BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
# Presentation: 763287

## Accelerator Physics

- Wolfram Fischer
- LARP Collaboration Meeting
- Berkeley, 28 April 2006

## Currently 3 Tasks:

Electron cloud studies

Interaction region upgrade and beam-beam

Long-range beam-beam compensation

- Electron cloud studies
- Interaction region upgrade and beam-beam
- Long-range beam-beam compensation

## FY06/07 Electron cloud studies – M. Furman

Heat load calculations for 12.5ns bunch spacing (new and urgent request)
Estimate of scrubbing time
3-D simulations including ion effects
Emittance growth from electron clouds
Analysis of SPS data
Simulate “pilot diagnostic bench”
Support CERN detector at RHIC

All in task sheet, except simulations for 12.5ns bunch spacing
FY07 effort approximately same as FY06 ($200k, all manpower)

- Heat load calculations for 12.5ns bunch spacing (new and urgent request)
- Estimate of scrubbing time
- 3-D simulations including ion effects
- _Emittance growth from __electron clouds_
- Analysis of SPS data
- Simulate “pilot diagnostic bench”
- Support CERN detector at RHIC
- All in task sheet, except simulations for 12.5ns bunch spacing
- FY07 effort approximately same as FY06 ($200k, all manpower)

- J.-L. Vay

## FY06/07 IR upgrade and beam-beam – T. Sen
Reports on IR options, energy deposition,beam-beam (FY06)
Prepare for Valencia workshop in October
Assessment of IR options including field errors (flux-jumps), long-range beam-beam compensation 

Task sheet needs to be extended beyond FY06
FY07 effort approximately same as FY06 ($260k, all manpower)

- Reports on IR options, energy deposition,beam-beam (FY06)
- Prepare for Valencia workshop in October
- Assessment of IR options including field errors (flux-jumps), long-range beam-beam compensation
- Task sheet needs to be extended beyond FY06
- FY07 effort approximately same as FY06 ($260k, all manpower)

- Quad first

- Dipole first

## FY06/07 Long-range bb compensation – T. Sen

- Refine experimental technique at RHIC
- Improve simulations (tabulate existing results)
- Test compensation with beam (FY07)
- Possible test of pulsed PS(technically very challengingLHC requirement, possibly built at CERN, under discussion)
- Task sheet needs to be extended beyond FY06
- FY07 effort $50-100k less than FY06 ($180k) if no new hardware constructed (pulsed PS still under discussion), but have 1⁄2-1 new post-doc

## Some comments on new initiatives for FY07

- A/C dipole Pursue in instrumentation for now, device building effort
- E-lenses for head-on compensation (AP) Start simulation/calculation study, no new hardware yet (post-doc)
- Crab cavity Can do small feasibility study (Rama)
- Crystal assisted collimation Relatively small effort, worthwhile supporting
- Optical Stochastic Cooling (AP)  Create supporting document to help MIT test (NSF funded), evaluate again after test
- For various reasons, no strong opinion yet on other proposals (Super-SyncLite monitor, head-tail monitor, dB/B emittance growth, LER)
# Presentation: 814260

## New DEC Branch Process

- For Support to
- ‘For-Profit” Companies

- Public Safety & Homeland Security Bureau
- Federal Communications Commission

## Support to ‘For-Profit’ Companies

_**New DEC Branch Procedure**_
- 	When it is determined by the DEC Branch Chief that the State EOC will not provide assistance to Industry or refer Industry requests for assistance to the JFO, all requests for assistance received at FCC headquarters, the NCC, or from other sources will be forwarded to the DEC Branch Chief in the JFO.  No licensees will be told to contact the State EOC.  At the direction of the DEC Branch Chief, the DEC Branch personnel will be assigned to:
- Coordinate actions to determine who can provide the needed assistance and continue coordination between the licensee and the helping organization until completion. Examples include, but are limited to:

## Support to ‘For-Profit’ Companies

_**Fuel requests**_: The DEC Staff will contact the State or other commercial sources (including other industry partners) for a list of fuel distributors; confirm from the list that the source has the fuel availability and ability to deliver to the needed site.  Continue coordination between the licensee and the fuel distributor until completion.
_**Generator requests**_: The DEC Staff will contact the State or other commercial sources (including other Industry partners) for a list of generator distributors/repair shops then confirm from the list, that the source has the type of generator needed and ability to deliver to the needed site.  Continue coordination between the licensee and the generator distributor/repair shop until completion.

## Support to ‘For-Profit’ Companies

_**Debris Removal**_:  The DEC Staff will contact the State or Local Police/Fire department or other commercial sources (including other Industry partners) for sources to remove debris from the roadway or operating site.  Once a source is identified the DEC Staff will continue coordination between the licensee and the debris removal unit until completion.
_**Access**_ – If available, the State Access Letter will be distributed to all licensees as soon as possible.  In the event the access letter is not sufficient, the DEC Staff will contact the State or local Police department or other organization manning the specific roadblock and requests access for the licensee.  Some access issues might require the DEC Staff to accompany the licensee to their operating site.

## Support to ‘For-Profit’ Companies

_**Other Requests**_:  Other requests for assistance not listed above will be handled using the same process as identified above to ensure that Industry requests are quickly resolved.
- Record and coordinate all actions with the DEC Branch Chief, FCC IMT, and the NCC.
- 3.	Report unresolved issues to the DEC Branch Chief, FCC IMT, and the NCC.

