BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
# Presentation: 316937

## SRDs and Cell Phones
New Equipment Causes Damage
Failure of Secondary Electrical Barrier

Collider-Accelerator Department
10-14-2008

**New Equipment Causes Damage**
**Failure of Secondary Electrical Barrier**
**Collider-Accelerator Department**
**10-14-2008**

**Take 5 for Safety**

**Notes:**
Point out Acronyms

## EMI from Cell Phones - Warning

**Electromagnetic interference (EMI) was observed between cell phones and SRDs**
**Distances greater than about 30 cm are sufficient to achieve EMI suppression**
**The EMI can be prevented by enclosing the SRD in a conductive shield**
**e.g., anti-static bag typically used for computer parts**
**Shielding should be incorporated into design of SRDs by manufacturer**
**Many detailed studies have been published on the EMI between cell phones and various medical devices**
**The internationally-recognized standard IEC 60601-1-2:2001 specifies that non life-supporting medical electrical equipment and*****/*****or medical electrical systems must be subjected to a radiated field RF at an immunity test level of 3 V m****−1**** over the frequency range 80 MHz to 2.5 GHz**
**For life-supporting equipment, the specified immunity level is 10 V m****−1**
**This limit can be exceeded by some cell phones operating at full power even at distances of more than 1 m away**
**Reference: Physics in Medicine and Biology, 50, N93-N99 (2005)**

## Critique #6 for FY08 – New Equipment Causes Damage

**Engineer and technician tested a quench protection assembly (QPA)**
**Test equipment was first time use (i.e., new current signal generator)**
**Assumed prior experience with similar test equipment was sufficient **
**Assumed first measurements were indicative of how test equipment would always behave**
**During adjustments on new test equipment, QPA was unknowingly overloaded with current pulses**
**Corrective Action:**
**Human Performance Committee **
**to help Electrical Groups develop **
**standard practice for **
**using new test equipment**

## Critique #7 for FY08 – Failure of Secondary Electrical Safety Barrier

**Tech entered North Gate at AGS with his key after gate locks were electrically disabled by MCR**
**Equipment covers in place; gate was secondary safety barrier**
**Gate found not to latch when shut every time**
**Gate fixed**
**Corrective Actions:**
**Check gate during sweep to ensure it latches when closed**
**Investigate the use of an audible/visual alarm at MCR if gate opens and/or warning to entrant**
**Add warning sign and tape barrier to gates**
**Add this information in training**

## Ladders With Wheels
# Presentation: 532171

## Slide 1

## STS launch

## Slide 3

## Slide 4

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Slide 7

## Slide 8

## Slide 9

## Slide 10

## Slide 11

## Slide 12

## SSME firing

## Slide 14

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## Slide 17

## STS 114  MISSION

## Slide 19

## Slide 20

## Slide 21

## STS!

## Slide 23

## Slide 24

## Slide 25

## Engine close up

## Slide 27

## Slide 28

## Slide 29

## Slide 30

## Slide 31

## Slide 32

## Slide 33

## Slide 34

## Slide 35

## Slide 36

## Slide 37

## Slide 38
# Presentation: 694079

## Laboratorio Metrológico de Variables Eléctricas

- ICE-San Pedro
- Apartado 10032
- San José
- Costa Rica
- Tel (506) 283 4622
- Fax (506) 234 8514
- E-mail: _[lmve@ice.go.cr](mailto:lmve@ice.go.cr)_
- Argentina, February 2008

## 1997 Start with SIM DMM comparison1997 Designated by LACOMET in EM and T&FPersonnel1997: 12004: 2

**Our clients need calibration of:**
- Stopwatches
- Tachometers
- Frequency meters
- Frequency counters
- Oscilloscope calibrators
- Oscilloscopes (bandwidth)
- Frequency standards
- Signal generators
- Telecommunications equipment (internal F standard)
- RF power measurements
- There are no secondary laboratories in Costa Rica

- Services
- T&F classifications
- 2.1.1, 2.2.1, 2.3.1, 3.3.1

## Traceability chart

- Quality system
- 2005: 	Application to Ente Costarricense de 	Acreditacion (ECA)
- 2006:	March-Assessment by ECA.
- 	Lead assessor: Bertha Munguia (A2LA).
- 	Technical expert: Peter Filipski (NRC).
- 	October: Corrective actions verification. All 	accepted by ECA.
- 2006: Accredited by www.eca.or.cr
- ICE-LMVE CMCs to be submitted for SIM review.

- Needs
- Bilateral agreements for guest working, and calibrations.
- Videoconferencing for technical advice.
- Additional CMCs requested by clients.
- Infrastructure improvement – lab design.

## Laboratorio Metrológico de Variables Eléctricas

- ICE-San Pedro
- Apartado 10032
- San José
- Costa Rica
- Tel (506) 283 4622
- Fax (506) 234 8514
- E-mail: _[lmve@ice.go.cr](mailto:lmve@ice.go.cr)_
- Argentina, February 2008
# Presentation: 673880

## Athena 106Limited Oversight of Vessels Not Subject to Inspection	

- DCA07MM001

## Areas of Oversight

- USCG and OSHA
- Towing Vessel Safety

## Types of Vessels

- Two barges
*Athena 106* and *IBR-234*
- Towing vessel
*Miss Megan*

## Oversight Agencies

- Coast Guard
- OSHA
- MACOSH

## USCG and OSHA

- Memorandum of understanding
- OSHA instruction of 1996

## OSHA Actions After Accident

- OSHA investigation
- Citation
- Athena and OSHA agreement

## USCG and OSHA

- Uninspected vessel safety
- Agreement between USCG and OSHA should reflect changes
- Industry should be informed

## Towing Vessel Safety

- Previous Board action addressing need for safety management systems (M-00-10)
- Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004

## Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004

- Towing vessels subject to inspection
- Towing safety management system
- Regulations will apply to vessels like *Miss Megan*

## Summary

- Towing Vessel Regulations and Safety Management Systems
- Assist Coast Guard and industry
- Provide safe operating practices
- Implement safeguards
- Improve management
- Ensure compliance
# Presentation: 777273

## Controls Software Migration

**Duplex Consoles**

## Goal of the Migration
Move the accelerator controls system from Vax/VMS to PC/Linux
Phase I
Console infrastructure including CLIB
Nearing completion
Phase II
Console applications and user libraries
~820 applications
At this stage ~60 tested plus ~400 compiled

