Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

Shutdown Energizes CAMD  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

was discovered that the vacuum chamber that insulates the liquid helium and nitrogen cryogenic vessels was leaking. This led the CAMD staff to move the shutdown from February to...

2

Shutdown 2013 Update  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Shutdown 2013 Update Shutdown 2013 Update Shutdown 2013 Update Print Friday, 01 March 2013 15:43 Sextupole upgrade The ALS is replacing all of the corrector magnets with sextupoles (48 of them) to allow for tighter horizontal control of the beam, thereby increasing beam brightness. This so-called "lattice upgrade" will also increase beam brightness by concentrating the horizontal emittance. (Top) ALS Project and Facility Management Group Leader Steve Rossi proudly shows off a newly-installed sextupole magnet. (Center) Christoph Steier and Arnaud Madur discuss challenges encountered during the installation. (Bottom) A corrector magnet that has been removed from the ring. Some sextupole magnets awaiting installation in the Building 15 staging area. Cold head replacement

3

Shutdown 2013 Update  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Shutdown 2013 Update Shutdown 2013 Update Shutdown 2013 Update Print Sextupole upgrade The ALS is replacing all of the corrector magnets with sextupoles (48 of them) to allow for tighter horizontal control of the beam, thereby increasing beam brightness. This so-called "lattice upgrade" will also increase beam brightness by concentrating the horizontal emittance. (Top) ALS Project and Facility Management Group Leader Steve Rossi proudly shows off a newly-installed sextupole magnet. (Center) Christoph Steier and Arnaud Madur discuss challenges encountered during the installation. (Bottom) A corrector magnet that has been removed from the ring. Some sextupole magnets awaiting installation in the Building 15 staging area. Cold head replacement The cooling elements in the three superbend magnets (and one spare) need to

4

Shutdown 2013 Update  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Shutdown 2013 Update Print Shutdown 2013 Update Print Sextupole upgrade The ALS is replacing all of the corrector magnets with sextupoles (48 of them) to allow for tighter horizontal control of the beam, thereby increasing beam brightness. This so-called "lattice upgrade" will also increase beam brightness by concentrating the horizontal emittance. (Top) ALS Project and Facility Management Group Leader Steve Rossi proudly shows off a newly-installed sextupole magnet. (Center) Christoph Steier and Arnaud Madur discuss challenges encountered during the installation. (Bottom) A corrector magnet that has been removed from the ring. Some sextupole magnets awaiting installation in the Building 15 staging area. Cold head replacement The cooling elements in the three superbend magnets (and one spare) need to

5

Shutdown 2013 Update  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Shutdown 2013 Update Print Shutdown 2013 Update Print Sextupole upgrade The ALS is replacing all of the corrector magnets with sextupoles (48 of them) to allow for tighter horizontal control of the beam, thereby increasing beam brightness. This so-called "lattice upgrade" will also increase beam brightness by concentrating the horizontal emittance. (Top) ALS Project and Facility Management Group Leader Steve Rossi proudly shows off a newly-installed sextupole magnet. (Center) Christoph Steier and Arnaud Madur discuss challenges encountered during the installation. (Bottom) A corrector magnet that has been removed from the ring. Some sextupole magnets awaiting installation in the Building 15 staging area. Cold head replacement The cooling elements in the three superbend magnets (and one spare) need to

6

Dates  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Dates Dates Nature Bulletin No. 511-A December 15, 1973 Forest Preserve District of Cook County George W. Dunne, President Roland F. Eisenbeis, Supt. of Conservation DATES When the wise men from the east, guided by a mysterious new star, traveled to Jerusalem and thence to Bethlehem where they worshipped the infant Jesus and presented Him with gifts, you can be sure that, in addition to gold and frankincense and myrrh, they carried dates as food to sustain them on their long journey. The Date Palm had been cultivated along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers since the time of the Sumerians, 3000 years before the birth of Christ. This tree, like the coconut palm, is unknown today in its wild state but is believed to have originated in Ethiopia. In early times it was abundant in Palestine and the scientific name, Phoenix, given to the date palm by the Greeks, may be due to the fact that they first saw it in Phoenicia. The "tree of life, " variously referred to in the Bible, was probably this palm.

7

DATE:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

DATE: DATE: AUG 12 1991 REPLY TO ATTN OF: EM-421 (J. Wagoner, 3-8147) SUBIECT: Elimination of the Duriron Company Site TO: The File I have reviewed the attached site summary and elimination recommendation for the Duriron Company Site in Dayton, Ohio. I have determined that there is little likelihood of radioactive contamination at this site. Based on the above, the Ouriron Company Site is hereby eliminated from further consideration under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program. W. Ale~ander~illiams,~PhD Designation and Certification Manager Off-Site Branch Division of Eastern Area Programs Office of Environmental Restoration Attachment -: bee: Weston EM-40 (2) P. Hevner Review: - OTS NOTE DATE: July 15, 1991 TO: Alexander WiTliams FROM: Dan Stou tF

8

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

9 9 DATE: April 25, 2011 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director, Policy Division Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) - Public Access SUMMARY: On April 15, 2011, the public side of the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) website was launched. This means that information posted to FAPIIS on and after this date, with the exception of past performance reviews, will be accessible by the public. Public access to information posted to FAPIIS prior to April 15, 2011, will be subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process. (See paragraph (b)(3) of

9

DATE:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

-RL5- DATE: September 13, 1990 TO: Alexander Williams (w 39 fusrap6 I FROM: Ed Mitchellzm SUBJECT: Elimination Recommendation for American Machine and Foundry in New York City The purpose of this note is to provide the following with respect to the former American Machine and Foundry Company (AMF) in New York City, New York--FUSRAP Considered Site Recommendation (g/13/90). 1 he recommendation is to eliminate the AMF New York City sites. If you agree, then please return an "approved" and dated copy of this note. Upon receipt of it, we will update the Considered-Sites Data Base for FUSRAP of DOE's intent to eliminate the site. Please call me at 353-1281 if you have +ny questions. cc: J. Wagoner D. Tonkay file FUSRAP NY.59 -------------------------------~---------------------------

10

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4 4 DATE: May 12, 2011 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director, Policy Division Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Acquisition Letter AL 2011-05/Financial Acquisition Letter FAL 2011-01 Congressional Notification of Pending Award of a Contract Action, Announcement of Selected Applications for Negotiation of Financial Assistance Awards, or to Award a Financial Assistance Action in excess of $1 Million SUMMARY: AL 2011-05/FAL 2011-01 (AL/FAL) implements statutory and non-statutory Congressional notification of pending award of a contract action, announcement of selected applications for negotiation of financial assistance awards, or to award a financial assistance

11

Date  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3, 2009 3, 2009 Tim Meeks, Administrator Western Area Power Administration P.O. Box 281213 Lakewood, CO 80228-8213 Dear Administrator Meeks: East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (East River) offers this letter as comment to the Western Area Power Administration's (Western) Federal Register Notice (FRN), (dated March 4, 2009, pp.9392-9393) concerning implementation of Western's new transmission loan or construction authority. East River is a wholesale electric power supply cooperative which provides twenty rural electric cooperatives and one municipal electric system transmission and power supply services. These twenty-one non-profit retail electric providers, which collectively own East River, serve about 90,000 residential, commercial

12

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EC Document No.: DOE-ID-INL-09-002 EC Document No.: DOE-ID-INL-09-002 SECTION A. Project Title: Smoking Shelters SECTION B. Project Description. Install up to three prefabricated outdoor shelters for smokers. Design and install a shelter base so that shelters can be movable. The base shall be designed to prevent shelters from moving or tipping over due to high winds. Specific location for shelters is to be determined, but the shelter bases will be placed atop existing concrete or asphalt such that no subsurface soil disturbance is expected. SECTION C. Environmental Aspects / Potential Sources of Impact none SECTION D. Determine the Level of Environmental Review (or Documentation) and Reference(s): Identify the applicable categorical exclusion from 10 CFR 1021, Appendix B, give the appropriate justification, and the approval date..

13

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3-45 3-45 DATE: April 16, 2013 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director Contract and Financial Assistance Policy Division Office of Policy Office of Acquisition and Project Management SUBJECT: DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 15.1 Source Selection Guide SUMMARY: Attached is a revised Source Selection Guide. The Guide has been updated to reflect changes to DOE policies and practices and includes new topics such as Flow of the Source Selection Process, Source Selection Official Designation, Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest Certificates, Source Selection Training and Roles and Responsibilities. This Flash and its attachments will be available online within a day, at the following website: http://energy.gov/management/office-management/operational-

14

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

EC Document No.: DOE-ID-INL-09-002 EC Document No.: DOE-ID-INL-09-002 SECTION A. Project Title: Smoking Shelters SECTION B. Project Description. Install up to three prefabricated outdoor shelters for smokers. Design and install a shelter base so that shelters can be movable. The base shall be designed to prevent shelters from moving or tipping over due to high winds. Specific location for shelters is to be determined, but the shelter bases will be placed atop existing concrete or asphalt such that no subsurface soil disturbance is expected. SECTION C. Environmental Aspects / Potential Sources of Impact none SECTION D. Determine the Level of Environmental Review (or Documentation) and Reference(s): Identify the applicable categorical exclusion from 10 CFR 1021, Appendix B, give the appropriate justification, and the approval date..

15

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

61 61 DATE: June 19, 2013 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director Policy Division Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Acquisition and Project Management SUBJECT: The Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 and How It Affects Federal Employee Non-Disclosure Policies, Forms, Certificates, Agreements and Acknowledgments SUMMARY: Acquisition Letter (AL) 2013-08 and Financial Assistance Letter (FAL) 2013-05 provide Contracting Officers with notice of the recently passed, Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (WPEA), Pub.L. 112- 199, and the DOECAST issued in response on April 24, 2013. This AL/FAL informs DOE/NNSA Contracting Officers to update any Non-Disclosure Policies, Forms, Certificates, Agreements, and Acknowledgements

16

DATE:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

a? a? ,itbd States Government memorandum Department of Energy DATE: APR 15 893 REPLY TO EM-421 (W. Williams, 903-8149) ATTN OF: Authorization for Remedial Action at the Former Associate Aircraft Site in SUBJECT: Fairfield, Ohio TO: W. Seay, DOE Oak Ridge Field Office The former Associate Aircraft Tool and Manufacturing, Inc., site at 3660 Dixie Highway, Fairfield, Ohio, is designated for remedial action under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Force Control Industries is the current occupant of the site. This designation is based on the results of radiological surveys and conclusions from an authority review. Copies of the radiological survey reports and the authority review are provided for information. The site has been assigned a low priority under the FUSRAP protocol. The

17

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

POLICY FLASH 2011-96 POLICY FLASH 2011-96 DATE: August 19, 2011 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director, Policy Division Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: RFP Section H Clause Templates SUMMARY: On May 3, 2011, twenty two draft Section H clause templates were distributed for Procurement Director (PD), Head of Contracting Activity (HCA), General Counsel and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) review and comment. All comments received were considered and changes were made as appropriate including the elimination of six clauses. The final version of the sixteen RFP Section H clause templates identified below will be available in STRIPES. 1) COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNET PROTOCOL VERSION 6 (IPV6) IN ACQUIRING

18

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

8 8 DATE: April 25, 2011 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director, Policy Division Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Implementation of Division B, Title I, Section 1101(a)(2) of the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 SUMMARY: Acquisition Letter 2011-04 provides implementing instructions and guidance for Section 1101(a)(2) of the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011, Pub. L. 112-10 (hereinafter "Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011). Section 1101(a)(2) of the Act provides that, unless otherwise specified, the authority and conditions provided for projects or activities (including the costs of direct loans and loan guarantees) appropriated, authorized, or

19

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

53 53 DATE: May 15, 2013 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director Contract and Financial Assistance Policy Division Office of Policy Office of Acquisition and Project Management SUBJECT: Implementation of Division F, Title I, Title II, and Title III and Division G, Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, Pub. L. No.113-6 SUMMARY: Acquisition Letter (AL) 2013-06 and Financial Assistance Letter (FAL) 2013-04 provides implementing instructions and guidance for Division F, Title I, Title II, and Title III and Division G, Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013, Pub. L. No.113-6. The AL addresses the following: Appropriations Act Section 301(a) Unfunded Requests for Proposals

20

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

POLICY FLASH 2013-12 POLICY FLASH 2013-12 DATE: December 7, 2012 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director Contract and Financial Assistance Policy Division Office of Policy Office of Acquisition and Project Management SUBJECT: Section 301(b) Congressional Notification of Multi-year Contract Award Report Revision for Fiscal Year 2013 SUMMARY: With reference to Acquisition Letter (AL) 2012-08 and Financial Assistance Letter (FAL) 2012-02 regarding Section 301(b) Congressional Notification of Multi-year Contract Award, the spreadsheet is revised for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 reporting. The revised spreadsheet will now have 5 funding columns that must be filled in for each 301(b) notification instead of 4 columns. The amounts in columns I through L should equal to the

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2- 36 2- 36 DATE: April 23, 2012 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director, Policy Division Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Implementation of Division B, Title III, Title V and Division C Title VII, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No.112- 74 and Related Conference Report SUMMARY: Acquisition Letter (AL) 2012-08 and Financial Assistance Letter (FAL) 2012-01 provides implementing instructions and guidance for Division B, Title III, Title V and Division C Title VII, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, Pub. L. No.112-74 and Related Conference Report. The AL addresses the following: Appropriations Act * Section 301(a) Unfunded Requests for Proposals

22

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

22 22 DATE: February 1, 2012 TO: Procurement Directors FROM: Director, Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Acquisition Letter AL 2012-07/Financial Acquisition Letter FAL 2012-01 Congressional Notification of Pending Award of a Contract Action, Announcement of Selected Applications for Negotiation of Financial Assistance Awards, or to Award a Financial Assistance Action in Excess of $1 Million SUMMARY: AL 2012-07/FAL 2012-01 (AL/FAL) implements statutory Congressional notification of pending award of a contract action, announcement of selected applications for negotiation of financial assistance awards, or to award a financial assistance action in excess of $1 million. The total value of the award includes options, budget periods and cost share. The

23

DATE:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

OOE F 1325.3 OOE F 1325.3 m e m o randum DATE: SEP 23 1988 Department of Energy IL_. 9 REPLY TO AlTN OF, NE-23 SUElJECT. Owner Searches for Potential Sites in Chicago IL, (7 TO: W . Cottrell, ORNL 0. Kozlouski, OTS W h ile in Chicago, Illinois, on September 13, 14, and 15, 1988, I drove to the suspected addresses of several potential FUSRAP sites. No owners were contacted during this activity because most of the work was done after normal working hours or while on the way to the airport when tim e would not permit the visit. I .?I ' - Former C-B Tool Products Co. 956 E. 58th Street Chicago, Illinois The University of Chicago Ingleside Hall is located at this address. It is the University O ffice of Employment and contains a U.S. Post O ffice. The structure is several stories and looks like it may have existed in the

24

The ALS Shutdown: Behind the Scenes  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

tool for monitoring the beam. CXRO will be using shutdown time to complete their new cleanroom in Sector 12. Rossi is often asked how shutdowns are scheduled, and the answer is...

25

Peer Review Hit Hard By Shutdown  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Peer Review Hit Hard By Shutdown ... The peer review system at many federal science funding agencies is gradually working its way out of chaos after the conclusion of a 16-day government shutdown. ... Hundreds of grant review panels were canceled at NSF and NIH alone. ...

ANDREA WIDENER

2013-10-28T23:59:59.000Z

26

Lunar descent using sequential engine shutdown  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The notion of sequential engine shutdown is introduced and its application to lunar descent is motivated. The concept calls for the utilization of multiple fixed thrust engines in place of a single continuously throttleable ...

Springmann, Philip N

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

27

Maximum Vacation Carryover Balance & Upcoming Holiday Shutdown...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

24, 2014 through Sunday, January 4, 2015 for the annual holiday shutdown. The Lab will resume normal business operations on Monday, January 5, 2015. As a reminder, December 24, 25,...

28

Shutdown of Departmental Operations Upon Failure by Congress to Enact Appropriations  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

To establish the procedure for the orderly shutdown of Department of Energy (DOE) operations in the absence of needed appropriations during a fiscal year. Cancels DOE 5500.6A. Canceled by DOE O 137.1 dated 9-4-98.

1992-05-18T23:59:59.000Z

29

Shutdown system for a nuclear reactor  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An ultimate shutdown system is provided for termination of neutronic activity in a nuclear reactor. The shutdown system includes bead chains comprising spherical containers suspended on a flexible cable. The containers are comprised of mating hemispherical shells which provide a ruggedized enclosure for reactor poison material. The bead chains, normally suspended above the reactor core on storage spools, are released for downward travel upon command from an external reactor monitor. The chains are capable of horizontal movement, so as to flow around obstructions in the reactor during their downward motion.

Groh, Edward F. (Naperville, IL); Olson, Arne P. (Western Springs, IL); Wade, David C. (Naperville, IL); Robinson, Bryan W. (Oak Lawn, IL)

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

30

Environmental Assessment for U-233 Stabilization, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

74 74 Environmental Assessment for U-233 Stabilization, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee U. S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Office Oak Ridge, Tennessee March 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE AND NEED....................................................................................................1 1.2 BACKGROUND/OVERVIEW.........................................................................................1

31

Table Search (or Ranking Tables)  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

;Table Search #3 #12;Outline · Goals of table search · Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3 search Table search #1: Deep Web · Table search #3: (setup): Fusion Tables · Table search #2: WebTables ­Version 1: modify document search ­Version 2: recover table semantics #12;Searching the Deep Web store

Halevy, Alon

32

Quality assurance program plan fuel supply shutdown  

SciTech Connect

This Quality Assurance Program plan (QAPP) describes how the Fuel Supply Shutdown (FSS) project organization implements the quality assurance requirements of HNF-MP-599, Project Hanford Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD) and the B and W Hanford Company Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP), FSP-MP-004. The QAPP applies to facility structures, systems, and components and to activities (e.g., design, procurement, testing, operations, maintenance, etc.) that could affect structures, systems, and components. This QAPP also provides a roadmap of applicable Project Hanford Policies and Procedures (PHPP) which may be utilized by the FSS project organization to implement the requirements of this QAPP.

Metcalf, I.L.

1998-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

33

Preliminary Evaluation of Removing Used Nuclear Fuel From Shutdown Sites |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Evaluation of Removing Used Nuclear Fuel From Shutdown Evaluation of Removing Used Nuclear Fuel From Shutdown Sites Preliminary Evaluation of Removing Used Nuclear Fuel From Shutdown Sites In January 2013, the Department of Energy issued the Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste. Among the elements contained in this strategy is an initial focus on accepting used nuclear fuel from shutdown reactor sites. This focus is consistent with the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, which identified removal of stranded used nuclear fuel at shutdown sites as a priority so that these sites may be completely decommissioned and put to other beneficial uses. Shutdown sites are defined as those commercial nuclear power reactor sites where the

34

Autonomic Shutdown of Lithium-Ion Batteries Using Thermoresponsive...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

shutdown of Li-ion batteries is demonstrated by incorporating thermoresponsive polyethylene (PE) microspheres (ca. 4 m) onto battery anodes. When the internal battery...

35

Nuclear reactor shutdown control rod assembly  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A temperature responsive, self-actuated nuclear reactor shutdown control rod assembly 10. The upper end 18 of a lower drive line 17 fits within the lower end of an upper drive line 12. The lower end (not shown) of the lower drive line 17 is connected to a neutron absorber. During normal temperature conditions the lower drive line 17 is supported by detent means 22,26. When an overtemperature condition occurs thermal actuation means 34 urges ring 26 upwardly sufficiently to allow balls 22 to move radially outwardly thereby allowing lower drive line 17 to move downwardly toward the core of the nuclear reactor resulting in automatic reduction of the reactor powder.

Bilibin, Konstantin (North Hollywood, CA)

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

36

Self-actuating reactor shutdown system  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A control system for the automatic or self-actuated shutdown or "scram" of a nuclear reactor. The system is capable of initiating scram insertion by a signal from the plant protection system or by independent action directly sensing reactor conditions of low-flow or over-power. Self-actuation due to a loss of reactor coolant flow results from a decrease of pressure differential between the upper and lower ends of an absorber element. When the force due to this differential falls below the weight of the element, the element will fall by gravitational force to scram the reactor. Self-actuation due to high neutron flux is accomplished via a valve controlled by an electromagnet and a thermionic diode. In a reactor over-power, the diode will be heated to a change of state causing the electromagnet to be shorted thereby actuating the valve which provides the changed flow and pressure conditions required for scramming the absorber element.

Barrus, Donald M. (San Jose, CA); Brummond, Willian A (Livermore, CA); Peterson, Leslie F. (Danville, CA)

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

37

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 EIA Glossary Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 Release date: February 2005 Next release date: February 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO2005) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2025. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2005, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2005 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2005 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2003-2005 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

38

Effect of the shutdown of a large coal fired power plant on ambient mercury species  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Effect of the shutdown of a coal-fired power plant on urbanof the shutdown of a large coal-fired power plant on ambientof the shutdown of a large coal-fired power plant on ambient

Wang, Yungang

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

39

Fuel cell system logic for differentiating between rapid and normal shutdown commands  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A method of controlling the operation of a fuel cell system wherein each shutdown command for the system is subjected to decision logic which determines whether the command should be a normal shutdown command or rapid shutdown command. If the logic determines that the shutdown command should be a normal shutdown command, then the system is shutdown in a normal step-by-step process in which the hydrogen stream is consumed within the system. If the logic determines that the shutdown command should be a rapid shutdown command, the hydrogen stream is removed from the system either by dumping to atmosphere or routing to storage.

Keskula, Donald H. (Webster, NY); Doan, Tien M. (Columbia, MD); Clingerman, Bruce J. (Palmyra, NY)

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

40

Microsoft Word - Val Team August-September 2009 shutdown.doc  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

PSS Validation Schedule August/September 2009 Shutdown Shutdown Begins: August 21 st [ Friday ] Shutdown Ends: September 29 th at 08:00 [ Start of Machine Studies ] Monday Sept. 7 th - Lab Holiday Dates Beamline System Lead Validator Validator Responsible Team Week 1 [ 8/24 - 8/28 ] Mon. 8/24 - Wed. 8/26 2-BM PSS-Gen 1 Nguyen Boron Nguyen / Hogrefe Mon. 8/24 - Wed. 8/26 16-BM PSS-Gen 1 Banks Markovich Budz / Banks Tue. 8/25 - Thur. 8/27 17-ID PSS-Gen 1 Friedman Hawkins Friedman / Hawkins Tue. 8/25 - Thur. 8/27 21-ID PSS-Gen 3 McNamara Budz McNamara / Forrestal Week 2 [ 8/31 - 9/4 ] Mon. 8/31 - Wed. 9/2 2-ID PSS-Gen 1 Nguyen McNamara Nguyen / Hogrefe Tue. 9/1 - Thur. 9/3 6-ID PSS-Gen 1 Budz Banks Nguyen / Hogrefe Mon. 8/31 - Wed. 9/2 8-ID PSS-Gen 1 Friedman Gibson Gibson / Boron

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Effect of the shutdown of a large coal-fired power plant on ambient mercury  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Effect of the shutdown of a large coal-fired power plant on ambient mercury Effect of the shutdown of a large coal-fired power plant on ambient mercury species Title Effect of the shutdown of a large coal-fired power plant on ambient mercury species Publication Type Journal Article LBNL Report Number LBNL-6097E Year of Publication 2013 Authors Wang, Yungang, Jiaoyan Huang, Philip K. Hopke, Oliver V. Rattigan, David C. Chalupa, Mark J. Utell, and Thomas M. Holsen Journal Chemosphere Volume 92 Issue 4 Pagination 360-367 Date Published 07/2013 Abstract In the spring of 2008, a 260MWe coal-fired power plant (CFPP) located in Rochester, New York was closed over a 4 month period. Using a 2-years data record, the impacts of the shutdown of the CFPP on nearby ambient concentrations of three Hg species were quantified. The arithmetic average ambient concentrations of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM), gaseous oxidized mercury (GOM), and particulate mercury (PBM) during December 2007-November 2009 were 1.6ng/m3, 5.1pg/m3, and 8.9pg/m3, respectively. The median concentrations of GEM, GOM, and PBM significantly decreased by 12%, 73%, and 50% after the CFPP closed (Mann-Whitney test, p<0.001). Positive Matrix Factorization (EPA PMF v4.1) identified six factors including O3-rich, traffic, gas phase oxidation, wood combustion, nucleation, and CFPP. When the CFPP was closed, median concentrations of GEM, GOM, and PBM apportioned to the CFPP factor significantly decreased by 25%, 74%, and 67%, respectively, compared to those measured when the CFPP was still in operation (Mann-Whitney test, p<0.001). Conditional probability function (CPF) analysis showed the greatest reduction in all three Hg species was associated with northwesterly winds pointing toward the CFPP. These changes were clearly attributable to the closure of the CFPP.

42

Fuel cell system shutdown with anode pressure control  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A venting methodology and pressure sensing and vent valving arrangement for monitoring anode bypass valve operating during the normal shutdown of a fuel cell apparatus of the type used in vehicle propulsion systems. During a normal shutdown routine, the pressure differential between the anode inlet and anode outlet is monitored in real time in a period corresponding to the normal closing speed of the anode bypass valve and the pressure differential at the end of the closing cycle of the anode bypass valve is compared to the pressure differential at the beginning of the closing cycle. If the difference in pressure differential at the beginning and end of the anode bypass closing cycle indicates that the anode bypass valve has not properly closed, a system controller switches from a normal shutdown mode to a rapid shutdown mode in which the anode inlet is instantaneously vented by rapid vents.

Clingerman, Bruce J. (Palmyra, NY); Doan, Tien M. (Columbia, MD); Keskula, Donald H. (Webster, NY)

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

43

Energy-efficient content delivery networks using cluster shutdown  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Content delivery networks (CDNs) are an important class of Internet-scale distributed systems that deliver web, streaming, and application content to end users. A commercial CDN could comprise hundreds of thousands of servers deployed in over thousand clusters across the globe and incurs significant energy costs for powering and cooling their servers. Since energy costs are a significant component of the total operating expense of a CDN, we propose and explore a novel technique called cluster shutdown that turns off an entire cluster of servers of a CDN that is deployed within a data center. By doing so, cluster shutdown saves not just the power consumed by the servers but also the power needed for cooling those servers. We present an algorithm for cluster shutdown that is based on realistic power models for servers and cooling equipment and can be implemented as a part of the global load balancer of a CDN. We evaluate our technique using extensive real-world traces from a large commercial CDN to show that cluster shutdown can reduce the system-wide energy usage by 67%. Further, much of the energy savings are obtainable without sacrificing either bandwidth costs or end-user performance. In addition, 79% of the optimal savings are attainable even if each cluster is limited to at most one shutdown per day, reducing the required operational overhead. Finally, we argue that cluster shutdown has intrinsic architectural advantages over the well-studied server shutdown techniques in the CDN context, and show that it saves more energy than server shutdown in a wide range of operating regimes.

Vimal Mathew; Ramesh K. Sitaraman; Prashant Shenoy

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

44

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2013 Data Tables  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook 2014 Release Date: May 7, 2014 | Next Release Date: March 2015 | See schedule | full report Overview Data Reference Case Side Cases Interactive Table Viewer...

45

TABLE19.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Table 19. PAD District IV-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

46

TABLE15.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Table 15. PAD District III-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum (Thousand Barrels) January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

47

TABLE11.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

(Thousand Barrels) Table 11. PAD District II-Year-to-Date Supply, Disposition, and Ending Stocks of Crude Oil and Petroleum January-July 2004 Products, Crude Oil...

48

DOE/EA-1488: Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (12/04)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

88 88 FINAL Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee December 2004 U. S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations 04-049(doc)/120204 04-049(doc)/120204 SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION contributed to the preparation of this document and should not be considered an eligible contractor for its review. Environmental Assessment for the U-233 Disposition, Medical Isotope Production, and Building 3019 Complex Shutdown at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee Date Issued-December 2004 U. S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations 04-049(doc)/120204 CONTENTS

49

Self-assessment of conduct of operations in safe shutdown  

SciTech Connect

This report documents a self-assessment of the Conduct of Operations Program as it applies to safe shutdown activities at the Pinellas Plant. The self-assessment was performed in two parts: Part one consisted of a review to determine the adequacy of programs, plans and procedures. Part two assessed the effectiveness of the implementation of programs, plans and procedures.

Not Available

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

50

ITER-like wall sliced beryllium tiles The JET Enhanced Performance 2 (EP2) shutdown  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

ITER-like wall sliced beryllium tiles Background The JET Enhanced Performance 2 (EP2) shutdown and remote handling equipment. JET remote handling systems #12;Outcome The EP2 shutdown was successful of the remote handling system are compatible with the required component manipulation. Pre EP2 shutdown Mid

51

Natural Convection Shutdown Heat Removal Test Facility (NSTF)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Natural Convection Natural Convection Shutdown Heat Removal Test Facility Scaling Basis Full Scale Half Scale NSTF Argonne National Laboratory's Natural Convection Shutdown Heat Removal Test Facility (NSTF) - one of the world's largest facilities for ex-vessel passive decay heat removal testing-confirms the performance of reactor cavity cooling systems (RCCS) and similar passive confinement or containment decay heat removal systems in modern Small Modular Reactors. Originally built to aid in the development of General Electric's Power Reactor Innovative Small Module (PRISM) Reactor Vessel Auxiliary Cooling System (RVACS), the NSTF has a long history of providing confirmatory data for the airside of the RVACS. Argonne National Laboratory's NSTF is a state-of-the-art, large-scale facility for evaluating performance

52

Uncertainty reduction requirements in cores designed for passive reactivity shutdown  

SciTech Connect

The first purpose of this paper is to describe the changed focus of neutronics accuracy requirements existing in the current US advanced LMR development program where passive shutdown is a major design goal. The second purpose is to provide the background and rationale which supports the selection of a formal data fitting methodology as the means for the application of critical experiment measurements to meet these accuracy needs. 6 refs., 1 fig., 2 tabs.

Wade, D.C.

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

53

Electrical Safety Program Date of last revision: August 2014  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1 Electrical Safety Program Date of last revision: August 2014 #12;2 Table of Contents Table ............................................................................................................... 19 Table 1 ­ Approach Boundaries to Energized Electrical Conductors and Circuit Parts for Shock.) ............................................................................................................................ 21 Table 1a Approach Boundariesa to Energized Electrical Conductors or Circuit Parts for Shock

Stuart, Steven J.

54

Hurricane Emergency Shutdown Actions June 24, 2014 Chancellor directs P&F to commence emergency preparations 1  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

(formerly Entergy) that shutdown actions are commencing (P&F) 5 Notify Contractors to secure construction

55

Conversion Tables  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center - Conversion Tables Contents taken from Glossary: Carbon Dioxide and Climate, 1990. ORNL/CDIAC-39, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Third Edition. Edited by: Fred O'Hara Jr. 1 - International System of Units (SI) Prefixes 2 - Useful Quantities in CO2 3 - Common Conversion Factors 4 - Common Energy Unit Conversion Factors 5 - Geologic Time Scales 6 - Factors and Units for Calculating Annual CO2 Emissions Using Global Fuel Production Data Table 1. International System of Units (SI) Prefixes Prefix SI Symbol Multiplication Factor exa E 1018 peta P 1015 tera T 1012 giga G 109 mega M 106 kilo k 103 hecto h 102 deka da 10 deci d 10-1 centi c 10-2

56

Version Date: July 2012 COPYRIGHT & TRADEMARKS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

WEB Clock Version Date: July 2012 #12;COPYRIGHT & TRADEMARKS Copyright © 1998, 2011, Oracle and Guide WEB Clock Page iii Table of Contents WEB Clock ........................................................................................................................ 1 WEB Clock Procedure

57

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format Excel logo Spreadsheets are provided in excel 1 to117 - Complete set of Supplemental Tables PDF Energy Consumption by Sector (Census Division) Table 1. New England XLS PDF Table 2. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 3. East North Central XLS PDF Table 4. West North Central XLS PDF Table 5. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 6. East South Central XLS PDF Table 7. West South Central XLS PDF Table 8. Mountain XLS PDF Table 9. Pacific XLS PDF Table 10. Total United States XLS PDF Energy Prices by Sector (Census Division) Table 11. New England XLS PDF Table 12. Middle Atlantic XLS PDF Table 13. East North Central XLS PDF Table 14. West North Central XLS PDF Table 15. South Atlantic XLS PDF Table 16. East South Central

58

Failure and Reliability Analysis for the Master Pump Shutdown System  

SciTech Connect

The Master Pump Shutdown System (MPSS) will be installed in the 200 Areas of the Hanford Site to monitor and control the transfer of liquid waste between tank farms and between the 200 West and 200 East areas through the Cross-Site Transfer Line. The Safety Function provided by the MPSS is to shutdown any waste transfer process within or between tank farms if a waste leak should occur along the selected transfer route. The MPSS, which provides this Safety Class Function, is composed of Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), interconnecting wires, relays, Human to Machine Interfaces (HMI), and software. These components are defined as providing a Safety Class Function and will be designated in this report as MPSS/PLC. Input signals to the MPSS/PLC are provided by leak detection systems from each of the tank farm leak detector locations along the waste transfer route. The combination of the MPSS/PLC, leak detection system, and transfer pump controller system will be referred to as MPSS/SYS. The components addressed in this analysis are associated with the MPSS/SYS. The purpose of this failure and reliability analysis is to address the following design issues of the Project Development Specification (PDS) for the MPSS/SYS (HNF 2000a): (1) Single Component Failure Criterion, (2) System Status Upon Loss of Electrical Power, (3) Physical Separation of Safety Class cables, (4) Physical Isolation of Safety Class Wiring from General Service Wiring, and (5) Meeting the MPSS/PLC Option 1b (RPP 1999) Reliability estimate. The failure and reliability analysis examined the system on a component level basis and identified any hardware or software elements that could fail and/or prevent the system from performing its intended safety function.

BEVINS, R.R.

2000-09-05T23:59:59.000Z

59

Short communication Enhanced autonomic shutdown of Li-ion batteries by polydopamine  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Short communication Enhanced autonomic shutdown of Li-ion batteries by polydopamine coated Accepted 9 July 2014 Available online 17 July 2014 Keywords: Li-ion batteries Thermal shutdown Polyethylene binder, applied onto a battery anode surface, dried, and incorporated into Li-ion coin cells. FTIR

Sottos, Nancy R.

