Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “mitigations”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Comprehensive Database of Environmental Mitigations Extracted from FERC-Licensed Hydropower Projects Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques, 1998-2023

This dataset provides a comprehensive inventory of environmental mitigation measures required by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensed hydropower facilities from 461 licenses that were issued from 1998 to 2023. These licenses constitute 446 of the 1015 FERC projects that were active at the end of 2023. 17,612 mentions of environmental mitigations were identified and categorized in 128 unique categories. Mitigations were identified using a Natural Language Processing (NLP) approach, specifically with a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer (BERT) model. Model-derived results were then reviewed and updated by a subject matter expert as needed. This dataset introduces important enhancements to previous efforts to inventory environmental mitigations, such as including associated license text for each mitigation, tracking the number of instances a mitigation was identified within a license, and providing improved location information. These enhancements significantly expand the dataset's utility, offering greater analytical capabilities and ensuring reproducibility. The dataset is downloadable as a zip file containing the metadata and dataset files.

Ruggles, Thomas [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (OR↗
DOE OSTI2026

Wildfire-Power Grid Interactions: Feedback, Impacts, Monitoring, Modeling, and Mitigation Strategies

Wildfires are increasingly interacting with electric power systems through a two-way hazard chain: fires damage grid assets and trigger cascading outages, while grid faults can ignite new fires under hot, dry, and windy conditions. This review synthesizes the state of knowledge across five domains: (i) physical impacts of flames, heat, and smoke on lines, towers, insulators, and substations; (ii) power-infrastructure-initiated ignitions via conductor clash, high-impedance faults, and corona discharge; (iii) widespread blackouts and disproportionate societal impacts; (iv) multi-scale monitoring spanning laboratory tests, in-situ and grid-integrated sensors, and Earth observation; (v) coupled modeling that links fire behavior with grid operations; and (vi) technological and strategic mitigation pathways spanning prevention, response, and recovery. We integrate these domains into a novel 'feedback-aware' socio-technical framework. Through a longitudinal analysis (2005-2025) of global incidents, we identify that while vegetation contact remains the most frequent ignition source, aging infrastructure failure has emerged as a critical driver of catastrophic 'mega-fires'. We further identify persistent gaps, including limited interoperability of high-frequency grid and environmental data, scarce real-time data assimilation, and under-developed equity metrics for outage management. We conclude by outlining a research agenda to (1) deploy interoperable sensing architectures, (2) advance feedback-coupled fire-grid simulations, and (3) evaluate mitigation portfolios through techno-economic and fairness lenses. Recognizing wildfire-grid interactions as coupled socio-technical systems is essential for protecting infrastructure and communities and for ensuring reliable, sustainable electricity in a changing world.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRS2010

Review of Leading Approaches for Mitigating Hypersonic Vehicle Communications Blackout and a Method of Ceramic Particulate Injection Via Cathode Spot Arcs for Blackout Mitigation

Vehicles flying at hypersonic velocities within the atmosphere become enveloped in a "plasma sheath" that prevents radio communication, telemetry, and most importantly, GPS signal reception for navigation. This radio "blackout" period has been a problem since the dawn of the manned space program and was an especially significant hindrance during the days of the Apollo missions. An appropriate mitigation method must allow for spacecraft to ground control and ground control to spacecraft communications through the reentry plasma sheath. Many mitigation techniques have been proposed, including but not limited to, aerodynamic shaping, magnetic windows, and liquid injection. The research performed on these mitigation techniques over the years will be reviewed and summarized, along with the advantages and obstacles that each technique will need to overcome to be practically implemented. A unique approach for mitigating the blackout communications problem is presented herein along with research results associated with this method. The novel method involves the injection of ceramic metal-oxide particulate into a simulated reentry plasma to quench the reentry plasma. Injection of the solid ceramic particulates is achieved by entrainment within induced, energetic cathode spot flows.

Gillman, Eric D.↗
DOE OSTI2025

US Hydropower & Environmental Mitigations: A 1998-2023 inventory of mitigation measures inside licensing documents

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license documents mandate environmental mitigation requirements to reduce potential environmental damage caused by non-federal hydropower facilities. This StoryMap showcases a dataset that leveraged Natural Language Processing (NLP) to inventory environmental mitigations from 465 FERC licenses that were issued from 1998-2023 (Ruggles et al, 2025). Users can explore trends in mitigation requirements over time and space with interactive maps and are presented with a demonstration use case.