## Questions?

**Associate Bureau Chief**
**Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau**
**Federal Communications Commission**
**202.418.1104**
**Richard.Lee@fcc.gov**
# Presentation: 691387

## February 22, 2006

- Advisory Committee

- MTAC

**Richard J. Strasser, Jr.**
**Chief Financial Officer &**
**Executive Vice President**

**February 22, 2006**

## Summary: October 1, 2005 - January 31, 2006

**Revenue/Volume at plan**
**Expense Inflation/Increases**
**Net Income at plan**

## Income Statement – January Year-to-date

**($ Millions)**

**$1,792**

**Numbers may not add due to rounding**

## Volume Compared to SPLY – January YTD

**Volume Compared to SPLY – January YTD**

## Volume and Revenue - Change to SPLY- Jan YTD

## Deliveries				     145.0M

**Deliveries****	****	****	****	****     145.0M**

## TFP Quarterly Trend 1997 – 2006

**TFP Quarterly Trend 1997 – 2006**

**Index: Quarter 1, FY 2003 = 1.0**

## Productivity – January YTD

_**Change from FY 2005**_

**Total Factor (TFP)****	****       0.1%**

**Output Per Workhour****	****1.1%**

## FY 2006 Net Income/Deficiency

**FY 2006 Net Income/Deficiency**

**YTD Jan **

**Qtr 2 Remainder**

**Qtr 3**

**Qtr 4**

**$0.2B**

**$0.1B**

**-$0.2B**

**Cumulative Net Deficiency  = $1.8B**

## February 22, 2006

- Advisory Committee

- MTAC

**Richard J. Strasser, Jr.**
**Chief Financial Officer &**
**Executive Vice President**

**February 22, 2006**
# Presentation: 063892

## Review of Priorities in the National Vaccine Plan

**NVAC Meeting**
**October 22, 2007**
**Alina Baciu**
**Institute of Medicine **

**Notes:**
The Committee on the Assessment of the US Drug Safety System was convened in June 2005 and concluded its work in September 2006 with the release of the report The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public.

## New IOM Committee 

- Committee formation in progress
- 12 members
- Areas of expertise: medicine, epidemiology, public health, public policy, vaccinology, decision analysis?

## Statement of Task

- An IOM committee will review and make recommendations regarding an update of the National Vaccine Plan.
- The committee will hold workshops with national expert stakeholders in medicine, public health, and vaccinology to review a publicly available, draft update of the Plan.
-  The committee will prepare a report with conclusions and recommendations about priority actions within the major components of the draft Plan.

## Timetable

- 3-phase project
- Phase I
- 9/30/07 to 3/30/08
- Meeting 1 for the giving of the charge and sponsor input
- Meeting 2 for national stakeholders, focusing on one area of the plan
- Deliver transcript of Meeting 2

## Timetable	

- Phase II: additional meetings with expert stakeholders to explore other areas of the plan
- Phase III: final meeting, presentation of commissioned papers, final report

## Study process

- A project web site and listserv are being established
- Meetings for information gathering are open to the public
- Meetings for committee deliberation are closed to the public

## Study process

- Report draft will undergo external peer review by multiple reviewers with relevant expertise
- Report is finalized and released to sponsor, then to stakeholders and the public

## Input needed

- Suggest categories of stakeholders
- Suggest specific names
- Role of NVAC during the study?
- Other?
# Presentation: 267470

## Voluntary Superior MonitoringSource Testing in the New Regulatory World IV

- October 30, 2002

## Goal of Presentation

- Informational
- Identified Need for better monitoring
- Team Formed
- Approach
- Incentives
- Industry feedback
- Project Status – October 2002
- Outstanding issues
- Next steps

## Reduced emissions!
Better control of processes
More and better information to agencies and public

- Reduced emissions!
- Better control of processes
- More and better information to agencies and public

## MACT Standards out the door
No resources available to repropose existing standards
Old monitoring outdated in existing standards

- MACT Standards out the door
- No resources available to repropose existing standards
- Old monitoring outdated in existing standards

## Cross Divisional Team and OECA
Searched OAQPS programs for opportunities
Settled on one idea – Superior Monitoring Option

- Cross Divisional Team and OECA
- Searched OAQPS programs for opportunities
- Settled on one idea – Superior Monitoring Option

## Approach

- General Provisions Option
- Parts 60, 61, and 63
- Voluntarily improved or superior monitoring
- Incentives given

## Example Incentives

- No “credible evidence” during testing of proposed monitoring
- Existing monitoring requirements eliminated
- Why do all the parameter monitoring if you can monitor for the pollutant of concern?
- Less reporting and recordkeeping

**Certainty of compliance must be equal to or better than required under existing rule!**

## Incentives Continued...

- Less frequent compliance testing
- QA for monitoring proposed by source
- Source may propose averaging period
- Source may propose an equivalent standard
- Streamlining

**Certainty of compliance must be equal to or better than required under existing rule!**

## Industry Feedback

- Does better monitoring exist? Yes
- Incentives for better monitoring? $’s
- Mechanisms for better monitoring?  Liked our idea of GP option!
- Level of interest? Get vendors to promote

## Project Status – October 2002

- Contractor help
- Rule language
- Criteria
- Incentives
- Guidance
- Statistics
- Rough draft form now
- Outline of preamble
- Rough General Provisions language

## Outstanding Issues

- Ability to write clear criteria that don’t conflict with Agency policies and existing regulations
- Getting folks to move “outside the box”

## Next Steps

- Draft of guidance and statistics – December 2002
- Continue talking with industry, EPA, and states/locals
- Draft of preamble and rule language – December 2002
- Proposal in FR – Summer 2003
# Presentation: 583138

## STUDY OF TROPOSPHERIC GRAVITY WAVES AT EQUATORIAL LATITUDE, INDIA

- M. LAL
- EQUATORIAL GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
- INDIAN INSTITUTE OF GEOMAGNETIC
- TIRUNELVELI – 627011, INDIA
- E-MAIL: MLAL@IIG.IIGM.RES.IN

## JULY 2000

- This figure shows the  daily average of the tropospheric  gravity wave amplitude obtained during July 2000. The upper panel is the –Dst index for comparison.

## SPT 2000

- This figure shows the power spectral density (psd)  of tropospheric gravity waves obtained at equatorial latitude, India during severe geomagnetic storm of Spt 2000. The upper panel is the daily average of gravity waves psd and lower panel is the –Dst index.