60

EA-0993: Shutdown of the Fast Flux Testing Facility, Richland, Washington |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

93: Shutdown of the Fast Flux Testing Facility, Richland, 93: Shutdown of the Fast Flux Testing Facility, Richland, Washington EA-0993: Shutdown of the Fast Flux Testing Facility, Richland, Washington SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the U.S. Department of Energy's Hanford Site's proposal to place the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) in a radiologically and industrially safe shutdown condition, suitable for a long-term surveillance and maintenance phase prior to final decontamination and decommissioning. This EA addresses the actions associated with Phase I (Facility Transition) and Phase II (Surveillance and Maintenance). PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD May 1, 1995 EA-0993: Finding of No Significant Impact Shutdown of the Fast Flux Testing Facility

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2012 Data Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Release Date: June 25, 2012 | Next Early Release Date: December 5, 2012 | Report Number: DOE/EIA-0383(2012) Overview Data Reference Case Side Cases Interactive Table Viewer Topics Source Oil/Liquids Natural Gas Coal Electricity Renewable/Alternative Nuclear Sector Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Energy Demand Other Emissions Prices Macroeconomic International Efficiency Publication Chapter Executive Summary Market Trends Issues in Focus Legislation & Regulations Comparison Appendices View All Filter By Source Oil Natural Gas Coal Electricity Renewable/Alternative Nuclear Sector Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Other Topics Emissions Prices Macroeconomic International Data TablesAll Tables Reference case summary & detailed tables... + EXPAND ALL Summary Case Tables Additional Formats

62

Preliminary Evaluation of Removing Used Nuclear Fuel From Nine Shutdown Sites  

SciTech Connect

The Blue Ribbon Commission on Americas Nuclear Future identified removal of stranded used nuclear fuel at shutdown sites as a priority so that these sites may be completely decommissioned and put to other beneficial uses. In this report, a preliminary evaluation of removing used nuclear fuel from nine shutdown sites was conducted. The shutdown sites included Maine Yankee, Yankee Rowe, Connecticut Yankee, Humboldt Bay, Big Rock Point, Rancho Seco, Trojan, La Crosse, and Zion. At these sites a total of 7649 used nuclear fuel assemblies and a total of 2813.2 metric tons heavy metal (MTHM) of used nuclear fuel are contained in 248 storage canisters. In addition, 11 canisters containing greater-than-Class C (GTCC) low-level radioactive waste are stored at these sites. The evaluation was divided in four components: characterization of the used nuclear fuel and GTCC low-level radioactive waste inventory at the shutdown sites an evaluation of the onsite transportation conditions at the shutdown sites an evaluation of the near-site transportation infrastructure and experience relevant to the shipping of transportation casks containing used nuclear fuel from the shutdown sites an evaluation of the actions necessary to prepare for and remove used nuclear fuel and GTCC low-level radioactive waste from the shutdown sites. Using these evaluations the authors developed time sequences of activities and time durations for removing the used nuclear fuel and GTCC low-level radioactive waste from a single shutdown site, from three shutdown sites located close to each other, and from all nine shutdown sites.

Maheras, Steven J. [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); Best, Ralph [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); Ross, Steven B. [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); Buxton, Kenneth A. [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); England, Jeffery L. [Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken, SC (United States); McConnell, Paul [Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM (United States)

2013-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

63

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

i i ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................................II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 4 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 6 COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) .................... 6

64

Plasma-surface interactions during tokamak disruptions and rapid shutdowns  

SciTech Connect

Recent progress in understanding of disruptions and in developing methods to avoid disruption damage is presented. Nearly complete mitigation of conducted heat loads has been achieved with high-Z gas jet shutdown. The resulting local radiation heat flash melting in the main chamber might be a concern in ITER, especially with beryllium walls. During the current quench, significant vessel forces can occur due to halo currents I-halo; however, these are found to fall reliably below a boundary of (halo current fraction times halo current peaking factor) <0.7 both experimentally and numerically. Numerical simulations indicate that runaway electrons (REs) could cause serious damage to hard-to reach components in ITER, making their suppression a high priority. During the current quench, less than 20% of the density required for collisional suppression of REs appears to have been achieved. Collisional suppression of REs may have been achieved, however, in full-current RE beams with gas injection. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Hollmann, E. M. [University of California, San Diego; Arnoux, G. [EURATOM, Culham Sci Ctr, Abingdon, Oxon England; Commaux, Nicolas JC [ORNL; Eidietis, N. W. [General Atomics, San Diego; Evans, T.E. [General Atomics, San Diego; Granetz, R. S. [MIT Plasma Science & Fusion Center, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA; Huber, A. [Forschungszentrum Julich, Julich, Germany; Humphreys, D A [General Atomics, San Diego; Izzo, V. A. [University of California, San Diego & La Jolla; James, A. N. [University of California, San Diego; Jernigan, Thomas C [ORNL; Lehnen, M. [Forschungszentrum Julich, Julich, Germany; Maddaluno, G. [Association Euratom-ENEA sulla Fusione, Italy; Paccagnella, R. [Consorzio RFX, Assoc Euratom ENEA Fus, Padua, Italy; Parks, P. B. [General Atomics; Phillipps, V. [Forschungszentrum Julich, Julich, Germany; Reinke, M. L. [MIT Plasma Science & Fusion Center, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA; Rudakov, D. L. [University of California, San Diego; Saint-Laurent, F. [CEA Cadarache, St. Paul lex Durance, France; Strait, E. J. [General Atomics, San Diego; Wesley, J. C. [General Atomics; Wong, C. P. C. [General Atomics, San Diego; Yu, J.H. [University of California, San Diego

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

65

Advanced wind turbine with lift cancelling aileron for shutdown  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An advanced aileron configuration for wind turbine rotors featuring an independent, lift generating aileron connected to the rotor blade. The aileron has an airfoil profile which is inverted relative to the airfoil profile of the main section of the rotor blade. The inverted airfoil profile of the aileron allows the aileron to be used for strong positive control of the rotation of the rotor while deflected to angles within a control range of angles. The aileron functions as a separate, lift generating body when deflected to angles within a shutdown range of angles, generating lift with a component acting in the direction opposite the direction of rotation of the rotor. Thus, the aileron can be used to shut down rotation of the rotor. The profile of the aileron further allows the center of rotation to be located within the envelope of the aileron, at or near the centers of pressure and mass of the aileron. The location of the center of rotation optimizes aerodynamically and gyroscopically induced hinge moments and provides a fail safe configuration.

Coleman, Clint (Warren, VT); Juengst, Theresa M. (Warren, VT); Zuteck, Michael D. (Kemah, TX)

1996-06-18T23:59:59.000Z

66

Advanced wind turbine with lift-destroying aileron for shutdown  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

An advanced aileron configuration for wind turbine rotors featuring an aileron with a bottom surface that slopes upwardly at an angle toward the nose region of the aileron. The aileron rotates about a center of rotation which is located within the envelope of the aileron, but does not protrude substantially into the air flowing past the aileron while the aileron is deflected to angles within a control range of angles. This allows for strong positive control of the rotation of the rotor. When the aileron is rotated to angles within a shutdown range of deflection angles, lift-destroying, turbulence-producing cross-flow of air through a flow gap, and turbulence created by the aileron, create sufficient drag to stop rotation of the rotor assembly. The profile of the aileron further allows the center of rotation to be located within the envelope of the aileron, at or near the centers of pressure and mass of the aileron. The location of the center of rotation optimizes aerodynamically and gyroscopically induced hinge moments and provides a fail safe configuration.

Coleman, Clint (Warren, VT); Juengst, Theresa M. (Warren, VT); Zuteck, Michael D. (Kemah, TX)

1996-06-18T23:59:59.000Z

67

MEMORANDUfl DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

DATE DATE cl e-w --we-- SUBJECT: __------------------------ _ OWNER (S) -----w-e Pamt a __---------------------- current: -------------------_______ Owner contacted 0 yes 0 no; if yes, date contacted --------w-w-- TYPE OF OPERATION ------------- erearch & Development a Facility Typr Praduction scale trstinq Pilot Scale Bench Seal e Process Theoretical Studies Sample & Analysis n Production 0 Disposal/Storage TYPE OF CONTRACT ---------------- 0 Prim* 7z Subcontract& Purchase Order . Mmuf l cturing University Research Organization Government Sponsored Facility Rther ----B.-------------- 0 Othrr information (i.e., cost + fixrd fee, unit prier, time 81 material, rte) -m-M--- -------------------------- ---------------------------- Contract/Purchase Order M

68

MEMORANDUM DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

DATE DATE :;++, -m--s B-w- -w---m-- SUBJECT: , ::;:: JLLiucd ALTERN&TE e---e---- --------------------------- CITY&da NCIME: ---------------------- - --------------------- J&f STATE: OWNER ( S 1 -----m-e Past 0 Current: ------------------------ Owner contacted 0 -------------------------- 0 yes no; if ye=, date contacted ------w---s-- TYPE OF OPERATION ----w------------ F Research & Development 0 Facility Type 0 Production scale testing F Pilot Scale 0 Manufacturing 0 Bench Scale Process 0 University Research 0 Theoretical 0 Organization Studies 0 Sample & Analysis 0 Government Sponsored Facility 0 Other --------------------- 0 Production 0 Disposal/Storage TYPE OF CONTRfiCT a--------------- 0 Prim- 0 Subcontract& s Purchase Order

69

1992 CBECS Detailed Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables To download all 1992 detailed tables: Download Acrobat Reader for viewing PDF files. Yellow Arrow Buildings Characteristics Tables (PDF format) (70 tables, 230 pages, file size 1.39 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables (PDF format) (47 tables, 208 pages, file size 1.28 MB) Yellow Arrow Energy End-Use Tables (PDF format) (6 tables, 6 pages, file size 31.7 KB) Detailed tables for other years: Yellow Arrow 1999 CBECS Yellow Arrow 1995 CBECS Background information on detailed tables: Yellow Arrow Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Yellow Arrow Statistical Significance of Data 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) Detailed Tables Data from the 1992 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables:

70

Table 25  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

89 89 Table 25 Created on: 1/3/2014 3:10:33 PM Table 25. Natural gas home customer-weighted heating degree days, New England Middle Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic Month/Year/Type of data CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT NJ, NY, PA IL, IN, MI, OH, WI IA, KS, MN, MO, ND, NE, SD DE, FL, GA, MD, DC, NC, SC, VA, WV November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0 November to November Normal 702 665 758 841 442 2012 751 738 772 748 527 2013 756 730 823 868 511 % Diff (normal to 2013) 7.7 9.8 8.6 3.2 15.6 % Diff (2012 to 2013) 0.7 -1.1 6.6 16.0 -3.0

71

Numerical simulation of a buried hot crude oil pipeline during shutdown  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

In this paper a mathematical model is built for a buried hot crude oil pipeline during shutdown, and an unstructured grid and ... and the three layers in the pipe (wax layer, pipe wall, and corrosion-inhibiting ....

Cheng Xu; Bo Yu; Zhengwei Zhang; Jinjun Zhang; Jinjia Wei; Shuyu Sun

2010-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

72

chapter 5. Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

5. Detailed Tables 5. Detailed Tables Chapter 5. Detailed Tables The following tables present detailed characteristics of vehicles in the residential sector. Data are from the 1994 Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey. Table Organization The "Detailed Tables" section consists of three types of tables: (1) Tables of totals such as number of vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) or gallons consumed; (2) tables of per household statistics such as VMT per household; and (3) tables of per-vehicle statistics, such as vehicle fuel consumption per vehicle. The tables have been grouped together by specific topics such as model-year data or family-income data to facilitate finding related information. The Quick-Reference Guide to the detailed tables indicates major topics of each table.

73

Notices TABLE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

7 Federal Register 7 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 160 / Thursday, August 18, 2011 / Notices TABLE 2-NET BURDEN CHANGE-Continued 2011-2012 2012-2013 Change % Change Burden disposition Total Applicants .................................... 23,611,500 24,705,864 +1,094,364 +4.63 Net decrease in burden. The increase in applicants is offset by the results of the Department's simplification changes. This has created an over- all decrease in burden of 8.94% or 2,881,475 hours. Total Applicant Burden ......................... 32,239,328 29,357,853 ¥2,881,475 ¥8.94 Total Annual Responses ....................... 32,239,328 46,447,024 +14,207,696 +44.07 Cost for All Applicants .......................... $159,370.20 $234,804.24 $75,434.04 +47.33 The Department is proud that efforts to simplify the FAFSA submission

74

Table 4  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of 4. Mean Annual Electricity Expenditures for Lighting, by Number of Household Members by Number of Rooms, 1993 (Dollars) Number of Rooms Number of Household Members All Households One to Three Four Five Six Seven Eight or More RSE Column Factors: 0.5 1.8 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 RSE Row Factors All Households................................... 83 49 63 76 87 104 124 2.34 One..................................................... 55 44 51 54 69 78 87 5.33 Two..................................................... 80 56 63 77 82 96 107 3.38 Three.................................................. 92 60 73 82 95 97 131 4.75 Four.................................................... 106 64 78 93 96 124 134 4.53 Five or More....................................... 112 70 83 98 99 117 150 5.89 Notes: -- To obtain the RSE percentage for any table cell, multiply the

75

Table G3  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

1905-0194 1905-0194 Expiration Date: 07/31/2013 May 28, 2010 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases 14 Table G3. Decision Chart for a Start Year Report for a Large Emitter Intending To Register Reductions Report Characteristics Reporting Requirements Schedule I Schedule II (For Each Subentity) Schedule III Schedule IV Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 3 Sec. 4 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 & Add. A Sec. 3 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Sec. 1 Sec. 2 Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Part A Part B Part C Independent Verification? All A- or B-Rated Methods? Foreign Emissions? Entity-Wide Reductions Only? Entity Statement Aggregated Emissions by Gas (Domestic and Foreign) † Emissions Inventory by Source

76

1995 Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey > Detailed Tables 1995 Detailed Tables Data from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in three groups of detailed tables: Buildings Characteristics Tables, number of buildings and amount of floorspace for major building characteristics. Energy Consumption and Expenditures Tables, energy consumption and expenditures for major energy sources. Energy End-Use Data, total, electricity and natural gas consumption and energy intensities for nine specific end-uses. Summary Table—All Principal Buildings Activities (HTML Format) Background information on detailed tables: Description of Detailed Tables and Categories of Data Statistical Significance of Data

77

DATE: TO:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

41 41 4 DATE: TO: September 2,2008 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Federal Procurement Data System Coding (FPDS) for Hurricane Gustav SUMMARY: An emergency declaration was made in preparation for Hurricane Gustav. The effective date for this declaration was August 29,2008. FPDS has been updated to include Hurricane Gustav as a choice in the data field "National Interest Action." When making an award to support the emergency, please ensure FPDS is properly coded. This Flash will be available online within a day, at the following website: http://www.rnananement.ener~y.~ov/policy guidance/policy flasheshtm. Questions concerning this policy flash should be

78

DATE: TO:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

28 28 - DATE: TO: v POLICY FLASH 2008-28 February 19,2008 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA41 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Acquisition Letter (AL) 2008-06, Domestic and Foreign Procurement Preference Requirements SUMMARY: AL 2008-06 (attached) replaces AL 2002-06, dated 08/14/02, "Domestic and Foreign Procurement Preference Rules," which is hereby canceled. AL 2002-06 disseminated deviations to FAR provisions and clauses relating to foreign acquisition for use by Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), and Power Marketing Administration (PMA) contracting activities. This new AL provides updated deviations to the FAR provisions and clauses for use by DOE,

79

One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown January 1, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Members of the team that helped safely close the Toxic Substances Control Act Incinerator at Oak Ridge gather for a photo. The team is from URS|CH2M, Oak Ridge, the prime contractor for the Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management. Members of the team that helped safely close the Toxic Substances Control Act Incinerator at Oak Ridge gather for a photo. The team is from URS|CH2M, Oak Ridge, the prime contractor for the Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management. OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - Oak Ridge's East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) is home to many unique facilities, each constructed for a specific purpose. Today, almost all of the facilities at the site are in the process of being

80

One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown One-of-a-Kind Facility Now in Safe Shutdown January 1, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Members of the team that helped safely close the Toxic Substances Control Act Incinerator at Oak Ridge gather for a photo. The team is from URS|CH2M, Oak Ridge, the prime contractor for the Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management. Members of the team that helped safely close the Toxic Substances Control Act Incinerator at Oak Ridge gather for a photo. The team is from URS|CH2M, Oak Ridge, the prime contractor for the Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management. OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - Oak Ridge's East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) is home to many unique facilities, each constructed for a specific purpose. Today, almost all of the facilities at the site are in the process of being

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

Audit of Shutdown and Transition of the Mound Plant, IG-0408  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

June 24, 1997 June 24, 1997 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM: John C. Layton Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: "Audit of Shutdown and Transition of the Mound Plant" BACKGROUND: The end of the Cold War has allowed the Department of Energy (Department) to reduce weapons production and consolidate operations throughout the nuclear weapons complex. As part of this consolidation, the Department has either transferred or is planning to transfer all weapons-related and production activities at the Mound Plant to other Departmental facilities. The objective of this audit was to determine if the shutdown and transition of the Mound Plant was progressing efficiently and effectively. More

82

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Adobe Acrobat Reader is required for PDF format. MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in excel Errata - August 25, 2004 1 to117 - Complete set of of Supplemental Tables PDF Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) XLS PDF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) XLS PDF Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) XLS PDF Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) XLS PDF Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) XLS PDF Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) XLS PDF Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

83

1999 CBECS Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > Detailed Tables 1999 CBECS Detailed Tables Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures Data from the 1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) are presented in the Building Characteristics tables, which include number of buildings and total floorspace for various Building Characteristics, and Consumption and Expenditures tables, which include energy usage figures for major energy sources. A table of Relative Standard Errors (RSEs) is included as a worksheet tab in each Excel tables. Complete sets of RSE tables are also available in .pdf format. (What is an RSE?) Preliminary End-Use Consumption Estimates for 1999 | Description of 1999 Detailed Tables and Categories of Data

84

Date Event  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Timeline of DOE's review of the Solyndra Loan Guarantee Application Timeline of DOE's review of the Solyndra Loan Guarantee Application Date Event 2005 Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program created (as part of EPAct 2005) Aug. 8, 2006 DOE issues solicitation seeking pre-applications for Title XVII loan guarantees Dec. 28, 2006 Solyndra submits pre-application, seeking funding for its Fab 1 manufacturing facility April - June 2007 DOE conducts financial and technical review of Solyndra pre-application Oct. 4, 2007 DOE invites Solyndra, and 15 other applicants, to submit full applications May 6, 2008 Company submits full application, seeking funding for its Fab 2 manufacturing facility. DOE begins due diligence. Sept. 4, 2008 DOE loan programs staff draft memorandum indicating that Solyndra was the "earliest mover" and may receive conditional commitment by January 16, 2009

85

UVM Central Heating & Cooling Plant Annual Maintenance Shutdown 2013 Affected Buildings  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

UVM Central Heating & Cooling Plant Annual Maintenance Shutdown 2013 Affected Buildings Sunday 19 heating, hot water and critical air conditioning > NO CAGE WASHING > NO AUTOCLAVES > Given Boiler Plant will be in operation to provide heating, hot water and critical air conditioning > NO CAGE WASHING > NO AUTOCLAVES

Hayden, Nancy J.

86

Dynamic Analysis of Floating Wind Turbines During Pitch Actuator Fault, Grid Loss, and Shutdown  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Coupled non-linear aero-hydro-servo-elastic simulations of three types of floating wind turbines (spar, semi- submersible, and tension leg platform) are carried out for several fault cases over a range of environmental conditions based on correlated wind and wave data from the North Sea. Three particular fault scenarios are considered: 1) blade seize, where the pitch actuator of one blade is blocked, 2) blade seize, recognized by the controller and followed by shutdown (grid disconnection and aerodynamic braking), and 3) grid loss followed by shutdown. The platform motions and structural loads caused by fault events are compared to loads encountered during normal operation and during selected extreme weather conditions. Although the global motions and mooring line loads tend to be largest during stormaconditions, selected platforms experience large pitch or yaw motions due to blade seize and shutdown. Imbalance loads due to blade seize can lead to particularly large loads on the blades and tower, andethe shutdown process can impose relatively large edgewise blade loads.

Erin E. Bachynski; Mahmoud Etemaddar; Marit I. Kvittem; Chenyu Luan; Torgeir Moan

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

87

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

December 22, 2000 (Next Release: December, 2001) Related Links Annual Energy Outlook 2001 Assumptions to the AEO2001 NEMS Conference Contacts Forecast Homepage EIA Homepage AEO Supplement Reference Case Forecast (1999-2020) (HTML) Table 1. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (New England) Table 2. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Middle Atlantic) Table 3. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East North Central) Table 4. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West North Central) Table 5. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (South Atlantic) Table 6. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (East South Central) Table 7. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (West South Central) Table 8. Energy Consumption by Source and Sector (Mountain)

88

Exhibit C Table of Contents  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" SCHEDULES AND LISTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Form Title A Schedule of Quantities and Prices B Milestone and Payment Schedule C Lower-Tier Subcontractor and Vendor List Exhibit C Schedules and Lists Dated 5-20-13 Subcontract No. 241314 Page 2 of 5 EXHIBIT "C" FORM A SCHEDULE OF QUANTITIES AND PRICES NOTE: This Exhibit "C" Form A is part of the model subcontract for Trinity and is provided to Offerors for informational purposes only. It is not intended that this form be returned with the Offeror's proposal. 1.0 WORK TO BE PERFORMED Work shall be performed strictly in accordance with requirements of the Subcontract

89

FY 2005 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 6 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 6 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 6 Science.........................................................................................................

90

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2002 (AEO2002) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2002, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2002 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seven tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2002 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2000-2002 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current

91

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Homepage Homepage Supplement Tables to the AEO2001 The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2001 (AEO2001) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1999 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2001, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2001 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2001 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1999 and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

92

Date | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Properties of type "Date" Properties of type "Date" Showing 47 properties using this type. A Property:ASHRAE 169 End Date Property:ASHRAE 169 Start Date B Property:Building/EndPeriod Property:Building/StartPeriod Property:Building/YearConstruction Property:Building/YearConstruction1 Property:Building/YearConstruction2 Property:Buildings/ModelYear Property:Buildings/PublicationYear C Property:CommercialOnlineDate D Property:DSIRE/LstUpdt E Property:EndDate Property:EndYear Property:EnergyAccessYearInitiated Property:Event/Date Property:ExpActivityDate E cont. Property:ExpActivityDateEnd F Property:File/CreationDate Property:FirstWellDate G Property:GEAReportDate Property:Geothermal/FY Property:Geothermal/ProjectEndDate Property:Geothermal/ProjectStartDate H Property:HPBD/DateOfOccupancy I Property:Incentive/DsireLstSubModSummaryUpdt

93

LSPE SAFE/ ARM SLIDE DATE 28 March 197  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

: ..'; I ~ ··,~ ' . LSPE SAFE/ ARM SLIDE NO. ATM-1088 REV. NO. PAGE OF- DATE 28 March 197 FAILURE/ ARM SLIDE FAILURE EVALUATION REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE BACKGROUND DESCRIPTION OF FAILURE with Slides Having PAGI i DATE 0, Page 1 1 3 3 3 12 15 16 Larger Fillet Radius 16 6. 2 Slide Tests With 10

Rathbun, Julie A.

94

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2000 (AEO2000) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1998 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2000, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2000 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-six tables are presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO200 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 1998, and 2000 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, Fourth Quarter 1999 or Short Term Energy Outlook, First Quarter 2000, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

95

The Upgrade of the CMS RPC System during the First LHC Long Shutdown  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The CMS muon system includes in both the barrel and endcap region Resistive Plate Chambers (RPC). They mainly serve as trigger detectors and also improve the reconstruction of muon parameters. Over the years, the instantaneous luminosity of the Large Hadron Collider gradually increases. During the LHC Phase 1 (~first 10 years of operation) an ultimate luminosity is expected above its design value of 10^34/cm^2/s at 14 TeV. To prepare the machine and also the experiments for this, two long shutdown periods are scheduled for 2013-2014 and 2018-2019. The CMS Collaboration is planning several detector upgrades during these long shutdowns. In particular, the muon detection system should be able to maintain a low-pT threshold for an efficient Level-1 Muon Trigger at high particle rates. One of the measures to ensure this, is to extend the present RPC system with the addition of a 4th layer in both endcap regions. During the first long shutdown, these two new stations will be equipped in the region |eta|control procedures.

M. Tytgat; A. Marinov; P. Verwilligen; N. Zaganidis; A. Aleksandrov; V. Genchev; P. Iaydjiev; M. Rodozov; M. Shopova; G. Sultanov; Y. Assran; M. Abbrescia; C. Calabria; A. Colaleo; G. Iaselli; F. Loddo; M. Maggi; G. Pugliese; L. Benussi; S. Bianco; M. Caponero; S. Colafranceschi; F. Felli; D. Piccolo; G. Saviano; C. Carrillo; U. Berzano; M. Gabusi; P. Vitulo; M. Kang; K. S. Lee; S. K. Park; S. Shin; A. Sharma

2012-09-10T23:59:59.000Z

96

FY 2005 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Congressional Budget Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropria ted as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress.

97

Shutdown and low-power operation at commercial nuclear power plants in the United States. Final report  

SciTech Connect

The report contains the results of the NRC Staff`s evaluation of shutdown and low-power operations at US commercial nuclear power plants. The report describes studies conducted by the staff in the following areas: Operating experience related to shutdown and low-power operations, probabilistic risk assessment of shutdown and low-power conditions and utility programs for planning and conducting activities during periods the plant is shut down. The report also documents evaluations of a number of technical issues regarding shutdown and low-power operations performed by the staff, including the principal findings and conclusions. Potential new regulatory requirements are discussed, as well as potential changes in NRC programs. A draft report was issued for comment in February 1992. This report is the final version and includes the responses to the comments along with the staff regulatory analysis of potential new requirements.

Not Available

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

98

Louisiana Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Louisiana Block Grant Tables Louisiana Block Grant Tables This table details funding for state, city, and county governments in the state of Louisiana. Louisiana Block Grant Tables...

99

Mississippi Block Grant Tables | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Mississippi Block Grant Tables Mississippi Block Grant Tables A table describing where state funding is being distributed Mississippi Block Grant Tables More Documents &...

100

2003 CBECS RSE Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" cbecs/cbecs2003/detailed_tables_2003/2003rsetables_files/plainlink.css" type=text/css rel=stylesheet> Home > Households, Buildings & Industry > Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) > 2003 Detailed Tables > RSE Tables 2003 CBECS Relative Standard Error (RSE) Tables Released: Dec 2006 Next CBECS will be conducted in 2007 Standard error is a measure of the reliability or precision of the survey statistic. The value for the standard error can be used to construct confidence intervals and to perform hypothesis tests by standard statistical methods. Relative Standard Error (RSE) is defined as the standard error (square root of the variance) of a survey estimate, divided by the survey estimate and multiplied by 100. (More information on RSEs)

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

lead-isotope dating  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

lead-isotope dating, lead-lead dating, lead-isotope age measurement, lead-lead age measurement ? Blei-Isotopen(-Alters)bestimmung, f, Blei-Isotopen-Datierung

2014-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

102

EM International Program Action Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 EM INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROGRAM] October, 2012 E M I n t e r n a t i o n a l P r o g r a m s Page 1 ACTION TABLE Subject Lead Office Engaging Country Meeting Location Purpose Status Date of Event 3 rd US/German Workshop on Salt Repository Research, Design and Operations N. Buschman, EM-22 Germany Albuquerque & Carlsbad, NM Continue collaboration with Germans on salt repository research, design and operations. Draft agenda prepared. October 8-12, 2012 International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC) Ministerial R. Elmetti, EM- 2.1 Multilateral Marrakech, Morocco To support the development of nuclear energy infrastructure globally through workforce training, information sharing, and approaches related to the safe, secure and responsible use of

103

Re-release Date: August 13, 2013  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Re-release Date: August 13, 2013" Re-release Date: August 13, 2013" "Table 27. Estimated rail transportation rates for coal, state to state, EIA data" ,,"Nominal Dollars per Ton",,,,"Annual Percent Change" "Origin State","Destination State",2008,2009,2010,," 2008-2010"," 2009-2010" "Alabama","Alabama"," $14.43"," $13.59"," $15.46",, 3.5, 13.8 "Alabama","Georgia"," $19.13"," $19.58"," $22.30",, 8.0, 13.9 "Alabama","Kentucky"," -"," W"," -",," -"," -" "Alabama","New Jersey"," W"," -"," -",," -"," -"

104

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Buildings Use Tables Buildings Use Tables (24 pages, 129 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 12. Employment Size Category, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 13. Employment Size Category, Floorspace, 1995 Table 14. Weekly Operating Hours, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 15. Weekly Operating Hours, Floorspace, 1995 Table 16. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 17. Occupancy of Nongovernment-Owned and Government-Owned Buildings, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the

105

ARM - Instrument Location Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

govInstrumentsLocation Table govInstrumentsLocation Table Instruments Location Table Contacts Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument Locations Site abbreviations explained in the key. Instrument Name Abbreviation NSA SGP TWP AMF C1 C2 EF BF CF EF IF C1 C2 C3 EF IF Aerosol Chemical Speciation Monitor ACSM Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer AERI Aethalometer AETH Ameriflux Measurement Component AMC Aerosol Observing System AOS Meteorological Measurements associated with the Aerosol Observing System AOSMET Broadband Radiometer Station BRS

106

A safety and regulatory assessment of generic BWR and PWR permanently shutdown nuclear power plants  

SciTech Connect

The long-term availability of less expensive power and the increasing plant modification and maintenance costs have caused some utilities to re-examine the economics of nuclear power. As a result, several utilities have opted to permanently shutdown their plants. Each licensee of these permanently shutdown (PSD) plants has submitted plant-specific exemption requests for those regulations that they believe are no longer applicable to their facility. This report presents a regulatory assessment for generic BWR and PWR plants that have permanently ceased operation in support of NRC rulemaking activities in this area. After the reactor vessel is defueled, the traditional accident sequences that dominate the operating plant risk are no longer applicable. The remaining source of public risk is associated with the accidents that involve the spent fuel. Previous studies have indicated that complete spent fuel pool drainage is an accident of potential concern. Certain combinations of spent fuel storage configurations and decay times, could cause freshly discharged fuel assemblies to self heat to a temperature where the self sustained oxidation of the zircaloy fuel cladding may cause cladding failure. This study has defined four spent fuel configurations which encompass all of the anticipated spent fuel characteristics and storage modes following permanent shutdown. A representative accident sequence was chosen for each configuration. Consequence analyses were performed using these sequences to estimate onsite and boundary doses, population doses and economic costs. A list of candidate regulations was identified from a screening of 10 CFR Parts 0 to 199. The continued applicability of each regulation was assessed within the context of each spent fuel storage configuration and the results of the consequence analyses.

Travis, R.J.; Davis, R.E.; Grove, E.J.; Azarm, M.A. [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)

1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

107

Requirements Analysis Study for Master Pump Shutdown System Project Development Specification [SEC 1 and 2  

SciTech Connect

This document has been updated during the definitive design portion of the first phase of the W-314 Project to capture additional software requirements and is planned to be updated during the second phase of the W-314 Project to cover the second phase of the Project's scope. The objective is to provide requirement traceability by recording the analysis/basis for the functional descriptions of the master pump shutdown system. This document identifies the sources of the requirements and/or how these were derived. Each requirement is validated either by quoting the source or an analysis process involving the required functionality, performance characteristics, operations input or engineering judgment.

BEVINS, R.R.

2000-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

108

Date created: Date amended: February 2009  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

or on any relevant individual issue � Determining what types of risk are acceptable and which appetite is usually defined as "the amount of risk that an organisation is prepared to accept, tolerateDate created: Date amended: February 2009 - 1 � Risk Management Policy.doc RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY 1

Subramanian, Sriram

109

FY 2009 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2009 Congressional Budget 1/30/2008 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 9:01:45AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Request State Table 1 1 $27,588

110

FY 2005 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Office of Management, Budget Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Preliminary Preliminary Department of Energy Department of Energy FY 2005 Congressional Budget FY 2005 Congressional Budget Request Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2004 State Tables State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Preliminary Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number

111

FY 2010 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request State Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper State Index Page Number FY 2010 Congressional Budget 5/4/2009 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 2:13:22PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request State Table 1 1 $46,946 $48,781 $38,844 Alabama 2 $6,569

112

Supplement Tables - Supplemental Data  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook 1999 Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Contacts bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage supplemental.gif (7420 bytes) (Errata as of 9/13/99) The AEO Supplementary tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 1997 to 2020. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO99, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO99 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of ninety-five tables are presented.

113

FY 2006 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 State Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2006 Congressional Budget 1/27/2005 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 3:32:58PM Page 1 of 2 FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp FY 2006 Request State Table

114

FY 2010 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary May 2009 Office of Chief Financial Officer FY 2010 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2010 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 2:08:56PM Department Of Energy 5/4/2009 Page Number FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009 Appropriation FY 2010 Request Laboratory Table 1 1 $1,200

115

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOEIG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ......

116

FY 2008 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Table State Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. State Index Page Number FY 2008 Congressional Budget 2/1/2007 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:53:08AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request State Table 1 1 $28,332 $30,341

117

Experiments in DIII-D toward achieving rapid shutdown with runaway electron suppression  

SciTech Connect

Experiments have been performed in the DIII-D tokamak [J. L. Luxon, Nucl. Fusion 42, 614 (2002)] toward understanding runaway electron formation and amplification during rapid discharge shutdown, as well as toward achieving complete collisional suppression of these runaway electrons via massive delivery of impurities. Runaway acceleration and amplification appear to be well explained using the zero-dimensional (0D) current quench toroidal electric field. 0D or even one-dimensional modeling using a Dreicer seed term, however, appears to be too small to explain the initial runaway seed formation. Up to 15% of the line-average electron density required for complete runaway suppression has been achieved in the middle of the current quench using optimized massive gas injection with multiple small gas valves firing simultaneously. The novel rapid shutdown techniques of massive shattered pellet injection and shell pellet injection have been demonstrated for the first time. Experiments using external magnetic perturbations to deconfine runaways have shown promising preliminary results.

Hollmann, E. M.; James, A. N.; Yu, J. H.; Izzo, V. A. [University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0417 (United States); Commaux, N.; Jernigan, T. C.; Baylor, L. R. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831 (United States); Eidietis, N. W.; Parks, P. B.; Wesley, J. C.; Brooks, N. H.; Jackson, G. L.; Zeeland, M. A. van; Wu, W. [General Atomics, P.O. Box 85608, San Diego, California 92186-5608 (United States); Evans, T. E.; Humphreys, D. A.; Strait, E. J.; Austin, M. E. [Fusion Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712 (United States)

2010-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

118

Experiments in DIII-D toward achieving rapid shutdown with runaway electron suppression  

SciTech Connect

Experiments have been performed in the DIII-D tokamak [J. L. Luxon, Nucl. Fusion 42, 614 (2002)] toward understanding runaway electron formation and amplification during rapid discharge shutdown, as well as toward achieving complete collisional suppression of these runaway electrons via massive delivery of impurities. Runaway acceleration and amplification appear to be well explained using the zero-dimensional (0D) current quench toroidal electric field. 0D or even one-dimensional modeling using a Dreicer seed term, however, appears to be too small to explain the initial runaway seed formation. Up to 15% of the line-average electron density required for complete runaway suppression has been achieved in the middle of the current quench using optimized massive gas injection with multiple small gas valves firing simultaneously. The novel rapid shutdown techniques of massive shattered pellet injection and shell pellet injection have been demonstrated for the first time. Experiments using external magnetic perturbations to deconfine runaways have shown promising preliminary results. (C) 2010 American Institute of Physics. [doi:10.1063/1.3309426

Hollmann, E. M. [University of California, San Diego; Commaux, Nicolas JC [ORNL; Eidietis, N. W. [General Atomics, San Diego; Evans, T. E. [University of Texas, Austin; Humphreys, D. A. [University of Texas, Austin; James, A. N. [University of California, San Diego; Jernigan, T. C. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL); Parks, P. B. [General Atomics; Strait, E. J. [University of Texas, Austin; Wesley, J. C. [General Atomics; Yu, J.H. [University of California, San Diego; Austin, M. E. [University of Texas, Austin; Baylor, Larry R [ORNL; Brooks, N. H. [General Atomics, San Diego; Izzo, V. A. [University of California, San Diego & La Jolla; Jackson, G. L. [General Atomics; Van Zeeland, M. A. [General Atomics, San Diego; Wu, W. [General Atomics, San Diego

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

119

Methods for nondestructive assay holdup measurements in shutdown uranium enrichment facilities  

SciTech Connect

Measurement surveys of uranium holdup using nondestructive assay (NDA) techniques are being conducted for shutdown gaseous diffusion facilities at the Oak Ridge K-25 Site (formerly the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant). When in operation, these facilities processed UF{sub 6} with enrichments ranging from 0.2 to 93 wt % {sup 235}U. Following final shutdown of all process facilities, NDA surveys were initiated to provide process holdup data for the planning and implementation of decontamination and decommissioning activities. A three-step process is used to locate and quantify deposits: (1) high-resolution gamma-ray measurements are performed to generally define the relative abundances of radioisotopes present, (2) sizable deposits are identified using gamma-ray scanning methods, and (3) the deposits are quantified using neutron measurement methods. Following initial quantitative measurements, deposit sizes are calculated; high-resolution gamma-ray measurements are then performed on the items containing large deposits. The quantitative estimates for the large deposits are refined on the basis of these measurements. Facility management is using the results of the survey to support a variety of activities including isolation and removal of large deposits; performing health, safety, and environmental analyses; and improving facility nuclear material control and accountability records. 3 refs., 1 tab.

