments that will be encountered during a spacecraft mission. It outlines the design, test and analysis, and risk control standards for the mission and certifies that it will survive in any external or self-induced environments that the spacecraft may experience. The Environmental Requirements Document (ERD) is the most important document in the Environmental Assurance Program, providing the design and test requirements for the project's flight system, subsystems, assemblies, and instruments. This summer's project was to assist Environmental Requirements Engineers (ERE's) in completing the Environmental Assurance Program Summary Report for both the Juno Project and Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) Project. The Summary Report is a document summarizing the environmental tests and analyses of each spacecraft at both the assembly and system level. It compiles a source of all relevant information such as waivers and Problem/Failure Reports (PFRs) into a single report for easy reference of how well the spacecraft met the requirements of the project.
Jupiter properties↗
X-33 Environmental Impact Statement: A Fast Track Approach
NASA is required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to prepare an appropriate level environmental analysis for its major projects. Development of the X-33 Technology Demonstrator and its associated flight test program required an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the NEPA. The EIS process is consists of four parts: the "Notice of Intent" to prepare an EIS and scoping; the draft EIS which is distributed for review and comment; the final ETS; and the "Record of Decision." Completion of this process normally takes from 2 - 3 years, depending on the complexity of the proposed action. Many of the agency's newest fast track, technology demonstration programs require NEPA documentation, but cannot sustain the lengthy time requirement between program concept development to implementation. Marshall Space Flight Center, in cooperation with Kennedy Space Center, accomplished the NEPA process for the X-33 Program in 13 months from Notice of Intent to Record of Decision. In addition, the environmental team implemented an extensive public involvement process, conducting a total of 23 public meetings for scoping and draft EIS comment along with numerous informal meetings with public officials, civic organizations, and Native American Indians. This paper will discuss the fast track approach used to successfully accomplish the NEPA process for X-33 on time.
McCaleb, Rebecca C.↗
Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501
The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Advanced Environmental Monitoring and Control Program: Technology Development Requirements
Human missions in space, from the International Space Station on towards potential human exploration of the moon, Mars and beyond into the solar system, will require advanced systems to maintain an environment that supports human life. These systems will have to recycle air and water for many months or years at a time, and avoid harmful chemical or microbial contamination. NASA's Advanced Environmental Monitoring and Control program has the mission of providing future spacecraft with advanced, integrated networks of microminiaturized sensors to accurately determine and control the physical, chemical and biological environment of the crew living areas. This document sets out the current state of knowledge for requirements for monitoring the crew environment, based on (1) crew health, and (2) life support monitoring systems. Both areas are updated continuously through research and space mission experience. The technologies developed must meet the needs of future life support systems and of crew health monitoring. These technologies must be inexpensive and lightweight, and use few resources. Using these requirements to continue to push the state of the art in miniaturized sensor and control systems will produce revolutionary technologies to enable detailed knowledge of the crew environment.
Jan, Darrell↗
NASA-STD 3001 and the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH): Evolution of NASA-STD-3000
The Habitability & Environmental Factors and Space Medicine Divisions have developed the Space Flight Human System Standard (SFHSS) (NASA-STD-3001) to replace NASA-STD-3000 as a new NASA standard for all human spaceflight programs. The SFHSS is composed of 2 volumes. Volume 1, Crew Health, contains medical levels of care, permissible exposure limits, and fitness for duty criteria, and permissible outcome limits as a means of defining successful operating criteria for the human system. Volume 2, Habitability and Environmental Health, contains environmental, habitability and human factors standards. Development of the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH), a companion to the standard, is currently under construction and entails the update and revision of NASA-STD-3000 data. This new handbook will, in the fashion of NASA STD-3000, assist engineers and designers in appropriately applying habitability, environmental and human factors principles to spacecraft design. Organized in a chapter-module-element structure, the HIDH will provide the guidance for the development of requirements, design considerations, lessons learned, example solutions, background research, and assist in the identification of gaps and research needs in the disciplines. Subject matter experts have been and continue to be solicited to participate in the update of the chapters. The purpose is to build the HIDH with the best and latest data, and provide a broad representation from experts in industry, academia, the military and the space program. The handbook and the two standards volumes work together in a unique way to achieve the required level of human-system interface. All new NASA programs will be required to meet Volumes 1 and 2. Volume 2 presents human interface goals in broad, non-verifiable standards. Volume 2 also requires that each new development program prepare a set of program-specific human factors requirements. These program-specific human and environmental factors requirements must be verifiable and tailored to assure the new system meets the Volume 2 standards. Programs will use the HIDH to write their verifiable program-specific requirements.