## Oct – Nov 2003

- This figure shows the tropospheric gravity waves amplitude obtained during Oct to Dec 2003. The upper panel is the –Dst index and the lower panel is the amplitude of gravity waves measured at equatorial latitude station, India.

## July – Aug 2004 

- This figure shows the gravity wave amplitude variation for July to Spt 2004. the upper panel shows the –Dst index variation. There is lag of about 20 days is seen between Dst enhancement and tropospheric gravity wave amplitude.

## Nov 2004

- This figure shows the amplitude of gravity wave variation and the –Dst index variation for the month of Nov 2004. There is a time lag of 5 days is seen between gravity wave maxima and –Dst index maxima.

## July – Aug 2004

- This figure shows the contour plot of tropospheric gravity waves obtained during Aug  2004. The presence of Acoustic gravity waves of period about 50 min has been obtained after the July 2004 geomagnetic storm.

## Oct – Dec 2003

- This figure shows the contour plot of the  tropospheric acoustic gravity waves obtained during Oct – Dec 2003. There is significant increase in the  gravity waves amplitude obtained after the geomagnetic storm.

## Nov 2004

- This figure shows the contour plot of acoustic gravity waves obtained during Nov 2004. The prominent presence of gravity waves is seen  after the Geomagnetic Storm.

## Thank You

- Any question, please send me an e-mail.
# Presentation: 376447

## MUTCD Part 8: Traffic Control for Highway-Rail Grade Crossings

**Notes:**
Part 8 addresses traffic control devices for highway-rail grade crossings.  The Millennium Edition now applies part 8 to ALL highway-rail grade crossings that are open to public travel, not just new or modernized crossings.  We’ve added sixteen new definitions to help clarify the terminology used throughout part 8. 

## Safety, Visibility, Placement, and Operations

**Safety, Visibility, Placement, and Operations**

**Notes:**
The Millennium Edition adds new standards, guidance and options, and revises some existing standards in order to address safety, visibility of traffic control devices, and placement and operation of signs, signal systems, and gate systems.  

These changes address concerns about the need to: 
Ensure the safety and efficiency of travel of all road users including pedestrians 
Eliminate gate running. 
Eliminate vehicles stopping on train tracks, and 
Assisting drivers whose vehicles get stuck on railroad tracks. 

## Cross-Buck Sign

**Notes:**
The Millennium Edition adds new requirements to promote better visibility of the Crossbuck sign.  A strip of retroreflective white material shall be used on the back of each blade of the crossbuck sign, except where the crossbuck signs are installed back-to-back.  It shall also be used on each support for the full length of the front and back of the support, from the crossbuck sign or number of tracks sign to near ground level.  This should provide better warning to motorists of the highway-rail grade crossing. 

## New Signs

**W10-11**

**W10-11b**

**Notes:**
New signs have been added for use by State and local transportation agencies.  These signs should provide information to commercial vehicle drivers and other road users to prevent vehicles stopping on or too close to the tracks.

## Four-Quadrant Gate Systems

**Notes:**
A new section on Four Quadrant Gate Systems has been added to the Millennium Edition.   This section was added as a means of eliminating gate running, which is a significant safety concern.

## Intelligent Transportation Systems 

- Option for the engineering study to include the Highway-Rail Intersection components of the National ITS Architecture
- To improve highway-rail grade crossing safety and operations

- _Lockheed-Martin Information Management Systems - Photo Enforcement Group_

**Notes:**
As a means of ensuring safety and increasing system performance, the Millennium Edition emphasizes the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems, known as ITS, for highway-rail grade crossings.  ITS includes a provision in its National ITS Architecture that links traffic management systems with rail operations and wayside equipment.  Part 8 of the Millennium Edition highlights this opportunity as a way to raise awareness of the benefits of incorporating advanced technologies into highway-rail grade crossings.
# Presentation: 250315

## TRIGGER EXAMINE

-    Purpose : Online monitoring of the performance of triggers at various levels
- Access trigger objects in the event and plot physics quantities of interest.
-     So far, Detector Examines, Physics Examine, Root-GUI, ..  had been the priority. Have recently begun to think about Trigger Examine.
- What Exists Now:
- L1CalExamine
- L1MuoExamine
- L1TrkExamine (?)
- L2 Examine
- Analyze Packages

**Pushpa  Bhat  **
**D0 Trigger Workshop **
**April 22-23, 2002**

## L1CalExamine

- Made to work online last week under t02.08.00
- Available for Cal shifters to run
-     /online/examines/development/l1calex/l1 cal_examine/online/..    (Executable)
- Plots of energies, occupancy in the trigger towers with () information and global sum energies.

**Bob Kehoe**

## L2 Trigger Examine Status report

**Joe Steele **
**University of Virginia**

| Package | Version |
| --- | --- |
| l1l2collector |  p11-03-00 |
| l1lunpacker | p11-04-00a |
| l2base | p11-04-00a |
| l2calworker | p11-04-00a |
| l2io | p11-03-00 |
| l2iogen | p11-03-00b |
| l2parser | p11-04-00a |
| l12utils | p11-01-00 |
| Muo-segmentcombi | v02-00-21 |

- L2Examine runs on an existing **.raw** data file on d0o121.
- Built under t02.08.00, with several other packages included:

## Histoscope displays L2Examine histograms
Histograms:
Prompt muons (#)
Muon quality
Muon phi
Muon eta
Muon Pt
Jet phi
Jet eta
Jet Pt
EM object Phi
EM object eta
EM object Pt
EM fraction
Isolation fraction
To Do list:
Test with online data.
Decide what quantities should be displayed.

- Histograms:
- Prompt muons (#)
- Muon quality
- Muon phi
- Muon eta
- Muon Pt
- Jet phi
- Jet eta
- Jet Pt
- EM object Phi
- EM object eta
- EM object Pt
- EM fraction
- Isolation fraction
- To Do list:
- Test with online data.
- Decide what quantities should be displayed.