Ruggles, Thomas A. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory ↗
DOE OSTI2025

Methane Mitigator – Development of a Scalable Vent Mitigation Strategy to Simultaneously Reduce Methane Emissions and Fuel Consumption from the Compression Industry (Final Technical Report)

Researchers at West Virginia University completed a multi-year project under DE-FE0031865 entitled “Methane Mitigator – Development of a Scalable Vent Mitigation Strategy to Simultaneously Reduce Methane Emissions and Fuel Consumption from the Compression Industry”. An assessment of natural gas production site emission sources was completed to quantify the potential for emissions reductions and reductions in fuel consumption. The main sources of fugitive methane emissions at gas productions sites include condensate tanks, produced water tanks, gas compressor packing vents, pneumatic controller vents, and natural gas engine crankcase vents.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2025

High tensile alloy of copper to mitigate current collector deformation in silicon electrodes for lithium-ion batteries

The volumetric changes of silicon electrodes, along with the strong adhesive properties of certain binders, can lead to plastic deformation of the current collector and create damage in the electrode coating. Here, in this study, we report a detailed study of silicon coatings on a high-tensile alloy (HTA) foil of copper with strength over twice that of conventional copper foils. The HTA current collectors with high mechanical strength can mitigate plastic deformation upon continuous cycling. At moderate areal capacities (2.5–3 mAh cm −2 ), conventional copper foils show significant wrinkling after only a few electrochemical cycles, whereas the HTA foils remain intact. We demonstrate viability of the HTA foils in large format xx6395 pouch cells, in which the HTA current collectors remain intact even at an areal capacity of 4.5 mAh cm −2 ; in contrast, wrinkles form in conventional copper current collectors increasing the likelihood of lithium plating. Computational studies show that stresses generated during cycling of silicon electrodes are very high in the current collector and at the current collector-coating interface, explaining the wrinkling of conventional Cu foils. Our studies highlight importance of current collector to solve the electrochemical and chemo-mechanical performance challenges associated with high-loading silicon electrodes.

Chemo-mechanical degradation↗
DOE OSTI2025

Solvent-Free Melt-Processed Cathode Mitigates Li Anode Instability in Polymer-Based Solid-State Batteries

Solvent-free manufacturing of battery components is a promising alternative to traditional slurry processing for reducing the cost and environmental impact. In this work, we used twin-screw melt extrusion to fabricate a polymer-based high voltage composite cathode. The melt-processed cathode is dense (near zero porosity) and thick (65 μm) and has high active material loading (80 wt %). The active particles are distributed uniformly throughout the melt-processed cathode, unlike the traditional slurry-cast cathode, which exhibits inhomogeneous particle distribution. In the melt-processed cathode, polymer and carbon form separate phases, whereas in the slurry-cast cathode they blend into a single phase. Due to these structural differences, the melt-processed cathode shows smooth charge–discharge profiles, while the slurry-cast cathode shows noisy charging and soft-shorting behavior. In conclusion, this work highlights that twin-screw extrusion as a scalable, solvent-free manufacturing method is advantageous in producing uniform cathodes, which mitigates anode instability.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Survive the Dust: Dust Mitigation Technology to Enable Survive the Night Capabilities