Pickett, Lynn↗
Defining the Natural Atmospheric Environment Requirements for the NASA Constellation Program
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration began developing a new vehicle under the Constellation Program to replace the Space Shuttle. The Ares-1 launch vehicle and the Orion capsule will be used to ferry crew and some payloads to the International Space Station and will also be used for new missions to the moon, As development of this new vehicle begins, the Natural Environments Branch at Marshall Space Flight Center has been tasked with defining the natural environments the vehicle will encounter and working with the program to develop natural environmental requirements for the vehicles' elements. An overview of the structure of the program is given, along with a description of the Constellation Design Specification for Natural Environments and the Constellation Natural Environments Definition for Design documents and how they apply to the Ares-I and Orion vehicles.
Roberts, Barry C.↗
Bioaccumulation Using Surrogate Samplers (Bass): Evaluation Of A Passive Sampler As An Alternative Monitoring Tool For Environmental Contaminants At The Savannah River Site
DOE sites conduct traditional environmental monitoring programs that require collecting, processing, and analyzing water, sediment, and fish samples. However, recently developed passive sampling technologies, such as Diffusive Gradient in Thin films (DGT), may measure the chemical phases that are available and toxic to organisms (the bioavailable fraction), thereby producing more accurate and economical results than traditional methods. Our laboratory study showed that dissolved copper concentrations measured by DGT probes were strongly correlated with the uptake of copper by Lumbriculus variegatus, an aquatic worm, and with concentrations of copper measured by conventional methods. Dissolved copper concentrations in DGT probes increased with time of exposure, paralleling the increase in copper with time that ocurred in Lumbriculus. Additional studies with a combination of seven dissolved metals showed similar results. These findings support the use of DGT as a biomimetic monitoring tool and provide a basis for refinement of these methods for cost-effective environmental monitoring at DOE sites.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Development of Environmental Qualification and Acceptance Test Requirements for the Constellation Program and Comparison with MIL-STD-1540E
No abstract available
Strong, Edward↗
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - Program Update - 17530
The legacy of the United States' early atomic energy program is an important piece of our Nation's history. That legacy however, left low-level radiological contamination at properties now owned and operated by commercial, private and/or local government entities. Although many of these contaminated sites were identified by the Government in the past, additional properties continue to be identified. The United States Government, thru the US Department of Energy (USDOE) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), is addressing these sites with the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) and has been doing so since the 1970's. The USDOE and the USACE both have roles in the Program. The USACE FUSRAP Program has an important task but faces many challenges to achieve a success conclusion. Since the implementation of 'sequestration cap' budgeting by Congress in 2012, the annual budget for the Program has decreased significantly compared to the funding levels in prior years. The Program complies with USACE Civil Works budgetary reprogramming rules that requires close coordination between the project and program teams to appropriately and efficiently obligate and expend Program funding. The very nature of environmental remediation work results in consistently finding additional unknowns during each phase of a project. The Program is required to follow Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) guidance and conduct cost recovery activities but does not have authorities such as those held by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). In order to pursue cost recovery actions, conclude a settlement agreement or file an administrative order, USACE must engage the US Department of Justice or USEPA to act on their behalf as USACE does not have the authority to do so themselves. Twenty years later, USACE continues to carry out the FUSRAP mission and work in coordination with the USDOE Office of Legacy Management (DOE-LM) to ensure that the Government's responsibilities are addressed. Success is measured by finishing each site cleanup so they can be turned back to their property owner and stakeholders for safe use. USACE continues to seek new technologies and methods of approach to improve and expedite site investigations and clean ups. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
SIRTF primary mirror design, analysis, and testing
The primary mirror assembly (PMA) requirements and concepts for the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) program are discussed. The PMA studies at NASA/ARC resulted in the design of two engineering test articles, the development of a mirror mount cryogenic static load testing system, and the procurement and partial testing of a full scale spherical mirror mounting system. Preliminary analysis and testing of the single arch mirror with conical mount design and the structured mirror with the spherical mount design indicate that the designs will meet all figure and environmental requirements of the SIRTF program.
Sarver, George L., III↗
Technology demonstrator program for Space Station Environmental Control Life Support System
The main objectives and requirements of the NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center Technology Demonstration Program are discussed. The program consists of a comparative test and a 90-day manned system test to evaluate an Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS). In the comparative test phase, 14 types of subsystems which perform oxygen and water reclamation functions are to be examined in terms of performance maintenance/service requirements, reliability, and safety. The manned chamber testing phase involves a four person crew using a partial ECLSS for 90 days. The schedule for the program and the program hardware requirements are described.