## Slide 5

## General Plan

- Try to use the Analyze packages directly or use as much code from them as possible
- Use ExamineMgr (with possibly some modifications to NtupleMgr) to combine many packages to build a Global Trigger Examine
- Input and help needed!

**More discussions at the Online Monitoring **
**  ****Meetings**
**This week on Thursday at 1:00 pm **
**  ****in the Comitium**
# Presentation: 726566

## Diagnostic Classificationof Prosthodontic Patients

## Diagnostic Code+Treatment CodeOutcome Data

## Slide 3

## Completely Dentate

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Slide 7

## Slide 8

## Slide 9

## Completely Edentulous

## Completely Edentulous

## Complete Edentulism

## Type I

- Residual bone height of 21mm or greater measured at the least vertical height of the mandible.

## Type II

- 	Residual bone height of 16-20 mm measured at the least vertical height of the mandible.

## Type III

- 	Residual alveolar bone height of 11-15 mm measured at the least vertical height of the mandible

## Type IV

- 	Residual vertical bone height of 10 mm or less measured at the least vertical height of the mandible

## Slide 17
# Presentation: 421240

## CAFTA-DR: Benefits for U.S. Business

- June 4th FedEx Webinar
- Mark Siegelman
- U.S. Department of Commerce
- Tel: 202-482-0704
- Email: Mark_Siegelman@ita.doc.gov

- El Salvador - March 1, 2006
- Honduras - April 1, 2006
- Nicaragua - April 1, 2006
- Guatemala - July 1, 2006
- Dominican Republic - March 1, 2007
- Costa Rica – Not yet ratified CAFTA-DR; public referendum in September 2007

**CAFTA-DR STATUS: ENTRY INTO FORCE**

- Promotes business with a significant market for U.S. Exports.
- Levels the Playing Field.
-     - Reciprocal commitments; not one-way like CBI.
-     - Counters Central American preferences to their
-       other FTA partners.
- Supports democracy, economic reform, and regional integration in our neighboring countries.

**WHY CAFTA-DR?**

- About 80 percent of U.S. exports of consumer and industrial goods became duty-free immediately upon implementation.
- Tariffs on remaining consumer and industrial products phased out within 5 or 10 years.
- Key U.S. export sectors that benefit from immediate duty elimination include information technology products, construction and agricultural equipment, paper products, pharmaceuticals, and medical and scientific equipment.

**TARIFF ELIMINATION**

- More than half of U.S. farm exports became duty-free immediately, including cotton, wheat, soybeans, key fruits and vegetables, and processed food products.
- Tariffs on most remaining U.S. farm products will be phased out within 15 years.
- Nearly all textile and apparel goods that meet the agreement’s rules of origin are now traded duty-free and quota-free, promoting opportunities for U.S. and regional fiber, yarn, fabric, and apparel manufacturing.

- Provides substantial market access across the entire _services_ regime (e.g. telecom, engineering, transportation, financial services).
- Provides higher standards for protecting _intellectual property rights (IPR)_,_ _such as copyrights, patents, and trademarks, and enhances means for enforcing those rights.
- Requires the use of fair and transparent _government procurement_ procedures, including advance notice of purchases and timely and effective bid review procedures  _ _

**CAFTA-DR: ****More Than Just Tariffs**

- Establishes a more secure and predictable legal framework for U.S. _investors _in the region.
- Requires transparency and efficiency in administering _customs_ procedures, facilitating entry of goods into these countries.
- Loosens restrictive “dealer protection” regimes that have locked U.S. firms into exclusive or inefficient distributor arrangements
- Provides strong _anti-corruption_ provisions against bribery in matters related to trade and investment.

- Provides protection for _labor_ and the _environment_; requires effective enforcement of laws and establishes cooperative programs to build local enforcement capacity.
- Creates strong _dispute settlement_ procedures.  Emphasis is on promoting compliance through consultation, but enforcement mechanism includes monetary penalties to enforce obligations of the agreement.
# Presentation: 224738

## Modular vs. Categorical Budgets

- How? Why? Who? When? What?!
- PHS Form 398

## What should you use?

- Modular or Categorical?
- How much do you need?
- If less than $250K in any year
- Modular budget ($25,000 is a module)
- No routine escalation for future years
-  Most Modular applications request same number of modules each year

## Who wants to know?

- Scientific Review Group  (SRG)
- Evaluation based on general, expert estimate of total effort and resources required for research
- Grants Management (GM) Preaward - 		Allowable, Reasonable, Allocable
- Program & GM
-   Appropriate funding level review

## How do I figure it out?

- Calculate total direct costs for entire project
- Subtract one-time costs (e.g. equipment)
- Divide remainder by number of years
- Add one module for year affected by increase

- Example:
- $195,000 year 1
-       ($25K equipment)
- $175,000 year 2
- $180,000 year 3
- $550K-$25K =$535K
- $535/3 = $175 /year
- $200K year 1
- $175K years 2 & 3

## Where do I put it?Modular budget page!

- Show total direct costs each year
- List key project personnel
- Names, % time and effort, and role on project
-   For consortium/contractual costs---Provide estimate of TOTAL COST (DC +F&A) along with names of key personnel, T&E, role and if organization is foreign or domestic
- Justify any variation in modules requested

## Why use Categorical budgets?

- If any year exceeds  $250,000
- Use budget form page 4, and form page 5
- Detailed categorical budgets AND justify
- All personnel salaries, time and effort, fringe benefits year 1
- Equipment, supplies, travel, other expenses
- Separate budget page form 4 and form 5 for consortium participants

##  What should you include? 

- Budget Justification:
- Equipment – list each item and cost
- Supplies – itemize by categories if <$1,000
- Animals?  State species and number to be used
- Patient Care costs – include projected patient accrual, # of days, estimated cost per day and costs per treatment or test

## What Else?

- Consultants – provide names and organizational affiliations whether requesting costs or not.  Provide letters confirming participation.
- On justification page, include
- Number of days of consultation anticipated
- Expected rate of compensation, travel, per diem and other related costs

## How about Other Expenses?

- List expenses by category and unit cost on budget page
- On justification page, provide narrative description of other expenses
- Rental leases		- Publication costs
- Service contracts	- Tuition Remission
- Animal and equipment maintenance

## 	      Notice Of Grant Award 

**LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT**
- Establishes funding level
- Establishes period of support
- Sets forth terms and conditions of award
- NIH Contact Information
- Program Director
- Grants Management Specialist

- NGA  $
- Read Me!