Introduction: As we return to the Moon, the lunar regolith (i.e. lunar dust) covering the surface will be an obstacle to nominal operations. Accounts from Apollo astronauts and analysis of hardware returned from the surface illustrate just how deleterious the dust can be [1]. During Apollo missions, the lunar dust adhered to hardware mechanically and electrostatically [2]. Surviving the Night: Mitigating the lunar dust will be critical to surviving the night. Going hand-in-hand with other extreme environment considerations, dust mitigation is critical to mission success. Dust Impacts on Other Systems: The lunar dust can have negative implications for power, thermal, mechanisms, and several other systems or sub-systems. For example, Apollo encountered marked degradation of performance in heat rejection systems for the lunar roving vehicle, science packages, and other components because of the lunar dust [1]. For power alone, dust can cause internal clogging for power connectors, heat rejection issues, excessive dust on reflective surfaces, reduced power output for solar arrays, and so on. Dust Mitigation Strategy: In addition to considering technology solutions, it is important for hardware, systems, and or components to have a dust mitigation strategy. At a high level, hardware that will encounter the lunar dust should consider these things when defining a dust mitigation strategy: • Understand Natural Environment • Understand Induced Environment • Understand Tolerance to Dust • Write Dust Requirements • Select Dust Mitigation Solutions • Test Hardware in Dusty Environment More information on each of these can be provided to hardware owners. Dust Mitigation Technology Development: NASA has a series of technologies that may be available for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night. Many of these solutions are leveraging dust mitigation technology development efforts from NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD), as well as efforts from ESDMD programs, industry, and academia. Through a series of STMD programs (both internal to NASA and through partnerships), there are several technologies in development as considerations as dust mitigation solutions for hardware. Within STMD, the Game Changing Development Program (GCD) has funded several internal dust mitigation projects including low to mid TRL development, demonstrations on CLPS landers of high TRL solutions, and creating standards and best practices for dust mitigation. STMD dust mitigation efforts also include a series of partnerships for developing technologies and advancing the state of dust mitigation at NASA. This includes the Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium (LSIC), Small Business Innovation Research, Early Stage Innovations (ESI), Space Technology Research Grants (STRG), Announcement of Collaboration Opportunities (ACOs) and Tipping Points (TPs), and Challenges and Crowdsourcing, among others. There are also a series of dust mitigation solutions that have been widely used terrestrially, or during Apollo. In recent years, several studies have produced more data on the efficacy of these potential solutions in the lunar environment. Dust Mitigation Solutions: Dust mitigation solutions generally fall into four categories: • Dust Tolerant Mechanisms • Passive Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Active Dust Mitigation Capabilities • Dust Measurement Capabilities There are a series of solutions that may prove beneficial for hardware that needs to survive the lunar night, including new technology development as well as proven, terrestrial solutions. This presentation will discuss in more detail what some of these solutions are for payloads going to the surface. References: [1] J. R. Gaier, NASA/TM—2005-213610, The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions [2] T. J. Stubbs, et al. Impact of Dust on Lunar Exploration, 2005

dust mitigation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancements in Lunar Dust Mitigation and Leveraging the Contamination Control Community

Lunar Dust Contamination: As we get closer to putting landers, rovers, payloads, and astronauts on the Moon, dust mitigation is becoming more critical than ever. To address the many challenges of dust mitigation on the surface, engineers and scientists are looking at various technologies that may have relevance for the contamination control community. This includes active, passive, architectural, and operational solutions. There have been advances in coatings for dust mitigation at NASA and through commercial partnerships (see Wiesner, Wohl, et al). There have been advancements to previous solutions as well as novel solutions to address dust mitigation on the surface and on-orbit. There have been several efforts to better understand the effectiveness of various terrestrial and dust mitigation solutions with much of this data published in recent years. In the area of dust mitigation, dust contamination or infiltration refers to the impingement or contact of planetary dust with items not normally dusty and whose operation may therefore be compromised. Recent Advancements in Dust Mitigation: Dust mitigation strategies are becoming more common for hardware heading to the Moon, with most major programs implementing lunar dust contamination requirements for human health and equipment. In the last couple of years, NASA has created more guidance to assist hardware developers with dust mitigation. This includes NASA-STD-1008 (Classifications and Requirements for Testing Systems and Hardware to be Exposed to Dust in Planetary) and NASA TP 20220018746 (Lunar Dust Mitigation Guide and Reference). Several projects are testing hardware in relevant dusty environments to understand their tolerance to lunar dust. There has been a significant increase in the amount of testing with lunar simulants, with the NASA Simulant Advisory Committee serving a resource for NASA and our partners. There are new solutions for detecting and monitoring the dust internally and externally. Learning from the contamination control community: In addition to sharing potentially relevant solutions at the workshop, the dust mitigation community is also interested in learning from the contamination control community on ways to address lunar dust. For instance, a major aspect of managing the dust is monitoring and detection. This is critical for understanding when maintenance is needed and to inform future missions. Another challenge of working with lunar dust is quantifying and characterizing the smallest of particles. There are also challenges in modeling lunar dust and its behavior. The dust mitigation community can also leverage lessons learned from the planetary protection community.

dust mitagation↗
DOE OSTI2024

Limits to forests-based mitigation in integrated assessment modelling: global potentials and impacts under constraining factors