Hagenauer, R.C.; Mayer, R.L. II.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

120

A CFD Model for High Pressure Liquid Poison Injection for CANDU-6 Shutdown System No. 2  

SciTech Connect

In CANDU reactor one of the two reactor shutdown systems is the liquid poison injection system which injects the highly pressurized liquid neutron poison into the moderator tank via small holes on the nozzle pipes. To ensure the safe shutdown of a reactor it is necessary for the poison curtains generated by jets provide quick, and enough negative reactivity to the reactor during the early stage of the accident. In order to produce the neutron cross section necessary to perform this work, the poison concentration distribution during the transient is necessary. In this study, a set of models for analyzing the transient poison concentration induced by this high pressure poison injection jet activated upon the reactor trip in a CANDU-6 reactor moderator tank has been developed and used to generate the poison concentration distribution of the poison curtains induced by the high pressure jets injected into the vacant region between the pressure tube banks. The poison injection rate through the jet holes drilled on the nozzle pipes is obtained by a 1-D transient hydrodynamic code called, ALITRIG, and this injection rate is used to provide the inlet boundary condition to a 3-D CFD model of the moderator tank based on CFX4.3, a CFD code, to simulate the formation of the poison jet curtain inside the moderator tank. For validation, an attempt was made to validate this model against a poison injection experiment performed at BARC. As conclusion this set of models is judged to be appropriate. (authors)

Bo Wook Rhee; Chang Jun Jeong [Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 150, Dukjin-Dong, Yusong-Gu, Taejon 305-353 (Korea, Republic of); Hye Jeong Yun; Dong Soon Jang [Choongnam National University, Daejeon 305-764 (Korea, Republic of)

2002-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

FY 2011 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

State Tables State Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer State Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0054 State Index Page Number FY 2011 Congressional Budget 1/29/2010 Department Of Energy (Dollars In Thousands) 6:34:40AM Page 1 of 2 FY 2009 Appropriation

122

FY 2007 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory tables Laboratory tables preliminary Department of Energy FY 2007 Congressional Budget Request February 2006 Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory tables preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2007 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 12:10:40PM Department Of Energy 1/31/2006 Page Number FY 2005 Appropriation FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007

123

FY 2011 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 March 2010 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Tables Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Department of Energy FY 2011 Congressional Budget Request DOE/CF-0055 Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2011 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:24:57AM Department Of Energy 1/29/2010 Page

124

FY 2008 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Table Laboratory Table Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2008 Congressional Budget Request February 2007 Office of Chief Financial Officer Laboratory Table Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2008 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 6:51:02AM Department Of Energy 2/1/2007 Page Number FY 2006 Appropriation FY 2007 Request FY 2008 Request

125

FY 2006 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary Department of Energy FY 2006 Congressional Budget Request Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/CFO February 2005 Laboratory Tables Preliminary Printed with soy ink on recycled paper The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, uses of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2006 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 3:43:16PM Department Of Energy 1/27/2005 Page Number FY 2004 Comp/Approp FY 2005 Comp/Approp

126

Fy 2009 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Laboratory Tables Laboratory Tables Preliminary February 2008 Office of Chief Financial Officer Department of Energy FY 2009 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2009 Congressional Budget Page 1 of 3 (Dollars In Thousands) 8:59:25AM Department Of Energy 1/30/2008 Page Number FY 2007 Appropriation FY 2008 Appropriation FY 2009

127

FY 2013 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 Current Enacted Congressional Approp. Approp. * Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy........................................ 1,771,721 1,809,638 2,337,000 +527,362 +29.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability......................................... 138,170 139,103 143,015 +3,912 +2.8% Nuclear energy................................................................................ 717,817 765,391 770,445 +5,054 +0.7% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................................. -16,500 -- --

128

FY 2009 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Current Current Congressional Op. Plan Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy.......................... -- 1,722,407 1,255,393 -467,014 -27.1% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................... -- 138,556 134,000 -4,556 -3.3% Nuclear energy................................................................. -- 961,665 853,644 -108,021 -11.2% Legacy management........................................................ -- 33,872 -- -33,872 -100.0% Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance..........................................

129

Control of nitric acid plant stack opacity during start-up and shutdown  

SciTech Connect

This patent describes an improvement in a process for the production of nitric acid wherein air and ammonia are mixed and combusted in an ammonia burner to produce an effluent containing nitrogen oxides. The effluent is cooled, condensed and separated into a liquid weak acid stream and gas stream. The liquid weak acid and vapor streams are fed into an absorber tower wherein they are countercurrently contacted with water to produce a nitric acid stream and an overhead with a reduced nitrogen oxides content. The overhead is combusted with a fuel in the presence of a catalyst in a catalytic combustor to produce a combustor exhaust, work expanded in an expander to recover energy and vented to the atmosphere as stack exhaust. The improvement involves controlling the opacity of the stack opacity during shutdown of the process.

Adams, J.B.; Gasper, J.A.; Stash, P.J.

1989-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

130

The management of large cabling campaigns during the Long Shutdown 1 of LHC  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The Large Hadron Collider at CERN entered into its first 18 month-long shutdown period in February 2013. During this period the entire CERN accelerator complex will undergo major consolidation and upgrade works, preparing the machines for LHC operation at nominal energy (7 TeV/beam). One of the most challenging activities concerns the cabling infrastructure (copper and optical fibre cables) serving the CERN data acquisition, networking and control systems. About 1000 kilometres of cables, distributed in different machine areas, will be installed, representing an investment of about 15 MCHF. This implies an extraordinary challenge in terms of project management, including resource and activity planning, work execution and quality control. The preparation phase of this project started well before its implementation, by defining technical solutions and setting financial plans for staff recruitment and material supply. Enhanced task coordination was further implemented by deploying selected competences to form a ...

Meroli, Stefano; Formenti, Fabio; Frans, Marten; Guillaume, Jean Claude; Ricci, Daniel

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

131

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents 4. Building HVAC Requirements ....................................................................................1 4.1.2 What's New for the 2013 Standards.............................................................................................3 4.1.4 California Appliance Standards and Equipment Certification

132

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Tables  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Cost Recovery Charge (CRC) Calculation Table Updated: October 6, 2014 FY 2016 September 2014 CRC Calculation Table (pdf) Final FY 2015 CRC Letter & Table (pdf) Note: The Cost...

133

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

/2011 /2011 Decades of Discovery Decades of Discovery Page 2 6/1/2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 6 2 BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES .................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Adenosine Triphosphate: The Energy Currency of Life .............................................. 7 2.2 Making Better Catalysts .............................................................................................. 8 2.3 Understanding Chemical Reactions............................................................................ 9 2.4 New Types of Superconductors ................................................................................ 10

134

FAILURE MODES AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS Dated: May 27, 2010  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1 NSTX FAILURE MODES AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS (FMEA) Revision 7 Dated: May 27, 2010 Prepared By: Name.07.13 09:11:02 -04'00' #12;NSTX Failure Modes & Effects Analysis / NSTX-FMEA-71-7 / p. 2 of 120 2 Table

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

135

International Energy Outlook - Table of Contents  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

International Energy Outlook International Energy Outlook EIA Glossary International Energy Outlook 2004 Report #: DOE/EIA-0484(2004) Release date: April 2004 Next release date: July 2005 The International Energy Outlook 2004 (IEO2004) presents an assessment by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the outlook for international energy markets through 2025. U.S.projections appearing in IEO2004 are consistent with those published in EIA's Annual Energy Outlook 2004 (AEO2004), which was prepared using the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS). Table of Contents Appendixes Highlights World Energy and Economic Outlook Outlook for Primary Energy Consumption Energy End Use Outlook for Carbon Dioxide Emissions World Economic Outlook Alternative Growth Case Trends in Energy Intensity

136

FY 2006 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Comparable Comparable Request to FY 2006 vs. FY 2005 Approp Approp Congress Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply Operation and maintenance................................................. 787,941 909,903 862,499 -47,404 -5.2% Construction......................................................................... 6,956 22,416 40,175 17,759 +79.2% Total, Energy supply................................................................ 794,897 932,319 902,674 -29,645 -3.2% Non-Defense site acceleration completion............................. 167,272 157,316 172,400 15,084 +9.6%

137

FY 2013 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

8 8 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0078 Department of Energy FY 2013 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2013 Congressional Budget

138

FY 2010 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2009 FY 2010 Current Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Recovery Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 1,704,112 2,178,540 16,800,000 2,318,602 +140,062 +6.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 136,170 137,000 4,500,000 208,008 +71,008 +51.8% Nuclear energy.............................................................................. 960,903 792,000 -- 761,274 -30,726 -3.9% Legacy management..................................................................... 33,872 -- -- --

139

FY 2012 State Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6 6 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0066 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request State Tables P li i Preliminary The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled

140

FY 2012 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2Statistical Table by Appropriation 2Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2011 FY 2012 Current Congressional Annualized Congressional Approp. Request CR Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy efficiency and renewable energy....................................... 2,216,392 2,355,473 2,242,500 3,200,053 +983,661 +44.4% Electricity delivery and energy reliability........................................ 168,484 185,930 171,982 237,717 +69,233 +41.1% Nuclear energy............................................................................. 774,578 824,052 786,637 754,028 -20,550 -2.7% Fossil energy programs Fossil energy research and development................................... 659,770 586,583 672,383 452,975

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

FY 2007 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Current Current Congressional Approp. Approp. Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance............................................ 1,779,399 1,791,372 1,917,331 +125,959 +7.0% Construction................................................................... 22,416 21,255 6,030 -15,225 -71.6% Total, Energy supply and conservation.............................. 1,801,815 1,812,627 1,923,361 +110,734 +6.1% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology..................................................... -160,000 -20,000 -- +20,000 +100.0% Fossil energy research and development.......................

142

FY 2012 Laboratory Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5 5 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables y Preliminary February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer DOE/CF-0065 Department of Energy FY 2012 Congressional Budget Request Laboratory Tables P li i Preliminary h b d i d i hi d h l l f b d h i f h The numbers depicted in this document represent the gross level of DOE budget authority for the years displayed. The figures include both the discretionary and mandatory funding in the budget. They do not consider revenues/receipts, use of prior year balances, deferrals, rescissions, or other adjustments appropriated as offsets to the DOE appropriations by the Congress. February 2012 Office of Chief Financial Officer Printed with soy ink on recycled paper Laboratory / Facility Index FY 2012 Congressional Budget

143

FY 2008 Statistical Table  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statistical Table by Appropriation Statistical Table by Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 Current Congressional Congressional Approp. Request Request $ % Discretionary Summary By Appropriation Energy And Water Development, And Related Agencies Appropriation Summary: Energy Programs Energy supply and conservation Operation and maintenance........................................... 1,781,242 1,917,331 2,187,943 +270,612 +14.1% Construction.................................................................... 31,155 6,030 -- -6,030 -100.0% Total, Energy supply and conservation............................. 1,812,397 1,923,361 2,187,943 +264,582 +13.8% Fossil energy programs Clean coal technology.................................................... -20,000 -- -58,000 -58,000 N/A Fossil energy research and development......................

144

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS OF SMART GRID TECHNOLOGIES October 5, 2010 i Table of Contents I. Introduction and Executive Summary.......................................................... 1 a. Overview of Smart Grid Benefits and Communications Needs................. 2 b. Summary of Recommendations .................................................................... 5 II. Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives ................................................ 7 a. DOE Request for Information ....................................................................... 7 b. Other Federal Government Smart Grid Initiatives .................................... 9 III. Communications Requirements of Smart Grid Applications .................. 11 a. Advanced Metering Infrastructure ............................................................12

145

COUNTRY INSTITUTION SIGNING DATE  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

COUNTRY INSTITUTION SIGNING DATE /RENEWAL WEB SITE ALBANIA University of Tirana 11.12.2001 www /RENEWAL WEB SITE FINLAND JAMK University of Applied Sciences 29.10.2009 www.jamk.fi/ FRANCE ?cole INSTITUTION SIGNING DATE /RENEWAL WEB SITE MACEDONIA St. Cyril and Methodius" University of Skopje 11

Di Pillo, Gianni

146

Iraq Produces Date Sugar  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Iraq will soon begin manufacture of sugar from dates as a result of experiments carried out under a UNESCO program by a Swiss scientist. Development of this industry will save the country some $16 million annually formerly spent for imported sugar.Dates ...

1955-04-18T23:59:59.000Z

147

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Geographic Location Tables Geographic Location Tables (24 pages, 136kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 3. Census Region, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 4. Census Region and Division, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 5. Census Region and Division, Floorspace, 1995 Table 6. Climate Zone, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 7. Metropolitan Status, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

148

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

2003 Detailed Tables 2003 Detailed Tables 2003 CBECS Detailed Tables most recent available Released: September 2008 Building Characteristics | Consumption & Expenditures | End-Use Consumption In the 2003 CBECS, the survey procedures for strip shopping centers and enclosed malls ("mall buildings") were changed from those used in previous surveys, and, as a result, mall buildings are now excluded from most of the 2003 CBECS tables. Therefore, some data in the majority of the tables are not directly comparable with previous CBECS tables, all of which included mall buildings. Some numbers in the 2003 tables will be slightly lower than earlier surveys since the 2003 figures do not include mall buildings. See "Change in Data Collection Procedures for Malls" for a more detailed explanation.

149

Last Revision Date: 8/16/2010 Last Merged Filing ID:  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Revision Date: 8/16/2010 Last Merged Filing ID: Revision Date: 8/16/2010 Last Merged Filing ID: Tariffs, Rate Schedules, and Other Tariff Documents Southwestern Power Administration Tariffs, Rate Schedules, and Other Tariff Documents Document Generated On: 10/1/2010 Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................1 PREAMBLE: AUTHORITIES AND OBLIGATIONS .............................................................................................1

150

Shut-down dose rate analyses for the ITER electron cyclotron-heating upper launcher  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract The electron cyclotron resonance heating upper launcher (ECHUL) is going to be installed in the upper port of the ITER tokamak thermonuclear fusion reactor for plasma mode stabilization (neoclassical tearing modes and the sawtooth instability). The paper reports the latest neutronic modeling and analyses which have been performed for the ITER reference front steering launcher design. It focuses on the port accessibility after reactor shut-down for which dose rate (SDDR) distributions on a fine regular mesh grid were calculated. The results are compared to those obtained for the ITER Dummy Upper Port. The calculations showed that the heterogeneous ECHUL design gives rise to enhanced radiation streaming as compared to the homogenous dummy upper port. Therefore the used launcher geometry was upgraded to a more recent development stage. The inter-comparison shows a significant improvement of the launchers shielding properties but also the necessity to further upgrade the shielding performance. Furthermore, the analysis for the homogenous dummy upper port, which represents optimal shielding inside the launcher, demonstrates that the shielding upgrade also needs to include the launcher's environment.

Bastian Weinhorst; Arkady Serikov; Ulrich Fischer; Lei Lu; Peter Spaeh; Dirk Strauss

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

151

TO: FILE DATE------  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

DATE------ DATE------ la Fp7 ---------__ OWNER(.=) m-----z- Past: -----_------------------ Current: ------------i----------- Owner c:nntacted q ye' s y "0; !' L-----J if yea, date contacted TYPE OF OPERATION -------_------___ 0 Research & Development cl Facility Type 0 Production scale testins 0 Pilot Scale 0 Bench Scale Process E Theoretical Studies Sample SI Analysis [7 Manufacturing i University $ Resear.& Organization Government Sponsored Facility 0 Other -~------------------- 0 Production G Di spo5alfStorage TYPE OF CONTRACT ~------~--~~---- 0 Prime 0 Suhccntractnr 0 Purchase Order q Other information (i.e., crJst + fixed fee, unit price, time & material, etc) ------- ---------------------------- ~Canfrakt/Purchase Order # ----------------___---------

152

Summary of Information Presented at an NRC-Sponsored Low-Power Shutdown Public Workshop, April 27, 1999, Rockville, Maryland  

SciTech Connect

This report summarizes a public workshop that was held on April 27, 1999, in Rockville, Maryland. The workshop was conducted as part of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) efforts to further develop its understanding of the risks associated with low power and shutdown operations at US nuclear power plants. A sufficient understanding of such risks is required to support decision-making for risk-informed regulation, in particular Regulatory Guide 1.174, and the development of a consensus standard. During the workshop the NRC staff discussed and requested feedback from the public (including representatives of the nuclear industry, state governments, consultants, private industry, and the media) on the risk associated with low-power and shutdown operations.

Wheeler, Timothy A.; Whitehead, Donnie W.; Lois, Erasmia

1999-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

153

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Released Date: February 2006 Released Date: February 2006 Next Release Date: February 2007 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 Table 1. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source (quadrillion Btu, unless otherwise noted) New England 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Energy Consumption Residential Distillate Fuel 0.313 0.330 0.337 0.301 0.294 0.294 0.293 0.293 0.292 0.291 0.288 0.286 0.284 0.282 0.278 Kerosene 0.012 0.014 0.014 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Liquefied Petroleum Gas 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.033 Petroleum Subtotal 0.354 0.375 0.381 0.346 0.338 0.339 0.338 0.338 0.337 0.337 0.334 0.332 0.330 0.328 0.325 Natural Gas 0.200 0.191 0.193 0.191 0.191 0.193 0.193 0.195 0.196 0.197 0.197

154

Dating the Vinland Map  

ScienceCinema (OSTI)

Scientists from Brookhaven National Laboratory, the University of Arizona, and the Smithsonian Institution used carbon-dating technology to determine the age of a controversial parchment that might be the first-ever map of North America.

None

2013-07-17T23:59:59.000Z

155

Table of Contents  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

NT0005638 NT0005638 Cruise Report 1-19 July 2009 HYFLUX Sea Truth Cruise Northern Gulf of Mexico Submitted by: Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi 6300 Ocean Dr. Corpus Christi, TX 78412 Principal Authors: Ian R. MacDonald and Thomas Naehr Prepared for: United States Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory October 30, 2009 Office of Fossil Energy HYFLUX Seatruth Cruise Report -1- Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................. 2 Participating Organizations ................................................................................................. 3 Major Equipment ................................................................................................................ 4

156

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Table 2. Total Energy Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 5. Total Coal Consumption, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 6. Total Electricity Sales, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 7. Crude Oil Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 8. Natural Gas Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 9. Coal Production, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 12. Net Coal Exports, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 13. World Oil Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Forecasts Table 15. Coal Prices to Electric Utilities, Actual vs. Forecasts

157

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Analysis Papers > Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Download Adobe Acrobat Reader Printer friendly version on our site are provided in Adobe Acrobat Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Actual vs. Forecasts Formats Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF Table 12. World Oil Prices Excel, PDF Table 13. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices

158

Help:Tables | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Tables Tables Jump to: navigation, search Tables may be authored in wiki pages using either XHTML table elements directly, or using wikicode formatting to define the table. XHTML table elements and their use are well described on various web pages and will not be discussed here. The benefit of wikicode is that the table is constructed of character symbols which tend to make it easier to perceive the table structure in the article editing view compared to XHTML table elements. As a general rule, it is best to avoid using a table unless you need one. Table markup often complicates page editing. Contents 1 Wiki table markup summary 2 Basics 2.1 Table headers 2.2 Caption 3 XHTML attributes 3.1 Attributes on tables 3.2 Attributes on cells 3.3 Attributes on rows 3.4 HTML colspan and rowspan

159

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Conservation Tables Conservation Tables (16 pages, 86 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 41. Energy Conservation Features, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 Table 42. Building Shell Conservation Features, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 43. Building Shell Conservation Features, Floorspace, 1995 Table 44. Reduction in Equipment Use During Off Hours, Number of Buildings and Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings

160

CBECS Buildings Characteristics --Revised Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Structure Tables Structure Tables (16 pages, 93 kb) CONTENTS PAGES Table 8. Building Size, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 9. Building Size, Floorspace, 1995 Table 10. Year Constructed, Number of Buildings, 1995 Table 11. Year Constructed, Floorspace, 1995 These data are from the 1995 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), a national probability sample survey of commercial buildings sponsored by the Energy Information Administration, that provides information on the use of energy in commercial buildings in the United States. The 1995 CBECS was the sixth survey in a series begun in 1979. The data were collected from a sample of 6,639 buildings representing 4.6 million commercial buildings and 58.8 billion square feet of commercial floorspace in the U.S. The 1995 data are available for the four Census

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

CARINA Data Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Cruise Summary Table and Data Cruise Summary Table and Data Users are requested to report any data or metadata errors in the CARINA cruise files to CDIAC. Parameter units in all CARINA data files are in CCHDO exchange format. No Cruise Namea (Alias) Areab Number of Stations Datec Ship Chief Scientist Carbon PI Oxygen Nutrients TCO2d TALK pCO2e pHf CFC Other Measurements Data Files 1 06AQ19920929g (06ANTX_6) (See map) 2 118 9/29-11/30/1992 Polarstern V. Smetacek M. Stoll, J. Rommets, H. De Baar, D. Bakker 62 114h 53 54i U C 0 Choloroa,b Fluorescence, NH4 Data Files (Metadata) 2 06AQ19930806 (06ARKIX_4) (See map) 4 64 8/6-10/5/1993 Polarstern D.K. Fütterer L. Anderson 64 63 63j, bb 0 0 0 59he 3H, 3He, 18O, 14C, 85Kr, Bak Data Files

162

Supplement Tables - Contact  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Supplement Tables to the AEO99 Supplement Tables to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Annual Energy Outlook 1999 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) Assumptions to the AEO99 bullet1.gif (843 bytes) NEMS Conference bullet1.gif (843 bytes) To Forecasting Home Page bullet1.gif (843 bytes) EIA Homepage furtherinfo.gif (5474 bytes) The Annual Energy Outlook 1999 (AEO99) was prepared by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, under the direction of Mary J. Hutzler (mhutzler@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222). General questions may be addressed to Arthur T. Andersen (aanderse@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-1441), Director of the International, Economic, and Greenhouse Gas Division; Susan H. Holte (sholte@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-4838), Director of the Demand and Integration Division; James M. Kendell (jkendell@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-9646), Director of the Oil and Gas Division; Scott Sitzer (ssitzer@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2308), Director of the Coal and Electric Power Division; or Andy S. Kydes (akydes@eia.doe.gov, 202/586-2222), Senior Modeling Analyst. Detailed questions about the forecasts and related model components may be addressed to the following analysts:

163

Appendix B: Summary Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman U.S. Energy Information Administration | Analysis of Impacts of a Clean Energy Standard as requested by Chairman Bingaman Appendix B: Summary Tables Table B1. The BCES and alternative cases compared to the Reference case, 2025 2009 2025 Ref Ref BCES All Clean Partial Credit Revised Baseline Small Utilities Credit Cap 2.1 Credit Cap 3.0 Stnds + Cds Generation (billion kilowatthours) Coal 1,772 2,049 1,431 1,305 1,387 1,180 1,767 1,714 1,571 1,358 Petroleum 41 45 43 44 44 44 45 45 45 43 Natural Gas 931 1,002 1,341 1,342 1,269 1,486 1,164 1,193 1,243 1,314 Nuclear 799 871 859 906 942 889 878 857 843 826 Conventional Hydropower 274 306 322 319 300 321 316 298 312 322 Geothermal 15 25 28 25 31 24 27 22 23 24 Municipal Waste 18 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Wood and Other Biomass 38 162 303 289 295 301 241 266

164

Site Characterization Report ORGDP Diffusion Facilities Permanent Shutdown K-700 Power House and K-27 Switch Yard/Switch House  

SciTech Connect

The K-700 Power House area, initially built to supply power to the K-25 gaseous diffusion plant was shutdown and disassembled in the 1960s. This shutdown was initiated by TVA supplying economical power to the diffusion plant complex. As a result of world wide over production of enriched, reactor grade U{sup 235}, the K-27 switch yard and switch house area was placed in standby in 1985. Subsequently, as the future production requirements decreased, the cost of production increased and the separation technologies for other processes improved, the facility was permanently shutdown in December, 1987. This Site Characterization Report is a part of the FY-88 engineering Feasibility Study for placing ORGDP Gaseous Diffusion Process facilities in 'Permanent Shutdown'. It is sponsored by the Department of Energy through Virgil Lowery of Headquarters--Enrichment and through Don Cox of ORO--Enrichment Operations. The primary purpose of these building or site characterization reports is to document, quantify, and map the following potential problems: Asbestos; PCB containing fluids; Oils, coolants, and chemicals; and External contamination. With the documented quantification of the concerns (problems) the Engineering Feasibility Study will then proceed with examining the potential solutions. For this study, permanent shutdown is defined as the securing and/or conditioning of each facility to provide 20 years of safe service with minimal expenditures and, where feasible, also serving DOE's needs for long-term warehousing or other such low-risk use. The K-700 power house series of buildings were either masonry construction or a mix of masonry and wood. The power generating equipment was removed and sold as salvage in the mid 1960s but the buildings and auxiliary equipment were left intact. The nine ancillary buildings in the power house area use early in the Manhattan Project for special research projects, were left intact minus the original special equipment. During the late 1960s and 1970s, some of the abandoned buildings were used for offices, special projects, and storage. Some of the remaining electrical transformers contain PCBs in concentrations less than 500 ppm. Many of the steam and hot water pipes in the buildings are insulated with asbestos insulation, but none of the equipment or buildings have high counts of surface radioactive contamination. The general conditions of the buildings are from fair to poor. Many should be boarded-up to prevent personnel entry and in some cases demolitions would be the safer alternative.

Thomas R.J., Blanchard R.D.

1988-06-13T23:59:59.000Z

165

Electric Power Monthly - Monthly Data Tables | OpenEI  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Power Monthly - Monthly Data Tables Power Monthly - Monthly Data Tables Dataset Summary Description Monthly electricity generation figures (and the fuel consumed to produce it). Source information available at EIA. Source EIA Date Released July 20th, 2010 (4 years ago) Date Updated July 20th, 2010 (4 years ago) Keywords consumption EIA Electricity Electricity Consumption Electricity Generation Data application/vnd.ms-excel icon generation_state_mon.xls (xls, 32.5 MiB) application/vnd.ms-excel icon consumption_state_mon.xls (xls, 14.7 MiB) Quality Metrics Level of Review Some Review Comment Temporal and Spatial Coverage Frequency Monthly Time Period License License Other or unspecified, see optional comment below Comment Work of the U.S. Federal Government Rate this dataset Usefulness of the metadata

166

COST BREAKDOWN AWARD NO: START DATE: EXPIRATION DATE: FISCAL...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

COST BREAKDOWN AWARD NO: START DATE: EXPIRATION DATE: FISCAL YEAR BREAKDOWN OF FUNDS ELEMENTS FY FY FY FY FY TOTAL Direct Labor Overhead Materials Supplies Travel Other Direct...

167

CBECS 1992 - Consumption & Expenditures, Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Figure on Energy Consumption in Commercial Buildings by Energy Source, 1992 Divider Line The 49 tables present detailed energy consumption and expenditure data for buildings in the commercial sector. This section provides assistance in reading the tables by explaining some of the headings for the data categories. It will also explain the use of row and column factors to compute both the confidence levels of the estimates given in the tables and the statistical significance of differences between the data in two or more categories. The section concludes with a "Quick-Reference Guide" to the statistics in the different tables. Categories of Data in the Tables After Table 3.1, which is a summary table, the tables are grouped into the major fuel tables (Tables 3.2 through 3.13) and the specific fuel tables (Tables 3.14 through 3.29 for electricity, Tables 3.30 through 3.40 for natural gas, Tables 3.41 through 3.45 for fuel oil, and Tables 3.46 through 3.47 for district heat). Table 3.48 presents energy management and DSM data as reported by the building respondent. Table 3.49 presents data on participation in electric utility-sponsored DSM programs as reported by both the building respondent and the electricity supplier.

168

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

d d POLICY FLASH 2010-64 DATE: TO: FROM: July 7,201 0 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-6 I Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-42 SUMMARY: Attached for your information is a summary of Federal Acquisition Circular (FAC) 2005-42 which makes changes to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). The FAC has eleven rules (seven final and four interim) and one technical amendment. Attached is a short overview of the rules to include its effective date and applicability date. To view FAC 2005-42 go to the Federal Register Browse web link at http://www.~~oaccess.~ov/fr/browse.html and search for the Federal Register Volume 75, Number 115 for Wednesday, June 16,2010.

169

MEMORANDUfl J: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

J: FILE DATE J: FILE DATE // //r /so -----------w------m FROM: 9. 34oyc -w--------v----- SUBJECT: D3 Bo;s CL&;C J mL-;+J; - Rcc cap 049 /'A :j$: &336;s L-.fh~ w-f L-1 ALE"nirTE __ ------------- --- ---_------------------ CITY: &u+M- - &. -w---v------ ---B-------w STATE: 0 h' -a---- OWNER(S) --pi::;- l>cl, b af.5 CA.-*>J CD Current: Gr;W i- ~U~&;P~ -------------,,' ,-,,,,-, Owner contacted 0 yes jg no; -------------------------- if yes, date contacted ------m------ TYPE OF OPERATION --w--w----------- & Research & Development a Facility Type 0 Production scale testing Cl Pilot Scale 0 Bench Scale Process 0 Theoretical Studies w Sample & Analysis 0 Manufacturing 0 University 0 Research Organization 0 Government Sponsored Facility

170

History of Radiocarbon Dating  

DOE R&D Accomplishments (OSTI)

The development is traced of radiocarbon dating from its birth in curiosity regarding the effects of cosmic radiation on Earth. Discussed in historical perspective are: the significance of the initial measurements in determining the course of developments; the advent of the low-level counting technique; attempts to avoid low-level counting by the use of isotopic enrichment; the gradual appearance of the environmental effect due to the combustion of fossil fuel (Suess effect); recognition of the atmosphere ocean barrier for carbon dioxide exchange; detailed understanding of the mixing mechanism from the study of fallout radiocarbon; determination of the new half-life; indexing and the assimilation problem for the massive accumulation of dates; and the proliferation of measurement techniques and the impact of archaeological insight on the validity of radiocarbon dates. (author)

Libby, W. F.

1967-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

171

Microsoft Word - table_87  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and natural gas plant liquids production, by state, 2012 Alabama 87,269 5,309 7,110 Alabama Onshore Alabama 33,921 2,614 3,132 Alabama Offshore Alabama 53,348 2,695 3,978 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Alaska 2,788,997 18,339 21,470 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 Arkansas 6,872 336 424 California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Onshore California 169,203 9,923 12,755 California Offshore California NA NA NA Federal Offshore California NA NA NA

172

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 5 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 8 1.2 Vacuum System 12 1.3 Power Supplies 14 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.7 Beam Line Front Ends 19 1.8 Facilities 19 1.9 Installation 20 2.1 Accelerator Physics 21 2 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress The progress and highlights of each major technical system are summarized below. Additional details are provided in Section B. Magnets - As of the end of this quarter (March 31, 2002), the status of magnet fabrication is as follows: Magnet Type Number Received % of Total Received Dipoles 40 100% Quadrupoles 102 100% Sextupoles 76 100%

173

Reviews, Tables, and Plots  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

4 Review of Particle Physics 4 Review of Particle Physics Please use this CITATION: S. Eidelman et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004) (bibtex) Standalone figures are now available for these reviews. Categories: * Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties * Standard Model and Related Topics * Particle Properties * Hypothetical Particles * Astrophysics and Cosmology * Experimental Methods and Colliders * Mathematical Tools * Kinematics, Cross-Section Formulae, and Plots * Authors, Introductory Text, History plots PostScript help file PDF help file Constants, Units, Atomic and Nuclear Properties Physical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (1 page) Astrophysical constants (Rev.) PS PDF (2 pages) International System of units (SI) PS PDF (2 pages) Periodic table of the elements (Rev.) errata PS PDF (1 page)

174

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

through June 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 9 1.2 Vacuum System 16 1.3 Power Supplies 21 1.4 RF System 25 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 26 1.6 Cable Plant 28 1.8 Facilities 28 2.0 Accelerator Physics 29 2.1 ES&H 31 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress Magnet System - The project has received three shipments of magnets from IHEP. A total of 55 dipole, quadrupole and sextupole magnets out of 218 have arrived. All main magnets will arrive by December. The additional mechanical and electrical checks of the magnets at SSRL have been successful. Only minor mechanical problems were found and corrected. The prototype

175

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AC05-00OR22800 AC05-00OR22800 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Page # TOC - i SECTION A - SOLICITATION/OFFER AND AWARD ......................................................................... A-i SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS ........................................................ B-i B.1 SERVICES BEING ACQUIRED ....................................................................................B-2 B.2 TRANSITION COST, ESTIMATED COST, MAXIMUM AVAILABLE FEE, AND AVAILABLE FEE (Modification 295, 290, 284, 280, 270, 257, 239, 238, 219, M201, M180, M162, M153, M150, M141, M132, M103, M092, M080, M055, M051, M049, M034, M022, M003, A002) ..........................................................B-2 SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/WORK STATEMENT DESCRIPTION OF

176

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

U U U . . S S . . D D E E P P A A R R T T M M E E N N T T O O F F E E N N E E R R G G Y Y O O F F F F I I C C E E O O F F I I N N S S P P E E C C T T O O R R G G E E N N E E R R A A L L Semiannual Report toCongress DOE/IG-0065 April 1 - September 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS From the Desk of the Inspector General ..................................................... 2 Impacts Key Accomplishments ............................................................................................... 3 Positive Outcomes ...................................................................................................... 3 Reports Investigative Outcomes .............................................................................................. 6 Audits ......................................................................................................................... 8

177

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

October October through December 2001 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Project Summary 1. Technical Progress 3 2. Cost Reporting 4 B. Detailed Reports 1.1 Magnets & Supports 7 1.2 Vacuum System 9 1.3 Power Supplies 13 1.4 RF System 16 1.5 Instrumentation & Controls 17 1.6 Cable Plant 18 1.9 Installation 19 2.0 Accelerator Physics 20 3 A. SPEAR 3 PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Technical Progress In the magnet area, the production of all major components (dipoles, quadrupoles, and sextupoles) has been completed on schedule. This results from a highly successful collaboration with our colleagues at the Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP) in Beijing. The production of corrector magnets is still in progress with completion scheduled for May 2002.