- Move the accelerator controls system from Vax/VMS to PC/Linux
- Phase I
- Console infrastructure including CLIB
- Nearing completion
- Phase II
- Console applications and user libraries
- ~820 applications
- At this stage ~60 tested plus ~400 compiled

- Introduction

## Migration Constraints

- Expect the migration to take time ( ≳ year )
- Allow application development to continue
- Avoid maintaining two versions of an application
- Put applications into production as soon as they have been ported and tested
- Be able to run both VMS and Linux applications
- Automatically choose the “best” version
- Linux version if tested and certified
- otherwise VMS version

## Solution: Duplex Consoles

- A Linux and a VMS console running together and talking to each other
- In default “best” mode will run the correct flavor version of an application
- In debugging modes the user can select a particular version
**Needs to be distributed throughout the division **

## Requirements (Windows PC)

- Exceed version 7 or 9
- X-windows server
- 25% of division have version 8
- Upgrade to version 9 cannot be done remotely
- Necessity of Exceed 7 upgrade not ruled out
- 50% of division
- Exceed customizations
- Startup script for duplex windows
- Startup script for Linux terminal sessions
- Can be pushed out remotely

## Exceed 8 to 9 Upgrade

- ~80 Consoles need to be upgraded
- A team of 3 competent system administrators will install the upgrade
- Controls dept. will schedule a time with users
- The users will be expected to make their machines available at that time
- If difficulties are encountered the upgrade will be deferred until controls dept. experts can resolve the problem

## Install New Customizations

- Will be pushed out remotely when ..
- All known duplex consoles bugs are fixed
- All Exceed 8 users are upgraded
- Documentation is complete
- All users have been notified of the transition and referred to the appropriate documentation
- VMS only consoles will be disabled once the transition is complete

## Special Cases

- Specific documentation is being prepared for ...
- Non Exceed users
- Home computers (a CD is being prepared)
- Mac users
# Presentation: 660101

## SVN-23/PRN-23INTEGRITY FAILUREOF01 JANUARY 2004

**Capt Heather Eastlack**
**2nd Space Operations Squadron**
**Written by: K. Kovach **
**9 Mar 04**

## OUTLINE

**Note on Nomenclature**
**Message to Remember**
**The SVN-23/PRN-23 Integrity Failure**
**The Range of User Impacts**
**Recommended Preventative**
**Summary **

## A NOTE ON NOMENCLATURE

**SVN-23 is the "Space Vehicle Number"**
**The production line number**
**Permanently "painted on the satellite's inside"**
**Users have no independent way to see the SVN **
**PRN-23 is the "PseudoRandom Noise code" (PRN) Number **
**Identifies P(Y)-code & C/A-code broadcast by SV**
**Users can independently see the SV's PRN codes **
**Also where SV shows up in the almanac data**
**Known as the "SV ID" number in ICD-GPS-200 **
**SVN-23 was Broadcasting as PRN-23 on 01 Jan 04**
**A GPS SV's PRN number is ground selectable**

## PRN-23 Anomaly Timeline

**SVN-23 Suffered an Integrity Failure on 01 Jan 04**
**Operating on a Rubidium clock**
**Clock failed at about 18:30Z (Holiday Afternoon) **
**Clock failure caused a substantial frequency error**
**Varied over time, max sustained error was 371 Hz at L1**
**371 Hz at L1 gives an 70.6 m/sec pseudorange rate error**
**An integrity failure because no timely warning issued**
**The Operational Control Segment (OCS) Set SVN-23 Unhealthy at **
**about 21:18Z**
**Accumulated pseudorange error was about 285,000 m**
**No SATZAP procedure performed**
**SATZAP changes identity of the SV's PRN code**
**SVN-23 remained trackable as PRN-23**

## 23

**23**

## International GPS Service (IGS) 5-MINUTE DATA

**International GPS Service (IGS) ****5-MINUTE DATA**

## IGS 5-MINUTE DATA

**IGS 5-MINUTE DATA**

**Failure at ~1830.**
**Loss of tracking.**

**Set Unhealthy at ~2118.**

## Master Control Station (MCS) & IGS DATA

**Master Control Station (MCS) ****& IGS DATA**

## FAA DATA -- FIRST 10 MINUTES

## SVN-23 RECOVERY

**SVN-23 Clock Switched Off at 23:05Z on 1 Jan 04**
**One Cesium clock remained on-board (marginal) **
**SVN-23 Service Restored**
**Set HEALTHY at 2253Z on 20 Jan 04**
**SVN-23 End-of-Life (PRN23 available for IIR-12)**
**Set DEAD at 2030Z on 5 Feb 04**
**Decommissioned (unavailable to users) at 2200Z on 13 Feb 04**

## CONTEXT

**This is the First Major Integrity Failure Since 2001**
**Integrity failures are rare (!)**
**For Aviation, Integrity Requirement is 1-10****-7****/hr**
**Or 1 integrity failure per 1,142 years**
**Obviously, SVs will Never meet the Aviation **
**Integrity Requirement Alone**
**Would need a 1,000-fold improvement**
**Integrity Failure Rate for GPS SVs is ********3 per year **
**Specified in SPS Performance Standard**
**Specified in PPS Performance Standard **

## GOOD NEWS

**IIR/IIR-M Satellites Don't Have This Failure Mode**
**It has been fixed (!)**
**Run two clocks concurrently**
**Atomic (Rubidium)**
**VCXO (Quartz)**
**Monitor short-term difference between the clocks**
**If difference greater than a threshold (~5 m)**
**Immediately switch to non-standard code**
**IIR/IIR-M Satellites thus Provide Integrity **
**1,000-fold improvement for large errors**
# Presentation: 326714

## Lehigh Northampton Airport Authority

**Managing LVIA Through Uncertain Times**
**George F. Doughty, Executive Director**
**March 18, 2005**

## Governance

- Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority
- Pennsylvania Municipal Authorities Act
- Nineteen Members Appointed by Lehigh and Northampton Counties
- All Municipal Powers – Except Power to Tax

## Sources of Revenue – 2005 Budget

- Total - $21,078,269

## Expenses – 2005 Budget

- Total - $15,859,187

## LVIA Market - 2.5 million people (40 mile radius)

## Our Chronic Issue – Most of our passengers use other airports

- Real potential of LVIA Market is not known, but probably is at least 5 million passengers

- Frequency
- Nonstops
- Price

## Why have major airlines not exploited the potential of LVIA?

- Yield – not volume
- Premium price for convenience
- Hub concentration – PHL, EWR
- “If you don’t want to pay us $1,000 at ABE –  then we will take $500 from you at PHL.”