## Questions about your award?

- Read the Notice of Grant Award  (NGA)
- Look in the NIH Grants Policy Statement
- Call your Research Administrator
- Call or e-mail the contacts on your NGA
- E-mail NIH grants Policy helpdesk
- Kathleen Shino, MBA
- NIDDK/GMB
- ks48e@nih.gov  301-594-8869
# Presentation: 240104

## FEMA – Emergency Management Institute Higher Education Conference

**Professional Emergency Managers **
**Plenary Panel **
**June 9, 2004**
**Sally M. Ziolkowski, Director                                                                Mitigation Division**
**DHS/FEMA Region IX**

## Theme and Key Issues

**Professional Emergency Managers as exemplary  practitioners to discuss their recommendations on core emergency management competencies and curricula.**
**Identify what FEMA Region IX looks for in a new employee.**

**Notes:**
Note: Twelve (12) vacancies and panel interviews in the past two 1⁄2 years.  Experience based on serving as first line supervisor for many of these new employees.

Reference - questionnaire completed prior to the October 2003 Hazards Manager of the 21st Century Workshop held in Denver, CO and sponsored by the Natural Hazards Center at the Univ. of CO at Boulder and Univ. of CO at Denver. 

## Formal Educational Programs

**Emergency Management****	****	****Geography/Geology**
**Accounting/Business****	****	****Political Science**
**Engineering****	****	****	****Public Policy**
**Environmental Studies****	****	****Education**
**Economics****	****	****	****	****Urban Planning**
**Computer Science****	****	****	****Psychology**
**Foreign Languages****	****	****World/English Literature**

## Personal Traits and Skills

**In a professional office and emergency management field**
**environment these personal skills and abilities need to be**
**demonstrated:**
**Critical Thinking****	****	****	****Problem Solving**
**Values, Ethics, Sound Judgment****	****Calculated Risk-Taking**
**Responsible, Commitment to Task****	****Self-Discipline**
**Resourceful, Curious, Flexible****	****Teamwork for Projects/Program**
**Self-Confidence, Presence****	****	****World (travel/people) Experiences**
**	**Look you in the eye** ****	****	****	****and Sensitivities**
**	**Firm handshake			**Open Minded, Eager to Learn**
- 	Articulate speech

**Notes:**
Note: Eliminate poor speech habits/practices (you know, like, um)

## Business Practice Knowledge and Abilities 

**In an office environment, the potential for understanding and developing expertise in these areas is essential:**
**Communication **– Written and oral in a logical, concise and persuasive style
**Outreach and Coordination** - Political astuteness among colleagues and customers
**Financial/Accounting** – Project analysis and grants management
**Computer Program Skills** – System/data base application and work tools
**Public Administration/Political Science** – Functions of state and local governments
**Urban/Land Use Planning** – Floodplain management, environmental studies and
-                                              compliance, and legal research

## Initial FEMA Specific Training

**National Response Plan/ Federal Response**
**Incident Command System**
**Strategic Planning & Performance Measures**
**Evolution of Emergency Management  –  Civil Defense Program**
**Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment necessary for creating Disaster Resistant Communities **
# Presentation: 224420

## Tropospheric Working Group:  Air Quality (AQ) from Space 

**Conveners:  **
**	****Bryan Duncan****1,2**** (Bryan.N.Duncan@nasa.gov)**
**	****Ken Pickering****1**** (Kenneth.E.Pickering@nasa.gov)**
**	****1*****Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Branch***
***	******	******NASA Goddard Space Flight Center***
***	******2******Goddard Earth Science & Technology Center, UMBC***
**Objectives and Goals**
**	****1) What is being done now for air quality?**
**	****2) What are the limitations and strengths of data for ****	****	****	****air quality issues?**
**	****3) Stimulate ideas/science/collaborations.**
**	****4) Give feedback to algorithm people.**

## Mandate for Air Quality (AQ) from Space? 

********* ******The National Academies Decadal Survey:***
***	***
***	******“******Chemical weather has a direct impact in a number of areas of interest for this study, especially air quality and human health.”***
********* ******NASA named air quality as one of “12 applications of national priority”.***
***      ***
***	******The Applied Sciences Program identifies practical uses of NASA-sponsored observations and science models “to provide decision support”.***
**	**

## Instruments of Interest 

***TES Products:*****    O****3****, CO**
***OMI Products:*****    Trop NO****2****, TCO, SO****2****, H****2****CO, ****	****	****	****	****aerosols**
***TES****** – indirect applications (e.g., data assimilation & inverse modeling)***
***OMI****** – “sees” boundary layer with limited efficiency, so more direct applications (e.g., emission estimates).***

## TIGHT SCHEDULE!!!!

**Please stay within your allotted time!**
**Your ****1-2 slides**** are designed to stimulate discussion, not to make a formal presentation!**
**Your 5 min includes**** questions & time required to put on a microphone & load your file!**
**Bryan (= ****bad cop****) will enforce time limits because he’s far less pleasant than Ken (= ****good cop****).**