178

2003 CBECS Detailed Tables: Summary  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel c2-pdf c2.xls c2.html Table C3. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels c3.pdf c3.xls c3.html Table C4. Expenditures for...

179

2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Table of Contents 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents June 2014 2014 Headquarters Facilities Master Security Plan - Table of Contents The Table of...

180

FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Summary Table FY 2014 Budget Request Summary Table Summary Table by Appropriations Summary Table by Organization More Documents & Publications FY 2014 Budget Request Statistical...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

ARM - Instrument - s-table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

govInstrumentss-table govInstrumentss-table Documentation S-TABLE : Instrument Mentor Monthly Summary (IMMS) reports S-TABLE : Data Quality Assessment (DQA) reports ARM Data Discovery Browse Data Comments? We would love to hear from you! Send us a note below or call us at 1-888-ARM-DATA. Send Instrument : Stabilized Platform (S-TABLE) Instrument Categories Ocean Observations For ship-based deployments, some instruments require actively stabilized platforms to compensate for the ship's motion, especially rotations around the long axis of the ship (roll), short axis (pitch), and, for some instruments, vertical axis (yaw). ARM currently employs two types of stabilized platforms: one electrically controlled for lighter instruments that includes yaw control (dubbed RPY for Roll, Pitch, Yaw) and one

182

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Modeling and Analysis Papers> Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation>Tables Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) MS Excel Viewer PDF (Acrobat Reader required Download Acrobat Reader ) Adobe Acrobat Reader Logo Table 2. Total Energy Consumption Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports Excel, PDF

183

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation - Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Annual Energy Outlook Forecast Evaluation Actual vs. Forecasts Available formats Excel (.xls) for printable spreadsheet data (Microsoft Excel required) PDF (Acrobat Reader required) Table 2. Total Energy Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 3. Total Petroleum Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 4. Total Natural Gas Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 5. Total Coal Consumption HTML, Excel, PDF Table 6. Total Electricity Sales HTML, Excel, PDF Table 7. Crude Oil Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 8. Natural Gas Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 9. Coal Production HTML, Excel, PDF Table 10. Net Petroleum Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 11. Net Natural Gas Imports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 12. Net Coal Exports HTML, Excel, PDF Table 13. World Oil Prices HTML, Excel, PDF

184

Create Date: Create Time  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

provisions. AB 0074 Ch. 666 Assembly Member Ma Public event action plans and cooperative agreements. AB 0080 Ch. 138 Assembly Member Fong Presidential primary: election date. AB 0082 Ch. 92 * Assembly Assembly Member Fong Elections: new citizens. AB 0089 Ch. 390 * Assembly Member Hill County employees

185

Quantum Dating Market  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

We consider the dating market decision problem under the quantum mechanics point of view. Quantum states whose associated amplitudes are modified by men strategies are used to represent women. Grover quantum search algorithm is used as a playing strategy. Success is more frequently obtained by playing quantum than playing classic.

O. G. Zabaleta; C. M. Arizmendi

2010-03-04T23:59:59.000Z

186

Table of Contents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Pacific Northwest Site Office U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Science Federal Technical Capability & Technical Qualification Program Self-Assessment Report Pacific Northwest Site Office May 2013 Submitted by: Joe Christ Assessment Leader Date' PNSO FTC & TQP Self-Assessment Report May 2013 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During April, a combined self-assessment of the Technical Qualification Program and Federal Technical Capability Program was performed at the Pacific Northwest Site Office. The assessment was led by a staff member from the site office who is assigned for maintaining and

187

table14.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections Table 14. Natural Gas Wellhead Prices, Actual vs. Reference Case Projections (current dollars per thousand cubic feet) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 AEO 1982 4.32 5.47 6.67 7.51 8.04 8.57 AEO 1983 2.93 3.11 3.46 3.93 4.56 5.26 12.74 AEO 1984 2.77 2.90 3.21 3.63 4.13 4.79 9.33 AEO 1985 2.60 2.61 2.66 2.71 2.94 3.35 3.85 4.46 5.10 5.83 6.67 AEO 1986 1.73 1.96 2.29 2.54 2.81 3.15 3.73 4.34 5.06 5.90 6.79 7.70 8.62 9.68 10.80 AEO 1987 1.83 1.95 2.11 2.28 2.49 2.72 3.08 3.51 4.07 7.54 AEO 1989* 1.62 1.70 1.91 2.13 2.58 3.04 3.48 3.93 4.76 5.23 5.80 6.43 6.98 AEO 1990 1.78 1.88 2.93 5.36 AEO 1991 1.77 1.90 2.11 2.30 2.42 2.51 2.60 2.74 2.91 3.29 3.75 4.31 5.07 5.77 6.45 AEO 1992 1.69 1.85 2.03 2.15 2.35 2.51 2.74 3.01 3.40 3.81 4.24 4.74 5.25 5.78 AEO 1993 1.85 1.94 2.09 2.30 2.44 2.60 2.85 3.12 3.47 3.84 4.31 4.81 5.28

188

Code Tables | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

System NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms Code Tables Code Tables U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards...

189

A dynamic process model of a natural gas combined cycle -- Model development with startup and shutdown simulations  

SciTech Connect

Research in dynamic process simulation for integrated gasification combined cycles (IGCC) with carbon capture has been ongoing at the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), culminating in a full operator training simulator (OTS) and immersive training simulator (ITS) for use in both operator training and research. A derivative work of the IGCC dynamic simulator has been a modification of the combined cycle section to more closely represent a typical natural gas fired combined cycle (NGCC). This paper describes the NGCC dynamic process model and highlights some of the simulators current capabilities through a particular startup and shutdown scenario.

Liese, Eric [U.S. DOE; Zitney, Stephen E. [U.S. DOE

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

MECS Fuel Oil Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

: Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas : Actual, Minimum and Maximum Use Values for Fuel Oils and Natural Gas Year Distillate Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 185 148 1224 3.4% 1994 152 125 1020 3.1% Residual Fuel Oil (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 505 290 1577 16.7% 1994 441 241 1249 19.8% Natural Gas (TBtu) Actual Minimum Maximum Discretionary Rate 1985 4656 2702 5233 77.2% 1994 6141 4435 6758 73.4% Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Markets and End Use, 1985 and 1994 Manufacturing Energy Consumption Surveys. Table 2: Establishments That Actually Switched Between Natural Gas and Residual Fuel Oil Type of Switch Number of Establishments in Population Number That Use Original Fuel Percentage That Use Original Fuel Number That Can Switch to Another Fuel Percentage That Can Switch to Another Fuel Number That Actually Made a Switch Percentage That Actually Made a Switch

191

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Turbines The Gas Turbine Handbook The Gas Turbine Handbook TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements Updated Author Contact Information Introduction - Rich Dennis, Turbines Technology Manager 1.1 Simple and Combined Cycles - Claire Soares 1.1-1 Introduction 1.1-2 Applications 1.1-3 Applications versatility 1.1-4 The History of the Gas Turbine 1.1-5 Gas Turbine, Major Components, Modules, and systems 1.1-6 Design development with Gas Turbines 1.1-7 Gas Turbine Performance 1.1-8 Combined Cycles 1.1-9 Notes 1.2 Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) - Massod Ramezan and Gary Stiegel 1.2-1 Introduction 1.2-2 The Gasification Process 1.2-3 IGCC Systems 1.2-4 Gasifier Improvements 1.2-5 Gas Separation Improvements 1.2-6 Conclusions 1.2-7 Notes 1.2.1 Different Types of Gasifiers and Their Integration with Gas Turbines - Jeffrey Phillips

192

HEMORANDUH TO: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

HEMORANDUH HEMORANDUH TO: FILE DATE 1123 lLjl ---WV-------------- FROM: P. s&w+ -------v-----s-- SUBJECT: lJ+ - e;& SITE NAME: LJo"zL - /L,' de Cd -J--h=- ALTERNATE l --e-e-- ------w------- ---,,,' ,m--, NAME: ---------------------- CITY: LL-pL~ ------------ ------------- STATE3 e--w-- OWNER tS) -----w-- Past I --k-!!.l~ -pa L . -v-----w------- Current: Owner contac?-ed 0 yes 0 no; if yes, I+Lff A zid;&m - -------------------------- date contacted ------B--m--- TYPE OF OPERATION ----------------- a Research 81 Development a Facility Type 0 Production scale testing 0 Pilot Scale 0 Bench Scale Procesr 0 Theoretical Studies 0 Sample & Analysis m Manuf acturinq 0 University 0 Research Organization 0 Government Sponrored Facility 0 Other

193

FROM: DATE: TO:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DATE: DATE: TO: POLICY FLASH 2010-48 May 06,20 1 0 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-6 1 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Acquisition LetterIFinancial Assistance Letter (ALIFAL) 201 0-06, Acquiring Information Technology, Requirement to Comply With Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) SUMMARY: ALIFAL 201 0-06 provides notice that the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council are issuing a final rule amending the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to require that Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) compliant products be included in all new information technology (IT) acquisitions using Internet Protocol (IP). ALIFAL 2010-06, accordingly, updates the IPv6 guidance provided in AL-2006-04.

194

TO: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

tlEi?ORANDUH tlEi?ORANDUH TO: FILE DATE FFtOil: c ----'- Y '%d 6- ----_----_ SUBJECT: SITE NAME: ----------STATE: Owner contacted 0 yes qno; if yes, date contacted ---------__-- TYPE OF OPERATION ----~_--_--~----_ &Research & Development @ Praduction scale testing. 0 Pilat Scale 0 Bench Scale Process a Theoretical Studies 0 Sample & Analysis tin Facility Type R Manufacturing IJ University 0 Research Organization IJ Gavernment Sponsored Facility 0 Other ----------------' --~- 0 Production E Disposal/Storage TYPE OF CONTRACT ~~_-~--_---_--__ P Prime 0 I Cl Subcontractor Other information (i.e., cost K Purchase Order jZM pati !& MC4 + fixed fee, unit price, time 81 material, etc) ---------------------_----~-- OWNERSHIP: AEC/MED AEC/MED GOVT GOVT

195

EIA - Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - chapter Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Chapter Tables Chapter Tables Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 Chapter Tables Table 1. Estimated fuel economy for light-duty vehicles, based on proposed CAFE standards, 2010-2015 Table 2. State appliance efficiency standards and potential future actions Table 3. State renewable portfolio standards Table 4. Key analyses from "issues in Focus" in recent AEOs Table 5. Liquid fuels production in three cases, 2007 and 2030 Table 6. Assumptions used in comparing conventional and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles Table 7. Conventional vehicle and plug-in hybrid system component costs for mid-size vehicles at volume production Table 8. Technically recoverable resources of crude oil and natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf, as of January 1, 2007

196

TABLE OF CONTENTS  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Report: "Cost-Effective Treatment of Produced Water Using Co-Produced Energy Sources for Small Producers," PRRC/NMT/Harvard Report: "Cost-Effective Treatment of Produced Water Using Co-Produced Energy Sources for Small Producers," PRRC/NMT/Harvard Final Report to Title of Project: Cost-Effective Treatment of Produced Water Using Co-Produced Energy Sources for Small Producers 07123-05.FINAL Date: January 5, 2012 Team Members: Robert Balch, Program Manager, PI Liangxiong Li, Principle Investigator Shanker Muraleedharan Jeff Harvard Point of Contact: Telephone Number: (575) 835-5305 Facsimile Number: (505) 835-6031 e-mail address: balch@prrc.nmt.edu Performer: New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology New Mexico Petroleum Recovery Research Center Performer Address: 801 Leroy Place Socorro, NM 87801 USA Participants: Harvard Petroleum Corporation

197

MECS 1991 Publications and Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Figure showing the Largest Energy Consumers in the Manufacturing Sector You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Manufacturing Consumption of Energy 1991 (file size 17.2 MB) pages:566 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 380,153 bytes) pages: 33, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector: An Overview Energy Consumption in the Manufacturing Sector, 1991 Manufacturing Capability To Switch Fuels Appendices Appendix A. Detailed Tables Appendix B. Survey Design, Implementation, and Estimates (file size 141,211 bytes) pages: 22. Appendix C. Quality of the Data (file size 135,511 bytes) pages: 8.

198

TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

............................................... 12 Water-Source Heat Pump Performance ............................ 18 Air-Source Heat Pump OF PERFORMANCE OF WATER-SOURCE HEAT PUMP .............................. ................. 23 FIGURE 2. NODAL. MONTHLY HEAT GAIN/LOSS FACTORS ........................... 5 TABLE 2. BASE TEMPERATURES

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

199

DATE: February 7, 1996  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Department of Energy Department of Energy Memorandum DATE: July 8, 2011 Report Number: INS-L-11-02 REPLY TO ATTN OF: IG-40 (S10IS001) SUBJECT: Letter Report on "Implementation of Nuclear Weapons Quality Assurance Requirements at Los Alamos National Laboratory" TO: Manager, Los Alamos Site Office INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE The National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) Los Alamos National Laboratory (Los Alamos) is a multidisciplinary research and production institution responsible for the design and production of nuclear weapons components. In its effort to attain the highest quality in weapons engineering design and manufacturing, the Department of Energy

200

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

> POLICY FLASH 2010-25 DATE: TO: FROM: February 22,201 0 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 1.4 Establishing the Position of Source Evaluation Board (SEB) Secretariat and Knowledge Manager SUMMARY: As discussed at the December 2009 Procurement Directors' Meeting, a position titled "Source Evaluation Board (SEB) Secretariat and Knowledge Manager" has been established in the Acquisition Planning and Liaison Division, MA-621 Attached is the subject new DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 1.4 which provides guidance on the establishment of the aforementioned position and the duties and responsibilities of the position.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

EIA - Appendix A - Reference Case Projection Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (2005-2035) Tables (2005-2035) International Energy Outlook 2010 Reference Case Projections Tables (2005-2035) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030). Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Appendix A. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region Table A1. World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel Table A2. World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

202

Categorical Exclusion (CX) Determinations By Date | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

0, 2011 0, 2011 CX-005390: Categorical Exclusion Determination Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstock and Biomass Conversion Technology for Renewable Energy Production and Economic Development CX(s) Applied: A9, B3.1, B5.1 Date: 03/10/2011 Location(s): Hawaii Office(s): Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Golden Field Office March 10, 2011 CX-005388: Categorical Exclusion Determination Sustainable Biosolids/Renewable Energy Plant CX(s) Applied: A9, A11 Date: 03/10/2011 Location(s): St. Petersburg, Florida Office(s): Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Golden Field Office March 10, 2011 CX-005387: Categorical Exclusion Determination South Table Mountain Complex and National Wind Technology Center Security Upgrades CX(s) Applied: B1.15 Date: 03/10/2011 Location(s): Colorado

203

Categorical Exclusion (CX) Determinations By Date | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

March 22, 2013 March 22, 2013 CX-010553: Categorical Exclusion Determination Appledorn Substation Construction CX(s) Applied: B4.11 Date: 03/22/2010 Location(s): Minnesota Offices(s): Western Area Power Administration-Upper Great Plains Region March 21, 2013 CX-010246: Categorical Exclusion Determination South Table Mountain Denver West Parkway Improvements CX(s) Applied: A9, B1.33 Date: 03/21/2013 Location(s): Colorado Offices(s): Golden Field Office March 21, 2013 CX-010244: Categorical Exclusion Determination Community-Wide Public Facilities Energy Efficiency Retrofit and Biomass Heating Conversion Project, Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program CX(s) Applied: B5.1 Date: 03/21/2013 Location(s): Alaska Offices(s): Golden Field Office March 21, 2013 CX-010167: Categorical Exclusion Determination

204

Categorical Exclusion (CX) Determinations By Date | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

25, 2013 25, 2013 CX-010158: Categorical Exclusion Determination Revenue Meter Replacement at Franklin County Public Utility District's (PUD) Taylor Flats Substation CX(s) Applied: B1.7 Date: 03/25/2013 Location(s): Washington Offices(s): Bonneville Power Administration March 22, 2013 CX-010166: Categorical Exclusion Determination Wenatchee District Wood Pole Replacements CX(s) Applied: B1.3 Date: 03/22/2013 Location(s): Washington, Washington Offices(s): Bonneville Power Administration March 22, 2013 CX-010553: Categorical Exclusion Determination Appledorn Substation Construction CX(s) Applied: B4.11 Date: 03/22/2010 Location(s): Minnesota Offices(s): Western Area Power Administration-Upper Great Plains Region March 21, 2013 CX-010246: Categorical Exclusion Determination South Table Mountain Denver West Parkway Improvements

205

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

10 10 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

206

EIA - Supplement Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

09 09 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 1. New England Excel Gif Table 2. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 3. East North Central Excel Gif Table 4. West North Central Excel Gif Table 5. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 6. East South Central Excel Gif Table 7. West South Central Excel Gif Table 8. Mountain Excel Gif Table 9. Pacific Excel Gif Table 10. Total United States Excel Gif Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 11. New England Excel Gif Table 12. Middle Atlantic Excel Gif Table 13. East North Central Excel Gif Table 14. West North Central Excel Gif Table 15. South Atlantic Excel Gif Table 16. East South Central Excel Gif Table 17. West South Central Excel Gif Table 18. Mountain Excel Gif Table 19. Pacific

207

PACIFic ocean Interior CArbon (PACIFICA) Cruise Summary Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Cruise Summary Table Cruise Summary Table PACIFICA Map All PACIFICA Original Cruise Data (PACIFICAsource.zip) No EXPOCODE1 Orig. Cruise Name / Old EXPOCODE No. Sts. Date (mm/dd/yyyy) Ship Name Chief Scientist Carbon PI TCO2 TAlk pCO2 pH CFC Other Measurements Data Project/Remarks MRI-JMA 1 49RY19970121 (49UP19970121) RF97-01 23 01/21/1997-02/08/1997 Ryofu Maru Naoyuki Ishikawa (JMA) Masao Ishii (MRI) 7 Nutr., DO, CHLORA, PPHYTN Data Files Metadata 2 49RY19970530 (49UP19970530) RF97-05 Leg.1 34 05/30/1997-06/22/1997 Ryofu Maru Naoshi Kubo (JMA) Nutr., DO, CHLORA, PPHYTN Data Files Metadata No CO2 param. 3 49RY19970623 (49UP19970623) RF97-05 Leg.2 31 06/23/1997-07/22/1997 Ryofu Maru Naoshi Kubo (JMA) Nutr., DO, CHLORA, PPHYTN Data Files

208

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

65 65 ' July 7,20 1 0 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act SUMMARY: This Flash forwards a draft Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause, 52.222- 40, Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Executive Order (EO) 13496, Notification of Employee Rights under Federal Labor Laws, dated January 30,2009, requires contractors and subcontractors to post a notice that informs employees of their rights under Federal labor laws, including the National Labor Relations Act. This Act encourages collective bargaining and protects the exercise by workers of their freedom

209

Issuance Date:: February  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Issuance Issuance Date:: February 11, 1966 POST-SHOT HYDROLOGI C SAFETY 68296 VUF-1014 FINAL REPORT FALLON, NEVADA OCTOBER 26, 1963 Hazleton-Nuclear Science Corporation October 30, 1965 SPONSORED BY THE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE U. S.ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION VELA UNIFORM PROJECT LEG A L NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of Government sponsored work. Neither the United States, nor the Commission, nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission: A. Makes any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respect to the accu- racy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information. apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privately owned rights; or B. Assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the

210

MEMORANDUM TO: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

/I // /s 3 /I // /s 3 ------------------- FROM: D. I&+ ---------------- SUBJECT: 5;le r 3-&-F.. SITE /+yNJs l3 ALTERNATE NAME: -w---- -SF ------------------------------ NAME: CITY: c ;A< ;,+,ZJ+ ------------,-L-----,,,,,, STATE: OH --w-w- OWNER(S) -w---s-- past: /" ' A--F5 ---w-m- -e----v-------- Current: 0~. A-+A.~~ -------------------------- Owner contacted 0 yes 0 no; if yes, date contacted ------------- TYPE OF OPERATION -------e--------w 0 Research & Development 0 Facility Type 0 Production scale testing 0 Pilot Scale 0 Bench Scale Process 0 Theoretical Studies 0 Sample 84 Analysis x Manufacturing 0 University 0 Research Organization 0 Government Sponsored Facility 0 Other --------------------- B Production 0 Disposal/Storage TYPE OF CONTRACT

211

MEMORANDUM TO: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

-.. -.. 37qg: MEMORANDUM TO: FILE DATE =b-- FROM: ---L- _------__ u . SUBJECT: SITE ACl= ALTERNATE NAME: -_______-~-----------------NA~E:__( CITY:--~---------_-STATE:-~~ (2 OWNE!sI_SL f Past- L&cl= w ------------------- ----- Current- w buL.r - ------------ ownq cm-ltacted 0 yes @ "no; if yes, data cnntacte TYPE OF OPERATION -------------_~-~ q Research & Development 0 Production %.cale testing 0 Pilot Scale 0 Bench Scale Process 0 Theoretical Studies 0 Sample 84 Analysis 0 Production i2 Disposal/Storage 0 Facility T 0 Hanufac 0 Univerrj 0 .R esearc 0 Governm 14 Other 1 I lil IrJ y,/3 Prime 0 Other infcrkion Subcwkractbr (i.e., ?bst + fixed fee! &nit price, Cl Purchase Order time & mate

212

United States Government DATE:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

5oE(E;,8 ' 0 H .2+ L-1 5oE(E;,8 ' 0 H .2+ L-1 United States Government DATE: MAR 0 8 1994 REPLY TO AlTN OF: EM-421 (W. A. Williams, 903-8149) SUBJECT: Authority Determination -- Former Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co., Hamilton, Ohio TO: The File The attached review documents the basis for determining whether the Department of Energy (DOE) has authority for taking remedial action at the former Herring-Hall-Marvin Safe Co. facility in Hamilton, Ohio, under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). The facility was used for the shaping and machining of uranium metal by the Manhattan Engineer District (MED) during the Second World War. The following factors are significant in reaching a decision and are discussed in more detail in the attached authority review:

213

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

-7' -7' August 20,2010 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Class Deviation by General Services Administration (GSA) to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 51.1, Contractor Use of Government Supply Sources, for Time and Material or Labor Hour Procurements SUMMARY: The attached GSA class deviation to FAR Part 51, Contractor Use of Government Supply Sources, dated October 8,2009, permits contracting officers to authorize all GSA contractors, who are performing an order on a time and material (T&M) or labor-hour (LH) basis, to purchase supplies and service from other schedule contractors or process requisitions through the GSA Supply Program. This deviation is effective for five years to October 7,2014,

214

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

1 1,2008 1 1,2008 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBTECT: Past Performance Data SIJMMARY: Beginning October 01,2008, all contractor past performance data shall be submitted through the Department of Defense (DoD) Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) at htt~://www.c~ars.csd.disa.mil/cr>arsmain.htm. Thus, the Department will no longer use the National Institute of Health (NIH) Contractor Performance System (CPS). To ensure all Contracting Officers understand how to use this new system, Web Cast Training has been scheduled for the following dates and times: October 8- 1:30-430 including construction and A/E training during the last hour November 6- 1:30-4:30 including construction and A/E training during the last hour

215

DATE: REPLY TO  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

DOE F 1325.8 DOE F 1325.8 (NW ed States Governhent ilmemorandum DATE: REPLY TO ' bPfl29 1993 Al-fN OF: EM-421 (W. W illiams, 903-8149) SUBJECT: Authorization for Remedial Action at the Former Associate Aircraft Site, Fairfield, Ohio TO: Manager, DOE Oak Ridge Field Office This is to notify you that the Former Associated Aircraft Site in Fairfield, Ohio, is designated,for remedial action under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). This notification does not constitute a FUSRAP baseline change control approval. Approval of the baseline change will be accomplished through the normal change control procedures. The site was used by the former Atomic Energy Commission for the machining and shaping of uranium metal during the 1950s. A radiological survey

216

DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: - - -- . POLICY FLASH 2005-18 February 14, 2005 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, ME-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management Small Business Contracting Policy Update SUMMARY: This Policy Flash forwards (1) information on locating Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSBs) and (2) a solicitation provision which provides guidance to prospective offerors on the impact of teaming arrangements on their small business status. 1 -- -- --------- 1. To locate SDVOSBs, you can go to the Department of Veteran Affairs' website for the Center for Veterans Enterprise site at http://www.vetbiz.gov/default2.htm. From that site you can link to the "Search for a Business" at http://vip.vetbiz.gov/search/default.asp to find SDVQSBs. 2. The following provision is recommended for solicitations

217

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

1 . 1 . January 20,20 1 0 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Commercial Items Test Program SUMMARY: Attached for your information is a copy of Civilian Agency Acquisition Council (CAAC) Letter 2009-04. It advises that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 201 0, Section 8 16 authorizes extension of the Commercial Items Test Program from January 1,20 10 to January 1,20 12 and that an expedited FAR Case is being processed to insert the new date at FAR 13.500(d). Also attached is a class deviation authorizing the use of simplified acquisition procedures for commercial items up to $5.5 million [$I1 million for acquisitions of commercial items under FAR

218

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

POLICY FLASH 2010-08 POLICY FLASH 2010-08 DATE: TO: FROM: October 28,2009 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-6 1 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Amendment to Extend the Partnership Agreement between the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) SUMMARY: The purpose of this flash is to advise you that an amendment was issued pursuant to Section VII of the Partnership Agreement (PA) between the SBA and the DOE. The amendment extends the current PA until November 30,2009. All other terms and conditions of the PA remain unchanged. This flash and its attachment will be available online at the following website: http://mana~ement.enerm.nov/policy nuidancelpolicy flashes.htm.

219

MEMORANDUM TO: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

5/22/w 5/22/w ------..------------- FROM: D- f&u+ ---------------- SUBJECT: E/;-+&o.. ReC*-C.AB&;O* +L /z&J; &DC,, /Ptrr; CLonr z-r. SITE NAME: _ ALTERNATE ----------WV-- --------------------- NAME: EAT ---- ------------------ CAY: r-led 4' or k -------------------------- STATE: ti Y VW---- OWNER tS) -------- Past: ---Cl&zt.t.r-----~-~- ---- =urr=nt: ti& LPdA Owner cnntacted 0 yes mo; i+ ye8, -------------------------- date contacted ------------- TYPE OF OPERATION ----------------- w Research & Development E3 Facility Type 0 Production scale testing Cl Pilot Scale a Bench Scale Process B Theoretical Studies 0 Sample & Analysis 0 Manufacturing 0 University @ Research Organization 0 Government Sponsored Facility 17 Other

220

Release Date: April 2010  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

April 2010 DOE/EIA-0121 (2009/04Q) April 2010 DOE/EIA-0121 (2009/04Q) Next Release Date: June 2010 Quarterly Coal Report October - December 2009 April 2010 U.S. Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric, and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 _____________________________________________________________________________ This report is available on the Web at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/qcr.pdf _____________________________________________ This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the independent statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA's data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in this

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

1 < 1 < DATE: TO: FROM: July 1,2010 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Revised DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 71.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process SUMMARY: There was mention in the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) report titled "Managing at the Speed of Light - Improving Mission Support Performance" that Departmental procurement personnel don't understand the Business Clearance (BC) process. In an effort to address this issue, each Procurement Director (PD) and Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) was ask to review Acquisition Guide Chapter 7 1.1 Headquarters Business Clearance Process and identify anything that was unclear, as well as recommend changes or ideas which

222

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6 6 DATE: TO: FROM: March 25,2010 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Rescind Policy Flashes 201 0-04 "Cease All Funding of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN)" and 201 0-06 "Additional Documentation Regarding Policy Flash Number 201 0-04" SUMMARY: The purpose of this flash to inform you that on March 10,201 0, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York issued an opinion regarding ACORN. In its opinion, the District Court concluded that the funding prohibitions regarding ACORN and related entities in FY 201 0 Continuing Resolution and in several of FY 201 0 appropriations acts

223

Date: Re: Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

~ ~ ~~ Date: Re: Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 April 5, 2007 TRADEMARK l APPLICATION AND LICENSING PROCEDURES, IPI Trademarks may be used by DOE or its contractors for identification of goods and services and serve as an intellectual property tool to enhance technology transfer. Registration in the PTO also helps to ensure that marks closely associated with DOE are not debased or devalued, and also helps to protect the public from those who may use marks closely associated with DOE to suggest "goods or services" are authorized by DOE. This IPI contains guidance on trademarks once the decision has been made to use a particular mark in commerce and obtain protection therefor. This IPI does not contain guidance as to when, in the first instance, a mark should be coined for association with a particular good/service, except at B.4 with respect to use of DOE as part of a mark.

224

J DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

ICY FLASH 2010-5- - ICY FLASH 2010-5- - J DATE: TO: FROM: June 10,2010 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Office of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 13 Policy and Operating Procedures for Use of the GSA Smartpay2 Purchase Card SUMMARY: Attached for your information is an updated and revised copy of DOE Acquisition Guide Chapter 13, Purchase Card Policy and Operating Procedures. This Flash and its attachment will be posted online, at the following website: http:llwww.mananement.enerliy.gov/~olicy guidance/policy flashes.htm. Questions concerning this policy flash should be directed to Denise Clarke at (202) 287-1 748 or DeniseT.Clarke@,hq.doe.~ov . Director Office of Procurement and

225

Procurement Directors DATE: TO:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

18 18 1 POLICY FLASH 2008-1 8 January 29,2008 Procurement Directors DATE: TO: FROM: Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-6 1 Ofice of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Federal Acquisition Circular 2008-18 SUMMARY: The General Services Administration has issued Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-23. This Circular can be found at page 732 14 of the December 26,2007 Federal Register. The Circular covers three subjects for which interim or final rules have been issued amending the Federal Acquisition Regulation. A description of each revision is contained in the attachment. None of these necessitates a revision of the DEAR. One of the revisions dealing with the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) replaces

226

DATE: TO: FROM:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

8 8 December 16,2009 Procurement Directors Office of Procurement and Assistance Policy, MA-61 Ofice of Procurement and Assistance Management SUBJECT: Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-38 SUMMARY: Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-3 8, which makes miscellaneous changes to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), was published in the December 10, 2009 issue of the Federal Register. A summary of the changes is attached. Due to the publication of two rules item I11 and item V, additional guidance is provided in this flash. Item I11 - Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) (FAR Case 2005-041) - The Acquisition Letter 2006-04, Acquiring Information Technology - Requirement to Comply with Internet Protocol Version 6, dated December 14,2005, is being reviewed to determine if

227

Nature Bulletin Table of Contents  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Table of Contents: Table of Contents: Here is our table of contents for the Forset Preserve District of Cook Country Nature Bulletins. To search, go to the Natuere Bulletin's Search Engine and type in your topic. You can also use your browser's "FIND" command to search the 750+ article titles here for a specific subject! Fish Smother Under Ice Coyotes in Cook County Tough Times for the Muskrats Wild Geese and Ducks Fly North Squirrels Spring Frogs Snapping Turtles A Phenomenal Spring Good People Do Not Pick Wildflowers Fire is the Enemy of Field and Forest Crows Earthworms Bees Crayfish Floods Handaxes and Knives in the Forest Preserves Ant Sanctuary Conservation Mosquitoes More About Mosquitoes Fishing in the Forest Preserve Our River Grasshoppers Chiggers Ticks Poison Ivy Fireflies

228

COST AND QUALITY TABLES 95  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 Tables 5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels U.S. Department of Energy Washington DC 20585 This report was prepared by the Energy Information Administration, the independent statistical and analytical agency within the Department of Energy. The information contained herein should not be construed as advocating or reflecting any policy position of the Department of Energy or any other organization. Contacts The annual publication Cost and Quality of Fuels for Electric Utility Plants (C&Q) will no longer be pub- lished by the EIA. The tables presented in this docu- ment are intended to replace that annual publication. Questions regarding the availability of these data should be directed to: Coal and Electric Data and Renewables Division

229

MTS Table Top Load frame  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

MTS Table Top Load frame MTS Table Top Load frame The Non-destructive Evaluation group operates an MTS Table Top Load frame for ultimate strength and life cycle testing of various ceramic, ceramic-matrix (FGI), carbon, carbon fiber, cermet (CMC) and metal alloy engineering samples. The load frame is a servo-hydraulic type designed to function in a closed loop configuration under computer control. The system can perform non-cyclic, tension, compression and flexure testing and cyclic fatigue tests. The system is comprised of two parts: * The Load Frame and * The Control System. Load Frame The Load Frame (figure 1) is a cross-head assembly which includes a single moving grip, a stationary grip and LVDT position sensor. It can generate up to 25 kN (5.5 kip) of force in the sample under test and can

230

CBECS 1992 - Building Characteristics, Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Detailed Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 The following 70 tables present extensive cross-tabulations of commercial buildings characteristics. These data are from the Buildings Characteristics Survey portion of the 1992 CBECS. The "Quick-Reference Guide," indicates the major topics of each table. Directions for calculating an approximate relative standard error (RSE) for each estimate in the tables are presented in Figure A1, "Use of RSE Row and Column Factor." The Glossary contains the definitions of the terms used in the tables. See the preceding "At A Glance" section for highlights of the detailed tables. Table Organization

231

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 1 to 116 Complete set of Supplemental Tables Complete set of Supplemental Tables. Need help, please contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central

232

Shut-down margin study for the next generation VVER-1000 reactor including 13נ13 hexagonal annular assemblies  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Shut-Down Margin (SDM) for the next generation annular fuel core of typical VVER-1000, 13נ13 assemblies are calculated as the main aim of the present research. We have applied the MCNP-5 code for many cases with different values of core burn up at various core temperatures, and therefore their corresponding coolant densities and boric acid concentrations. There is a substantial drop in SDM in the case of annular fuel for the same power level. Specifically, SDM for our proposed VVER-1000 annular pins is calculated when the average fuel burn up values at the BOC, MOC, and EOC are 0.531, 11.5, and 43MW-days/kg-U, respectively.

Farshad Faghihi; S. Mohammad Mirvakili

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

233

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

FRAUD POLICY Table of Contents Section 1 - General Statement Section 2 - Management's Responsibility for Preventing Fraud Section 3 - Consequences for Fraudulent Acts Section 4 - Procedures for Reporting Fraud Section 5 - Procedures for the Investigation of Alleged Fraud Section 6 - Protection Under

Shihadeh, Alan

234

CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

-Specific Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) Section 8 Employee Training Section 9 Inspections and Exposure1 CHP NOTEBOOK Table of Contents Section 1 Safety Program Key Personnel Section 2 Laboratory Protective Equipment (PPE) Assessment Section 18 Hazard Assessment Information and PPE Selection Information

Braun, Paul

235

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2009-2013 (million cubic feet) 2009 Total 259,848 327,105 586,953 1,878,928 606,403 2,485,331...

236

PARENT HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

PARENT HANDBOOK 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS The Parent's Role 3 Academics 7 Academic Advising 7 Academic Services 26 Athletics, Physical Education and Recreation 28 Campus Resources and Student Services 30 to seeing you in person and connecting with you online! PARENT HANDBOOK THEPARENT'SROLE PARENT HANDBOOK 3

Adali, Tulay

237

Automatic Construction of Diagnostic Tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......more usual, at least in microbiology.) Keys and diagnostic tables...Mechanization and Data Handling in Microbiology, Society for Applied Bacteriology...by A. Baillie and R. J. Gilbert, London: Academic Press...cultures, Canadian Journal of Microbiology, Vol. 14, pp. 271-279......