## Historical Successes

- Major Carriers
-     AC, CO, DL, NW, UA, US
- Scheduled Charter
-     Southeast Airlines
- Initiated Service - August 2002
- Carried 516,048 passengers through 11-30-04 (PIE, SFB, FLL, LAS)
- Service reliable and well received
- Saved LVIA passengers over $10 Million
- Brought $2 Million Income to LNAA
- Proved LVIA to FL market

## Historical Successes

- Southeast terminated on 11-30-04
- 30% of market replaced with:
-     TransMeridian Airlines (started on 2-10-05)
-      Lehigh Valley Air (start on 3-24-05)

## More Bad News Possible

- UA, US in Chapter 11
- DL Weak
- Continued flat growth by majors
- Loss of short haul business traveler

## Strategies

- Cost Containment
- Staff Reductions
- Defer Capital Projects/Expenses
- Focus on Mission Critical Items
- Debt Refinancing/Restructuring
- Moving Functions In-House
- Fixed Base Operator (FBO) - LVAS
- Ground Handling Services
- Aircraft Fueling

## Strategies - continued

- Revenue Management
- Vehicle Parking Lot Rate Adjustments
- Hangar Rental Rate Adjustments
- Airline Fee Adjustments
- Verification of Full Cost Recovery

## Future Options

- New Service
- Expand LVAir
- Real Estate Development
# Presentation: 301144

## <date/time>

## Best Electronic Practices

- Tom Babel
- Corporate Director of Student Finance
- DeVry Inc.

- Session 21-

## Who is DeVry?

- DeVry Institute of Technology
- 50,000 students
- 80% receive financial assistance
- 3 semesters per calendar year
- Keller Graduate School of Management
- 7,000 students
- 40% receive financial assistance
- 5 quarters per year

- Session 21-

## What are the Financial Aid processing issues facing DeVry?

- 50% of new enrollments apply for admission within 2 months of class start date.
- Quick turnaround to meet student need for financial planning.
- Compressed timeframe for processing applications.
- Heavy workload.

- Session 21-

## What are the Financial Aid processing issues facing DeVry?

- Most students are unfamiliar with financial applications, including the financial aid application (FAFSA).
- Delayed submission of applications.
- High percentage of incomplete applications.
- High need for personalized assistance.
- High incidence of follow-up requirements.

- Session 21-

## What are the Financial Aid processing issues facing DeVry?

- Geographic dispersion of Institutes
- Many aid sources
- Many financial assistance partners
- Overlapping award periods (Borrower-based Academic Year loans)

- Session 21-

## Developing an Electronic Solution

- Assisted Self-Service
- Single Point of Entry
- Concurrent Applications Process
- Electronic applications
- Partnered presentations
- Use of data utilities and common standards

- Session 21-

## Assisted Self-Service

- Optional Information gathering
- Smart pages
- Guided Tour
- Transactional Journal
- Estimated Award Letter

- Session 21-

## Single Point of Entry

**Financial Aid Overview**

**Financial Counseling**

**Financial Aid Applications**

- Estimated Award Letter

- Session 21-

## Concurrent Applications Process

**FOTW**

**RCR**

**ISIR**

**Loan App**

- Session 21-

## Electronic Applications

***Electronic Applications***

- FAFSA on the Web
- Easier to complete
- Fewer errors
- Overall processing improvement

- Session 21-

## Electronic Applications

- Borrower-initiated loan application
- Lenders distribute/collect promissory notes
- Quicker distribution/collection
- Reduced paperwork in FA Office
- (New) Concurrent electronic signature

- Session 21-

## Partnered Presentations

***Partnered Presentations***

- Framed Links
- Sallie Mae
- Bank of America
- Educaid

- Session 21-

## Data Utilities and Common Standards

- CommonLine
- ELM
- NDN
- National Student Clearinghouse
- JIT Funding
- Hold and Release

- Session 21-

## Measuring Student Satisfaction

- “Grade this Site”
- Academic grading for content and utility
- Comments
- Internet-based surveys for transactional events
- Financial Advising
- Award Letters
- Billing Statements

- Session 21-
# Presentation: 728748

## Suspicious Activity Report Filing Trend for the State of Missouri                                                                                       For the Period April 1, 1996 through December 31, 2007

***Total SARs: 39,464***

**Suspicious Activity Report Filing Trend for the State of Missouri                                                                                       For the Period April 1, 1996 through December 31, 2007**

## Characterizations of Suspicious Activity for the State of Missouri

- Note:  The pie chart represents the top nine characterizations plus additional characterizations in total.
-            An individual SAR may cite more than one characterization.  Hence, the number of characterizations detailed here significantly exceeds the total number of SARs.

**Characterizations of Suspicious Activity for the State of Missouri**
**For the Period April 1, 1996 through December 31, 2007**

## Missouri Mortgage Loan Fraud SAR Filing Trend For the Period April 1, 1996 through December 31, 2007

***Total SARs: 2,747***

- Note:  Suspicious Activity Report statistical data is continuously updated as additional reports are filed and processed.  For this reason, there may be minor discrepancies between the statistical figures contained in this report and those in previous FinCEN reports.  Annual numbers for this exhibit are calculated by ***Subject Address*** and not filer address; therefore, the annual totals appearing in the above graph do not match those in Section 1, Exhibit 8 (Characterization of Suspicious Activity by State & Territory by Year).

## Suspicious Activity Report Geographic Pattern for the State of Missouri

**For the Period January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006**

**Note: Statistics based on Filer Branch Address**

## Suspicious Activity Report Geographic Pattern for the State of Missouri

**For the Period January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007**

**Note: Statistics based on Filer Branch Address**
# Presentation: 424707

## Multi-decadal variation of biology in western North Pacific

**1968-present**
**Jan.-Aug.**
**(Every month.)**

**Available long-time series for wNP ML biology**

**1971-present**
**Summer&winter**

## Density, PO4, Chl and NCP in the mixed layer 

**along 137E ****(3 yrs running mean)**

- .