Forests-based measures such as afforestation/reforestation (A/R) and reducing deforestation (RDF) are considered promising options to mitigate climate change, yet their mitigation potentials are limited by economic and biophysical factors that are largely uncertain. The range of mitigation potential estimates from integrated assessment models raises concerns about the capacity of land systems to provide realistic, cost-effective and permanent land-based mitigation. We use the Global Change Analysis Model to quantify the economic mitigation potential of forests-based measures by simulating a climate policy including a tax on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, forestry, and other land uses. In addition, we assess how constraining unused arable land (UAL) availability, forestland expansion rates, and global bioenergy demand may influence the forests-based mitigation potential by simulating scenarios with alternative combinations of constraints. Results show that the average forests-based mitigation potential in 2020–2050 increases from 738 MtCO 2 .yr -1 through a forestland increase of 86 Mha in the fully constrained scenario to 1394 MtCO 2 .yr -1 through a forestland increase of 146 Mha when all constraints are relaxed. Regional potentials in terms of A/R and RDF differ strongly between scenarios: unconstrained forest expansion rates mostly increase A/R potentials in northern regions (e.g., +120 MtCO 2 .yr -1 in North America); while unconstrained UAL conversion and low bioenergy demand mostly increase RDF potentials in tropical regions (e.g., +76 and +68 MtCO 2 .yr -1 in Southeast Asia, respectively). This study shows that forests-based mitigation is limited by many factors that constrain the rates of land use change across regions. These factors, often overlooked in modelling exercises, should be carefully addressed for understanding the role of forests in global climate mitigation and defining pledges towards the Paris Agreement.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Robust Design Under Uncertainty in Quantum Error Mitigation

Error mitigation techniques are crucial to achieving near-term quantum advantage. Classical postprocessing of quantum computation outcomes is a popular approach for error mitigation, which includes methods, such as zero noise extrapolation, virtual distillation, and learning-based error mitigation. However, these techniques have limitations due to the propagation of uncertainty resulting from the finite shot number of a quantum measurement. In this work, we introduce general and unbiased methods for quantifying the uncertainty and error of error-mitigated observables based on the strategic sampling of error mitigation outcomes. We then extend our approach to demonstrate the optimization of performance and robustness of error mitigation under uncertainty. To illustrate our methods, we apply them to zero noise extrapolation and Clifford date regression in the ground state of the XY model simulated using depolarizing and International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) Toronto noise models, respectively. In particular, we optimize the choice of noise levels and the allocation of shots for zero noise extrapolation and the distribution of the training circuits for Clifford data regression. While our methods are readily applicable to any postprocessing-based error mitigation approach, in practice they must not be prohibitively expensive—even though they perform optimizations of the error mitigation hyperparameters requiring sampling of a statistical distribution of error mitigation outcomes. By leveraging surrogate-based optimization, we show that our methods can efficiently perform optimal design for a zero noise extrapolation implementation. We then further demonstrate the transferability of learned zero noise extrapolation hyperparameters to other similar circuits.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2015

Implications of Climate Mitigation for Future Agricultural Production

Climate change is projected to negatively impact biophysical agricultural productivity in much of the world. Actions taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate future climate changes, are thus of central importance for agricultural production. Climate impacts are, however, not unidirectional; some crops in some regions (primarily higher latitudes) are projected to benefit, particularly if increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is assumed to strongly increase crop productivity at large spatial and temporal scales. Climate mitigation measures that are implemented by reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations lead to reductions both in the strength of climate change and in the benefits of carbon dioxide fertilization. Consequently, analysis of the effects of climate mitigation on agricultural productivity must address not only regions for which mitigation is likely to reduce or even reverse climate damages. There are also regions that are likely to see increased crop yields due to climate change, which may lose these added potentials under mitigation action. Comparing data from the most comprehensive archive of crop yield projections publicly available, we find that climate mitigation leads to overall benefits from avoided damages at the global scale and especially in many regions that are already at risk of food insecurity today. Ignoring controversial carbon dioxide fertilization effects on crop productivity, we find that for the median projection aggressive mitigation could eliminate approximately 81% of the negative impacts of climate change on biophysical agricultural productivity globally by the end of the century. In this case, the benefits of mitigation typically extend well into temperate regions, but vary by crop and underlying climate model projections. Should large benefits to crop yields from carbon dioxide fertilization be realized, the effects of mitigation become much more mixed, though still positive globally and beneficial in many food insecure countries.

Mueller, Christoph↗
DOE OSTI2026

Quantum utility-scale error mitigation for quantum quench dynamics in Heisenberg spin chains