W. R. Willcox; S. P. Lapage

1972-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

238

An optimal filtering algorithm for table constraints  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Filtering algorithms for table constraints are constraint-based, which means that the propagation queue only contains information on the constraints that must be reconsidered. This paper proposes four efficient value-based algorithms for table constraints, ...

Jean-Baptiste Mairy; Pascal Van Hentenryck; Yves Deville

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

239

Table Name query? | OpenEI Community  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Name query? Home > Groups > Databus Is there an API feature which returns the names of tables? Submitted by Hopcroft on 28 October, 2013 - 15:37 1 answer Points: 0 if you are...

240

Type Policy Title Here Effective Date: [Insert Date  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Type Policy Title Here Effective Date: [Insert Date] Policy Statement [Type Statement Text Here] Reason(s) for the Policy [Type Reason Text Here] Primary Guidance to Which This Policy Responds [Type Primary Policy Here ­ If there is NOT a Primary Policy indicate that] Responsible University Office

Salzman, Daniel

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

Absolute Time Radiometric Dating: the source of the dates on  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Absolute Time Radiometric Dating: the source of the dates on the Geologic Time Scale Radiometric.g. uranium to lead. · The parent element is radioactive, the daughter element is stable. · The decay rate nucleosynthesis. Common Radioactive Elements, Parents and Daughters · Carbon-14, C14 Nitrogen-14, N14 · Uranium

Kammer, Thomas

242

Table 7. U.S. Coal Exports  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

U.S. Coal Exports U.S. Coal Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 7. U.S. Coal Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Continent and Country of Destination April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change North America Total 3,122,664 2,010,882 3,565,711 5,133,546 5,327,583 -3.6 Canada* 1,773,644 943,061 2,101,534 2,716,705 3,176,066 -14.5 Dominican Republic 51,792 211,736 124,720 263,528 312,741 -15.7 Honduras - 41,664 34,161 41,664 68,124 -38.8 Jamaica 25 36,311 - 36,336 33,585 8.2 Mexico 1,244,972 777,750 1,268,077 2,022,722 1,698,391 19.1 Other** 52,231 360 37,219 52,591 38,676 36.0 South America Total 2,945,181 3,368,119

243

Table 16. U.S. Coke Exports  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

U.S. Coke Exports U.S. Coke Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 16. U.S. Coke Exports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Continent and Country of Destination April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change North America Total 162,796 79,217 201,795 242,013 340,944 -29.0 Canada* 73,859 17,837 112,348 91,696 161,596 -43.3 Mexico 88,535 60,517 86,721 149,052 176,163 -15.4 Other** 402 863 2,726 1,265 3,185 -60.3 South America Total 223 217 591 440 1,158 -62.0 Other** 223 217 591 440 1,158 -62.0 Europe Total 48,972 59,197 - 108,169 6 NM Other** 347 11,743 - 12,090 - - United Kingdom 48,625 47,454 - 96,079 6 NM Asia Total 317 553 633 870 4,778

244

Table 20. Coal Imports by Customs District  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Coal Imports by Customs District Coal Imports by Customs District (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 20. Coal Imports by Customs District (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Customs District April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change Eastern Total 469,878 331,008 156,004 800,886 350,124 128.7 Baltimore, MD - - 106,118 - 154,318 - Boston, MA 373,985 154,438 - 528,423 51,185 NM Buffalo, NY 44 - - 44 - - New York City, NY 1,373 1,402 487 2,775 507 447.3 Norfolk, VA - 68,891 - 68,891 35,856 92.1 Ogdensburg, NY - 1 12 1 12 -91.7 Portland, ME 42,428 44,547 - 86,975 - - Providence, RI 52,028 61,729 49,387 113,757 108,226 5.1 St. Albans, VT 20

245

Table 21. U.S. Coke Imports  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

U.S. Coke Imports U.S. Coke Imports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Table 21. U.S. Coke Imports (short tons) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Quarterly Coal Report, April - June 2013 Year to Date Continent and Country of Origin April - June 2013 January - March 2013 April - June 2012 2013 2012 Percent Change North America Total 10,284 2,293 159,462 12,577 183,712 -93.2 Canada 3,009 2,293 159,462 5,302 183,712 -97.1 Panama 7,275 - - 7,275 - - South America Total 25,267 13,030 88,424 38,297 106,612 -64.1 Brazil - - 78,595 - 78,595 - Colombia 25,267 13,030 9,829 38,297 28,017 36.7 Europe Total 6,044 40,281 165,027 46,325 485,791 -90.5 Czech Republic - 170 - 170 - - Spain 363 - - 363 - - Ukraine 5,681 40,111 5,047 45,792 53,543 -14.5 United Kingdom

246

Chemistry Department Assessment Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

0 Chemistry Department Assessment May, 2006 Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 1 Prelude 1 Mission Statement and Learning Goals 1 Facilities 2 Staffing 3 Students: Chemistry Majors and Student Taking Service Courses Table: 1997-2005 graduates profile Table: GRE Score for Chemistry Majors, 1993

Bogaerts, Steven

247

Conference dates 1620 April 2012  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Conference dates 16­20 April 2012 Location The Square Conference Centre Brussels, Belgium www/nanotechnologies Mark your Calendar #12;Conference dates 16­20 April 2012 The Square Conference Centre Brussels, Belgium success, Photonics Europe 2012 will again feature choice conferences and plenary presentations

Jahns, Jürgen

248

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

25 25 Table 11 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:10:53 PM Table 11. Underground natural gas storage - storage fields other than salt caverns, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,900 2,976 76 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,856 2,563 -293 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 2,781 2,822 41 2011 January 4,166 2,131 6,298 -63 -2.9 27 780 753 February 4,166 1,597 5,763 -10 -0.6 51 586 535 March 4,165 1,426 5,591 -114 -7.4 117 288 172

249

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

1 1 Table 8 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:07:39 PM Table 8. Underground natural gas storage - all operators, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total a Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals b 2008 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,340 3,374 34 2009 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,315 2,966 -349 2010 Total c -- -- -- -- -- 3,291 3,274 -17 2011 January 4,303 2,306 6,609 2 0.1 50 849 799 February 4,302 1,722 6,024 39 2.3 82 666 584 March 4,302 1,577 5,879 -75 -4.6 168 314 146 April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100

250

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Action Codes Table | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Action Codes Table Home > About Us > Our Programs > Nuclear Security > Nuclear Materials Management & Safeguards System > NMMSS Information, Reports & Forms > Code Tables > Action Codes Table

251

Description of Energy Intensity Tables (12)  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables 3. Description of Energy Intensity Data Tables There are 12 data tables used as references for this report. Specifically, these tables are categorized as tables 1 and 2 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1985, 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1985 and the three subsequent years (1988, 1991, and 1994) tables 3 and 4 present 1988, 1991, and 1994 energy-intensity ratios that have been adjusted to the mix of products shipped from manufacturing establishments in 1985 tables 5 and 6 present unadjusted energy-intensity ratios for Offsite-Produced Energy and Total Inputs of Energy for 1988, 1991, and 1994; along with the percentage changes between 1988 and the two subsequent

252

Sandia National Labs: PCNSC: IBA Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Home Home About Us Departments Radiation, Nano Materials, & Interface Sciences > Radiation & Solid Interactions > Nanomaterials Sciences > Surface & Interface Sciences Semiconductor & Optical Sciences Energy Sciences Small Science Cluster Business Office News Partnering Research Ion Beam Analysis (IBA) Periodic Table (HTML) IBA Table (HTML) | IBA Table (135KB GIF) | IBA Table (1.2MB PDF) | IBA Table (33MB TIF) | Heavy Ion Backscattering Spectrometry (HIBS) | Virtual Lab Tour (6MB) The purpose of this table is to quickly give the visitor to this site information on the sensitivity, depth of analysis and depth resolution of most of the modern ion beam analysis techniques in a single easy to use format: a periodic table. Note that you can click on each panel of this

253

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO2006) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2003 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2006, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2006 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and seventeen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2006 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Forecasts for 2004-2006 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term forecasts and are based on more current information than the AEO.

254

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables - Supplemental  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 The AEO Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the Annual Energy Outlook 2007 (AEO2007) using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets for 2005 to 2030. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO2007, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO2007 projections. The files containing these tables are in spreadsheet format. A total of one hundred and eighteen tables is presented. The data for tables 10 and 20 match those published in AEO2007 Appendix tables A2 and A3, respectively. Projections for 2006 and 2007 may differ slightly from values published in the Short Term Energy Outlook, which are the official EIA short-term projections and are based on more current information than the AEO.

255

NEPA COMPLIANCE SURVEY Project Information Project Title: Liner Drilling Date:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Liner Drilling Date: Liner Drilling Date: 4-5-10 DOE Code: 71092 Cont ractor Code: 8067-766 Project Lead: Frank Ingham Project Overview Nothing out of the ordinary for drilling an existing location 1. What are the environmental impacts? NE SW Sec 21 , T39N, R78W (45-3-X-21 well) 2. What is the legal location? 3. What is the duration of the project? Approximately a week 4 . What major equipment will be used if any (work over rig, drilling rig, Drilling Rig etc.)? Will Drill out of 9 5/8 caslng with liner drillng assembly. After drilling approximately 750 to 1000 ft, will test liner hanging assembly set and retrieve multiple times. The table b elow is to be completed by the Project Lead and reviewed by the Environmental Specialis t and the DOE NEPA Compliance Officer. NOTE: If Change of Scope occurs, Project Lead must submit a new NEPA Compliance Survey a

256

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4-2030) 4-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Price Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Price Case Tables Low Price Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity Table 10. Electricity Trade Table 11. Petroleum Supply and Disposition Balance

257

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 - Low Economic Growth Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Low Macroeconomic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030 MS Excel Viewer Spreadsheets are provided in Excel Low Economic Growth Case Tables (2004-2030) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables Low Economic Growth Case Tables Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

258

Impact of IrRu Oxygen Evolution Reaction Catalysts on Pt Nanostructured Thin Films under Start-Up/Shutdown Cycling  

SciTech Connect

Electron microscopy and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) methods have been utilized to study the role of oxygen evolution reaction (OER) catalysts in mitigating degradation arising from start-up/shutdown events. Pt nanostructured thin films (NSTF) were coated with a Ru0.1Ir0.9 OER catalyst at loadings ranging from 1 to 10 g/cm2 and submitted to 5,000 potential cycles within a membrane electrode assembly. Analysis of the as-deposited catalyst showed that Ir and Ru coating is primarily metallic, and further evidence is provided to support the previously reported interaction between Ru and the perylene-red support. Aberration-corrected scanning transmission electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy were used to observe the impact of the OER catalysts on Pt dissolution and migration through the membrane. Elemental mapping showed a high percentage of the Ir catalyst was maintained on the NSTF whisker surfaces following testing. The presence of the OER catalysts greatly reduced the smoothing of the Pt NSTF whiskers, which has been correlated with Pt dissolution and losses in electrochemically active surface area. The dissolution of both Ir and Pt led to the formation of IrPt nanoparticle clusters in the membrane close to the cathode, as well as the formation of a Pt band deeper in the membrane.

Cullen, David A [ORNL; More, Karren Leslie [ORNL; Atanasoska, Liliana [3M, Industrial Mineral Products Division; Atanasoski, Radoslav [3M, Industrial Mineral Products Division

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

259

Fast Plasma Shutdowns Obtained With Massive Hydrogenic, Noble and Mixed-Gas Injection in DIII-D  

SciTech Connect

Massive gas injection (MGI) experiments with H{sub 2}, D{sub 2}, He, Ne and Ar and 'mixed' (H{sub 2} + Ar and D{sub 2} + Ne) gases injected into 'ITER-similar' 1.3-MA H-mode plasmas are described. Gas species, injected quantity Q, delivery time, t{sub inj}, rate-of-rise and intrinsic and added impurities are found to affect the attributes and 'disruption mitigation' efficacies of the resulting fast plasma shutdowns. With sufficient Q and t{sub inj} < {approx}2 ms, all species provide fast (within {le} {approx}3 ms), more-or-less uniform radiative dissipation of the 0.7-MJ plasma thermal energy and fast but benign current decays with reduced vacuum vessel vertical force impulse. With pure and mixed low-Z gases, free-electron densities up to 2 x 10{sup 21} m{sup -3} are obtained. While these densities are high relative to normal tokamak densities, they are still an order of magnitude smaller than the densities required for unconditional mitigation of the runaway electron avalanche process. Key information relevant to the design of effective MGI systems for larger tokamaks and ITER has been obtained and the collective species and Q-variation data provides a rich basis for validation of emerging 2D + t MHD/transport/radiation models.

Wesley, J; Hollmann, E; Jernigan, T; Van Zeeland, M; Baylor, L; Boedo, J; Combs, S; Evans, T; Groth, M; Humphreys, D; Hyatt, A; Izzo, V; James, A; Moyer, R; Parks, P; Rudakov, D; Strait, E; Wu, W; Yu, J

2008-10-14T23:59:59.000Z

260

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in B-100 Bone-equivalent plastic Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52740 1.450 85.9 0.05268 3.7365 0.1252 3.0420 3.4528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.435 7.435 7.443 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.803 5.803 1.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.535 4.535 2.543 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.521 3.521 5.080 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.008 3.008 8.173 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.256 2.256 2.401 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.115 2.115 3.319 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 5.287 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 8.408 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 1.376 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.859 0.000 1.859 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 1.866 1.913 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.940 0.000 0.000 1.940 4.016 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.973 0.000 0.000 1.974 5.037 × 10 2 1.40

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium monoxide Na 2 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.48404 2.270 148.8 0.07501 3.6943 0.1652 2.9793 4.1892 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.330 6.330 8.793 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.955 4.956 1.601 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.883 3.884 2.984 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.024 3.024 5.943 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.588 2.588 9.541 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.954 1.954 2.789 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.840 1.840 3.846 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.725 1.725 6.102 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.663 1.664 9.656 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.646 0.000 1.647 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.647 0.000 1.647 1.571 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.659 0.000 1.660 2.177 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.738 0.000 0.000 1.738 4.531 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.771 0.000 0.000 1.772 5.670 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

262

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Tissue-equivalent gas (Propane based) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55027 1.826 × 10 -3 59.5 0.09802 3.5159 1.5139 3.9916 9.3529 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.132 8.132 6.782 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.337 6.337 1.241 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.943 4.944 2.326 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.831 3.831 4.656 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.269 3.269 7.500 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.450 2.450 2.209 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.303 2.303 3.053 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.158 2.158 4.855 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.084 2.084 7.695 × 10 1 263. MeV 3.527 × 10 2 2.068 0.000 2.069 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.071 0.000 2.072 1.252 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.097 0.000 2.097 1.732 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.232 0.000 0.000 2.232 3.580 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.289 0.000 0.000 2.290

263

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead oxide (PbO) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.40323 9.530 766.7 0.19645 2.7299 0.0356 3.5456 6.2162 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.046 4.046 1.411 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.207 3.207 2.532 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.542 2.542 4.656 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.003 2.003 9.146 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.727 1.727 1.455 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.327 1.327 4.176 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.256 1.256 5.729 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.188 1.189 9.017 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.158 1.158 1.415 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.155 0.000 1.155 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.161 0.000 0.000 1.161 2.279 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.181 0.000 0.000 1.181 3.133 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.266 0.001 0.000 1.267 6.398 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.299 0.001 0.000 1.301 7.955 × 10 2 1.40

264

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Liquid argon (Ar) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 18 (Ar) 39.948 (1) 1.396 188.0 0.19559 3.0000 0.2000 3.0000 5.2146 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.687 5.687 9.833 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.461 4.461 1.786 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.502 3.502 3.321 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.731 2.731 6.598 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.340 2.340 1.058 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.084 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.669 1.670 4.250 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.570 1.570 6.732 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.518 1.519 1.063 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.508 0.000 1.508 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.509 0.000 1.510 1.725 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.526 0.000 0.000 1.526 2.385 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.610 0.000 0.000 1.610 4.934 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.644 0.000 0.000 1.645 6.163

265

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-13 (CF 3 Cl) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.47966 0.950 126.6 0.07238 3.5551 0.3659 3.2337 4.7483 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.416 6.416 8.659 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.019 5.019 1.578 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.930 3.930 2.945 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 5.870 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.615 2.615 9.430 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.971 1.971 2.760 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 3.809 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.745 1.745 6.041 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.685 1.685 9.551 × 10 1 283. MeV 3.738 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.668 0.000 1.668 1.553 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.151 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.762 0.000 0.000 1.763 4.473 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.596 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

266

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lutetium silicon oxide [Lu 2 SiO 5 ] Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42793 7.400 472.0 0.20623 3.0000 0.2732 3.0000 5.4394 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.679 4.679 1.209 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.692 3.693 2.181 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.916 2.916 4.029 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.287 2.287 7.953 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.968 1.968 1.270 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.503 1.503 3.666 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.421 1.422 5.038 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.344 1.344 7.944 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.308 1.308 1.248 × 10 2 242. MeV 3.316 × 10 2 1.304 1.304 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.309 0.000 0.000 1.309 2.014 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.329 2.773 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.416 5.684 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.449 0.001 0.000 1.450 7.080

267

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Boron oxide (B 2 O 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49839 1.812 99.6 0.11548 3.3832 0.1843 2.7379 3.6027 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.889 6.889 8.045 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.381 5.381 1.468 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.208 4.208 2.744 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.269 3.269 5.477 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.794 2.794 8.807 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.102 2.103 2.583 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 3.567 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.843 1.843 5.674 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.768 1.768 9.010 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 1.472 × 10 2 307. MeV 3.990 × 10 2 1.742 0.000 1.742 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.750 0.000 1.750 2.045 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.822 0.000 0.000 1.823 4.285 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.854 0.000 0.000 1.855 5.373 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

268

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Liquid H-note density shift (H 2 ) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 1 (H) 1.00794 (7) 7.080 × 10 -2 21.8 0.32969 3.0000 0.1641 1.9641 2.6783 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 16.508 16.508 3.316 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 12.812 12.812 6.097 × 10 -1 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 9.956 9.956 1.147 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 7.684 7.684 2.307 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 6.539 6.539 3.727 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 4.870 4.870 1.105 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 4.550 4.550 1.531 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 4.217 4.217 2.448 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 4.018 0.000 4.018 3.912 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 3.926 0.000 3.926 6.438 × 10 1 356. MeV 4.497 × 10 2 3.919 0.000 3.919 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 3.922 0.000 3.922 8.988 × 10 1 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 4.029 0.000 4.030 1.906 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 4.084 0.001

269

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Cortical bone (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52130 1.850 106.4 0.06198 3.5919 0.1161 3.0919 3.6488 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.142 7.142 7.765 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.581 5.581 1.417 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.366 4.366 2.646 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.393 3.393 5.281 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.900 2.901 8.489 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.179 2.179 2.489 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.044 2.044 3.440 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.475 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.830 1.830 8.700 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 1.422 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.803 0.000 1.803 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.812 0.000 1.812 1.976 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.888 0.000 0.000 1.889 4.138 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.922 0.000 0.000 1.923 5.187 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

270

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-13B1 (CF 3 Br) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.45665 1.500 210.5 0.03925 3.7194 0.3522 3.7554 5.3555 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.678 5.678 9.844 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.454 4.454 1.788 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.498 3.498 3.325 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.729 2.729 6.606 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.339 2.339 1.059 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.771 1.771 3.086 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.671 1.671 4.251 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.574 1.574 6.729 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.524 1.524 1.062 × 10 2 266. MeV 3.567 × 10 2 1.513 0.000 1.513 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.515 0.000 1.515 1.721 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.531 0.000 0.000 1.532 2.378 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.616 0.000 0.000 1.616 4.919 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.650 0.001 0.000 1.651 6.142 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

271

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium carbonate (Na 2 CO 3 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49062 2.532 125.0 0.08715 3.5638 0.1287 2.8591 3.7178 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.575 6.575 8.449 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.142 5.142 1.540 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.026 4.026 2.874 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.131 3.131 5.729 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.679 2.679 9.204 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 2.695 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.895 1.895 3.721 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.771 1.772 5.914 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.703 1.703 9.381 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 1.531 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.690 0.000 1.691 2.125 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.764 0.000 0.000 1.764 4.440 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.796 0.000 0.000 1.797 5.563 × 10 2 1.40

272

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Tungsten hexafluoride (WF 6 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42976 2.400 354.4 0.03658 3.5134 0.3020 4.2602 5.9881 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.928 4.928 1.143 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.880 3.880 2.067 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.057 3.057 3.828 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.393 2.393 7.574 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.056 2.056 1.211 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.565 1.565 3.509 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.479 1.479 4.827 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.396 1.396 7.623 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.353 1.353 1.200 × 10 2 253. MeV 3.431 × 10 2 1.346 0.000 1.346 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.349 0.000 0.000 1.349 1.942 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.367 0.000 0.000 1.367 2.679 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.451 0.001 0.000 1.452 5.516 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.485 0.001 0.000 1.486 6.877

273

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Standard rock Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.50000 2.650 136.4 0.08301 3.4120 0.0492 3.0549 3.7738 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.619 6.619 8.400 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.180 5.180 1.530 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.057 4.057 2.854 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.157 3.157 5.687 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.701 2.702 9.133 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.028 2.029 2.675 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.904 1.904 3.695 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.779 1.779 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.710 1.710 9.331 × 10 1 297. MeV 3.884 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.688 0.000 1.688 1.523 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.698 0.000 1.698 2.114 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.774 0.000 0.000 1.775 4.418 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.808 0.000 0.000 1.808 5.534 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

274

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Ceric sulfate dosimeter solution Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.55279 1.030 76.7 0.07666 3.5607 0.2363 2.8769 3.5212 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.909 7.909 6.989 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.170 6.170 1.278 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.391 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.739 3.739 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.193 3.193 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.398 2.398 2.261 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.255 2.255 3.123 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.102 2.102 4.968 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 7.896 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.980 0.000 1.980 1.292 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.979 0.000 1.979 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.986 0.000 1.986 1.797 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.062 0.000 0.000 2.062 3.774 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.096 0.000 0.000 2.097 4.735 × 10

275

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Silicon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 14 (Si) 28.0855 (3) 2.329 173.0 0.14921 3.2546 0.2015 2.8716 4.4355 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.363 6.363 8.779 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.987 4.987 1.595 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.912 3.912 2.969 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.047 3.047 5.905 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.608 2.608 9.476 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.965 1.965 2.770 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.849 1.849 3.822 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.737 1.737 6.064 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.678 1.678 9.590 × 10 1 273. MeV 3.633 × 10 2 1.664 0.000 1.664 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.665 0.000 1.666 1.559 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.681 0.000 1.681 2.157 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.767 0.000 0.000 1.768 4.475 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.803 0.000 0.000 1.804 5.595 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

276

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyethylene terephthalate (Mylar) (C 10 H 8 O 4 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.52037 1.400 78.7 0.12679 3.3076 0.1562 2.6507 3.3262 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.420 7.420 7.451 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.789 5.789 1.362 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.522 4.522 2.548 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.509 3.509 5.093 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.997 2.997 8.197 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.250 2.250 2.409 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.108 2.108 3.329 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.963 1.964 5.305 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.440 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 1.382 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.848 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.855 0.000 1.855 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.926 0.000 0.000 1.926 4.039 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.958 0.000 0.000 1.959

277

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Dichlorodiethyl ether C 4 Cl 2 H 8 O Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51744 1.220 103.3 0.06799 3.5250 0.1773 3.1586 4.0135 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.789 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.561 5.561 1.421 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.349 4.349 2.655 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.380 3.380 5.300 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.889 2.889 8.521 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.174 2.174 2.499 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.042 2.042 3.450 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.907 1.907 5.486 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.832 1.832 8.708 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.807 0.000 1.807 1.422 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.817 0.000 1.817 1.974 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.895 0.000 0.000 1.896 4.129 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.931 5.174 × 10

278

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 82 (Pb) 207.2 (1) 11.350 823.0 0.09359 3.1608 0.3776 3.8073 6.2018 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.823 3.823 1.524 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.054 3.054 2.705 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.436 2.436 4.927 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.928 1.928 9.600 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.666 1.666 1.521 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.283 1.283 4.338 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.215 1.215 5.943 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.151 1.152 9.339 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.124 1.124 1.463 × 10 2 226. MeV 3.145 × 10 2 1.122 0.000 1.123 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.130 0.000 0.000 1.131 2.352 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.151 0.000 0.000 1.152 3.228 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.237 0.001 0.000 1.238 6.572 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.270 0.001 0.000 1.272 8.165 × 10 2 1.40

279

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium iodide (NaI) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.42697 3.667 452.0 0.12516 3.0398 0.1203 3.5920 6.0572 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.703 4.703 1.202 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.710 3.710 2.169 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.928 2.928 4.009 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.297 2.297 7.917 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.975 1.975 1.264 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.509 1.509 3.652 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.427 1.427 5.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.347 1.348 7.916 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.310 1.310 1.245 × 10 2 243. MeV 3.325 × 10 2 1.305 1.305 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.310 0.000 0.000 1.310 2.010 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.329 0.000 0.000 1.330 2.768 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.417 0.001 0.000 1.418 5.677 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.452 0.001 0.000 1.453 7.070 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

280

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyvinyl alcohol (C 2 H3-O-H) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54480 1.300 69.7 0.11178 3.3893 0.1401 2.6315 3.1115 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.891 7.891 6.999 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.153 6.153 1.280 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.804 4.804 2.396 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.726 3.726 4.793 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.181 3.181 7.717 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.383 2.384 2.270 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.231 2.232 3.140 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.076 2.076 5.007 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.986 1.986 7.974 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.950 0.000 1.950 1.307 × 10 2 324. MeV 4.161 × 10 2 1.949 0.000 1.949 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.955 0.000 1.955 1.820 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.026 0.000 0.000 2.026 3.830 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.059 0.000 0.000 2.059 4.809 × 10 2 1.40

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Cesium Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 55 (Cs)132.9054519 (2) 1.873 488.0 0.18233 2.8866 0.5473 3.5914 6.9135 0.14 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.464 4.464 1.277 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.532 3.532 2.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.794 2.794 4.224 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.195 2.195 8.315 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.890 1.890 1.325 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.444 1.444 3.820 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.366 1.366 5.248 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.291 1.291 8.274 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.257 1.257 1.300 × 10 2 236. MeV 3.250 × 10 2 1.254 1.254 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.261 0.000 0.000 1.261 2.096 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.284 0.000 0.000 1.285 2.882 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.378 0.001 0.000 1.380 5.881 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.415 0.001 0.000 1.417 7.311 × 10 2

282

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Propane (C 3 H 8 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.58962 1.868 × 10 -3 47.1 0.09916 3.5920 1.4339 3.8011 8.7939 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.969 8.969 6.137 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.982 6.982 1.125 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.441 5.441 2.109 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 4.212 4.213 4.228 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.592 3.592 6.815 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.688 2.688 2.010 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.525 2.526 2.780 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.365 2.365 4.424 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.281 2.281 7.018 × 10 1 267. MeV 3.577 × 10 2 2.262 0.000 2.263 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.265 0.000 2.265 1.143 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.291 0.000 2.291 1.582 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.434 0.000 0.000 2.435 3.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.495 0.000 0.000 2.496 4.086 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

283

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polystyrene ([C 6 H 5 CHCH 2 ] n ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53768 1.060 68.7 0.16454 3.2224 0.1647 2.5031 3.2999 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.803 7.803 7.077 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.084 6.084 1.294 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.749 4.749 2.424 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.683 3.683 4.848 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.144 3.144 7.806 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.359 2.359 2.296 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.210 2.211 3.174 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.058 2.058 5.059 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.970 1.971 8.049 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.937 0.000 1.937 1.318 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.936 0.000 1.936 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.942 0.000 1.943 1.834 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.015 0.000 0.000 2.015 3.856 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.048 0.000 0.000 2.049 4.841 × 10 2 1.40

284

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Air (dry, 1 atm) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49919 1.205 × 10 -3 85.7 0.10914 3.3994 1.7418 4.2759 10.5961 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.039 7.039 7.862 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.494 5.495 1.436 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.294 4.294 2.686 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.333 3.333 5.366 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.847 2.847 8.633 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.140 2.140 2.535 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.013 2.014 3.501 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.889 1.889 5.562 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.827 1.827 8.803 × 10 1 257. MeV 3.471 × 10 2 1.815 0.000 1.816 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 1.819 1.430 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.844 0.000 1.844 1.977 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.968 0.000 0.000 1.968 4.074 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.020 0.000 0.000 2.021 5.077 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

285

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Lead tungstate (PbWO 4 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.41315 8.300 600.7 0.22758 3.0000 0.4068 3.0023 5.8528 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 4.333 4.333 1.311 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.426 3.426 2.360 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.710 2.711 4.350 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.131 2.131 8.566 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.835 1.835 1.365 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.406 1.406 3.931 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.331 1.331 5.397 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.261 1.261 8.498 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.231 1.231 1.333 × 10 2 227. MeV 3.154 × 10 2 1.229 1.230 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.237 0.000 0.000 1.238 2.145 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.260 0.000 0.000 1.260 2.946 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.349 0.001 0.000 1.350 6.007 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.383 0.001 0.000 1.385 7.469 × 10 2 1.40

286

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Carbon (compact) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) [12.0107 (8)] 2.265 78.0 0.26142 2.8697 -0.0178 2.3415 2.8680 0.12 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.116 7.116 7.772 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.549 5.549 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.331 4.331 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.355 3.355 5.318 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.861 2.861 8.567 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.126 2.127 2.531 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.991 1.992 3.505 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.854 1.854 5.597 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.775 1.775 8.917 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 1.462 × 10 2 317. MeV 4.096 × 10 2 1.745 0.000 1.745 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.751 0.000 1.751 2.034 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.820 4.275 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.850 0.000 0.000 1.851 5.365 × 10

287

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Methanol (CH 3 OH) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56176 0.791 67.6 0.08970 3.5477 0.2529 2.7639 3.5160 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.169 8.169 6.759 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.369 6.369 1.236 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.972 4.972 2.315 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.855 3.855 4.631 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.291 3.291 7.457 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.469 2.469 2.194 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.321 2.322 3.032 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.166 2.166 4.823 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 7.664 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.039 0.000 2.039 1.254 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 2.038 0.000 2.039 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.045 0.000 2.045 1.744 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.121 0.000 0.000 2.122 3.665 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.156 0.000 0.000 2.157 4.600 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 ×

288

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Carbon (amorphous) Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 6 (C) 12.0107 (8) 2.000 78.0 0.20240 3.0036 -0.0351 2.4860 2.9925 0.10 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.117 7.117 7.771 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.550 5.551 1.420 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.332 4.332 2.658 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.357 3.357 5.317 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.862 2.862 8.564 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.129 2.129 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.994 1.994 3.502 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.857 1.857 5.591 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.778 1.779 8.905 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 1.459 × 10 2 313. MeV 4.055 × 10 2 1.749 0.000 1.749 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.755 0.000 1.756 2.030 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.824 0.000 0.000 1.825 4.266 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.855 0.000 0.000 1.856 5.353 × 10

289

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Mix D wax Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.56479 0.990 60.9 0.07490 3.6823 0.1371 2.7145 3.0780 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 8.322 8.322 6.628 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.485 6.486 1.213 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 5.060 5.060 2.273 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.922 3.922 4.549 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.347 3.347 7.327 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.505 2.506 2.158 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.346 2.346 2.985 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.182 2.182 4.761 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.087 2.087 7.584 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 2.049 0.000 2.049 1.243 × 10 2 328. MeV 4.201 × 10 2 2.048 0.000 2.048 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 2.053 0.000 2.053 1.731 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.125 0.000 0.000 2.125 3.647 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.158 0.000 0.000 2.159 4.581 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10 3 2.213

290

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Sodium nitrate NaNO 3 Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49415 2.261 114.6 0.09391 3.5097 0.1534 2.8221 3.6502 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.702 6.702 8.281 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.239 5.239 1.510 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.100 4.100 2.820 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.187 3.187 5.624 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.726 2.726 9.039 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.053 2.053 2.648 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.927 1.927 3.656 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.800 1.800 5.814 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.729 1.729 9.228 × 10 1 298. MeV 3.894 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.705 0.000 1.705 1.507 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.714 0.000 1.714 2.092 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 0.000 1.787 4.377 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.819 0.000 0.000 1.819 5.486 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

291

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Freon-12B2 (CF 2 Br 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.44901 1.800 284.9 0.05144 3.5565 0.3406 3.7956 5.7976 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 5.330 5.330 1.053 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 4.190 4.190 1.908 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 3.297 3.297 3.540 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 2.577 2.577 7.017 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.212 2.212 1.123 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.680 1.680 3.263 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.586 1.586 4.491 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.496 1.496 7.099 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.452 1.452 1.118 × 10 2 252. MeV 3.421 × 10 2 1.445 0.000 1.445 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.448 0.000 1.449 1.809 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.467 0.000 0.000 1.468 2.496 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.556 0.000 0.000 1.557 5.139 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.592 0.001 0.000 1.593 6.409 × 10 2 1.40 GeV

292

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Eye lens (ICRP) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.54977 1.100 73.3 0.09690 3.4550 0.2070 2.7446 3.3720 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.912 7.912 6.984 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 6.171 6.171 1.277 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.819 4.819 2.390 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.738 3.738 4.779 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.192 3.192 7.693 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.396 2.396 2.262 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.251 2.251 3.125 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 2.095 2.096 4.976 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 2.006 2.006 7.914 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 1.296 × 10 2 318. MeV 4.105 × 10 2 1.971 0.000 1.971 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.977 0.000 1.977 1.803 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 2.051 0.000 0.000 2.051 3.790 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 2.085 0.000 0.000 2.085 4.756 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502 × 10

293

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Compact bone (ICRU) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.53010 1.850 91.9 0.05822 3.6419 0.0944 3.0201 3.3390 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.406 7.406 7.477 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.783 5.783 1.365 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.521 4.521 2.552 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.511 3.511 5.097 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 3.000 3.000 8.199 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.247 2.247 2.408 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.106 2.106 3.330 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.962 1.962 5.307 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.880 1.880 8.444 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.850 1.382 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.849 0.000 1.849 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.856 0.000 1.857 1.922 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.930 0.000 0.000 1.930 4.036 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.963 0.000 0.000 1.964 5.063 × 10 2 1.40 GeV 1.502

294

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Polyimide film (C 22 H 10 N 2 O 5 ) n Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.51264 1.420 79.6 0.15972 3.1921 0.1509 2.5631 3.3497 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.299 7.299 7.576 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.695 5.695 1.385 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.449 4.449 2.590 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.453 3.453 5.177 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.949 2.949 8.332 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.214 2.214 2.448 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.074 2.074 3.384 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.932 1.932 5.392 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.851 1.851 8.577 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 1.404 × 10 2 314. MeV 4.065 × 10 2 1.820 0.000 1.820 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.826 0.000 1.827 1.953 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.897 0.000 0.000 1.898 4.102 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.929 0.000 0.000 1.930 5.147 × 10 2 1.40

295

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Silicon dioxide (fused quartz) (SiO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49930 2.200 139.2 0.08408 3.5064 0.1500 3.0140 4.0560 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 6.591 6.591 8.438 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.158 5.158 1.537 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.041 4.041 2.866 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.145 3.145 5.710 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.691 2.691 9.170 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.030 2.030 2.682 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.908 1.908 3.701 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.786 1.786 5.878 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.719 1.719 9.315 × 10 1 288. MeV 3.788 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.699 0.000 1.699 1.518 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.711 0.000 1.711 2.105 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.789 0.000 0.000 1.790 4.391 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.823 0.000 0.000 1.824 5.497

296

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Radon Z A [g/mol] ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 86 (Rn) [222.01758 (2)]9.066 × 10 -3 794.0 0.20798 2.7409 1.5368 4.9889 13.2839 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 3.782 3.782 1.535 × 10 0 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 3.018 3.018 2.730 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 2.405 2.405 4.980 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 1.902 1.902 9.715 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 1.644 1.644 1.540 × 10 1 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 1.267 1.267 4.394 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 1.201 1.201 6.019 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.140 1.140 9.452 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.116 1.117 1.479 × 10 2 216. MeV 3.039 × 10 2 1.116 1.116 Minimum ionization 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.127 0.000 0.000 1.128 2.372 × 10 2 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.154 0.000 0.000 1.154 3.249 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.258 0.001 0.000 1.260 6.559 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.300 0.001 0.000 1.302 8.119

297

Table  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Muons Muons in Solid carbon dioxide (dry ice; CO 2 ) Z/A ρ [g/cm 3 ] I [eV] a k = m s x 0 x 1 C δ 0 0.49989 1.563 85.0 0.43387 3.0000 0.2000 2.0000 3.4513 0.00 T p Ionization Brems Pair prod Photonucl Total CSDA range [MeV/c] [MeV cm 2 /g] [g/cm 2 ] 10.0 MeV 4.704 × 10 1 7.057 7.057 7.841 × 10 -1 14.0 MeV 5.616 × 10 1 5.508 5.508 1.432 × 10 0 20.0 MeV 6.802 × 10 1 4.304 4.304 2.679 × 10 0 30.0 MeV 8.509 × 10 1 3.341 3.341 5.353 × 10 0 40.0 MeV 1.003 × 10 2 2.854 2.854 8.612 × 10 0 80.0 MeV 1.527 × 10 2 2.145 2.145 2.529 × 10 1 100. MeV 1.764 × 10 2 2.017 2.017 3.493 × 10 1 140. MeV 2.218 × 10 2 1.886 1.886 5.554 × 10 1 200. MeV 2.868 × 10 2 1.812 1.812 8.811 × 10 1 300. MeV 3.917 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 1.438 × 10 2 303. MeV 3.950 × 10 2 1.787 0.000 1.787 Minimum ionization 400. MeV 4.945 × 10 2 1.795 0.000 1.795 1.997 × 10 2 800. MeV 8.995 × 10 2 1.866 0.000 0.000 1.866 4.182 × 10 2 1.00 GeV 1.101 × 10 3 1.896 0.000 0.000 1.897 5.245 × 10

298

Estimated Cost Description Determination Date:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

and posted 2/10/2011 and posted 2/10/2011 *Title, Location Estimated Cost Description Determination Date: uncertain Transmittal to State: uncertain EA Approval: uncertain $50,000 FONSI: uncertain Determination Date: uncertain Transmittal to State: uncertain EA Approval: uncertain FONSI: uncertain Total Estimated Cost $70,000 Attachment: Memo, Moody to Marcinowski, III, SUBJECT: NEPA 2011 APS for DOE-SRS, Dated: Annual NEPA Planning Summary Environmental Assessments (EAs) Expected to be Initiated in the Next 12 Months Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) Jan-11 Estimated Schedule (**NEPA Milestones) South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Industrial Stormwater General Permit (IGP) # SCR000000 November 12, with an effective date of January

299

Variable White Dwarf Data Tables  

SciTech Connect

Below, I give a brief explanation of the information in these tables. In all cases, I list the WD {number_sign}, either from the catalog of McCook {ampersand} Sion (1987) or determined by me from the epoch 1950 coordinates. Next, I list the most commonly used name (or alias), then I list the variable star designation if it is available. If not, I list the constellation name and a V** or?? depending on what the last designated variable star for that constellation is. I present epoch 2000 coordinates for all of the stars, which I precessed from the 1950 ones in most cases. I do not include proper motion effects; this is negligible for all except the largest proper motion DAV stars, such as L 19-2, BPM 37093, B 808, and G 29-38. Even in these cases, the error is no more than 30` in declination and 2 s in right ascension. I culled effective temperatures from the latest work (listed under each table); they are now much more homogeneous than before. I pulled the magnitude estimates from the appropriate paper, and they are mean values integrated over several cycles. The amplitude given is for the height of a typical pulse in the light curve. The periods correspond the dominant ones found in the light curve. In some cases, there is a band of power in a given period range, or the light curve is very complex, and I indicate this in the table. In the references, I generally list the paper with the most comprehensive pulsation analysis for the star in question. In some cases, there is more than one good reference, and I list them as well.