- .

## Time series of Chlorophyll-a Subsurface Maximum Depth (CSMD) (m) 

## Physical/biological changes in western North Pacific (Oyashio)

**Physical/biological changes in western North Pacific (Oyashio)**

**dPO4=-0.008uM/y**

**dPO4=-0.019uM/y**

**dNPP=-0.40/y**
**(Feb. - Aug.)**

**dNPP=-0.43/y**
**(Feb. - Apr.)**

- Spring column-integate Chla
- decline=-11.5mg/m3/y

- Spring zooplancton ww
- decline = -11.5mg/m3/y

**(Feb.)**

**(Jul.)**

***Ono et al., 2002, GRL***
***Chiba et al.,2004, J. Oceangr.***

- Spring diatom percentage
- decline = -2.16%/y

## Above Ks(PO4)

- Above Ks(PO4)

- ...but decline

## Iron limiting in spring 

- Above Ks(PO4)

- ...but decline

- Iron limiting in spring
- western Subarctic NP?

## Slide 7

## =

- Mixing season

- Dust season

**=**

- NO INCREASE

## Slide 9

## Slide 10

## (Nishioka, in prep.)

## Slide 12

## Kasai et al.,2001, Bull. Hokkaido Natl. Fish. Res. Int. 

***Kasai et al.,2001, Bull. Hokkaido Natl. Fish. Res. Int.****** ***
# Presentation: 020358

## Lactose Intolerant

- By: Alec Y., Joey M., Bob M., and Brian H.

## Lactose Intolerance Means...

- Lactose is a sugar found in milk. Some people have problems digesting lactose and may have symptoms, such as nausea, cramps, gas, and diarrhea when they eat foods containing milk products. Young children with lactose intolerance should not eat milk products. Most older children and adults differ in the amounts of lactose they can handle. Lactose intolerance is very common in adults and in not dangerous.
- Lactose Intolerant people may have to avoid prepared foods that contain milk, such as bread and other baked goods; processed cereals and drinks; instant potatoes; soups; lunch meats and instant food mixes, such as powdered coffee creamer and whipped cream.

## Lactose Intolerant continued... 

- The most important nutrient in dairy products is calcium, which is essential for the growth and repair of bones. It can be difficult for people with lactose intolerance to get enough calcium; however, lactose reduced milk and other dairy products are available at many supermarkets. Also, many nondairy products are high in calcium. Green vegetables, such as broccoli and collard or turnip greens, and fish with soft, edible bones such as salmon and sardines. They are excellent sources of calcium.

## Info

- Who: Young Active Man
- Age: 22
- Height: 6 ft
- Weight: 185 lbs
- Energy Level: High
- Total Caloric Intake Need: 3784

## Breakfast8:00 am

**Orange Juice(1cup) - 105**
**Black-eyed peas with bacon (1cup) – 180**
**Fresh Grapes (1cup)- 58**
**Canned Pineapples (1cup)- 200**
_**Total Calories**_
_**543**_

## Lunch12:30

**One medium pear – 98**
**1\2 cup of raisins – 224**
**One Grapefruit – 80 **
**1\2 cup strawberries – 50**
**One cup of noodles and rice – 192**
**Two pieces of sushi – 50**
**1\4 cup of peanuts – 214**
**1 cup of chili – 300**
_**Total Calories**_
**1208**

## Snacks

**Pretzel mix – 140**
**Peanut butter and celery – 202**
**Banana – 120**
**Baked potato – 280**
**Chili – 300 **
-  **Total Calories **
** ****1042 calories**

## Dinner5:30 p. m.

**Apple Juice -1 cup – 90**
**Baked Beans- 1⁄2 cup –150**
**Fried Catfish- 3 oz. – 194    **
**Baked Potato - 1 large – 280**
**Fried Rice - 3⁄4 cup – 190**
**Fresh Apple  -1 medium- 91**
**Total Calories-995**

## Exercise Schedule

**Jog for 15 minutes in the morning**
**Lift weights after breakfast for 10 minutes**
**Aerobics after lunch for 8 minutes**
**Do Yoga after dinner for 5 minutes **
** ****Total Calories Today -  3788**

## THE END
# Presentation: 667094

## Runway Incursion ForumPromoting Runway Safety

**Sandra L. Rowlett**
**Deputy Chief**
**Operational Factors Division**

**March 27, 2007**

## 63 Fatalities

**in the United States Since 1990**

**1990 Atlanta, GA:  B727 / Beech A100**
**1990 Detroit, MI:  DC9 / B727**
**1991 Los Angeles, CA:  B737 / SW-4**
**1994 St. Louis, MO:  DC9 / C441**
**1996 Quincy, IL:  Beech 1900 / Beech A90**
**2000 Sarasota, FL:  C172 / C152**

**63 Fatalities**

## Runway Incursions

**All Categories**

**Tower Operations  (millions)**

**4.5**

**6.5**

**5.5**

**6.0**

**7.0**

**4.0**

**5.0**

**Runway Incursion Rate**
**Runway Incursions per 1,000,000 Tower Operations**

**YTD 03/19/07**

**5.14**

**5.16**

**62.78**

**63.12**

**5.19**

**138 as of 3/19/06**

**Runway Incursions**

**63.01**

- * Rates are based on Estimated Tower Operations

**5.40**

**61.13**

**Rate est. 6.01* as of 3/19/07**

## Los Angeles International Airport 

**Los Angeles International Airport **
**August 19, 2004**

## Boston Logan International Airport 

**June 9, 2005**

## Chicago O’Hare International Airport 

**Chicago O’Hare International Airport **
**July 23, 2006**

## Runway Incursion

**ICAO:****  ****Any occurrence at an aerodrome involving the incorrect presence of an aircraft vehicle or person on the protected area of a surface designated for the landing and take-off of aircraft**

**Runway Incursion**

## NTSB Safety Recommendation

**Require, at all airports with scheduled passenger service, a ground movement safety system that will prevent runway incursions. **
**The system should provide a direct warning capability to flight crews. **
**In addition, demonstrate through computer simulations or other means that the system will prevent incursions.  ****A-00-66**

