Tampa Bay Mass Transit: Planning for Tomorrow

Tampa Bay Region, Florida Tampa Bay mass transit: planning for tomorrow. Summary report. Prepared for the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. Washington, D.C. : TRW Systems Group, 1970

Henri Temianka Photographs, Professional Acquaintances

https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/temianka_photos/1119/thumbnail.jp

Yucca Mountain Site Charecterization Project Design Package 1C System Safety Analysis

The purpose of this analysis is to systematically identify and evaluate hazards related to the Yucca Mountain Project Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) Design Package IC, Surface Utilities (for a list of package 1C subsystems see section 3). This process is an integral part of the systems engineering process; whereby safety is considered during planning, design, testing, and construction. A largely qualitative approach was used since a radiological System Safety Analysis is not required. The risk assessment in this analysis characterizes the accident scenarios associated with the Design Package 1C structures/systems/components in terms of relative risk and includes recommendations for mitigating all identified risks. The priority for recommending and implementing mitigation control features is: (1) Incorporate measures to reduce risks and hazards into the structure/system/component (S/S/C) design, (2) add safety devices and capabilities to the designs that reduce risk, (3) provide devices that detect and warn personnel of hazardous conditions, and (4) develop procedures and conduct training to increase worker awareness of potential hazards, on methods to reduce exposure to hazards, and on the actions required to avoid accidents or correct hazardous conditions. The scope of this analysis is limited to the Design Package 1C structures/systems/components (S/S/Cs) during normal operations. Hazards occurring during maintenance and ''off normal'' operations have not been included in this analysis

Mission science requirements AS-511 /CSM-112/ LM-10 Apollo Mission J-1 (Apollo 16)

This document contains the science requirements for the Apollo J-1 Mission. It is intended for use by the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC) and offsite personnel in program and mission planning and in the integration and implementation of mission science requirements.Contract NAS 9-8166prepared by TRW Systems for Lunar Missions Office Science and Applications Directorate Manned Spacecraft Center ; [submitted by Richard R. Baldwin].General science requirements -- Experiments requirementsReview draf

Tampa Bay Region Mass Transportation: Phase II Appendixes

Tampa Bay Region, Florida Tampa Bay region mass transportation: Phase II. Prepared for the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, by Harvey N. Kreisberg. McLean, Va : TRW Systems Group, 1971. With appendixes document

AS-512/CSM-114/ LM-12 Apollo Mission J-3 (Apollo 17) mission science planning document

The Mission Science Planning Document (MSPD) is intended primarily as a science overview for use by experiment Principal Investigators, members of the scientific community, and personnel involved in planning science activities for the Apollo Mission J-3. It is also intended to provide detailed interim data for use in implementing the science requirements presented in the MSC-controlled J-3 Mission Requirements Document (MRD) until such data are published in other MSC-controlled documents.Contract NAS 9-12330prepared by TRW Systems for Science Missions Support Division, Science and Applications Directorate, Manned Spacecraft Center ; submitted by Richard R. Baldwin.General mission science planning -- Experiment descriptions -- Photographic plan -- Lunar surface science plan -- Science recovery plan -- Lunar receiving laboratory planPreliminar

Use of Irrigation to Extend the Seeding Window for Final Reclamation at Yucca Mountain, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy has implemented a program to investigate the feasibility of various techniques for reclaiming lands disturbed during site characterization at Yucca Mountain. As part of this program, two studies were conducted in 1997 to assess the effects of combinations of seeding date (date that seeds are planted) and supplemental irrigation on densities of native plant species at Yucca Mountain. Study objectives were to (1) determine whether the traditional seeding window (October-December) could be extended through combinations of seeding date and irrigation date, (2) determine which combination of seeding date and irrigation was most successful, and (3) assess the effects of irrigation versus natural precipitation on seedling establishment. In the first study, a multi-species seed mix of 16 native species was sown into plots on four dates (12/96, 2/97, 3/97, and 4/97). Irrigation treatments were control (no irrigation) or addition of 80 mm of supplemental water applied over a one month period. Plant densities were sampled in August and again in October, 1997. In the second study, Larrea tridentata and Lycium andersonii, two species that are common at Yucca Mountain, but difficult to establish from seed, were sown together into plots in January and August, 1997. Half the plots were irrigated with approximately 250 mm of water between August 18 and September 11, while the remaining plots received no irrigation (control). Plant densities were sampled in October, 1997. The August census for the multi-species mix study showed irrigated plots that were sown in February, March and April had higher plant densities and more species than plots that were not irrigated. Irrigation had no effect on plant densities on plots that were seeded in December. Plots were used again in October following 18 mm of precipitation in September. Densities of three species, Ambrosia dumosa, Hymenoclea salsola, and L. tridentata, (warm-season species) were lower on irrigated plots sown in December, February, and March, and showed no response to irrigation on plots sown in April. Therefore, early spring irrigation did not facilitate establishment of warm-season species. These results suggest that these species are dependent upon precipitation while temperatures are warm in late summer or fall. However, control plots that were seeded in December had acceptable densities of these species. A more practical approach might be to avoid irrigation costs by seeding in December and waiting for fall precipitation. The remaining species (cool-season species) showed an opposite response to supplemental water with greater densities on irrigated plots sown in February, March, and April, and no response to irrigation on plots sown in December. While these results show that irrigation can extend the seeding window for cool-season species should it be necessary, it was also apparent that if seeds are sown by late December, irrigation is not necessary to achieve acceptable plant densities