## Discussions 

_**Sessions**_
**1) *****Detection of Boundary Layer Trace Gases***
**2) *****Retrieval and AQ issues for OMI NO******2***** **
**3) *****Future work with Aura data for Air Quality***
_**Questions to Keep in Mind**_
**a) Is the current data useful to EPA now?**
**b) What products would EPA like to have?**
**c) Who will fund the development of these data products? NASA? EPA?**

## Introductory Presentations 

***AQ : ******Ken Pickering/Joseph Vaughan/Shobha ******	******	******	******Kondragunta***** **
**	****“****What are the satellite data needs of the air quality community?”**
***Aerosols : ******Mian Chin***
**	****“****Possibilities and challenges in using satellite aerosol data for air quality.”**
***Trace Gases : ******Randall Martin/Folkert Boersma***** **
**	****“****Successes and challenges in satellite remote sensing of trace gases for air quality applications.”**
# Presentation: 666771

## Pythia and Herwig settings

- +

- -

- Q2max: K PARP(67)

- Kt2 = PARP(64)(1-z)Q2
-  QCD = PARP (61)

- ISR setting
- Tune-A: PARP(67)=4
- Pt(Z) tunning: PARP(64)=0.2 by Willis (Herwig: 1.0)
- Top/diboson MC production in 4.9.1
- Tune-A: PARP(67)=4
- Pt(Z) tunning: PARP(64)= 1.0
- W/Z production MC production in 4.9.1
- Tune-A: PARP(67)=4 (no effect)
- Pt(Z) tunning: PARP(64)= 0.2
- Direction for universal setting
- Tune PARP(64) and (61)

- No effect for S-channel resonances
- (W/Z/Higgs etc)

## Pythia settings

- Willis Pt(Z) tune

## MC validations on Pythia & Herwig samples

|  | Pythia | Herwig |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 4.11.1
mean | ttopei(Mt=175)
170.9+-0.2 | ttopli(Mt=175)
170.6+-0.3 |
| 5.3.2
mean  | ttopui(Mt=178)
170.0+-0.3 | ttopti(Mt=178)
173.9+-0.2 |

- Comparison of mean (MPV) values in Top mass templates
-  after full simulation

- Problem in 5.3.2 Pythia?

- Why is the reconstructed top mass of ttopui still same as that of ttopei Pythia sample? though we see about 3 GeV increase in HERWIG?
-  Let’s check the HEPG level

## Status at HEPG level

|  | Pythia | Herwig |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 4.11.1
mean
MPV | ttopei(Mt=175)
174.7+-0.4
175.2+-0.4 | ttopli(175)
174.5+-0.6
175.8+-0.6 | ttoppk(170)

170.4+-1.0 | ttopsk(180)

179.2+-1.0 |
| 5.3.2
Mean
MPV | ttopui(Mt=178)
175.8+-0.2
177.3+-0.4 | ttopti(178) : Pt(b, lepton) same between 
180.2+-0.4    ttopti and ttopui
181.0+-0.2 |  |  |

- Pythia ttopui: MPV is correct, but mean value is wrong: ISR/FSR problem?
- Why the mean (and MPV) of Herwig ttopti is higher?

-  Comparisons of Pt(W), Pt(b-parton), Pt(lepton) between Pythia and HERWIG at HEPG level
- Gen 5 Pythia and HERWIG with Mtop=178 GeV show almost identical distributions,

- Comparison of mean (MPV) values in Top mass templates
-  at HEPG particle levels (smeared jets)

## Status at HEPG level

|  | Pythia | Herwig |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 4.11.1
mean
MPV | ttopei(Mt=175)
174.7+-0.4
175.2+-0.4 | ttopli(175)
174.5+-0.6
175.8+-0.6 | ttoppk(170)

170.4+-1.0 | ttopsk(180)

179.2+-1.0 |
| 5.3.2
Mean
MPV | ttopui(Mt=178)
175.8+-0.2
177.3+-0.4 | ttopti(178) : Pt(b, lepton) same between 
180.2+-0.4    ttopti and ttopui
181.0+-0.2 |  |  |

- Pythia ttopui: MPV is correct, but mean value is wrong: ISR/FSR problem?
- Why the mean (and MPV) of Herwig ttopti is higher?

-  Comparisons of Pt(W), Pt(b-parton), Pt(lepton) between Pythia and HERWIG at HEPG level
- Gen 5 Pythia and HERWIG with Mtop=178 GeV show almost identical distributions,

- Comparison of mean (MPV) values in Top mass templates
-  at HEPG particle levels (smeared jets)

## Issue in Herwig

- Offline 5.3.2: Herwig 6.504
- But Herwig 6.4 in offline 4.9.1
- Herwig 6.504 with Photon in offline 5.3.3
- Need to validiate Herwig 6.504 ttbar with QED Off and Mtop=175 GeV (vs V6.4 Herwig ttbar)

## Comparisons at HEPG 

- Pt(b): 68.1->69.7
-  4.11.1 ->5.3.2

- Pt(W): 80.7->81.8
- 4.11.1 -> 5.3.2

- Pt(b):Pythis vs Herwig
- 5.3.2 ( 178 )

- Pt(W):Pythis vs Herwig
- 5.3.2 ( 178 )
# Presentation: 237777

## Institutional Needs

- Where is OMB?
- Where are the ecologists?
- Data collection
- The organization of science
- Review
- Methods

## OMB

- Legal concerns - silence
- Animosity/paranoia
- Interactions b/w NCEE & OMB
- A-4 - anything you want it to be - uncertainty for EPA - rumor
- Rules get passed without $B > C
- Can we do something to help?

## Ecologists?

- 1 name
- Talked to him, begged off RIA expertise
- OWOW, no economists < 1/5 ecologists
- Implications for analysis

## Data Collection

- ICRs Information Collection Requests
- Surveys, CV
- “Biggest practical issue”
- Time pressure - court deadlines
- OMB review, public comment
- +7 years
- EPA suggested protocol (denied)

## The Organization of Analysis

- Program offices lead - and finance
- NCEE a centralized reviewer
- OAQPS - a dedicated economics shop
- SJ memo “a renewed effort to coordinate”

## Review

- Takes many forms
- No consistency across reviewers/reviews
- Only “novel elements get reviewed”
- Time pressure
- A standing body?