## Denver International Airport

**Denver International Airport**

- Cargo Area

- Taxiway M

## Slide 10

## Slide 11

## Slide 12

## Slide 13

## Denver International Airport

**Denver International Airport**
**January 5, 2007**

## Slide 15

## Forum Participants

**Forum Participants**

**Air Line Pilots Association **
**Air Transport Association **
**Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association **
**American Association of Airport Executives**
**Department of the Air Force**
**Department of the Navy **
**Federal Aviation Administration**
**Flight Safety Foundation**
**National Air Traffic Controllers Association**
**Regional Airline Association**
**Transportation Safety Board, Canada**

## Technology Displays

**Technology Displays**

**Eagle Integrated Solutions**
**Era Corporation **
**Federal Aviation Administration**
**Honeywell**
**Jeppesen**
**Max-Viz**
**Norris Optical**
**Searidge Technologies**
**Sensis**
**Technology Planning**
**Transtech**

## NTSB Staff

**NTSB Staff**

- Dan Bartlett 			Pete Hall
- Sally Bennett			Keith Holloway
- Chris Bisett 			Ted Lopatkiewicz
- Bill Bramble 		 	Jeff Marcus
- Darrin Broadwater 		Paul Misencik
- Tim Burtch 	 		Alice Park
- Pat Cariseo 		 	Christy Spangler
- Antion Downs 		Dave Tew
- Scott Dunham 	 	Elaine Weinstein
# Presentation: 920892

## SOURCES

**Conversations with Lapanday Managers and Union Leaders.**
- 	Jose R. Molina. April - May 2001
**From Seed to Shelf.**
- 	(Brochure)
- 	 Lapanday Foods. 2001
**From Seed to Shelf.**
- 	(CD-ROM, 16 min.10sec.)
- 	Lapanday Foods. 2000
**Labor-Management Cooperation at Work.**
- 	National Conciliation and Mediation
- 		Board.
- 	Department of Labor and Employment,
- 	Intramuros, Manila, 1999
- Repositioning RP Agriculture for Global Competitiveness: The Lapanday
- Experience:  Lessons and Emerging
- Strategies:   Luis P. Lorenzo, Jr.
- 	Philippine Star. May 25, 2001

## ANNUAL PRODUCTION1987 - 1989BEFORE LMC

- 1987		3.069M		    60%
- 1988		3.479M		    67%
- 1989		3.118M		    60%
- Average		3.222M		        63%

- Year		Yield		    %Fruit
- 		Boxes/Hectare	    Recovery

- ATTACHMENT  A

## ANNUAL PRODUCTION1990 - 2000AFTER LMC

- Year	         Yield	  % Fruit	           	           	Boxes/Hectare                   Recovery
- 1990	      3.729M	           85%
- 1991	      3.912M	           83%
- 1992	      4.047M	           87%
- 1993	      3.742M	           80%
- 1994	      3.461M	           75%
- 1995	      3.935M	           84%
- 1996	      4.017M	           88%
- 1997	      3.751M	           83%
- 1998	      3.584M	           88%
- 1999	      4.167M	           95%
- 2000	      4.312M	           95%
- Average	          3.883M	   	 86%

- ATTACHMENT   B
# Presentation: 925630

## The Big Picture (dates very approximate)

- 2005

- 2025

- 2020

- 2015

- 2010

- CERN:

- LHC

- ATLAS+CMS

- LHC-B

- FNAL:

- Tevatron

- CDF+D0

- BTeV

- Linac+Booster+Main Injector

- Proton Driver+Main Injector???

- NuMI/Nova??

- ILC??

- w/o BTeV, there’s at large gap with no physics or major projects at FNAL

- MiniBooNE, etc

- NuMI/Minos

## Some practical questions

- Why was BTeV cancelled?
- Big expenses (war, non-working missile defense, mission to Mars, etc + tax cuts) = not enough money.
- Stupid, but not as stupid as canceling Hubble,the ITER follies, or the Mars mission, so we shouldn’t be surprised.
- Will it come back?
- No.  BTeV had a window of opportunity before LHC-B that will go away.
- Will the lab close after 2009?
- Nothing is impossible, but I doubt it.  No lab has ever closed and FNAL is the only remaining high energy physics lab in the country.
- However, it’s possible the lab might change its mission, and this *might *involve significant staff reduction.  No one knows.

## Near Term Consequences

- The lab will reduce staff by ~100 people over the next year (about 20 out of AD).
- As much as possible, this will be done through ordinary attrition and retirement incentives.
- Will probably still be a few layoffs.
- How will the layoffs be determined?
- Not decided, but performance will definitely be a factor.
- Will we lose anyone from this department?
- I honestly don’t know.

## The Brighter Side

- This department has just become much more important
- So far, no one has come up with a good use for the Tevatron after ~2009 or so.
- The proton source and the Main Injector will carry the lab after that.
- The remarks of Orbach and Staffin highlight the significance of the neutrino program in the future of US science.
- Likely assures timely funding for the “Proton Plan”
- Considering post-Tevatron follow-up plans
- Retask Recycler as a Main Injector preloader
- ???
- In my opinion, it increases the likelihood  that a proton driver will be built.

## What can you do?

- The best way to keep the lab going is to do a good job:
- The DOE is impressed with the current status of Run II
- We must impress them with NuMI and beyond.
# Presentation: 867567

## Numerical Optimization of Stellarators with Small Number of Periods 

_*M.A.Samitov*__*1*_*, W.A.Cooper**2**, M.F.Heyn**3**, M.Yu.Isaev**1**, A.A.Ivanov**4**, V.N.Kalyuzhnyj**5**, S.V.Kasilov**5**, W.Kerbichler**3**, A.A.Martinov**4**, S.Yu.Medvedev**4**, M.I.Mikhailov**1**, V.V.Nemov**5**, C.Nührenberg**6**, J.Nührenberg**6**, Yu.Yu.Poshekhonov**4**, V.D.Shafranov**1**, A.A.Subbotin**1**, K.Yamazaki**7**, R.Zille**6*
- 1Russian Research Centre "Kurchatov Institute", Moscow, Russia
- 2CRPP, Association Euratom-Confederation Suisse, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland
- 3Institut für Theorerishe Physik, Techische Universitàt Graz, Graz, Austria
- 4Keldish Institute, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
- 5IPP, NSC “Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology”, Kharkov, Ukraine
- 6Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, IPP-EURATOM Association, Germany
- 7National Institute for Fusion Science, Toki, Japan

## Penalty functions

**Penalty functions include:**
-  pseudo-symmetry condition;
-  condition of closure of the second adiabatic invariant contours;
-  Mercier, resistive and ballooning modes  stability;
-  Cross-section geometry restrictions (to prevent high  elongation, narrow angles and concaves)

- N=3, aspect ratio A~6.8,  <β>=3.9%
- N=2, aspect ratio A~3.9,  <β>=2.4%
- both with improved particle confinement and  Mercier and ballooning modes stability.