Adams, Alan M.↗
Evaluation of Fire Station 23-425, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada
The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to modernize the Mercury town site at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet current and future National Weapons Science, Global and Homeland Security Programs, and Environmental Management mission requirements. These plans—including anticipated demolitions, consolidations, and rebuilding at Mercury—are considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 U.S.C. § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 U.S.C. § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, 36 C.F.R. Part 800. Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of Mercury. This effort resulted in the identification, recordation, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District, including the identification of its contributing components. This district was recommended eligible for listing to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP or National Register) under Criteria A and C but was unevaluated under Criteria B and D at that time. The Mercury Historic District contains 153 individual landscapes, buildings, and structures. Of these resources, all except one are recommended as contributing elements of the historic district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. During most of the Cold War, the land now called the NNSS was named the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This report concerns the proposed demolition of the 1966 Fire Station 23-425 in Mercury as a phase of the larger modernization program mentioned above. Further evaluation of this property indicates that it does not meet any of the Secretary of the Interior’s Significance Criteria for eligibility for the NRHP at either the national or local levels. However, it does remain an important contributing element of Mercury Historic District. This is part of a series of reports.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Technology Evaluation for Environmental Risk Mitigation Compendium
The Technology Evaluation for Environmental Risk Mitigation (TEERM) Principal Center and its predecessor organization the Acquisition Pollution Prevention Program (AP2) supported the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in identifying technology solutions to risks and costs to NASA programs driven by environmental regulations and requirements. TEERM researched the commercial and government marketplace to locate viable and available technologies that met NASAs needs. TEERM focused on addressing environmentally-driven risks of direct concern to NASA programs and facilities, including hazardous materials in NASA operations and materials that became obsolescent because of environmental regulations. TEERM projects aimed to reduce cost; ensure the health and safety of people, assets, and the environment; promote efficiency; and minimize duplication. Major TEERM and AP2 projects focused on waste minimization and hazardous waste treatment, recycling, corrosion prevention and control, solvent and ozone depleting substances substitution, and aqueous based cleaners. In 2017, NASA made the decision to terminate the TEERM Principal Center. This Compendium Report documents TEERM and AP2 project successes. The Compendium Report traces the evolution of TEERM based on evolving risks and requirements for NASA and its relationship to the Space Shuttle Program, the United States Department of Defense, the European Space Agency, and other public and private stakeholders. This Compendium Report also documents project details from Project Summaries and Joint Test Plans and describes project stakeholders and collaborative effort results.
material obsolescent↗
Report series: Evaluation, Finding of Effect, and Mitigation Documentation for the 1960s Dormitories and 1950s Quonset Hut Foundations, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada [3 Reports Consolidated]
The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to modernize the town of Mercury at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet current and future National Weapons Science, Global and Homeland Security Programs, and Environmental Management mission requirements. These plans—including anticipated demolitions, consolidations, and rebuilding at Mercury—are considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 U.S.C. § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 U.S.C. § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, 36 C.F.R. Part 800. Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of Mercury in 2017. This effort resulted in the identification, recording, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District, as well as the identification of its contributing components. This district was recommended eligible to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP or National Register) under Criteria A and C, but was unevaluated under Criteria B and D at that time. The Mercury Historic District contains 153 individual landscapes, buildings, and structures. Of these resources, DRI recommends all except one as contributing elements of the historic district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. During most of the Cold War, the land now called the NNSS was referred to as the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This report evaluates resources dating to the 1950s and 1960s between Jangle and Knothole Streets and south of Ranger Avenue in Mercury prior to the proposed demolition of all resources in that area between Sandstone and Greenhouse Avenues as a phase of the larger modernization program mentioned above. Although the Mercury Historic District as a whole is eligible to the National Register, further evaluation of these properties, as detailed in this report, indicates that none are individually eligible under any of the Secretary of Interior’s Significance Criteria, either at the national or local level.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Evaluation of 1950s-Era Architectural Resources in Blocks 10, 11, and 17, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada
The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to modernize the Mercury town site at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet current and future National Weapons Science, Global and Homeland Security Programs, and Environmental Management mission requirements. These plans, including anticipated demolitions, consolidations, and rebuilding at Mercury, are considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 U.S.C. § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 U.S.C. § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, 36 C.F.R. Part 800. The Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of Mercury. This effort resulted in the identification, recording, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. D230), including the identification of its contributing components (Reno et al. 2018). This district was recommended eligible to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP or National Register) under Criteria A and C but was unevaluated under Criteria B and D at that time. The Mercury Historic District contains 154 individual landscapes, buildings, and structures. Of these resources, DRI recommends all except one as contributing elements of the historic district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. During most of the Cold War, the land now called the NNSS was formerly the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This report is concerned with evaluating resources dating to the 1950s in Blocks 10, 11, and 17 in Mercury prior to the proposed demolition of 22 resources in Blocks 10 and 11 as a phase of the larger modernization program mentioned above. Although the Mercury Historic District as a whole is eligible to the National Register, further evaluation of these properties as detailed in this report indicates that none are individually eligible under any of the Secretary of Interior’s Significance Criteria, either at the national or local level. This is one report in the report series "Evaluation, Finding of Effect, and Mitigation Documentation for 1950s-Era Architectural Resources, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada".
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