Bradley, P. A.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

300

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2008 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 2 0 6,256 6,258 Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 * 0 0 * Hawaii............................. 2,554 5 0 0 2,559 Illinois.............................. 0 15 0 0 15 Indiana............................ 0 30 0 0 30 Iowa ................................ 0 24 3 0 27 Kentucky......................... 0 15 0 0 15 Maryland ......................... 0 181 0 0 181 Massachusetts................ 0 13 0 0 13 Minnesota ....................... 0 46 0 0 46 Missouri .......................... * 6 0 0 6 Nebraska ........................ 0 28 0 0 28 New Hampshire .............. 0 44 0 0 44 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 489 489 New York ........................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2009 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 7,525 7,527 Connecticut..................... 0 * 0 0 * Delaware ........................ 0 2 0 0 2 Georgia........................... 0 0 52 * 52 Hawaii............................. 2,438 9 0 0 2,447 Illinois.............................. 0 20 0 0 20 Indiana............................ 0 * 0 0 * Iowa ................................ 0 3 0 0 3 Kentucky......................... 0 18 0 0 18 Maryland ......................... 0 170 0 0 170 Massachusetts................ 0 10 0 0 10 Minnesota ....................... 0 47 0 0 47 Missouri .......................... * 10 0 0 10 Nebraska ........................ 0 18 0 0 18 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 454 454 New York ........................

302

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 4 0 5,144 5,148 Delaware ........................ 0 1 0 0 1 Georgia........................... 0 0 732 0 732 Hawaii............................. 2,465 6 0 0 2,472 Illinois.............................. 0 17 0 0 17 Indiana............................ 0 1 0 0 1 Iowa ................................ 0 2 0 0 2 Kentucky......................... 0 5 0 0 5 Louisiana ........................ 0 0 249 0 249 Maryland ......................... 0 115 0 0 115 Massachusetts................ 0 * 0 0 * Minnesota ....................... 0 12 0 0 12 Missouri .......................... * 18 0 0 18 Nebraska ........................ 0 12 0 0 12 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 457 457 New York ........................

303

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2007 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ......................... 0 3 0 6,866 6,869 Delaware ........................ 0 5 0 0 5 Georgia........................... 0 2 0 0 2 Hawaii............................. 2,679 4 0 0 2,683 Illinois.............................. 0 11 0 0 11 Indiana............................ 0 81 0 554 635 Iowa ................................ 0 2 38 0 40 Kentucky......................... 0 124 0 0 124 Maryland ......................... 0 245 0 0 245 Massachusetts................ 0 15 0 0 15 Minnesota ....................... 0 54 0 0 54 Missouri .......................... 7 60 0 0 66 Nebraska ........................ 0 33 0 0 33 New Hampshire .............. 0 9 0 0 9 New Jersey ..................... 0 0 0 379 379 New York ........................

304

Table-top job analysis  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this Handbook is to establish general training program guidelines for training personnel in developing training for operation, maintenance, and technical support personnel at Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. TTJA is not the only method of job analysis; however, when conducted properly TTJA can be cost effective, efficient, and self-validating, and represents an effective method of defining job requirements. The table-top job analysis is suggested in the DOE Training Accreditation Program manuals as an acceptable alternative to traditional methods of analyzing job requirements. DOE 5480-20A strongly endorses and recommends it as the preferred method for analyzing jobs for positions addressed by the Order.

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

305

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - Low Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main Low Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary Low Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year Low Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply, Disposition, and Price Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions

306

EIA-Annual Energy Outlook 2010 - High Economic Growth Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Economic Growth Tables (2007-2035) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 Main High Economic Growth Tables (2007- 2035) Table Title Formats Summary High Economic Growth Case Tables PDF Gif Year-by-Year High Economic Growth Case Tables Excel Gif Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary Excel Gif Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source Excel Gif Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption Excel Gif Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption Excel Gif Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions Excel Gif

307

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, October 1991  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

308

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, August 1991  

SciTech Connect

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (August 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M., Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

309

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, September 1991  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

310

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1991  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

311

Environmental regulatory update table, July 1991  

SciTech Connect

This Environmental Regulatory Update Table (July 1991) provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Houlberg, L.M.; Hawkins, G.T.; Salk, M.S.

1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

Environmental Regulatory Update Table, November 1990  

SciTech Connect

The Environmental Regulatory Update Table provides information on regulatory initiatives of interest to DOE operations and contractor staff with environmental management responsibilities. The table is updated each month with information from the Federal Register and other sources, including direct contact with regulatory agencies. Each table entry provides a chronological record of the rulemaking process for that initiative with an abstract and a projection of further action.

Hawkins, G.T.; Houlberg, L.M.; Noghrei-Nikbakht, P.A.; Salk, M.S.

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

313

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

3 3 Table 9 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:08:24 PM Table 9. Underground natural gas storage - by season, 2011-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year, Season, and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2011 Refill Season April 4,304 1,788 6,092 -223 -11.1 312 100 -212 May 4,304 2,187 6,491 -233 -9.6 458 58 -399 June 4,302 2,530 6,831 -210 -7.7 421 80 -340 July 4,300 2,775 7,075 -190 -6.4 359 116 -244 August 4,300 3,019 7,319 -134 -4.2 370 126 -244 September 4,301 3,416 7,717 -92 -2.6 454 55

314

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

1) 1) June 2013 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2011 2011 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table E1. Primary Energy, Electricity, and Total Energy Price Estimates, 2011 (Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector g,h Retail Electricity Total Energy g,i Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total g,h,i Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Other e Total Wood and Waste f Alabama 3.09 5.66 26.37 22.77 25.54 27.12 13.18 19.42 25.90 0.61 3.01 8.75 2.56 27.08 19.85 Alaska 3.64 6.70 29.33 23.12 29.76 31.60 20.07 34.62 26.61 - 14.42 20.85 6.36 47.13 25.17 Arizona 1.99 7.07 27.73 22.84 31.95 26.97 17.00 17.23 26.71 0.75 6.31 10.79 2.16 28.46 25.23 Arkansas 1.93 6.94 26.37 22.45 26.66 27.35 17.35 33.22

315

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Monthly 31 Table 13 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:28:44 PM Table 13. Activities of underground natural gas storage operators, by state, September 2013 (volumes in million cubic feet) State Field Count Total Storage Capacity Working Gas Storage Capacity Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Alabama 2 35,400 27,350 8,050 21,262 29,312 2,852 15.5 1,743 450 Alaska a 5 83,592 67,915 14,197 20,455 34,652 NA NA 1,981 30 Arkansas 2 21,853 12,178 9,648 3,372 13,020 -1,050 -23.7 204 0 California 14 599,711 374,296

316

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2004 2004 Consumption Summary Tables Table S1. Energy Consumption Estimates by Source and End-Use Sector, 2004 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydro- electric Power d Biomass e Other f Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/Losses g Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Alabama 2,159.7 853.9 404.0 638.5 329.9 106.5 185.0 0.1 -358.2 393.7 270.2 1,001.1 494.7 Alaska 779.1 14.1 411.8 334.8 0.0 15.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 56.4 63.4 393.4 266.0 Arizona 1,436.6 425.4 354.9 562.8 293.1 69.9 8.7 3.6 -281.7 368.5 326.0 231.2 511.0 Arkansas 1,135.9 270.2 228.9 388.3 161.1 36.5 76.0 0.6 -25.7 218.3 154.7 473.9 288.9 California 8,364.6 68.9 2,474.2 3,787.8 315.6 342.2

317

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9) 9) June 2011 State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 Through 2009 2009 Consumption Summary Tables Table C1. Energy Consumption Overview: Estimates by Energy Source and End-Use Sector, 2009 (Trillion Btu) State Total Energy b Sources End-Use Sectors a Fossil Fuels Nuclear Electric Power Renewable Energy e Net Interstate Flow of Electricity/ Losses f Net Electricity Imports Residential Commercial Industrial b Transportation Coal Natural Gas c Petroleum d Total Alabama 1,906.8 631.0 473.9 583.9 1,688.8 415.4 272.9 -470.3 0.0 383.2 266.0 788.5 469.2 Alaska 630.4 14.5 344.0 255.7 614.1 0.0 16.3 0.0 (s) 53.4 61.0 325.4 190.6 Arizona 1,454.3 413.3 376.7 520.8 1,310.8 320.7 103.5 -279.9 -0.8 400.8 352.1 207.8 493.6 Arkansas 1,054.8 264.1 248.1 343.1 855.3 158.7 126.5 -85.7 0.0 226.3 167.0 372.5

318

Microsoft Word - table_01.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

3 3 Table 1 Table 1. Summary of natural gas supply and disposition in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Year and Month Gross Withdrawals Marketed Production NGPL Production a Dry Gas Production b Supplemental Gaseous Fuels c Net Imports Net Storage Withdrawals d Balancing Item e Consumption f 2008 Total 25,636 21,112 953 20,159 61 3,021 34 2 23,277 2009 Total 26,057 21,648 1,024 20,624 65 2,679 -355 -103 22,910 2010 Total 26,816 22,382 1,066 21,316 65 2,604 -13 115 24,087 2011 January 2,299 1,953 92 1,861 5 236 811 R -24 R 2,889 February 2,104 1,729 82 1,647 4 186 594 R 20 R 2,452 March 2,411 2,002 95 1,908 5 171 151 R -4 R 2,230 April 2,350 1,961 93 1,868 5 R 152 -216 R 17 R 1,825 May 2,411 2,031

319

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) U.S. Energy Information Administration | Natural Gas Annual 4 Table 2 Alabama 215,710 7,110 -162,223 617,883 0 -2,478 0 666,738 Alaska 351,259 21,470 22,663 0 -9,342 0 0 343,110 Arizona 117 0 -13,236 389,036 -43,838 0 0 332,079 Arkansas 1,146,168 424 -18,281 -831,755 0 -103 0 295,811 California 246,822 12,755 104,820 2,222,355 -109,787 48,071 0 2,403,385 Colorado 1,709,376 81,943 -107,940 -1,077,968 0 2,570 4,412 443,367 Connecticut 0 0 4,191 225,228 0 260 0 229,159 Delaware 0 0 21,035 80,692 0 51 * 101,676 District of Columbia 0 0 497 28,075 0 0 0 28,572 Florida 18,681 0 15,168 1,294,620 0 0 0 1,328,469

320

TableHC2.12.xls  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Detached Attached 2 to 4 Units Energy Information Administration: 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

TableHC10.13.xls  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

or More... 0.3 Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators U.S. Census Region Northeast Midwest Table HC10.13 Lighting Usage...

322

TABLE54.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Administration (EIA) Forms EIA-812, "Monthly Product Pipeline Report," and EIA-813, Monthly Crude Oil Report." Table 54. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline...

323

TABLE53.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Table 53. Movements of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products by Pipeline, Tanker, and Barge Between July 2004 Crude Oil ... 0 383 0...

324

2011 Annual Report Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

) ...................12 Smart Grid Cyber Security.....................................................13 ICT Supply ChainComputer Security Division 2011 Annual Report #12;Table of Contents Welcome ................................................................. 1 Division Organization .................................................2 The Computer Security

325

Summary Statistics Table 1. Crude Oil Prices  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Cost Report." Figure Energy Information Administration Petroleum Marketing Annual 1996 3 Table 2. U.S. Refiner Prices of Petroleum Products to End Users (Cents per Gallon...

326

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

GIS DEVELOPMENT GUIDE Volume II Table of Contents SURVEY OF AVAILABLE DATA Introduction ...................................................................................13 EVALUATING GIS HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE Introduction ...................................................................................14 Sources of Information About GIS......................................................14 GIS

Ghelli, Giorgio

327

U.S. Spent Nuclear Fuel Data as of December 31,2002 -Table 2  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 1 | Table 3 Table 2. Nuclear Power Plant Data as of December 31, 2002 Reactor Name State Reactor Type Reactor Vendor a Core Size (number of assemblies) Startup Date (year)b License Expiration (year) Actual Retirement (year) Arkansas Nuclear 1 AR PWR B&W 177 1974 2034 Arkansas Nuclear 2 AR PWR CE 177 1978 2018 Beaver Valley 1 PA PWR WE 157 1976 2016 Beaver Valley 2 PA PWR WE 157 1987 2027 Big Rock Point MI BWR GE 84 1962 2000 1998 Braidwood 1 IL PWR WE 193 1987 2026 Braidwood 2 IL PWR WE 193 1988 2027 Browns Ferry 1 AL BWR GE 764 1973 2013 Browns Ferry 2 AL BWR GE 764 1974 2014 Browns Ferry 3 AL BWR GE 764 1976 2016 Brunswick 1 NC BWR GE 560 1976 2016

328

Annual Energy Outlook 2009 - High Price Case Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6-2030) 6-2030) Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 XLS GIF Spreadsheets are provided in Excel High Price Case Tables (2006-2030) Table Title Formats Summary High Price Case Tables PDF GIF High Price Case Tables XLS GIF Table 1. Total Energy Supply and Disposition Summary XLS GIF Table 2. Energy Consumption by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 3. Energy Prices by Sector and Source XLS GIF Table 4. Residential Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 5. Commercial Sector Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 6. Industrial Sector Key Indicators and Consumption XLS GIF Table 7. Transportation Sector Key Indicators and Delivered Energy Consumption XLS GIF Table 8. Electricity Supply, Disposition, Prices, and Emissions XLS GIF Table 9. Electricity Generating Capacity

329

MEMORANDUM I TO: FILE DATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

MEMORANDUM MEMORANDUM I TO: FILE DATE -----_-_- FaOM: ~~,~hkcid!,~- ' ALTERNATE CITY: I\ptw)a.yk --~---_--___-~--~---______ STATE: I current: ------------_------_-~~~~~ if yes, date contacted ____ TYPE OF OPERATION -_---_---------__ 0 Research & Development 6 Facility Type 0 Production scale testing 0 Pilat Scale 0 Bench Scale Process 0 Theoretical Studies Sample $ rraductian & Analysis a Manufacturing I 0 University I (1 Research Organization 0 Government Sponao&ed Facility 0 Cither I ----e------y-------- 0 Disposal/Storage TYPE OF CONTRACT --~_----~__~~~-- ' 0 Prime q Subcontract& q Purchase Order cl Other informatian (i.e., cost + fixed fee, unit pri'ce, time & material, qtc) ------- --------------------~------ Contract/Purchase Order #

330

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

12 Request for Pre-Applications 12 Request for Pre-Applications Workscope Descriptions FY 2012 Request for Pre-Applications PROGRAM SUPPORTING: FUEL CYCLE R&D SEPARATIONS AND WASTE FORMS (F E DE R A L POC - J I M B R E SE E & T E C H NI C A L POC - T E R R Y T ODD) Separations and Waste Forms (FC-1) - The separations and waste forms campaign develops the next generation of fuel cycle and waste management technologies that enable a sustainable fuel cycle, with minimal processing, waste generation, and potential for material diversion. Today's technology challenges include the economical recovery of transuranic elements for recycle/transmutation; and minimizing waste generation (including both high level and low level waste). Priority research efforts revolve around achieving near-zero radioactive off-gas emissions; developing a simplified, single-step

331

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2 2 SECTION A. Project Title: INL - Off-Road ATV Use In Support of Engineering Surveys SECTION B. Project Description The proposed action will allow for off-road ATV use near T-24 and T-25 at the Idaho National Laboratory Site. The ATV(s) will be used to survey in support of engineering design for a proposed upgraded haul road within the INL Site. Currently, an Environmental Assessment is being prepared to address upgrading either T-24 or T-25 to establish a site transportation route for the out-of-commerce shipment of materials and wastes from MFC to other site areas to reduce U.S. Highway 20 road closures, improve safety, and reduce cost. Since off-road use of motorized vehicles is prohibited unless approval is obtained, this Environmental Checklist will document that

332

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE G 440.2B-1A 9-19-05 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE AVIATION PROGRAM PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (METRICS) for use with DOE O 440.2B, Aviation Management and Safety [This Guide describes suggested nonmandatory approaches for meeting requirements. Guides are not requirements documents and may not be construed as requirements in any audit or appraisal for compliance with the parent Policy, Order, Notice, or Manual.] U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AVAILABLE ONLINE AT: INITIATED BY: www.directives.doe.gov Office of Aviation Management/OMBE/CFO DOE G 440.2B-1A i (and ii) 9-19-05 FOREWORD This Department of Energy (DOE) Aviation Program performance indicators interim guide is approved by the Office of Aviation Management (OAM) and is available for use by all DOE and

333

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

09-003 09-003 SECTION A. Project Title: Removal of Central Facilities Area (CFA)-661 Interior Walls and Mezzanine. SECTION B. Project Description The initial action to be covered under this Environmental Checklist will be removal of the mezzanines from CFA-661 to provide for material storage and work space for the National and Homeland Security (N&HS) Wireless Test Bed project. More specifically, this involves storage of electronic equipment, antennas and antenna masts, personnel supplies, and a variety of spare parts to support the project. In addition to storage, plans include a staging and lay down area where partial assembly of project equipment can be performed. Following completion of N&HS work within CFA-661, Facilities and Site Services will then remove the interior walls.

334

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

ICP-12-003 ICP-12-003 SECTION A. Project Title: CPP-684 - Remote Analytical Laboratory Facility Modifications SECTION B. Project Description The proposed activities are intended to render CPP-684 Remote Analytical Laboratory (RAL) as a limited access area by removing existing operational functions that are currently performed in the facility. In general, the activities will involve (1) removing the need for building heat and overall reduction of power consumption; (2) converting the existing fire protection system to an anti-freeze charged system; (3) relocating the Remote Distribution Module (RDM), which is part of installed equipment used for the emergency communication system from CPP-684 to CPP-663; and, if pursued, (4) perform specific tasks which would allow a downgrade CPP-684

335

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3 3 SECTION A. Project Title: Relocation of National and Homeland Security New Generation Wireless Test Bed Equipment and Personnel SECTION B. Project Description: This activity is to relocate and consolidate Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC (BEA) National and Homeland Security (NHS) New Generation Wireless Test Bed (NGWTB) program personnel and equipment from Critical Infrastructure Test Range Complex (CITRC) to Central Facilitis Area (CFA). This activity also includes relocating the antenna field from vicinity Power Burst Facility (PBF)-641 to the vicinity of PBF-620 Cell Site 9 area. The Remote Testing Monitoring Facility will be relocated from the vicinity of Gate 3 to the Cell Site 9 area. The Cell Site 9 area near PBF-620 is previously disturbed soil and asphalt.

336

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

16 16 SECTION A. Project Title: GaRDS Vehicle X-Ray System Procurement, Installation and Operations SECTION B. Project Description: . This effort will be to procure, install, and operate a Gamma Radiation Detection System (GaRDS) capable of providing X-Ray images of incoming vehicles and delivery trucks. The scanner will be equipped with a 1 Ci Cobalt-60 gamma source and will be installed in building MFC-736. This security building is located on Taylor Blvd approximately one mile south of the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) and already houses a Vehicle Explosives Detection System equipped with two 50 microgram Cf-252 sources. The purpose of the proposed detection system is to enhance the security capability for MFC facilities, research programs, and personnel.

337

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2 2 SECTION A. Project Title: MFC Dial Room Replacement Project SECTION B. Project Description: The proposed project is to construct and operate a new dial room at the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) to continue operation of the telecommunications system at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). As part of the INL Private Branch Exchange (PBX) consolidation effort, the need to replace Central Facilities Area (CFA), Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC), and Power Burst Facility (PBF) PBX switches will eliminate the current switches potential failure and provide the necessary maintainable hardware and software to support INL missions. The project will maintain the existing dial room in the basement of MFC-752 as a splice/conduit/equipment

338

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

09-001 09-001 SECTION A. Project Title: ICP Routine Maintenance SECTION B. Project Description The purpose of this document is to address actions that meet the intent of the categorical exclusion (CX) B1.3 as described in 10 CFR 1021, Appendix B to Subpart D. Both typical and non-typical types of actions, such as routine maintenance, minor modifications, and custodial services required to support safe and efficient plant operations even if performed on an infrequent basis are addressed. All of the activities will be performed in support of CWI operations. The actions will occur within site boundaries of the INL and ICP facilities and within leased facilities in Idaho Falls, Idaho. Routine maintenance includes custodial services for buildings, structures, rights-of-way, infrastructures (e.g., pathways, roads, and

339

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3 3 SECTION A. Project Title: INL - Site Wide Well Abandonment Activities SECTION B. Project Description The proposed action will abandon inactive wells and injection wells at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site. Wells and injection wells will be abandoned as per MCP-1442, MCP-3480 and the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) requirements, as applicable. The wells to be abandoned are located both within the INL facility boundaries and outside of the INL facility boundaries. The proposed action will address all classes of wells including Class IV and V injection wells. The wells will be abandoned in accordance with instructions provided in this Environmental Checklist, MCP-3480 and Section 4.5 in MCP-1442, Well Drilling, Maintenance, Surveillance, and Abandonment Activities. The MCPs identify the process to be followed for

340

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5 5 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-ICP-12-002 SECTION A. Project Title: ICP Routine Maintenance SECTION B. Project Description The purpose of this document is to address actions that meet the intent of the categorical exclusion (CX) B1.3 as described in 10 CFR 1021, Appendix B to Subpart D. Both typical and non-typical types of actions, such as routine maintenance, minor modifications, and custodial services required to support safe and efficient plant operations even if performed on an infrequent basis are addressed. All of the activities will be performed in support of CWI operations. The actions will occur within site boundaries of the INL and ICP facilities and within leased facilities in Idaho Falls, Idaho. Routine maintenance includes custodial services for buildings, structures, rights-of-way,

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

1 1 SECTION A. Project Title: CFA-696 Power and Plumbing Upgrades SECTION B. Project Description: There is insufficient electrical power in the East Bay and the West Bay of the Central Facility Area (CFA) Transportation Complex to allow the craftsmen to fully utilize the available floor space without the use of extension cords. Additionally, a new hydraulic hose clamper is to be installed in the Parts Room and it needs a dedicated 30A power supply. The craftsmen also need another wash sink in the East Bay. The current method of connecting to the internet using Local Area Network (LAN) cables is cumbersome and inefficient. There is not enough lighting in the north side of the southeast section of the East Bay. This project installs the necessary electrical service, additional plumbing, and wireless internet capability as itemized below:

342

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

5 5 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-ICP-12-002 SECTION A. Project Title: ICP Routine Maintenance SECTION B. Project Description The purpose of this document is to address actions that meet the intent of the categorical exclusion (CX) B1.3 as described in 10 CFR 1021, Appendix B to Subpart D. Both typical and non-typical types of actions, such as routine maintenance, minor modifications, and custodial services required to support safe and efficient plant operations even if performed on an infrequent basis are addressed. All of the activities will be performed in support of CWI operations. The actions will occur within site boundaries of the INL and ICP facilities and within leased facilities in Idaho Falls, Idaho. Routine maintenance includes custodial services for buildings, structures, rights-of-way,

343

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-008 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-008 SECTION A. Project Title: Maintenance and Modification of Well TRA-08 SECTION B. Project Description: TRA-08, a groundwater monitoring well located approximately 1.5 miles south of the ATR Complex was drilled and constructed in 1990. The well is currently used as a groundwater monitoring compliance point for the ATR Complex Cold Waste Pond Industrial Wastewater Reuse Permit (IWRP). It is also used for CERCLA groundwater monitoring by CWI. Over the life of the well, corrosion of the carbon steel casing has resulted in an accumulation of rust flakes in the bottom of the well thus adversely affecting the efficiency of the well. In addition, the water level in the well has dropped from a depth of approximately 477 ft below ground surface at

344

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 2 __________________________ 1 DOE's strategic plans included the Nuclear Energy Research and Development Roadmap" (2010 Predecisional draft) and reports such as "Facilities for the Future of Nuclear Energy Research: A Twenty-year Outlook". SECTION A. Project Title: Materials and Fuel Complex (MFC) Infrastructure Upgrades: Sewage Lagoons Upgrades SECTION B. Project Description: MFC Infrastructure Upgrades - MFC Sewage Lagoon Upgrades This EC focuses on upgrades to the existing 2.4 acre evaporative sewage lagoons, located north-east and outside of the MFC fenced area. These existing lagoons are currently at capacity with the approximately 800 personnel based at MFC. The number of researchers and operations

345

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

10-009 10-009 SECTION A. Project Title Idaho Falls (IF)-608 Uninterrupted Power Supply Upgrade Project SECTION B. Project Description: This project increases the Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) capacity in the IF-608 Information Operations and Research Center (IORC) by removing two existing UPS systems (50 KVA and 36 KVA) and installing a 225 KVA system. A ~15 ton cooling unit will be installed on the roof for heat removal. Associated work will include additional electrical panel(s) and electrical conduit rerouting and installation. Disposal of the existing UPS systems may be required depending on whether they are claimed off the excess list. This work will be performed either under blanket subcontracts or by a separate construction contractor and is planned for completion by

346

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

6 6 SECTION A. Project Title: TRA-653 HVAC Modifications SECTION B. Project Description: The proposed project plans to replace the existing blowers, swamp coolers and electric heaters in the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Test Reactor Area-653 (TRA-653) office area with three roof mounted heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) units; and install six roof mounted HVAC units at the TRA-653 machine shop area. These modifications are needed to enhance workplace habitability, maintain a more consistent building environment, and achieve a more energy efficient system. The TRA- 653 machine shop currently uses portable swamp coolers to cool their shop. TRA-653 is eligible for the National Historic Register, however, the activity as described is exempt from cultural resource review (INL Cultural Resource Management Plan;

347

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

7 7 SECTION A. Project Title: TRA-609 Compressed Air System Drain Line Modification and Valve Replacement SECTION B. Project Description: Due to periods of insufficient water flow to the sewer ponds, the clay liners in the ponds can dry out and crack. This proposed action is to add an additional drain line, which will allow clean well water that has been used to cool compressors to then be drained into the sewer system ponds during low flow periods in order to maintain a higher, more consistent water level. There are no chemicals added to the water. This project will replace the 1.5" compressor oil cooling water solenoid valves with ball valves on M-6, M-7 and M-8; replace the 2" compressor oil and air cooling system flow control valves on M-6, M-8 and M-9; install a new check valve in the compressed air system auxiliary compressor line; install a drain line

348

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

10-009 10-009 SECTION A. Project Title Idaho Falls (IF)-608 Uninterrupted Power Supply Upgrade Project SECTION B. Project Description: This project increases the Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) capacity in the IF-608 Information Operations and Research Center (IORC) by removing two existing UPS systems (50 KVA and 36 KVA) and installing a 225 KVA system. A ~15 ton cooling unit will be installed on the roof for heat removal. Associated work will include additional electrical panel(s) and electrical conduit rerouting and installation. Disposal of the existing UPS systems may be required depending on whether they are claimed off the excess list. This work will be performed either under blanket subcontracts or by a separate construction contractor and is planned for completion by

349

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

7 7 SECTION A. Project Title: TRA-609 Compressed Air System Drain Line Modification and Valve Replacement SECTION B. Project Description: Due to periods of insufficient water flow to the sewer ponds, the clay liners in the ponds can dry out and crack. This proposed action is to add an additional drain line, which will allow clean well water that has been used to cool compressors to then be drained into the sewer system ponds during low flow periods in order to maintain a higher, more consistent water level. There are no chemicals added to the water. This project will replace the 1.5" compressor oil cooling water solenoid valves with ball valves on M-6, M-7 and M-8; replace the 2" compressor oil and air cooling system flow control valves on M-6, M-8 and M-9; install a new check valve in the compressed air system auxiliary compressor line; install a drain line

350

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4 4 SECTION A. Project Title: Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) Infrastructure Upgrades - Technical Support Building SECTION B. Project Description: Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) Infrastructure Upgrades - General The number of researchers and operators at the Materials and Fuels Complex has significantly increased, and is projected to increase further in the future to support the expanding research activities at the facility. These activities will require infrastructure upgrades (office space, potable water, wastewater treatment, communications, etc.) to accommodate the increasing number of personnel and work shifts. The INL will prepare a separate environmental checklist (EC) and conduct the appropriate level of environmental review for each

351

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2 2 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-003 SECTION A. Project Title: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Reactive Tracers. SECTION B. Project Description The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Reactive Tracers project will be conducted at both the Raft River hydrothermal site in South Central Idaho and at the INL Research Center in Idaho Falls. The purpose of this work is to characterize tracers and test these tracers at the Raft River project through use of tracers and methods under realistic conditions. INL researchers will use an existing commercial hydrothermal site at Raft River that is currently operated by U.S. Geothermal, Inc. (USG), with whom INL has established a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) partnership. Numerous wells have previously been

352

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5 5 SECTION A. Project Title: Materials and Fuel Complex (MFC) Infrastructure Upgrades: Modular Office Units SECTION B. Project Description: MFC Infrastructure Upgrades - General The number of researchers and operators at MFC has significantly increased, and is projected to increase further in the future to support the expanding research activities at the facility. These activities will require Infrastructure upgrades (office space, potable water, wastewater treatment, communications, etc.) to accommodate the increasing number of personnel and work shifts. The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) will prepare a separate environmental checklist (EC) and conduct the appropriate level of environmental review for each infrastructure improvement project.

353

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4 4 SECTION A. Project Title: Characterization of Fluidized Beds via Pressure Fluctuation Analysis SECTION B. Project Description: The purpose of this work is to conduct research using pressure as a measure of performance for fluidized beds (spouted, bubbling, or slugging) at the Center for Advanced Energy Studies (CAES). The approach to this research activity consists of two main tasks: 1. Sieving the bed media with a motorized sieve shaker - sintered aluminosilicate spheres (used in the petroleum industry as a proppant to hold fractures open when the rock formation has been hydro-fractured) and assorted seeds (mustard, canola, sorghum, etc.). The aluminosilicate spheres have very little dust potential. Some of the aluminosilicates may have free silica

354

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 2 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-003 SECTION A. Project Title: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Reactive Tracers. SECTION B. Project Description The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Reactive Tracers project will be conducted at both the Raft River hydrothermal site in South Central Idaho and at the INL Research Center in Idaho Falls. The purpose of this work is to characterize tracers and test these tracers at the Raft River project through use of tracers and methods under realistic conditions. INL researchers will use an existing commercial hydrothermal site at Raft River that is currently operated by U.S. Geothermal, Inc. (USG), with whom INL has established a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) partnership. Numerous wells have previously been

355

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6 6 SECTION A. Project Title: TRA-653 HVAC Modifications SECTION B. Project Description: The proposed project plans to replace the existing blowers, swamp coolers and electric heaters in the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Test Reactor Area-653 (TRA-653) office area with three roof mounted heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) units; and install six roof mounted HVAC units at the TRA-653 machine shop area. These modifications are needed to enhance workplace habitability, maintain a more consistent building environment, and achieve a more energy efficient system. The TRA- 653 machine shop currently uses portable swamp coolers to cool their shop. TRA-653 is eligible for the National Historic Register, however, the activity as described is exempt from cultural resource review (INL Cultural Resource Management Plan;

356

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

12 12 SECTION A. Project Title: Reactor Power Up Rate, Compressor Replacement, Neutron Radiography Restore, Liquid Scintillation Counter - Texas A&M University SECTION B. Project Description Texas A&M will replace an existing 54-year old compressor to improve reliability of the reactor operation and purchase a liquid scintillator counter to give the facility the ability to perform tritium analysis. Additionally, under NRC License R-83, Texas A&M will up rate the reactor power from 1MW to 1.5 MW and purchase equipment to restore capability to perform Neutron Radiography. SECTION C. Environmental Aspects / Potential Sources of Impact Radioactive Material Use - To calibrate the liquid scintillator, radioactive standards are used. Procedures are in place to handle.