**Obtained systems**

## Magnetic Surface, N=3

- Boundary magnetic surface of optimized **N=3**, aspect ratio **A~7** and ******4%** system and  lines *B*=constant on the magnetic surface corresponding to 1/2 of minor plasma radius.

***B***

- Toroidal Boozer angle, one period

- Poloidal Boozer angle,  one period

- Cross-section at start, at quarter and at a half of period

**Notes:**
Показать что такое псеввдосимметрия

## Magnetic Surface, N=2

- Boundary magnetic surface of optimized **N=2**, aspect ratio **A~4** and ******2.4%** system

***B***

- Toroidal Boozer angle, one period

- Poloidal Boozer angle,  one period

- Cross-section at start, at quarter and at a half of period

- Lines B=constant on the magnetic surface corresponding to 1/2 of minor plasma radius

**Notes:**
Показать что такое псеввдосимметрия

## Example of N=1 system

- Boundary magnetic surface of **N=1**, aspect ratio **A~4** and 1.5% system

***B***

## Conclusions

- Investigation were performed on optimization of stellarator configurations with poloidal direction of B-lines  with  small number of system periods.
- Boundary magnetic surfaces were obtained for two- and three- periodical systems with improved collisionless particle confinement and  with Mercier and ballooning modes stability.
- For these systems, requirement of the ballooning stability partially is in contradiction  with quasi-isodynamicity condition and leads to increased losses.
**In future plans:**
- - Investigate β limit for stability consistent with confinement
- - Optimization of N=1 system
# Presentation: 522627

## Module 8C

**A Brief Overview of Specific Mental Disorders and Cross-Cutting Issues:  **
***ADHD, PTSD, Eating Disorders, Pathological Gambling***

## In This Module . . .

- Module 8A
- Cross-Cutting Issues: Suicidality, Nicotine Dependence
- Personality Disorders
- Module 8B
- Mood and Anxiety Disorders
- Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders

**Module 8C**
- Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD)
- Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
- Eating Disorders
- Pathological Gambling
- Appendix D

## TIP Exercise—Assignments

- Group 1	AD/HD (pp. 235–237)
- 			– Appendix D, pp. 402–408
- Group 2	PTSD (pp. 238–240)
- 			– Appendix D, pp. 408–416
- Group 3 	Eating Disorders (pp. 240–246)
- 			– Appendix D, pp. 417–425
- Group 4	Pathological Gambling (pp. 246–248)
- 			– Appendix D, pp. 425–436

## TIP Exercise— Panel Presentation

*With your group:*
- Review the text’s sections on your assigned diagnosis and related information.
- Create a 3–5 minute panel presentation on:
- “How to Recognize and Work with Substance Abuse Clients Who Also Have ______ Disorder ”
*	**	**	**      *
-  Features to look for
-  Prevalence, assessment, and engagement
-  Practical information on working with client
*(18 minutes**)*
# Presentation: 498972

## 2004-2005 EDExpress Pell/CODHands-On 

**Jody Sears**
**Paula Bakey**

***Session 27***

## What’s New in EDExpress 2004-2005?

- School Electronic Process Guide
- Posted 11/6/2003
- COD Technical Reference
- Posted 11/6/2003 (subsequent updates posted)
- Release 1.0 Cover Letter & Desk Reference
- Posted 1/12/2004
- Release 2.0 Cover Letter & Desk Reference
- Posting with Release 2.0 software – early Apr ‘04

## What’s New in EDExpress 2004-2005?

- Access 2002 platform
- Splash screen color matches FAFSA
- FAFSA and Correction entry done using FAA Access to CPS Online
- FAA Access Setup steps available in Release 1.0 Desk Reference
- For more information, attend Sessions 22 or 30 or visit the PC Lab

## What’s New In Release 2.0—Pell 

- COD Setup Tab Replaces Pell Setup Tab and Direct Loan Setup Tab
- Pell School Setup—Enrollment Fields are now optional
- Pell School Setup—Option to calculate and disburse awards with or without pennies

## What’s New In Release 2.0—Pell 

- Pell System Setup—Set default for combining exports for Pell and DL data
- Disbursement Profile Code Setup—Create Disbursement Profile Codes that function in both Pell and Direct Loan Modules

## What’s New In Release 2.0--Pell

- Two New Data Request Reports are now available from COD
- POP Report
- Verification Status Report
- Label changes throughout Pell screens providing added clarity

## What’s New in Release 2.0—Pell 

- Message Classes now include year identifiers

- CRAA05IN

- CRAA05OP

- Export

- Import

## Increase Productivity and Efficiency—Global 

- Customizing my User/System view
- Using Grid functionality to View and Retrieve records
- Create customized reports
- Exporting grids
- Using File Formats
- Re-importing files

## Increase Productivity and Efficiency—Global 

- Clearing Locks
- Resetting Password
- Printing to File
- COD-Generated Reports
- Import Edit Reports
- EDExpress-Generated Reports

## Increase Productivity and Efficiency—Pell 

- Disbursement Profile Codes
- Create disbursements for a few or many groups of records quickly
- Create one code to work in both modules
- Multiple Entry
- Update origination records
- Create and update disbursement records

## Increase Productivity and Efficiency—Pell 

- Calculate Award Amounts globally
- Tips
- Resolving common origination and disbursement rejects
- Using COD and EDExpress-generated reports to aid in reconciliation

## Customer Service Contact Information

- CPS/SAIG Technical Support
- 1-800-330-5947
- _[CPSSAIG@pearson.com](mailto:CPSSAIG@pearson.com)_
- COD Customer Service
- 1-800-848-0978
- http://www.cod.ed.gov
- _[CODsupport](mailto:CODsupport@acs-inc.com)__[@](mailto:CODsupport@acs-inc.com)__[acs](mailto:CODsupport@acs-inc.com)__[-inc.com](mailto:CODsupport@acs-inc.com)_
# Presentation: 904242