## Methods

- Skepticism over CV, BT
- Expert elicitation
- What endpoints should we measure?
- Inertia, challenge & litigation
- Methods propagate
- Mitchell & Carson
- “Chase off the shelf methods”
- A contract with OMB to allow experimentation

## Final Thoughts

- RIA & PART
- Money to develop robust tools
- Not just money for an answer
- Follow the money
- Forget methods, what about data?
- Should we be making organizational recommendations?
# Presentation: 535071

## Extramural Loan Repayment

- Extramural Programs
- Contraception and Infertility
- Health Disparities
- Individuals from Disadvantaged Backgrounds
- Pediatric Research – Children’s Health Act
- Clinical Research – Clinical Research Enhancement Act
- Eligibility
- Researchers with qualifying educational debt
- First-time PIs, Director Subprojects, K Awardees, Postdoc NRSA recipients (in first or third year of support)
- Payments to loaning institution up to $35,000 per year
- Pay tax on the loan payments
- Concurrent service requirement
- Office of Loan Repayment
- Website:  _[http://www.lrp.nih.gov/](http://www.lrp.nih.gov/)_

## Extramural Loan Repayment: Process

- Web-based electronic applications
- LRP database
- LRP Office examines for eligibility
- nature and amount of debt
- research activities
- necessary degrees
- Electronic applications referred to ICs for review
- External reviewers – IC selects applications for funding
- Referred back to LRP Office
- Develop service contract with LRP awardee and repayment contract with loaning institution
- Loans repaid for up to 2 years or as long as awardee remains eligible

## Extramural Loan Repayment for NRSA Recipients

- Postdoc NRSA recipients incur a service obligation during the first year of support
- Pay back with a second year of NRSA support
- Problem for LRP recipient
- Federal Law prohibits repayment of two obligations simultaneously
- Hiatus in LRP

## Extramural LRP for NRSA Recipients

- Existing provisions permit NRSA recipients to extend the time to begin payback
- Need marker for LRP award in payback files to _absolutely_ prevent second year of NRSA support from serving as payback year
- GAO – Congressional Scrutiny
- IG – Problems with payback system
- Approach:
- IMPAC II record – easy to identify awardee
- No IMPAC II record – manual indicator of LRP award
# Presentation: 247506

## Multiple River Sources on WFS

- 1998

## Slide 2

## Slide 3

## WFS - Seasonal Changes in Rivers

**CDOM vs. salinity**

## WFS - Seasonal Changes in Rivers

**Fluorescence efficiency**

## wet

**wet**

- SW Florida Monthly Rainfall

- Aug. 2004 Charlie

- Jun. 2005
- Nov. 2005 Wilma

## Annual Rainfall Variation

## A = low runoff – high infiltrationD = high runoff low infiltration 

***Courtesy of USF- Geospatial Analysis Laboratory***

- A = low runoff – high infiltrationD = high runoff low infiltration

## Slide 9

## Slide 11

## Slide 12
# Presentation: 085525

## A comparison of SRTM and Ordnance Survey terrain-height data

- David Bacon

## A comparison of SRTM and Ordnance Survey terrain-height data

- A comparison allows some inferences of accuracy to be drawn.
- The following results are based on:
-       'Delta-h' = (SRTM height) - (OS height)

## 10-km tiles colour-coded according to mean delta-h for 100-m point spacing(10-points per tile).

- Most means are slightly positive.

## 10-km tiles colour-coded according to SD of delta-h for 100-m point spacing(10-points per tile).

- Black tiles have at least one default (missing) data point.  Most are in hilly country, but some are apparently due to tall buildings.

## The histogram of all delta-hs

- consists largely of different exponential slopes, and is susceptible to modelling.

## Decorrelation distances of delta-h

- do not depend much on SDs

## Decorrelation distances of delta-h

- To assess the effect of height errors it can be assumed that errors within (say) 300m are correlated, and further apart are statistically independent.

- Elevation angle distributions can be combined to assess effect of errors

## Sensitivity to height errors: 300 GHz

- assessed by calculating diffraction losses for identical profile points extracted from SRTM and OS data.

## Sensitivity to height errors: 3 GHz

- Bullington is less affected than the 3-edge model.
- Sensitivity increases with frequency, andat 3 GHz the differences are similar to model accuracy.

## Conclusions

- More attention should, perhaps, be paid to the accuracy of terrain-height data.
- It would be practicable to provide a risk factor for a given level of accuracy, at least for simple propagation models.
- The lower requirements on terrain information of the Bullington diffraction model is an advantage in reducing the effect of height errors, and making it simpler to assess them.
# Presentation: 335291

## Lessons Learned: Contributing to Security Awareness

- Gene Marquez  April 13, 2004

## If we don’t utilize what we’ve learned, then ....

- _[ ](http://affiliates.allposters.com/link/redirect.asp?item=392029&AID=95642888)_
- _[ ](http://affiliates.allposters.com/link/redirect.asp?item=392029&AID=95642888)_

- Value of Lessons Learned (LL)

##    Value of Lessons Learned 

- We’re no better off than Wylie Coyote!

## Lessons Learned

**Lessons Learned (LL)** - Good work practices or innovative approaches that are captured and are shared to promote repeat application. Lessons learned may also be adverse work practices or experiences that are captured and shared to avoid recurrence.

## Lessons Learned

- The Safeguards & Security LL Program captures, analyzes, and disseminates security-related LL information.  The intent of the program is to:
-  1.  Gather information from Line operations and other sources.
-  2.  Add value to the information by analyzing, organizing and                       packaging it.
- 3. Return the information to the Line as Lessons Learned.