357

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

42 42 SECTION A. Project Title: Innovative Manufacturing Process for Improving the Erosion/Corrosion Resistance of Power Plant Components via Powder Metallurgy & Hot Isostatic Processing Methods - Electric Power Research Institute SECTION B. Project Description The objective of this project is to conduct the necessary design, processing, manufacturing, and validation studies to assess powder metallurgy/hot isostatic processing (PM/HIP) as a method to produce very large near-net shaped (NNS) components with erosion/corrosion resistant surfaces for use in nuclear and electrical power generation equipment. * Project tasks include the following: * Modeling of NNS Component Alloy & Mold/Can design * Test coupon development, demonstration, and screening for surface applications

358

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EC Document No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-011 EC Document No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-011 DIRECTIONS: Responsible Managers, Project Environmental Lead, and Environmental Support personnel complete this form by following the instructions found at the beginning of each section and submit to Environmental Support & Services (environmental.checklist@inl.gov). SECTION A. Project Title: CFA and ATR-Complex Analytical and R&D Laboratory Operation (Overarching) SECTION B. Project Description: This EC replaces overarching EC INL-05-017 due to changes in the laboratories identified in EC INL-05-017. The proposed action will continue to cover laboratory-based analytical and research and development (R&D) activities in laboratories located at the Central Facility Area (CFA) and the Advanced Test Reactor Complex (ATR-C) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). These activities include

359

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

0 0 SECTION A. Project Title: Test Reactor Cask Implementation. SECTION B. Project Description: This proposed action is a process and facility modification. Background / Purpose & Need The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) uses the Naval Reactors (NR) Casks to transport test trains between the Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) Expended Core Facility and the ATR. The Naval Reactor (NR) Casks, however, are approaching the end of their design life. In 1997, Bettis initiated a contract for construction of the NR Cask replacement, the Test Reactor Cask (TRC). The TRC is a revised and updated design of the NR cask and will be more robust structurally and provide more shielding than the current NR Casks. Construction of two TRCs is nearly finished and the INL must now modify the ATR facility and update ATR safety

360

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

5 5 SECTION A. Project Title: Replace 200,000 Gallon Water Storage Tank at MFC SECTION B. Project Description: The project is to replace the current 200,000 gallon potable water tank at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) with a new 300,000 gallon water tank. The existing tank and foundation will be removed and the waste materials managed and disposed under the direction of Waste Generator Services (WGS). The installation area for the new tank will be excavated and the new tank put in place. The new tank will be connected to the existing water system and will be coated on both exterior and interior surfaces to prevent corrosion. All valves and lines will be closed off to the construction area until the new tank is in place and the valves reconnected.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

5 5 SECTION A. Project Title: Materials and Fuel Complex (MFC) Infrastructure Upgrades: Modular Office Units SECTION B. Project Description: MFC Infrastructure Upgrades - General The number of researchers and operators at MFC has significantly increased, and is projected to increase further in the future to support the expanding research activities at the facility. These activities will require Infrastructure upgrades (office space, potable water, wastewater treatment, communications, etc.) to accommodate the increasing number of personnel and work shifts. The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) will prepare a separate environmental checklist (EC) and conduct the appropriate level of environmental review for each infrastructure improvement project.

362

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-008 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-INL-10-008 SECTION A. Project Title: Maintenance and Modification of Well TRA-08 SECTION B. Project Description: TRA-08, a groundwater monitoring well located approximately 1.5 miles south of the ATR Complex was drilled and constructed in 1990. The well is currently used as a groundwater monitoring compliance point for the ATR Complex Cold Waste Pond Industrial Wastewater Reuse Permit (IWRP). It is also used for CERCLA groundwater monitoring by CWI. Over the life of the well, corrosion of the carbon steel casing has resulted in an accumulation of rust flakes in the bottom of the well thus adversely affecting the efficiency of the well. In addition, the water level in the well has dropped from a depth of approximately 477 ft below ground surface at

363

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3 3 CX Posting No.: DOE-ID-ICP-12-005 SECTION A. Project Title: INTEC - U-233 Waste Stream Disposition SECTION B. Project Description The proposed action will transfer 171 drums of U-233 waste from the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP) to INTEC for verification, treatment, and repackaging for final disposition at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The U233 drums are a portion of waste historically managed as transuranic as part of the 1995 Idaho Settlement Agreement.The waste management actions will be performed in CPP-659 or the Radioactive Mixed Waste Staging Facility (CPP-1617). The bulk of the U-233 waste is from the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory and consists of U-233/Th-232 contaminated materials (minor amounts of enriched, depleted and natural powders) generated in the 1970's during development of a

364

Date:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

1.45 10.06 0.99 0.04786 2.85 0.13 1.30 Froude Number Flow Type Notes Messages 0.66 Subcritical 0.64 Subcritical 0.41 Subcritical 0.58 Subcritical 0.48 Subcritical 0.42...

365

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

understand what is required to be a nuclear supplier. 6. Gen IV Fabrication Centric Roadmap The objective of this program is to develop a succinct document that will allow...

366

Date  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

that Sandia contracts are settled for a reasonable amount and that no instances of fraud related to these contracts is apparent. We will not report on the adequacy of your...

367

DATE:  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

2 E-2 IWFDP Volume 1 (Process Strategy) provides the basis for how the double-shell tanks (DST) will be used to stage and deliver waste feed to the WTP. This volume provides an...

368

DATE:  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

of approximately 55 Mgal 1 of radioactive waste contained in the Hanford Site waste tanks and closure of all the tanks and associated facilities. The Hanford Federal Facility...

369

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) uses the Naval Reactors (NR) Casks to transport test trains between the Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) Expended Core Facility and the ATR. The...

370

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

operations (such as preparation of chemical standards and sample analysis); and small-scale pilot projects (generally less than 2 years) frequently conducted to verify a...

371

DATE:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

(w 39 fusrap6 I FROM: Ed Mitchellzm SUBJECT: Elimination Recommendation for American Machine and Foundry in New York City The purpose of this note is to provide the following...

372

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

and repairing wastewater systems lines and connections that could impact the discharge to wastewater systems. 8. Drinking Water Contamination - Performing maintenance activities on...

373

DATE:  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Release; Further Dissemination Unlimited By Janis D. Aardal at 1:25 pm, Jan 31, 2013 DOERL-2001-41 Revision 6 SITEWIDE INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS PLAN FOR HANFORD CERCLA RESPONSE...

374

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

buildings"..., and Overarching EC INL-05-002 "Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Program ... Justification: Removal of the interior walls and mezzanines will be a...

375

DATE:  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Corporations Section 743 Any Payment for the Election for a Federal Office or to a Political Committee Section 3003 Reporting on Conference Spending 2 The FAL addresses the...

376

DATE:  

Energy Savers (EERE)

Corporations * Section 735 Any Payment for the Election for a Federal Office or to a Political Committee * Section 742 Reporting on Conference Spending The FAL addresses the...

377

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

of Impact: Generating and Managing Waste - The proposed activity would generate scrap metal and industrial waste. Project personnel will contact Waste Generator Services (WGS) to...

378

DATE:  

Energy Savers (EERE)

Letter (AL) 2013-08 and Financial Assistance Letter (FAL) 2013-05 provide Contracting Officers with notice of the recently passed, Whistleblower Protection Enhancement...

379

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

will rest on a new concrete foundation and house the necessary heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), electrical, life safety and communications systems but will not...

380

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Mixed Waste Staging Facility (CPP-1617). The bulk of the U-233 waste is from the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory and consists of U-233Th-232 contaminated materials (minor...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

DATE:  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, Pub. L. No. 113-76. SUMMARY: Acquisition Letter (AL) 2014-04 and Financial Assistance Letter (FAL) 2014-01 provides implementing...

382

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Building The INL must operate and maintain infrastructure and facilities to support the nuclear energy research, development, demonstration, and commercial application programs,...

383

DATE:  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

es...A-i Appendix B Estimation of Selected Single-Shell Tank Heat Generation Rates...B-i RPP-RPT-54981, Revision 0 ii List of...

384

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

SECTION B. Project Description The proposed activities are intended to render CPP-684 Remote Analytical Laboratory (RAL) as a limited access area by removing existing...

385

DATE:  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

has been revised. The subject form has been posted on the DOE Financial Assistance web page on the Recipients Page under the Financial Assistance Forms and Information for...

386

DATE  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

A. Project Title: Innovative Manufacturing Process for Improving the ErosionCorrosion Resistance of Power Plant Components via Powder Metallurgy & Hot Isostatic Processing...

387

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

01 01 SECTION A. Project Title: Nuclear Fabrication Consortium SECTION B. Project Description The mission of the NFC will be accomplished through both public and private funding. The list below outlines the programs that have identified for initiation under the initial DOE funding. Additional programs are envisioned and will be proposed, subject to any applicable budget constraints, to DOE-NE as they become known to EWI, the NFC, and DOE. 1. Automation of Advanced Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) Technologies The objective of the first phase of this project is to improve the reliability of NDE methods by increasing the automation content. 2. Advanced Laser Technology The objective is to identify laser applications that offer significant productivity gains over the current processes being used, and

388

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2 2 __________________________ 1 DOE's strategic plans included the Nuclear Energy Research and Development Roadmap" (2010 Predecisional draft) and reports such as "Facilities for the Future of Nuclear Energy Research: A Twenty-year Outlook". SECTION A. Project Title: Materials and Fuel Complex (MFC) Infrastructure Upgrades: Sewage Lagoons Upgrades SECTION B. Project Description: MFC Infrastructure Upgrades - MFC Sewage Lagoon Upgrades This EC focuses on upgrades to the existing 2.4 acre evaporative sewage lagoons, located north-east and outside of the MFC fenced area. These existing lagoons are currently at capacity with the approximately 800 personnel based at MFC. The number of researchers and operations

389

DATE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5 5 SECTION A. Project Title: Replace 200,000 Gallon Water Storage Tank at MFC SECTION B. Project Description: The project is to replace the current 200,000 gallon potable water tank at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) with a new 300,000 gallon water tank. The existing tank and foundation will be removed and the waste materials managed and disposed under the direction of Waste Generator Services (WGS). The installation area for the new tank will be excavated and the new tank put in place. The new tank will be connected to the existing water system and will be coated on both exterior and interior surfaces to prevent corrosion. All valves and lines will be closed off to the construction area until the new tank is in place and the valves reconnected.

390

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2005 Alabama .................................. 255,157 9,748 13,759 37,048 Alaska...................................... 3,089,229 23,700 27,956 105,449 Arkansas.................................. 16,756 177 231 786 California ................................. 226,230 11,101 13,748 45,926 Colorado .................................. 730,948 25,603 34,782 95,881 Florida...................................... 3,584 359 495 1,400 Illinois....................................... 280 37 46 129 Kansas..................................... 476,656 22,165 31,521 85,737 Kentucky.................................. 38,792 1,411 1,716 5,725 Louisiana ................................. 2,527,636 73,035 103,381

391

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Producing Gas Wells by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2006-2010 Alabama .......................................................... 6,227 6,591 6,860 6,913 7,026 Alaska.............................................................. 231 239 261 261 269 Arizona ............................................................ 7 7 6 6 5 Arkansas.......................................................... 3,814 4,773 5,592 6,314 7,397 California ......................................................... 1,451 1,540 1,645 1,643 1,580 Colorado .......................................................... 20,568 22,949 25,716 27,021 28,813 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 2,419 2,552 1,527 1,984 1,852 Illinois...............................................................

392

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2004-2008, and by State, 2008 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ R 16,335,710 -- R 6.25 R 20,196,346 R 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,424,440 -- 7.96 21,239,516 169,038,089 Alabama ............................... 246,747 2,382,188 9.65 257,884 2,489,704 Alaska................................... 337,359 2,493,128 7.39 398,442 2,944,546 Arizona ................................. 503 3,568 7.09 523 3,710 Arkansas...............................

393

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... 2,476 281 2,757 2,789 271 3,060 Alaska.......................... 2 4 6 2 1 3 Arizona ........................ 285 98 383 274 116 390 Arkansas...................... 648 456 1,104 582 443 1,025 California ..................... 36,124 R 3,467 R 39,591 35,126 3,762 38,888 Colorado ...................... 341 4,475 4,816 297 4,787 5,084 Connecticut.................. 2,386 810 3,196 2,228 910 3,138 Delaware ..................... 96 69 165 39 73 112 Florida.......................... 161 288 449 123 484 607 Georgia........................ 1,003 1,887 2,890 956 1,298 2,254 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 25 0 25 Idaho............................ 108 91 199 109 78 187 Illinois...........................

394

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... 2,495 R 304 R 2,799 2,487 299 2,786 Alaska.......................... 6 4 10 7 5 12 Arizona ........................ 328 86 414 319 106 425 Arkansas...................... 782 R 441 R 1,223 671 449 1,120 California ..................... 39,426 2,061 41,487 38,150 2,076 40,226 Colorado ...................... 393 3,782 4,175 364 3,954 4,318 Connecticut.................. 2,625 845 3,470 2,618 819 3,437 Delaware ..................... 134 52 186 124 55 179 Florida.......................... R 174 224 R 398 159 273 432 Georgia........................ R 993 2,168 R 3,161 854 2,599 3,453 Hawaii.......................... 29 0 29 28 0 28 Idaho............................ 117 79 196 116 79 195

395

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2001-2005 Alabama .......................................................... 4,597 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 Alaska.............................................................. 170 165 195 224 227 Arizona ............................................................ 8 7 9 6 6 Arkansas.......................................................... 4,825 6,755 7,606 3,460 2,878 California ......................................................... 1,244 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 Colorado .......................................................... 22,117 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,271 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 Illinois...............................................................

396

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2009 Alabama .................................. 248,232 11,667 17,232 42,984 Alaska...................................... 2,830,034 19,542 22,925 86,767 Arkansas.................................. 2,352 125 168 541 California ................................. 198,213 11,042 13,722 45,669 Colorado .................................. 1,233,260 47,705 67,607 174,337 Illinois....................................... 164 24 31 84 Kansas..................................... 370,670 18,863 26,948 72,922 Kentucky.................................. 60,167 2,469 3,270 9,982 Louisiana ................................. 2,175,026 67,067 95,359 250,586 Michigan .................................. 23,819 2,409

397

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 11 0 0 6,138 6,149 Connecticut.................. 0 91 0 0 0 91 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 3 0 0 0 3 Hawaii.......................... 2,610 3 0 0 0 2,613 Illinois........................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Indiana......................... 0 2 0 0 1,640 1,642 Iowa ............................. 0 * 0 0 46 46 Kentucky...................... 0 3 0 0 0 3 Maryland ...................... 0 41 0 0 0 41 Massachusetts............. 0 51 0 0 0 51 Minnesota .................... 0 13 0 0 0 13 Missouri ....................... 0 78 0 0 0 78 Nebraska ..................... 0 19 0 0 0 19 New Hampshire ........... 0 92 0 0 0 92 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 175 175 New York .....................

398

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

20 20 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2004-2008 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 3,589,221 Mexico ...................................................... 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 43,314 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 3,632,535 LNG Algeria....................................................... 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 0 Australia.................................................... 14,990 0 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 54,839 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

399

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2007 Alabama .................................. 257,443 13,381 19,831 48,922 Alaska...................................... 2,965,956 22,419 26,332 99,472 Arkansas.................................. 11,532 126 162 552 California ................................. 206,239 11,388 13,521 47,045 Colorado .................................. 888,705 27,447 38,180 102,563 Florida...................................... 2,422 103 132 423 Illinois....................................... 235 38 48 131 Kansas..................................... 391,022 19,600 28,063 74,941 Kentucky.................................. 38,158 1,455 1,957 5,917 Louisiana ................................. 2,857,443 77,905 110,745

400

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C11. Energy Consumption by Source, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum b Retail Electricity Sales State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu State Trillion Btu 1 Texas 1,695.2 Texas 3,756.9 Texas 5,934.3 Texas 1,283.1 2 Indiana 1,333.4 California 2,196.6 California 3,511.4 California 893.7 3 Ohio 1,222.6 Louisiana 1,502.9 Louisiana 1,925.7 Florida 768.0 4 Pennsylvania 1,213.0 New York 1,246.9 Florida 1,680.3 Ohio 528.0 5 Illinois 1,052.2 Florida 1,236.6 New York 1,304.0 Pennsylvania 507.6 6 Kentucky 1,010.6 Pennsylvania 998.6 Pennsylvania 1,255.6 New York 491.5

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2008 Alabama .................................. 253,028 11,753 17,222 43,191 Alaska...................................... 2,901,760 20,779 24,337 92,305 Arkansas.................................. 6,531 103 139 446 California ................................. 195,272 11,179 13,972 46,176 Colorado .................................. 1,029,641 37,804 53,590 139,332 Florida...................................... 300 16 22 65 Illinois....................................... 233 33 42 115 Kansas..................................... 397,587 19,856 28,302 76,021 Kentucky.................................. 58,899 1,783 2,401 7,233 Louisiana ................................. 2,208,920 66,369 94,785 245,631

402

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2002-2006 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 Mexico ...................................................... 1,755 0 0 9,320 12,749 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 LNG Algeria....................................................... 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 Australia.................................................... 0 0 14,990 0 0 Brunei ....................................................... 2,401 0 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

403

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2001-2005 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,728,537 3,784,978 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 Mexico ...................................................... 10,276 1,755 0 0 9,320 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,738,814 3,786,733 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 LNG Algeria....................................................... 64,945 26,584 53,423 120,343 97,157 Australia.................................................... 2,394 0 0 14,990 0 Brunei ....................................................... 0 2,401 0 0 0 Egypt.........................................................

404

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing Gas and Gas Condensate by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2002-2006 Alabama .......................................................... 4,803 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 Alaska.............................................................. 165 195 224 227 231 Arizona ............................................................ 7 9 6 6 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 6,755 7,606 3,460 R 3,462 3,811 California ......................................................... 1,232 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 Colorado .......................................................... 23,554 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,245 3,039 2,781 2,123 1,946 Illinois...............................................................

405

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 67,561 135 R 67,696 67,099 135 67,234 Alaska R 12,724 303 R 13,027 13,073 61 13,134 Arizona 56,349 198 56,547 56,252 280 56,532 Arkansas 67,454 361 67,815 68,151 614 68,765

406

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 5. Number of Wells Producing by State and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2003-2007 Alabama .......................................................... 5,157 5,526 5,523 6,227 6,591 Alaska.............................................................. 195 224 227 231 239 Arizona ............................................................ 9 6 6 7 7 Arkansas.......................................................... 7,606 3,460 3,462 R 3,814 4,773 California ......................................................... 1,249 1,272 1,356 1,451 1,540 Colorado .......................................................... 18,774 16,718 22,691 20,568 22,949 Gulf of Mexico.................................................. 3,039 2,781 2,123 R 2,419 2,552 Illinois...............................................................

407

Microsoft Word - table_09.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 9. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Imports and Exports, 2003-2007 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a .................................................... 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,700,454 3,589,995 3,782,708 Mexico ...................................................... 0 0 9,320 12,749 54,062 Total Pipeline Imports............................. 3,437,230 3,606,543 3,709,774 3,602,744 3,836,770 LNG Algeria....................................................... 53,423 120,343 97,157 17,449 77,299 Australia.................................................... 0 14,990 0 0 0 Egypt......................................................... 0 0 72,540 119,528 114,580 Equatorial Guinea .....................................

408

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 21. Number of Natural Gas Industrial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2007-2008 Alabama ...................... 2,409 295 2,704 2,476 281 2,757 Alaska.......................... 7 4 11 2 4 6 Arizona ........................ 296 99 395 285 98 383 Arkansas...................... 637 418 1,055 648 456 1,104 California ..................... 35,814 3,320 39,134 36,124 3,533 39,657 Colorado ...................... 298 4,294 4,592 341 4,475 4,816 Connecticut.................. 2,472 845 3,317 2,386 810 3,196 Delaware ..................... 125 60 185 96 69 165 Florida.......................... 156 311 467 161 288 449 Georgia........................ R 1,013 1,900 R 2,913 1,003 1,887 2,890 Hawaii.......................... 27 0 27 27 0 27 Idaho............................ 109 79 188 108 91 199 Illinois...........................

409

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2006 Alabama .................................. 287,278 14,736 21,065 54,529 Alaska...................................... 2,665,742 20,993 24,638 93,346 Arkansas.................................. 13,702 166 212 734 California ................................. 223,580 11,267 14,056 46,641 Colorado .................................. 751,036 26,111 36,317 97,697 Florida...................................... 3,972 357 485 1,416 Illinois....................................... 242 37 47 128 Kansas..................................... 453,111 21,509 30,726 83,137 Kentucky.................................. 39,559 1,666 2,252 6,763 Louisiana ................................. 2,511,802 73,551 105,236

410

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2005-2009 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ R 18,305,411 -- R 7.97 R 21,112,053 R 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 21,604,158 79,188,096 Alabama ............................... 225,666 975,789 4.32 236,029 1,020,599 Alaska................................... 397,077 1,163,555 2.93 397,077 1,163,554 Arizona ................................. 695 2,214 3.19 712 2,269 Arkansas............................... 680,613 2,332,956 3.43

411

Microsoft Word - table_21.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 21. Number of natural gas commercial consumers by type of service and state, 2010-2011 R Revised data. Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent rounding. Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition." Please see the cautionary note regarding the number of residential and commercial customers located on the second page of Appendix A of this report. Alabama R 68,017 146 R 68,163 67,522 135 67,657 Alaska 12,673 325 12,998 12,721 303 13,024 Arizona 56,510 166 56,676 56,349 198 56,547 Arkansas 67,676 311 67,987 67,454 361 67,815 California 399,290 40,282

412

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State, 2006-2010 2006 Total ............................ 15,981,421 -- 6.39 19,409,674 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,335,710 -- 6.25 20,196,346 126,164,553 2008 Total ............................ 18,305,411 -- 7.97 21,112,053 168,342,230 2009 Total ............................ 18,763,726 -- 3.67 R 21,647,936 R 79,348,561 2010 Total ............................ 19,262,198 -- 4.48 22,402,141 100,272,654 Alabama ............................... 212,769 949,340 4.46 222,932 994,688 Alaska................................... 316,546 1,002,566 3.17 374,226 1,185,249 Arizona ................................. 165 676 4.11 183 753 Arkansas............................... 936,600 3,594,843 3.84

413

Microsoft Word - table_10.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

4 4 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:09:15 PM Table 10. Underground natural gas storage - salt cavern storage fields, 2008-2013 (volumes in billion cubic feet) Natural Gas in Underground Storage at End of Period Change in Working Gas from Same Period Previous Year Storage Activity Year and Month Base Gas Working Gas Total Volume Percent Injections Withdrawals Net Withdrawals a 2008 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 440 398 -42 2009 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 459 403 -56 2010 Total b -- -- -- -- -- 511 452 -58 2011 January 137 174 311 65 59.3 23 69 46 February 137 125 262 48 62.5 30 80 49 March 137 151 288 39 34.8 51 25 -25 April 140 172 312 17 11.2 42 21 -22 May 140 211 352

414

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Supplemental Gas Supplies by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado ...................... 0 2 0 0 5,283 5,285 Connecticut.................. 0 273 0 0 0 273 Delaware ..................... 0 * 0 0 0 * Georgia........................ 0 * 0 0 0 * Hawaii.......................... 2,593 14 0 0 0 2,606 Illinois........................... 0 11 0 4 0 15 Indiana......................... 0 30 0 0 1,958 1,988 Iowa ............................. 0 2 0 30 0 31 Kentucky...................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Maryland ...................... 0 382 0 0 0 382 Massachusetts............. 0 46 0 0 0 46 Minnesota .................... 0 154 0 0 0 154 Missouri ....................... 0 15 0 0 0 15 Nebraska ..................... 0 16 0 * 0 16 New Hampshire ........... 0 84 0 0 0 84 New Jersey .................. 0 0 0 0 435 435 New York

415

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

17 17 Table C12. Total Energy Consumption, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP, Ranked by State, 2011 Rank Total Energy Consumption Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Energy Consumption per Real Dollar of GDP State Trillion Btu State Billion Chained (2005) Dollars State Thousand Btu per Chained (2005) Dollar 1 Texas 12,206.6 California 1,735.4 Louisiana 19.7 2 California 7,858.4 Texas 1,149.9 Wyoming 17.5 3 Florida 4,217.1 New York 1,016.4 North Dakota 15.4 4 Louisiana 4,055.3 Florida 661.1 Alaska 14.3 5 Illinois 3,977.8 Illinois 582.1 Mississippi 13.8 6 Ohio 3,827.6 Pennsylvania 500.4 Kentucky 13.5

416

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2003-2007, and by State, 2007 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 19,517,491 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,425,867 -- 7.33 18,927,095 138,750,746 2006 Total ............................ R 15,981,421 -- R 6.39 R 19,409,674 R 124,074,399 2007 Total ............................ 16,031,199 -- 6.37 20,019,321 127,530,680 Alabama ............................... 259,062 1,926,374 7.44 270,407 2,010,736 Alaska................................... 368,344 2,072,647 5.63 433,485 2,439,193 Arizona ................................. 634 3,791 5.98 655 3,913 Arkansas...............................

417

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 7. Natural Gas Processed, Liquids Extracted, and Estimated Extraction Loss by State, 2010 Alabama .................................. 242,444 13,065 19,059 47,741 Alaska...................................... 2,731,803 17,798 20,835 79,355 Arkansas.................................. 9,599 160 213 692 California ................................. 204,327 10,400 13,244 42,509 Colorado .................................. 1,434,003 57,924 82,637 209,191 Kansas..................................... 341,778 18,424 26,251 70,425 Kentucky.................................. 66,579 3,317 4,576 13,311 Louisiana ................................. 2,207,760 71,231 102,448 262,178 Michigan .................................. 23,449 2,207 2,943 8,272 Mississippi ...............................

418

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

7 7 Table 7. Supplemental gas supplies by state, 2012 (million cubic feet) Colorado 0 99 0 4,313 4,412 Georgia 0 0 660 0 660 Hawaii 2,491 20 0 0 2,510 Illinois 0 1 0 0 1 Indiana 0 1 0 0 1 Kentucky 0 1 0 0 1 Louisiana 0 0 553 0 553 Maryland 0 116 0 0 116 Minnesota 0 9 0 0 9 Missouri * 0 0 0 * Nebraska 0 4 0 0 4 New Jersey 0 0 0 139 139 North Dakota 52,541 0 0 0 52,541 Ohio 0 6 360 0 366 Pennsylvania 0 2 0 0 2 Vermont 0 3 0 0 3 Virginia 0 48 0 0 48 Total 55,032 309 1,573 4,452 61,366 State Synthetic Natural Gas Propane-Air Biomass Gas Other Total * Volume is less than 500,000 cubic feet.

419

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4) 4) June 2007 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2004 2004 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2004 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector d,e Retail Electricity Total Energy d,f Coal Natural Gas Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass c Total d,e,f Distillate Fuel Jet Fuel LPG a Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Other b Total Alabama 1.57 7.72 11.91 8.82 15.78 13.68 4.78 8.25 12.28 0.43 1.81 5.32 1.68 18.01 11.29 Alaska 1.91 3.59 12.43 9.61 19.64 15.55 3.63 12.09 11.05 - 6.68 9.07 3.18 32.29 11.09 Arizona 1.31 6.84 13.59 9.53 18.40 15.33 5.29 7.23 13.92 0.45 5.90 6.68 2.18 21.83 15.24 Arkansas 1.25 8.09 12.01 8.30 14.80 13.97 4.67 11.02 12.77 0.49 1.79 6.59 1.43 16.76 11.89 California 1.82 7.63 13.58

420

All Price Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7) 7) August 2009 State Energy Price and Expenditure Estimates 1970 Through 2007 2007 Price and Expenditure Summary Tables Table S1a. Energy Price Estimates by Source, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Million Btu) State Primary Energy Electric Power Sector e,f Retail Electricity Total Energy e,g Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Fuel Biomass Total e,f,g Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel LPG b Motor Gasoline Residual Fuel Oil Other c Total Wood and Waste d Alabama 2.17 9.06 19.43 16.20 21.84 21.26 8.46 14.19 19.62 0.42 2.71 7.47 2.29 22.46 16.01 Alaska 2.34 5.76 19.43 16.35 28.63 22.14 11.51 23.69 17.97 - 10.51 14.88 4.94 38.96 17.87 Arizona 1.61 8.44 19.84 16.24 27.16 21.95 10.04 11.27 20.50 0.57 10.86 9.61 2.78 25.02 20.72 Arkansas 1.65 9.33 19.63 15.73 21.10 21.54 8.65 18.76 20.42 0.57 2.66 9.45 1.98 20.57

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A: PREINTERVIEW OBSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SECTION B: HOUSING TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SECTION C: HOME HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SECTION D: AIR CONDITIONING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 SECTION E: WATER HEATING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 SECTION F: LIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 SECTION G: APPLIANCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Cooking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Refrigerators and Freezers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

422

Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook  

Reports and Publications (EIA)

The Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Supplemental tables were generated for the reference case of the AEO using the National Energy Modeling System, a computer-based model which produces annual projections of energy markets. Most of the tables were not published in the AEO, but contain regional and other more detailed projections underlying the AEO projections.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

423

Tables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

design challenges for tabletop interfaces: integrating access to public and private information, managing a cooperative gesture to organize digital documents on an interactive table. Our tabletop interface designTables in Context: Integrating Horizontal Displays with Ubicomp Environments Abstract Our work

Klemmer, Scott

424

Tafel Musik: Formatting algorithm of tables  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

This paper provides a description on the formatting algorithm of tables that the authors have developed. This algorithm is an important component of the so called TafeMusik (Tafel Musik) environment. TafeMusikprovides the user with an environment to ... Keywords: First-fit algorithm, Linear programming, Optimization, Tables, Tabular formatting, Tabular layout

K. -H. Shin; K. Kobayashi; A. Suzuki

1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

425

Energy Information Administration (EIA) - Supplement Tables  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Regional Energy Consumption and Prices by Sector Energy Consumption by Sector Table 1. New England Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 2. Middle Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 3. East North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 4. West North Central Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table 5. South Atlantic Consumption & Prices by Sector & Census Division. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

426

Radiokrypton dating finally takes off  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...dating, based on the well-known radioactive decay...essentially has a single, well-mixed, and steady source, the...fortunately it works well for noble gases...Isolation Pilot Plant, New Mexico . J Contam Hydrol 160...radionuclides in Yellowstone geothermal gas emissions: A reconnaissance...

Werner Aeschbach-Hertig

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

427

1999 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey Detailed Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Consumption and Expenditures Tables Table C1. Total Energy Consumption by Major Fuel ............................................... 124 Table C2. Total Energy Expenditures by Major Fuel................................................ 130 Table C3. Consumption for Sum of Major Fuels ...................................................... 135 Table C4. Expenditures for Sum of Major Fuels....................................................... 140 Table C5. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels................................................................................................... 145 Table C6. Expenditures by Census Region for Sum of Major Fuels......................... 150 Table C7. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity by Building Size for Sum of

428

T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information T-583: Linux Kernel OSF Partition Table Buffer Overflow Lets Local Users Obtain Information...

429

Table 4-3 Site Wide Environmental Management Matrix  

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

Table 4-3. Site-Wide Environmental Management Matrix National Renewable Energy Laboratory's South Table Mountain Complex FINAL POTENTIAL ISSUES PROGRAM OF IMPROVEMENTS Off- Site...

430

OTS NOTE DATE: TO: FROM:  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

TO: FROM: March 25, 1991 A. Williams D. stout P SUBJECT: Elimination Recommendation for the Star Cutter Corporation The .attached memorandum and supporting documents are the basis for our recommendation to eliminate the former Star Cutter Corporation site from further consideration under FUSRAP. The site is located in Farmington Hills, Michigan. Documents discovered to date which indicate use or handling of radioactive material by Star Cutter consist of two Analytical Data Sheets, dated June 29, 1956, prepared by the National Lead Company of Ohio (NLO), an Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) prime contractor. The data sheets report the results of radiological monitoring conducted during operation of an oil- cooled drilling/hollowing machine. The sheets record measurements during

431

Save the Date - NTSF 2013  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Save the Date Save the Date U.S. Department of Energy National Transportation Stakeholders Forum May 14-16 th , 2013 Buffalo, New York Please mark your calendar to attend the next meeting of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Transportation Stakeholders Forum (NTSF) scheduled for May 14-16, 2013. This annual event will be held at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, located near the downtown business and entertainment districts in Buffalo, New York. The 2013 meeting is co-sponsored by DOE's Offices of Environmental Management and Nuclear Energy and follows several highly successful yearly gatherings. It is co-hosted by the Council of State Governments Eastern Regional Conference and the Northeast High-Level Radioactive Waste Transportation Task Force.