## Survey of Analysesof ADD Observables at LHC

## Eboli, Han, Magro and Mercadente

- hep-ph/9908358
- virtual graviton exchange
- gg → γγ
- q-qbar → γγ
- 2σ limits

## Feynman Diagrams

## 95% CL Limits

## Atwood, Bar-Shalom, Soni

- hep-ph/9906400
- Assumed n = 4
- ∫Ldt = 30 fb-1
- pp → VV, jj
- Results compatible with hep-ph/9908358
- 3σ resolution if MD < 6 TeV

## Hinchliffe, Vacavant

- J. Phys G 2001 Vol. 27 p. 1839
- gg → gG → j + missing ET
- gq → qG → j + missing ET
- q-qbar → gG → j + missing ET

## Other Important Points

- n = 6 cannot be probed at LHC, as the cross section for graviton emission is too small
- The authors point out cosmological observations of SN 1987a imply MD > 50 TeV for n = 2, in apparent contradiction to their own analysis.

## Discovery Reach
# Presentation: 947460

## Shield Status & Plans

- TM 2221 Mokhov, Rakhno, Striganov, Peterson “Radiation Load to the SNAP CCD” 09/15/03
- Progress in development of work plans for FY’04 & FY’05
- Physicists & Engineers
- What we want to accomplish at the Collaboration Meeting

- Tom Diehl  10/22/2003

## Preliminary Results from MARS - Sources

- Cosmic Ray Sources:

- Creme96 & Spenvis
- Proton spectrum matches
- (within a factor of 2x)
- AMS data in higher energy
- Range
- This is a very good start.

- The Radiation Load comes from
- Trapped protons and electrons
- Primary protons, electrons, and heavy ions
- Solar Events

## Shielding and Detector Model (1) 

- The trick with MARS is to select the appropriate level of detail.
- Include the most important shielding components. Consideration is given to proximity to detector and components mass
- Put a lot of effort into detailing the detector.

## Shielding and Detector Model (2) 

## Preliminary Results

- Results from Galactic (Primary) hadrons
- The shielding seems to be generating low energy neutrons. I don’t yet know if it is making this component of the  dose worse than not having a shield.

- The cold plate is the worst generator.

- Neutrons from primary hadrons

## Preliminary Results

- Results from Trapped radiation
- The total dose is higher. The shielding helps.
- Not so many neutrons are generated

- Solar Flares
- 4 rads from the worst day

- Trapped hadron flux

## Preliminary MARS Results

- Total Dose:
- Suggests we may want to shield better when we are in the radiation belts.
- Effect on CCD’s
- I’m still trying to figure this part out:

- Predicted degradation over 4 yrs (%).

## Progress in Physics R&D Plan

- For the SNAP R&D plan
- I wrote a partial plan for the shielding simulations: MARS and Geant
- I need to check with NVM on the MARS part of the plan.  He’s been busy.
- I need to identify people resources for the GEANT part of the plan (to help Fritz D.)
- I’d like to improve this before we go to LBL.

## Progress in Engineering R&D Plan

- For the SNAP R&D plan
- Tom Nicol will lead the engineers
- Tom Page has already been working on this
- Lanfranco, Cease & Olis have expressed strong interest.
- This is a good group. These are the guys I want.
- They are meeting this week to come up with something better than my first attempt.

## Collaboration Meeting

- Who’s going from the shield group? What are they going to do?
- Physicists: Diehl (talk), Dejongh.
- Engineers: Nicol, Lanfranco, Cease
- Tom N. has to meet and make friends/plans with the LBL guys
- Giobatta to get into FEA on the shield itself
- Cease (w/ Scarpine?) to look into the photon ray-tracing and reflections
- Go out Saturday, come back Tuesday red-eye or Wednesday morning. Attend the collaboration meeting and the first day of the internal review.

## Summary

- The previous update to you guys was ~ August 20.
- Since then
- TM 2221 by the MARS guys is a good first start
- Developing plans and schedules for simulations part and engineering part.
- Received a big boost in engineering resources. (I plan to defend it).
- Collaboration Meeting plans
# Presentation: 084112

## Assessment of Six -Year Rainfall Record by PR 

**1. Annual Rainfall in Tropics by PR/TRMM**
**2. Inference of Annual Rainfall**
**3. Discussion**
**4. Conclusion and Further Subject**

**Tasuku Tanaka**
**EORC/JAXA**

## Slide 2

## Slide 3

## 1. Annual Rainfall in Tropics by PR/TRMM

**                 ****   ****PR/TRMM                                ****   ****GPCP**
**Y1998****	****  ****911.8mm      1.9mm                 1027.7mm        6.5mm**
**Y1999****	****  ****940.5mm    30.6mm                 1003.7mm     -17.5mm**
**Y2000****	****  ****930.2mm    20.3mm                 1014.8mm       -6.4mm**
**Y2001****	****  ****914.6mm      4.7mm                 1020.0mm       -1.2mm**
**Y2002****	****  ****878.7mm   -32.2mm                 1029.1mm        7.9mm**
**Y2003    ****  ****883.4mm   -26.5mm                 1031.9mm       10.6mm**
**Ave.       ****  ****909.9mm                                   1021.2mm**
**                               **

## Rainfall Measurement
    - Continuous Observation:

    - Instantaneous Observation:

Proposition of Agreement of Continuous and Instantaneous Observations

PR Data Retrieval:

Assumption for The Proposition

            Large Sample Size
            Random Sample

-     - Continuous Observation:
-     - Instantaneous Observation:
- Proposition of Agreement of Continuous and Instantaneous Observations
- PR Data Retrieval:
- Assumption for The Proposition
-             Large Sample Size
-             Random Sample

**Rain Fall Inference**

## 3. Discussion

- 3.1 Is PR data smaller than the widely-accepted annual rainfall, 990mm ?
-               Yes, we need to investigate the bias between PR and GPCP.
- 3.2 Does the year to year change of rainfall agree with GPCP data?
-                Year 2002 and 2003 PR data are less, provably due to change
-               of the altitude of the near-surface rain rate.
- 3.3 Validation of PR data against in-situ rain gauge should meet the two assumptions: Large Sample Size and Random Sample. It is also noted that the scatter plot of the hourly rain fall and the instantaneous rain rate is not linear and we do not know its form.
- 3.4  PR data random sample is difficult to pick up with respect to the local sun time.