Here, we implement a quantum error mitigation method termed self-mitigation, which is comparable to zero-noise extrapolation, at large scales to achieve quantum utility on near-term, noisy quantum computers. We investigate the effectiveness of several quantum error mitigation strategies, including self-mitigation, by simulating quantum quench dynamics for Heisenberg spin chains with system sizes up to 104 qubits using IBM quantum processors. In particular, we discuss the limitations of zero-noise extrapolation and the advantages offered by self-mitigation at large scales. The self-mitigation method demonstrates stable accuracy with large systems of 104 qubits comprising more than 3,000 CNOT gates. Also, we combine the discussed quantum error mitigation methods with practical entanglement entropy measuring methods, and it shows a good agreement with the theoretical estimation. Our study illustrates the usefulness of near-term noisy quantum hardware in examining the quantum quench dynamics of many-body systems at large scales and lays the groundwork for surpassing classical simulations with quantum methods prior to the development of fault-tolerant quantum computers.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Simulation Center for Runaway Electron Avoidance and Mitigation (SCREAM SciDAC) (Technical Final Report)

Runaway electrons can severely damage the plasma facing components on ITER during a major disruption and pose a major risk for tokamak fusion. It has been recognized that an adequate disruption mitigation system (DMS) is essential for the safe operation of ITER. The United States is responsible for the design and implementation of the disruption mitigation system on ITER, and in July 2016 the Simulation Center for Runaway Electron Avoidance and Mitigation (SCREAM) was launched by DOE, in a joint Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) and Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) collaboration. SCREAM was a comprehensive theory and simulation SciDAC center that provided physics guidance in the avoidance and mitigation of runaway electrons, and in tandem with domestic and international experiments, helped establish the qualitative and quantitative bases for safe operational scenarios and viable mitigation techniques. The SCREAM center assembled a national team of experts in runaway electron physics, tokamak disruptions, magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulation, and advanced algorithms and computing. The team combined advanced simulation and analysis capability facilitated by direct participation of ASCR SciDAC institutes with theoretical models and code development by FES scientists to focus on the runaway risk for ITER and tokamaks in general. The research scope was focussed on integrated simulations of kinetic runaway electrons, including MHD and fluid models of impurity transport, within a research plan guided by theory. The specific research tasks were (1) establish the fundamental physics of runaway generation, saturation, and dynamical evolution in a tokamak; (2) examine the critical path toward runaway avoidance; and (3) investigate the viability and effectiveness of the leading candidate schemes for runaway mitigation. In all three areas, members of the team carried out scoping studies that established the readiness for rapid and critical advances, especially in the deployment and further development of large-to extreme-scale simulation tools. Our multi-pronged computational approach included (1) relativistic Fokker-Planck solvers with discretization in phase space, (2) self-consistent particle-in-cell techniques, (3) particle-based Monte-Carlo, and (4) MHD-particle hybrid simulations. Cross-check between these different methods provided an additional means for verification and further bolstered the fidelity of our physics prediction. Validation against experimental results brings confidence to the predictive capability for ITER and frequently leads to new ideas for understanding and mitigating the thermal quench driven runaway electron phenomenon.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
NASA NTRS2005

GO/NO-GO - When is medical hazard mitigation acceptable for launch?

Medical support of spaceflight missions is composed of complex tasks and decisions that dedicated to maintaining the health and performance of the crew and the completion of mission objectives. Spacecraft represent one of the most complex vehicles built by humans, and are built to very rigorous design specifications. In the course of a Flight Readiness Review (FRR) or a mission itself, the flight surgeon must be able to understand the impact of hazards and risks that may not be completely mitigated by design alone. Some hazards are not mitigated because they are never actually identified. When a hazard is identified, it must be reduced or waivered. Hazards that cannot be designed out of the vehicle or mission, are usually mitigated through other means to bring the residual risk to an acceptable level. This is possible in most engineered systems because failure modes are usually predictable and analysis can include taking these systems to failure. Medical support of space missions is complicated by the inability of flight surgeons to provide "exact" hazard and risk numbers to the NASA engineering community. Taking humans to failure is not an option. Furthermore, medical dogma is mostly comprised of "medical prevention" strategies that mitigate risk by examining the behaviour of a cohort of humans similar to astronauts. Unfortunately, this approach does not lend itself well for predicting the effect of a hazard in the unique environment of space. This presentation will discuss how Medical Operations uses an evidence-based approach to decide if hazard mitigation strategies are adequate to reduce mission risk to acceptable levels. Case studies to be discussed will include: 1. Risk of electrocution risk during EVA 2. Risk of cardiac event risk during long and short duration missions 3. Degraded cabin environmental monitoring on the ISS. Learning Objectives 1.) The audience will understand the challenges of mitigating medical risk caused by nominal and off-nominal mission events. 2.) The audience will understand the process by which medical hazards are identified and mitigated before launch. 3.) The audience will understand the roles and responsibilities of all the other flight control positions in participating in the process of reducing hazards and reducing medical risk to an acceptable level.

Hamilton, Douglas R.↗