## Security Awareness

- “A Two-Pronged” Approach -
- Re-enforcing security basics
- Alerting the workforce about undesired  performance (events or trends)
- Security incident data
- Feedback from S&S programs/operations
- Feedback from Line
- Audit/Inspection results
- DOE/HQ, NNSA “alerts”

## LL Sources

- Security incident management database
- Standard monthly reports
- Quarterly reports - analysis, trending, highlights, and recommendations
- Real-time identification of “hot topics”
- Feedback from S&S programs/operations
- Feedback from Line (LIWG, individuals)
- Audit/Inspection results
- Corporate Security “Stand Downs”
- DOE/HQ, NNSA “alerts/notices”

## Communicating LL

- Lessons Learned Website (subscription based)
- Porcelain Press
- Sandia Daily News (email distribution)
- Lab News Articles (biweekly publication)
- Posters & signs
- Awareness Videos, Corp. Homepage “hot button”
- Targeted communications (email, Secretarial Newsletter, etc.)
- Security Education Briefings
- Line Organization Briefings

##     Where Do We Go From Here?

-     Where Do We Go From Here?

*It’s all about achieving the desired Security Performance, so we’ll...*
- Work to better tap LL sources
- Continue to work at INTEGRATION (SEALL team, Security Ed. + Awareness + Training, communications)
- Work to identify useful metrics
- Keep the customer in mind (“info. overload”)
- Learn from YOU!
# Presentation: 743198

## RM-04-011DYNAMIC ASSESSMENT OF PATIENT-REPORTED CHRONIC DISEASE OUTCOMESPre-Application MeetingJanuary 26, 2004Rockville, MD

## Deborah N. Ader, Ph.D., NIAMS

- _[Aderd@mail.nih.gov](mailto:Aderd@mail.nih.gov)_
**Larry Fine, M.D., DrPH, OBSSR**
- _[Finel@mail.nih.gov](mailto:Finel@mail.nih.gov)_** **
**Call-in: (888) 566-5788**

## GOAL of RFA

**Improve assessment of self-reported **
**symptoms and other domains of **
**health-related quality of life across **
**a wide range of chronic diseases**

**GOAL of RFA**

## STRUCTURE

**Collaborative agreement**** network  - Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System      (PROMIS) consisting of:**
**   ****3-6 Primary Research Sites **
**   ****A Statistical Coordinating Center**
**   ****Steering Committee**
**   ****Scientific Advisory Board**

## Slide 5

## BROAD OBJECTIVES

**Develop and test a large bank of items measuring PRO**
**Create a CAT for efficient assessment of PRO across a range of chronic diseases**

## BROAD OBJECTIVES

** ****Create a ****publicly available****, ****adaptable**** and **
**  ****sustainable**** system that will:**

-  Administer a CAT-based PRO questionnaire
-     or allow researchers to download the CAT

-  Collect PRO data for research and to update

-  Provide instant reports

## SPECIFIC RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 

**Develop a core set of questions:**
-  Primarily from existing items
-  Most common dimensions of PRO
-     relevant to widest range of chronic
-     diseases; special interest in pain
-     and fatigue
-  Large diverse sample

## SPECIFIC RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 

**Develop common metrics**
**Create item bank using modern measurement theory**
**Develop CAT**
**Create web-based, user-friendly repository**
**Plan to maximize acceptance **
**Conduct feasibility studies **
**Plan for a public private partnership**

## Primary Research Sites

-  Identify and define key PRO constructs
-  Contribute expertise to design PROMIS
-  Collect data from specified populations
-  Conduct independent studies that will
-   complement PROMIS

## PRS APPLICATIONS

**Independent Project**

- 25-Page research proposal
- Maximum Budget: $450,000 total

**Network Projects**

- Two Network Concept Proposals
- Estimated budget - Total budget for
-    PRS and Network combined not
-    to exceed $875,000

## Statistical Coordinating Center

** ****Collect, manage, and analyze PRO data**
**  ****using psychometric, statistical, and**
**  ****survey research methods**

** ****Design and create a use-friendly PROMIS**
**   ****that protects patient confidentiality**

## SCC APPLICATIONS

**  ****Item Bank Development **
**  ****CAT Development **
**  ****PRO Assessment, Data Collection,  **
**   ****Reporting System **
**  ****Data management, training, and QC**
**  ****Data analysis **
**  ****Data confidentiality and system security**
**  ****Communication **
**  ****Scientific leadership and dissemination**** **

## QUESTIONS?
# Presentation: 789959

## WHFS Enhancements

- Hydrologic Program Manager’s Conference
- December 7-10, 2004
- New Orleans, LA

## OB4 Enhancements

- OB4 wrapping up deployment
- Major enhancements:
- Site Specific
- Riverpro
- Hydroview/MPE

## OB4 Enhancements

- Site Specific
- Major modifications to the interface
- Graphical Editing capabilities added
- Implementation of SAC/SMA as hydrologic modeling component – retained API implementation as an option
- SAC/SMA implementation requires passing of model state information between RFC and WFO

## OB4 Enhancements

- Riverpro
- Modifications made to support VTEC and 922 requirements
- Not all enhancements in 4.0 – some in 4.1
- Ability to include probability information in Riverpro-created products

## OB4 Enhancements

- Hydroview/MPE
- More user control over map background overlays
- User can specify map projection via .Apps_defaults token
- Additional MPE fields can be generated
- Local bias multisensor mosaic
- Local bias satellite precip estimate

## OB4.1 Enhancements

- OB4.1 to be deployed in early CY 2005
- OB4.1 enhancements focused on Riverpro support for VTEC and 922
- As a result of VTEC OT&E, these changes will not be formally implemented until late CY 2005; however, Riverpro will contain these features

## OB5 Enhancements

- OB5 to be deployed in Spring 2005
- Precipitation data storage and retrieval
- Time Series enhancements
- Site Specific enhancements
- Damcrest