## August

- (1998-2003)

- A: Simple Average

-  B: Average with 3 Hour

- Monthly Rain Rate of August, Y ‘98-Y ‘03

- [mm/day]

- 0.5°×0.5°

## August

- (A-B)/B

**Monthly Rain Rate of August, Y ‘98-Y ‘03**

- (1998-2003)

- 10% Over Estimate

- Under Estimate for Foot of Himalaya Mountains

**Data Sample is more in the Early Afternoon**

## 4. Conclusion and Further Subject 

- PR data reveals the characteristics of rain fall in the tropics: the tropical convergence zone, El-nino, arid zone, etc.
- Comparing annual global rain fall data of PR, we can reveal the bias in the year 2002 and year 2003.
- Validation of PR data against in-situ rain gauge data or GPCP is needed. But how do we compare the two data sets, taking account of “Large Sample Size” and “Random Sample”?
# Presentation: 664049

## Civil Rights 

**Office of Civil Rights**

- Civil Rights
- Training Seminar
- October 21  – 23,  2008
- Washington, DC

## FTA Civil Rights Training

**Agenda**

**Tuesday — October 21, 2008**
- 8:00 am — 9:00 am	Registration
- 9:00 am — 9:15 am 	Welcome, Overview and
- 			Introductions
- 9:15 am — 9:45 am	Small Group Breakouts on 				Disadvantaged Business 					Enterprise Program (DBE) 					Program
- 9:45 am  — 10:15 am	DBE Program Overview
- 10:15 am — 10:45 am	DBE Goal Methodology
- 10:45 am — 11:00 am 	Break
- 11:00 am — 12:15 pm	DBE – Goal Methodology
**12:15 pm — 1:30 pm  Lunch **
**On your Own**
- 1:30 pm — 3:30 pm 	DBE — Certification
- 			Marc Pentino, Departmental Office of
- 			Civil Rights
- 3:30 pm — 3:45 pm 	Break
- 3:45 pm — 4:30 pm	DBE —	Fraud
- 4:30 pm — 5:00 pm	Questions and Answers
- 5:00 pm 			Class adjournment

## FTA Civil Rights Training

**Agenda**

**Wednesday — October 22, 2008**
- 8:00 am — 9:00 am	Registration
- 9:00 am — 9:15am 	Welcome, Overview of the day
- 9:15 am — 9:45 am	Small Group Breakouts on Title VI
- 9:45 am — 10:30 am	Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 			(Title VI) Overview
- 10:30 am — 10:45 am 	Break
- 10:45 am — 11:15 am	Overview of New Title VI Circular
- 11:15 am — 12:00 noon	Exercise: City of Metropolis
**12:00 Noon — 1:15 pm  Lunch **
**On your Own**
- 1:15 pm — 2:00 pm	Title VI Video “Divided Highways
- 2:00 pm — 2:30 pm 	Environmental Justice
- 2:30 pm — 3:00 pm	Department of Justice Video
- 			“Language Barriers”
- 3:00 pm — 3:15 pm 	Break
- 3:15 pm — 4:45 pm	Limited English Proficiency (LEP)
- 4:45 pm — 5:00 pm	Question and Answers
- 5:00 pm 			Class adjournment

## FTA Civil Rights Training

**Agenda**

**Thursday** **—** **October 23, 2008**
- 8:00 am — 9:00 am	Registration
- 9:00 am — 9:30 am 	Welcome, Overview of the day
- 9:30 am — 10:15 am	Small Group Breakouts on Americans 			with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)
- 10:15 am — 10:30 am 	Break
- 10:30 am — 12:00 Noon 	ADA Overview and Updates
**12:00 Noon — 1:15 pm  Lunch **
**On your Own**
- 1:15 pm — 2:45 pm 	ADA Fixed Route Self Assessment
- 2:45 pm — 3:00 pm 	Break
- 3:00 pm — 4:15 pm	Complementary Paratransit
- 			Self-Assessment
- 4:15 pm — 4:30 pm	ADA Trivia!
- 4:30 pm — 5:00 pm 	Class evaluations and adjournment
# Presentation: 000725

## Dengue

- Clinical Manifestations and Epidemiology

- CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
- AND PREVENTION

## I.  Virus, Vector and Transmission

## Dengue Virus

- Causes dengue and dengue hemorrhagic fever
- Is an arbovirus
- Transmitted by mosquitoes
- Composed of single-stranded RNA
- Has 4 serotypes (DEN-1, 2, 3, 4)

## Dengue Viruses

- Each serotype provides specific lifetime immunity, and short-term cross-immunity
- All serotypes can cause severe and fatal disease
- Genetic variation within serotypes
- Some genetic variants within each serotype appear to be more virulent or have greater epidemic potential

## Transmission of Dengue Virusby Aedes aegypti

- Transmission of Dengue Virusby *Aedes aegypti*

**Viremia**

**Viremia**

**DAYS**

**0**

**5**

**8**

**12**

**16**

**20**

**24**

**28**

**Human #1**

**Human #2**

**Mosquito feeds /**

**acquires virus**

**Mosquito refeeds /**

**transmits virus**

- Intrinsic
- incubation
- period

## Replication and Transmissionof Dengue Virus (Part 1)

- Replication and Transmissionof Dengue Virus (Part 1)

- 1. Virus transmitted
-     to human in mosquito
-     saliva

- 2. Virus replicates
-     in target organs

- 3. Virus infects white
-     blood cells and
-     lymphatic tissues

- 4. Virus released and
-     circulates in blood

## Replication and Transmissionof Dengue Virus (Part 2)

- Replication and Transmissionof Dengue Virus (Part 2)

- 5. Second mosquito
-     ingests virus with blood

- 6. Virus replicates
-     in mosquito midgut
-     and other organs,
-     infects salivary
-     glands

- 7. Virus replicates
-     in salivary glands

## Aedes aegypti Mosquito

*Aedes aegypti* Mosquito

## Aedes aegypti

*Aedes aegypti*

- Dengue transmitted by infected female mosquito
- Primarily a daytime feeder
- Lives around human habitation
- Lays eggs and produces larvae preferentially in artificial containers