432

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

7 7 Created on: 12/12/2013 2:04:58 PM Table 3. Selected national average natural gas prices, 2008-2013 (dollars per thousand cubic feet, except where noted) Year and Month NGL Composite Spot Price a Natural Gas Spot Price b Citygate Price Delivered to Consumers Electric Power Price d Residential Commercial Industrial Price % of Total c Price % of Total c Price % of Total c 2008 Annual Average 15.20 8.86 9.18 13.89 97.5 12.23 79.7 9.65 20.4 9.26 2009 Annual Average 8.99 5.24 6.48 12.14 97.4 10.06 77.8 5.33 18.8 4.93 2010 Annual Average 11.83 4.37 6.18 11.39 97.4 9.47 77.5 5.49 18.0 5.27 2011 January 13.03 4.49 5.69 9.90 96.5 R 8.74 72.8 R 5.66 R 16.8 5.66 February 13.64 4.09 5.75 10.14 96.5 8.88 72.0 R 5.77 R 16.6

433

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 6. Natural gas processed, liquids extracted, and estimated extraction loss by state, 2011 Alabama 230,546 12,265 17,271 43,636 Alaska 2,721,396 18,314 21,554 82,255 Arkansas 5,611 212 268 883 California 180,648 9,831 12,095 39,909 Colorado 1,507,467 63,075 90,801 223,858 Illinois 15,727 705 1,043 2,409 Kansas 322,944 18,098 25,804 67,845 Kentucky 60,941 3,398 4,684 13,377 Louisiana 2,048,175 66,426 95,630 239,349 Michigan 21,518 2,132 2,465 7,875 Mississippi 126,859 7,732 11,221 28,404 Montana 11,185 927 1,252 3,744 New Mexico 795,069 61,857 90,291 223,829 North Dakota 112,206 10,199 14,182 41,156 Oklahoma 1,218,855 91,963 134,032 328,694 Pennsylvania 131,959 6,721 8,931 26,896 Tennessee 6,200

434

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 120,717 77.85 125,467 78.45 124,857 78.77 R 129,337 R 79.22 115,449 76.41 Alaska................................... 2,539 3.78 6,411 9.76 11,433 27.77 15,472 R 33.10 16,582 31.35 Arizona ................................. 11,380 53.61 10,089 58.81 9,174 60.05 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 Arkansas............................... 114,976 94.00 112,544 95.03 105,215 94.65 R 94,613 R 94.06 84,177 94.77 California .............................. 606,097 90.94 682,886 92.26 740,589 95.06 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 Colorado ............................... 136,704 99.27 128,709 98.75 111,291 99.07 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41

435

Microsoft Word - table_05.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 5. Number of producing gas wells by state and the Gulf of Mexico, December 31, 2008-2012 Alabama 6,860 6,913 7,026 7,063 6,327 Alaska 261 261 269 277 185 Arizona 6 6 5 5 5 Arkansas 5,592 6,314 7,397 8,388 8,538 California 1,645 1,643 1,580 1,308 1,423 Colorado 25,716 27,021 28,813 30,101 32,000 Gulf of Mexico 1,527 1,984 1,852 1,559 1,474 Illinois 45 51 50 40 40 Indiana 525 563 620 914 819 Kansas 17,862 21,243 22,145 25,758 24,697 Kentucky 16,290 17,152 17,670 14,632 17,936 Louisiana 19,213 18,860 19,137 21,235 19,792 Maryland 7 7 7 8 9 Michigan 9,995 10,600 10,100 11,100 10,900 Mississippi 2,343 2,320 1,979 5,732 1,669 Missouri 0 0 0 53 100 Montana 7,095 7,031 6,059 6,477 6,240 Nebraska 322 285 276 322 270 Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 New Mexico 44,241 44,784

436

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 2. Natural gas production, transmission, and consumption, by state, 2011 (million cubic feet) Alabama 195,581 17,271 -53,277 480,317 0 7,282 0 598,068 Alaska 356,225 21,554 14,450 0 -16,398 0 0 332,723 Arizona 168 0 -17,607 348,820 -42,026 0 0 289,357 Arkansas 1,072,212 268 3,943 -791,878 0 212 0 283,797 California 250,177 12,095 72,353 1,954,947 -91,287 20,598 0 2,153,498 Colorado 1,637,576 90,801 -76,093 -1,005,837 0 3,128 4,268 465,985 Connecticut 0 0 1,253 228,585 0 129 0 229,710 Delaware 0 0 11,756 67,928 0 -31 0 79,716 District of Columbia 0 0 1,961 31,016 0 0 0 32,976 Florida 15,125 0 -5,102 1,208,317 0 0 0 1,218,340 Georgia 0 0 -10,315 459,390 75,641 2,542 701 522,874 Gulf of Mexico 1,812,328 0 -82 -1,711,029 0

437

Microsoft Word - table_26.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 26. Percent distribution of natural gas supply and disposition by state, 2011 Alabama 0.8 2.5 Alaska 1.5 1.4 Arizona < 1.2 Arkansas 4.7 1.2 California 1.0 8.8 Colorado 6.8 1.9 Connecticut -- 0.9 Delaware -- 0.3 District of Columbia -- 0.1 Florida 0.1 5.0 Georgia -- 2.1 Gulf of Mexico 7.9 0.4 Hawaii -- < Idaho -- 0.3 Illinois < 4.0 Indiana < 2.6 Iowa -- 1.3 Kansas 1.2 1.1 Kentucky 0.5 0.9 Louisiana 12.8 5.7 Maine -- 0.3 Maryland < 0.8 Massachusetts -- 1.8 Michigan 0.6 3.2 Minnesota -- 1.7 Mississippi 0.3 1.8 Missouri -- 1.1 Montana 0.3 0.3 Nebraska < 0.7 Nevada < 1.0 New Hampshire -- 0.3 New Jersey -- 2.7 New Mexico 5.0 1.0 New York 0.1

438

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.30 100.00 15.58 80.17 10.57 27.20 17.32 10.03 Alaska................................... 8.72 100.00 8.66 74.90 5.49 78.23 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.60 100.00 13.01 93.06 10.47 29.65 11.00 8.60 Arkansas............................... 14.09 100.00 11.32 64.49 10.56 3.87 -- 9.23 California .............................. 12.75 99.31 11.75 56.69 10.80 4.85 11.32 8.23 Colorado ............................... 9.77 100.00 9.01 95.24 8.76 0.56 13.57 7.02 Connecticut........................... 17.85 97.75 13.81 70.71 12.63 47.28 24.04 10.48 Delaware .............................. 16.07 100.00 14.24

439

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 129,337 79.22 115,449 76.41 114,699 76.48 R 114,325 R 75.97 103,662 72.80 Alaska................................... 15,472 33.10 16,582 31.35 11,619 36.94 5,934 30.04 1,304 21.77 Arizona ................................. 9,290 44.85 9,569 56.37 11,457 62.11 13,292 68.67 14,200 70.35 Arkansas............................... 94,613 94.06 84,177 94.77 83,347 95.22 82,213 95.85 81,841 96.13 California .............................. 791,981 94.75 738,704 94.54 690,491 94.32 699,283 94.69 726,927 95.15 Colorado ............................... 111,316 99.23 125,618 99.41 110,565 99.38 116,699 99.55 119,032 99.44 Connecticut...........................

440

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Calais, ME .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 2,131 5.62 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 43,980 4.01 Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 113 4.49 Marysville, MI...................... 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 14,925 4.85 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 2,044 5.04 St. Clair, MI ......................... 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 R 492,235 R 8.96 612,369 4.62 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2003-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 Alaska................................... 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 Arizona ................................. 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 Arkansas............................... 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 California .............................. 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 Colorado ............................... 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 Connecticut........................... 5.59 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 Delaware .............................. 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 Florida................................... 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 Georgia................................. 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15

442

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

4 4 Table 14. Underground natural gas storage capacity by state, December 31, 2012 (million cubic feet) Alabama 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 11,200 13,500 2 27,350 35,400 Arkansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12,178 21,853 2 12,178 21,853 California 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 349,296 592,411 14 349,296 592,411 Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 60,582 124,253 10 60,582 124,253 Illinois 0 0 0 17 215,594 779,862 11 87,368 220,070 28 302,962 999,931 Indiana 0 0 0 12 19,215 80,746 10 13,809 30,003 22 33,024 110,749 Iowa 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 0 0 0 4 90,313 288,210 Kansas 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,968 283,974 19 123,343 284,905 Kentucky 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana 11 200,702 297,020 0 0 0 7 211,780 402,626 18 412,482

443

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 18. Natural Gas Delivered to Industrial Consumers for the Account of Others by State, 2005-2009 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 115,449 76.4 114,699 76.5 114,325 76.0 103,662 72.8 94,597 72.1 Alaska................................... 16,582 31.4 11,619 36.9 5,934 30.0 1,304 21.8 1,827 27.5 Arizona ................................. 9,569 56.4 11,457 62.1 13,292 68.7 14,200 70.4 12,730 70.9 Arkansas............................... 84,177 94.8 83,347 95.2 82,213 95.8 81,841 96.1 74,752 96.4 California .............................. 738,704 94.5 690,491 94.3 699,283 94.7 R 683,512 R 94.9 673,034 95.3 Colorado ............................... 125,618 99.4 110,565 99.4 116,699 99.5 119,032 99.4 112,995 99.5 Connecticut...........................

444

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2006 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 484,711 12 484,711 5.82 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.18 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 881,037 11 103,731 29 984,768 11.82 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.37 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 275,200 0 0 4 275,200 3.30 Kansas.................................. 1 1,088 0 0 18 287,295 19 288,383 3.46 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 208,827 23 218,394

445

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2002-2006 (Million Cubic Feet) 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580 0 0 0 293,580 California................. 0 7,068 7,068 3,080 64,735 67,816 74,884 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,719,169 828,458 4,547,627 4,547,627 Louisiana ................ 125,481 11,711 137,192 NA NA NA 137,192 Texas...................... 54,672 2,391 57,063 NA NA NA 57,063 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010

446

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2004-2008 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 252 7.43 Detroit, MI ........................... 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 27,220 8.37 Marysville, MI...................... 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 8,756 7.48 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 3,122 8.75 St. Clair, MI ......................... 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 524,065 8.98 Noyes, MN .......................... 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

447

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2004-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 6.65 8.47 10.26 8.78 9.84 Alaska................................... 3.05 3.74 5.25 6.75 6.74 Arizona ................................. 5.63 7.32 7.67 8.25 8.49 Arkansas............................... 7.12 8.83 7.96 8.55 8.88 California .............................. 6.04 7.88 6.76 6.82 8.11 Colorado ............................... 5.02 6.10 7.61 6.23 6.98 Connecticut........................... 7.56 9.74 9.11 8.67 10.24 Delaware .............................. 6.13 8.32 8.84 7.58 8.32 Florida................................... 6.60 9.30 8.32 7.97 9.73 Georgia................................. 6.81 9.85 9.37 8.15 9.35

448

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2007-2011 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,782,708 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 Mexico 54,062 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 Total Pipeline Imports 3,836,770 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 LNG Algeria 77,299 0 0 0 0 Egypt 114,580 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 Equatorial Guinea 17,795 0 0 0 0 Nigeria 95,028 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 Norway 0 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 Peru 0 0 0 16,045 16,620 Qatar 18,352 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 Trinidad/Tobago 447,758 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 Yemen 0 0 0 38,897 60,071 Total LNG Imports 770,812 351,698

449

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.13 100.00 15.07 79.82 8.70 24.02 -- 7.19 Alaska................................... 8.68 100.00 7.57 76.01 4.67 69.96 -- 3.58 Arizona ................................. 17.21 100.00 12.84 93.36 10.49 31.33 9.40 6.84 Arkansas............................... 13.08 100.00 10.07 70.38 9.51 4.15 8.39 7.04 California .............................. 11.57 99.50 10.20 60.63 9.07 5.31 7.71 6.72 Colorado ............................... 8.84 100.00 8.10 95.70 7.21 0.45 8.72 4.35 Connecticut........................... 16.39 98.20 12.61 71.49 10.54 50.04 20.57 7.81 Delaware .............................. 16.21 100.00 14.48

450

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2005 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 15,572 15,356 216 493 606 -114 103 Alaska....................... 0 0 0 738 738 0 0 Arkansas................... 4,394 4,707 -313 72 51 20 -293 California .................. 190,055 179,359 10,696 82 50 31 10,727 Colorado ................... 38,588 39,442 -854 0 0 0 -854 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 1,383 682 701 701 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 138 145 -7 -7 Georgia..................... 0 0 0 4,179 2,660 1,520 1,520 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 46 189 -143 -143 Illinois........................ 260,515 259,288 1,226 3 405 -402 824 Indiana...................... 21,405 22,827 -1,422 831 1,066 -236 -1,658 Iowa .......................... 66,827 70,206 -3,379 2,626 2,845 -219

451

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2005-2009 (Million Cubic Feet) 2005 Total ................ 363,652 321,019 684,671 2,474,076 730,830 3,204,906 3,889,577 Alabama.................. 152,902 0 152,902 NA NA NA 152,902 Alaska..................... 74,928 305,641 380,568 0 0 0 380,568 California................. 0 6,685 6,685 684 53,404 54,088 60,773 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 2,473,392 677,426 3,150,818 3,150,818 Louisiana ................ 99,290 8,294 107,584 NA NA NA 107,584 Texas...................... 36,532 400 36,932 NA NA NA 36,932 2006 Total ................ 321,261 308,391 629,652 2,272,669 681,869 2,954,538 3,584,190 Alabama.................. 145,762 0 145,762 NA NA NA 145,762 Alaska..................... 62,156 292,660 354,816

452

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 20. Number of natural gas residential consumers by type of service and state, 2011-2012 Alabama R 772,892 0 R 772,892 767,412 0 767,412 Alaska 121,736 0 121,736 122,983 0 122,983 Arizona 1,146,280 6 1,146,286 1,157,682 6 1,157,688 Arkansas 551,795 0 551,795 549,959 0 549,959 California R 10,545,585 R 79,605 10,625,190 10,547,706 134,210 10,681,916 Colorado 1,645,711 5 1,645,716 1,659,803 5 1,659,808 Connecticut 494,065 905 494,970 503,241 897 504,138 Delaware 152,005 0 152,005 153,307 0 153,307 District of Columbia 130,888 14,636 145,524 129,674 16,264 145,938 Florida 664,564 R 14,635 R 679,199 672,160 14,861 687,021 Georgia 321,515 1,418,491 1,740,006 319,179 1,420,364 1,739,543 Hawaii 25,305 0 25,305

453

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2003-2007 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 15 4.34 48 5.36 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Detroit, MI ........................... 19,737 5.47 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 22,156 7.61 22,904 6.88 Marysville, MI...................... 811 5.06 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 3,483 7.36 9,158 7.77 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 605 4.94 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 5,070 8.11 4,389 7.13 St. Clair, MI ......................... 238,444 6.13 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 286,582 7.39 418,765 7.24 Noyes, MN .......................... 172 5.43 2,193 5.77 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 38 6.48 1,429 4.98 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

454

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2006-2010 (Million Cubic Feet) 2006 Total ................ 321,261 308,391 629,652 2,272,669 681,869 2,954,538 3,584,190 Alabama.................. 145,762 0 145,762 NA NA NA 145,762 Alaska..................... 62,156 292,660 354,816 0 0 0 354,816 California................. 156 6,654 6,809 2,094 38,313 40,407 47,217 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 2,270,575 643,556 2,914,131 2,914,131 Louisiana ................ 88,657 8,822 97,479 NA NA NA 97,479 Texas...................... 24,529 255 24,785 NA NA NA 24,785 2007 Total ................ 276,117 341,925 618,042 2,204,379 654,334 2,858,713 3,476,755 Alabama.................. 134,451 0 134,451 NA NA NA 134,451 Alaska..................... 48,876 325,328 374,204

455

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 3. Gross withdrawals and marketed production of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2008-2012 (million cubic feet) 2008 Total 15,134,644 5,609,425 2,022,228 2,869,960 25,636,257 3,638,622 166,909 718,674 21,112,053 953,451 20,158,602 2009 Total 14,414,287 5,674,120 2,010,171 3,958,315 26,056,893 3,522,090 165,360 721,507 21,647,936 1,024,082 20,623,854 2010 Total 13,247,498 5,834,703 1,916,762 5,817,122 26,816,085 3,431,587 165,928 836,698 22,381,873 1,066,366 21,315,507 2011 Total 12,291,070 5,907,919 1,779,055 8,500,983 28,479,026 3,365,313 209,439 867,922 24,036,352 1,134,473 22,901,879 2012 Total 12,736,678 4,969,668 1,539,395 10,296,572 29,542,313 3,259,680 212,848 761,836 25,307,949 1,250,340 24,057,609

456

Microsoft Word - table_07.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Created on: 1/7/2014 9:25:31 AM Table 7. Marketed production of natural gas in selected states and the Federal Gulf of Mexico, 2008-2013 (million cubic feet) Year and Month Alaska Louisiana New Mexico Oklahoma Texas Wyoming Other a States Federal Gulf of Mexico U.S. Total 2008 Total 398,442 1,377,969 1,446,204 1,886,710 6,960,693 2,274,850 4,452,843 2,314,342 21,112,053 2009 Total 397,077 1,548,607 1,383,004 1,901,556 6,818,973 2,335,328 4,834,474 2,428,916 21,647,936 2010 Total 374,226 2,210,099 1,292,185 1,827,328 6,715,294 2,305,525 5,412,154 2,245,062 22,381,873 2011 January 31,027 224,410 100,352 154,940 588,714 178,331 496,362 178,597 1,952,732 February 31,076 208,495 88,553

457

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2007 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 1 8,300 0 0 1 11,000 2 19,300 0.23 Arkansas............................... 0 0 0 0 2 22,000 2 22,000 0.26 California .............................. 0 0 0 0 12 487,711 12 487,711 5.80 Colorado ............................... 0 0 0 0 8 98,068 8 98,068 1.17 Illinois.................................... 0 0 18 876,960 11 103,731 29 980,691 11.67 Indiana.................................. 0 0 12 81,490 10 32,804 22 114,294 1.36 Iowa ...................................... 0 0 4 278,238 0 0 4 278,238 3.31 Kansas.................................. 1 931 0 0 18 287,996 19 288,926 3.44 Kentucky............................... 0 0 3 9,567 20 210,792 23 220,359

458

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 3. Gross Withdrawals and Marketed Production of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2004-2008 (Million Cubic Feet) 2004 Total ............. 17,885,247 6,084,431 NA 23,969,678 3,701,656 96,408 654,124 19,517,491 926,600 18,590,891 2005 Total ............. 17,471,847 5,984,975 NA 23,456,822 3,699,535 119,097 711,095 18,927,095 876,497 18,050,598 2006 Total ............. 17,995,554 5,539,464 NA 23,535,018 3,264,929 129,469 730,946 19,409,674 906,069 18,503,605 2007 Total ............. 17,065,375 R 5,818,405 1,779,875 R 24,663,656 R 3,662,685 R 143,457 R 661,168 R 20,196,346 930,320 R 19,266,026 2008 Total ............. 18,011,151 5,844,798 1,898,399 25,754,348 3,638,563 166,588 709,681 21,239,516 953,451 20,286,065 Alabama Total ...... 159,912 6,368 111,273 277,553 475 1,801 17,394

459

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2004-2008 (Million Cubic Feet) 2004 Total ................ 401,662 279,249 680,911 3,214,488 840,852 4,055,340 4,736,252 Alabama.................. 165,630 0 165,630 NA NA NA 165,630 Alaska..................... 73,457 260,667 334,125 0 0 0 334,125 California................. 0 6,966 6,966 850 53,805 54,655 61,622 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,213,638 787,047 4,000,685 4,000,685 Louisiana ................ 117,946 11,299 129,245 NA NA NA 129,245 Texas...................... 44,630 316 44,946 NA NA NA 44,946 2005 Total ................ 363,652 321,019 684,671 2,474,076 730,830 3,204,906 3,889,577 Alabama.................. 152,902 0 152,902 NA NA NA 152,902 Alaska..................... 74,928 305,641 380,568

460

Microsoft Word - table_02.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

5 5 Created on: 12/12/2013 1:57:32 PM Table 2. Natural gas consumption in the United States, 2008-2013 (billion cubic feet) Delivered to Consumers Year and Month Lease and Plant Fuel a Pipeline and Distribution Use b Residential Commercial Industrial Electric Power Vehicle Fuel Total Total Consumption 2008 Total 1,220 648 4,892 3,153 6,670 6,668 26 21,409 23,277 2009 Total 1,275 670 4,779 3,119 6,167 6,873 27 20,965 22,910 2010 Total 1,286 674 4,782 3,103 6,826 7,387 29 22,127 24,087 2011 January 107 R 83 970 528 R 659 540 3 R 2,699 R 2,889 February 97 70 R 768 432 R 600 484 2 R 2,285 R 2,452 March 111 63 R 595 R 361 R 616 482 3 R 2,056 R 2,230 April 109 51 R 341 R 232 R 569 521 R 2 R 1,665 R 1,825 May 112 46 R 205 R 166 R

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


461

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2008 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 11,900 15,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 20,900 26,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14,500 22,000 2 14,500 22,000 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 283,796 498,705 12 283,796 498,705 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 42,579 95,068 8 42,579 95,068 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 18 244,900 874,384 10 51,418 103,606 28 296,318 977,989 Indiana................ 0 0 0 12 19,978 81,991 10 12,791 32,946 22 32,769 114,937 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 87,350 284,747 0 0 0 4 87,350 284,747 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 118,885 281,291 19 119,260 282,221 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 94,598 210,792 23 101,227 220,359 Louisiana ............

462

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2006 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 20,604 12,127 8,477 704 698 7 8,484 Arkansas................... 4,789 4,081 707 45 57 -12 695 California .................. 168,957 182,247 -13,290 92 76 16 -13,274 Colorado ................... 35,836 38,506 -2,670 0 0 0 -2,670 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 532 246 286 286 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 68 68 * * Georgia..................... 0 0 0 7,705 1,963 5,742 5,742 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 415 275 140 140 Illinois........................ 242,754 235,590 7,163 238 358 -119 7,044 Indiana...................... 23,598 20,707 2,891 1,447 1,172 275 3,165 Iowa .......................... 68,750 65,187 3,563 2,438 1,540 899 4,462 Kansas...................... 103,105 99,698 3,407

463

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2001-2005 (Million Cubic Feet) 2001 Total ................ 508,374 170,206 678,580 4,146,993 989,969 5,136,962 5,815,542 Alabama.................. 200,862 0 200,862 NA NA NA 200,862 Alaska..................... 113,870 149,067 262,937 0 0 0 262,937 California................. 0 7,262 7,262 3,913 67,034 70,947 78,209 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 4,143,080 922,935 5,066,015 5,066,015 Louisiana ................ 140,358 13,513 153,871 NA NA NA 153,871 Texas...................... 53,285 364 53,649 NA NA NA 53,649 2002 Total ................ 485,126 211,778 696,905 3,722,249 893,193 4,615,443 5,312,348 Alabama.................. 202,002 0 202,002 NA NA NA 202,002 Alaska..................... 102,972 190,608 293,580

464

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 25. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2009-2010 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 20.22 R 18.41 20.18 97.7 17.85 19.44 17.89 97.9 Georgia................................. 13.20 16.81 16.30 14.1 12.18 15.67 15.17 14.3 Maryland ............................... 13.09 R 16.80 13.73 82.8 12.20 13.51 12.44 81.7 New Jersey ........................... 14.49 R 16.52 14.54 97.7 12.77 14.87 12.84 96.6 New York .............................. 14.96 R 15.38 15.05 77.1 13.87 14.55 14.04 74.6 Ohio ...................................... 11.64 13.64 12.68 47.8 10.28 11.80 11.13 43.7 Pennsylvania ........................ 14.56 R 16.46 14.74 90.9

465

Microsoft Word - table_22.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

3 3 Table 22. Average City Gate Price of Natural Gas in the United States, 2002-2006 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 4.74 6.06 6.65 8.47 10.26 Alaska................................... 2.36 2.33 3.05 3.74 5.25 Arizona ................................. 3.77 4.87 5.63 7.32 7.67 Arkansas............................... 5.17 6.07 7.12 8.83 7.96 California .............................. 3.20 5.16 6.04 7.88 6.76 Colorado ............................... 2.72 4.11 5.02 6.10 7.61 Connecticut........................... 6.42 5.59 7.56 R 9.74 9.11 Delaware .............................. 5.37 5.88 6.13 8.32 8.84 Florida................................... 3.90 5.87 6.60 9.30 8.32 Georgia................................. 4.55 6.25 6.81 9.85 9.37 Hawaii...................................

466

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

0 0 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Residential Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2009-2010 Alabama ...................... R 785,005 0 R 785,005 768,921 0 768,921 Alaska.......................... 120,124 0 120,124 121,166 0 121,166 Arizona ........................ 1,130,047 0 1,130,047 1,138,448 0 1,138,448 Arkansas...................... 557,355 0 557,355 549,970 0 549,970 California ..................... R 10,454,747 R 56,203 R 10,510,950 10,469,734 72,850 10,542,584 Colorado ...................... 1,622,429 5 1,622,434 1,634,582 5 1,634,587 Connecticut.................. 488,614 735 489,349 489,380 805 490,185 Delaware ..................... 149,006 0 149,006 150,458 0 150,458 District of Columbia...... 129,738 13,698 143,436 130,048 14,103 144,151 Florida.......................... 659,725 14,365

467

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Commercial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2008-2009 Alabama ...................... R 65,193 120 R 65,313 67,468 128 67,596 Alaska.......................... 12,267 497 12,764 12,854 363 13,217 Arizona ........................ 57,481 105 57,586 57,022 169 57,191 Arkansas...................... 68,943 201 69,144 68,794 249 69,043 California ..................... 417,531 29,629 447,160 406,270 35,225 441,495 Colorado ...................... 144,543 176 144,719 145,455 169 145,624 Connecticut.................. 50,023 3,880 53,903 50,106 4,404 54,510 Delaware ..................... 12,619 84 12,703 12,726 113 12,839 District of Columbia...... 6,838 3,186 10,024 6,706 3,582 10,288 Florida.......................... 41,164 16,961 58,125 41,748 17,801 59,549

468

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2009 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 18.12 100.0 14.93 78.7 6.48 27.9 19.17 4.30 Alaska................................... 10.23 100.0 9.51 85.3 4.02 72.5 -- W Arizona ................................. 17.65 100.0 12.15 88.0 8.19 29.1 14.96 4.16 Arkansas............................... 13.39 100.0 10.71 59.4 8.47 3.6 -- 4.14 California .............................. 9.43 98.9 7.75 54.9 6.57 4.7 7.61 4.44 Colorado ............................... 8.80 100.0 7.56 94.8 6.57 0.5 9.12 4.27 Connecticut........................... 14.81 97.5 9.92 69.0 8.44 37.5 15.26 4.89 Delaware .............................. 17.79 100.0 15.87 53.5 13.99 2.1 14.12 W District of Columbia...............

469

Microsoft Word - table_13.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 13. Additions to and Withdrawals from Gas Storage by State, 2010 (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ................... 23,026 16,740 6,286 946 968 -21 6,264 Arkansas................... 4,672 4,368 304 42 40 2 306 California .................. 226,810 203,653 23,157 56 54 2 23,159 Colorado ................... 43,250 45,010 -1,760 0 0 0 -1,760 Connecticut............... 0 0 0 651 473 178 178 Delaware .................. 0 0 0 73 76 -2 -2 Georgia..................... 0 0 0 2,693 2,314 379 379 Idaho......................... 0 0 0 142 72 70 70 Illinois........................ 247,458 245,135 2,323 398 325 74 2,397 Indiana...................... 21,943 22,454 -511 1,983 1,148 835 324 Iowa .......................... 76,407 78,444 -2,037 1,458 1,312 146 -1,891 Kansas...................... 113,253 121,737 -8,484

470

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2006-2007 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 21.48 24.62 21.54 97.95 20.55 23.23 20.61 97.79 Georgia................................. 15.84 18.81 R 18.37 14.70 14.64 18.02 17.53 14.35 Maryland ............................... 16.14 17.41 16.36 82.27 14.95 16.26 15.17 83.26 New Jersey ........................... 14.87 17.69 R 14.91 98.66 14.45 16.50 14.48 98.35 New York .............................. 15.09 16.99 15.35 86.06 15.50 15.46 15.49 84.07 Ohio ...................................... 14.41 14.36 14.39 58.77 13.05 13.95 13.47 53.01 Pennsylvania ........................ 16.48 16.06 16.45

471

Microsoft Word - table_06.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Table 6. Wellhead Value and Marketed Production of Natural Gas, 2001-2005, and by State, 2005 2001 Total ............................ 19,577,660 -- 4.00 20,570,295 82,202,805 2002 Total ............................ 14,467,289 -- 2.95 19,884,780 58,596,868 2003 Total ............................ 14,589,545 -- 4.88 19,974,360 97,555,375 2004 Total ............................ 15,223,749 -- 5.46 R 19,517,491 R 106,521,974 2005 Total ............................ 15,525,771 -- 7.33 18,950,734 138,987,902 Alabama ............................... 285,237 2,645,780 9.28 296,528 2,750,513 Alaska................................... 502,887 2,387,581 4.75 487,282 2,313,492 Arizona ................................. 211 1,445 6.86 233 1,599 Arkansas............................... 190,533 1,383,193 7.26

472

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

8 8 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2010 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 16,150 21,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 25,150 32,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13,898 21,760 2 13,898 21,760 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 311,096 542,511 13 311,096 542,511 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 49,119 105,768 9 49,119 105,768 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 17 216,132 772,381 11 87,368 218,106 28 303,500 990,487 Indiana................ 0 0 0 13 19,437 81,268 9 13,545 30,003 22 32,982 111,271 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 90,613 288,010 0 0 0 4 90,613 288,010 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 122,814 283,891 19 123,190 284,821 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 100,971 212,184 23 107,600 221,751 Louisiana ............

473

Microsoft Word - table_24.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 24. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Residential and Commercial Sector Consumers by Local Distribution and Marketers in Selected States, 2007-2008 (Nominal Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Florida................................... 20.55 23.23 20.61 97.79 21.11 25.00 21.19 97.78 Georgia................................. 14.64 18.02 17.53 14.35 15.46 18.73 18.26 14.43 Maryland ............................... 14.95 16.26 15.17 83.26 15.98 16.54 16.08 83.15 New Jersey ........................... 14.45 16.50 14.48 98.35 15.15 18.07 15.21 97.98 New York .............................. R 15.79 15.46 R 15.73 R 82.34 16.79 16.57 16.75 80.64 Ohio ...................................... 13.05 13.95 13.47 53.01 14.60 14.45 14.52 52.47 Pennsylvania ........................

474

Microsoft Word - table_14.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

7 7 Table 14. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity by State, December 31, 2009 (Capacity in Million Cubic Feet) Alabama ............. 1 11,900 15,900 0 0 0 1 9,000 11,000 2 20,900 26,900 Arkansas............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13,898 21,760 2 13,898 21,760 California ............ 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 296,096 513,005 13 296,096 513,005 Colorado ............. 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 48,129 105,768 9 48,129 105,768 Illinois.................. 0 0 0 18 252,344 885,848 10 51,418 103,606 28 303,761 989,454 Indiana................ 0 0 0 12 19,367 81,328 10 12,791 32,946 22 32,157 114,274 Iowa .................... 0 0 0 4 87,414 284,811 0 0 0 4 87,414 284,811 Kansas................ 1 375 931 0 0 0 18 118,964 281,370 19 119,339 282,300 Kentucky............. 0 0 0 3 6,629 9,567 20 96,855 210,801 23 103,484 220,368 Louisiana ............

475

Microsoft Word - table_08.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

5 5 Table 8. Summary of U.S. natural gas imports, 2008-2012 Imports Volume (million cubic feet) Pipeline Canada a 3,589,089 3,271,107 3,279,752 3,117,081 2,962,827 Mexico 43,314 28,296 29,995 2,672 314 Total Pipeline Imports 3,632,403 3,299,402 3,309,747 3,119,753 2,963,140 LNG by Vessel Egypt 54,839 160,435 72,990 35,120 2,811 Nigeria 12,049 13,306 41,733 2,362 0 Norway 14,882 29,327 26,014 15,175 6,212 Peru 0 0 16,045 16,620 0 Qatar 3,108 12,687 45,583 90,972 33,823 Trinidad/Tobago 266,821 236,202 189,748 128,620 112,207 Yemen 0 0 38,897 60,071 19,595 Total LNG Imports 351,698 451,957 431,010 348,939 174,649 Total Imports 3,984,101 3,751,360

476

Microsoft Word - table_19.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

6 6 Table 19. Number of Natural Gas Residential Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2004-2005 Alabama ...................... R 806,660 R 0 R 806,660 799,256 0 799,256 Alaska.......................... 104,360 0 104,360 108,401 0 108,401 Arizona ........................ 993,885 0 993,885 1,042,662 0 1,042,662 Arkansas...................... R 554,844 0 R 554,844 555,861 0 555,861 California ..................... 9,921,331 R 36,081 R 9,957,412 10,092,466 31,967 10,124,433 Colorado ...................... R 1,496,873 3 R 1,496,876 1,524,810 3 1,524,813 Connecticut.................. 468,918 414 469,332 474,807 414 475,221 District of Columbia...... 120,709 17,425 138,134 127,139 13,873 141,012 Delaware ..................... 133,197 0 133,197 137,115 0 137,115 Florida.......................... R 628,104 10,910

477

Microsoft Word - table_20.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 20. Number of Natural Gas Commercial Consumers by Type of Service and State, 2006-2007 Alabama ...................... R 66,222 115 R 66,337 65,738 118 65,856 Alaska.......................... 12,858 1,526 14,384 12,491 917 13,408 Arizona ........................ 56,955 136 57,091 57,047 122 57,169 Arkansas...................... 69,318 157 69,475 69,319 176 69,495 California ..................... 426,379 15,673 442,052 421,449 24,671 446,120 Colorado ...................... 139,566 180 139,746 141,201 219 141,420 Connecticut.................. 49,056 3,926 52,982 48,522 3,867 52,389 Delaware ..................... 12,288 57 12,345 12,507 69 12,576 District of Columbia...... 7,004 3,406 10,410 6,867 3,048 9,915 Florida.......................... 41,190 14,069 55,259 41,325 15,995 57,320

478

Microsoft Word - table_11.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 11. Summary of U.S. Natural Gas Exports By Point of Exit, 2001-2005 (Volumes in Million Cubic Feet, Prices in Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Pipeline (Canada) Eastport, ID......................... 0 -- 176 4.40 15 4.34 48 5.36 0 -- Detroit, MI ........................... 35,644 4.57 7,431 3.03 19,737 5.47 40,030 6.47 40,255 8.12 Marysville, MI...................... 3,651 3.92 0 -- 811 5.06 4,455 6.83 5,222 7.92 Sault Ste. Marie, MI ............ 0 -- 0 -- 605 4.94 6,666 6.38 5,537 8.13 St. Clair, MI ......................... 122,293 3.82 164,084 3.42 238,444 6.13 317,797 6.56 286,804 7.77 Noyes, MN .......................... 0 -- 71 1.99 172 5.43 2,193 5.77 0 -- Babb, MT ............................ 549 3.55 143 2.28 38 6.48 1,429 4.98 0 -- Havre, MT ...........................

479

Microsoft Word - table_23.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

4 4 Table 23. Average Price of Natural Gas Delivered to Consumers by State and Sector, 2005 (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Alabama ............................... 15.82 100.00 13.13 81.65 9.51 23.59 -- 9.67 Alaska................................... 5.73 100.00 4.93 51.19 2.59 68.65 -- 3.42 Arizona ................................. 13.54 100.00 9.85 93.29 8.53 43.63 7.91 8.24 Arkansas............................... 13.65 100.00 10.20 74.07 9.44 5.23 10.16 8.59 California .............................. 11.86 99.66 10.69 68.67 9.84 5.46 8.80 8.09 Colorado ............................... 10.29 99.99 9.39 95.15 8.68 0.59 8.17 7.41 Connecticut........................... 16.24 98.75 13.00 70.34 11.68 46.41 14.60 9.31 District of Columbia............... 16.87 79.76 13.17 100.00 --

480

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 Table 4. Offshore gross withdrawals of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2007-2011 (million cubic feet) 2007 Total 276,117 341,925 618,042 2,204,379 654,334 2,858,713 3,476,755 Alabama 134,451 0 134,451 NA NA NA 134,451 Alaska 48,876 325,328 374,204 0 0 0 374,204 California 312 6,977 7,289 2,137 43,379 45,516 52,805 Gulf of Mexico 0 0 0 2,202,242 610,955 2,813,197 2,813,197 Louisiana 63,357 9,512 72,868 NA NA NA 72,868 Texas 29,121 108 29,229 NA NA NA 29,229 2008 Total 297,565 356,139 653,704 1,849,891 524,965 2,374,857 3,028,561 Alabama 125,502 0 125,502 NA NA NA 125,502 Alaska 43,079 345,109 388,188 0 0 0 388,188 California 266 6,764 7,029 1,601 43,300 44,902

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "date shutdown table" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


481

Microsoft Word - table_04.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Table 4. Offshore Gross Withdrawals of Natural Gas by State and the Gulf of Mexico, 2003-2007 (Million Cubic Feet) 2003 Total ................ 456,090 254,150 710,240 3,565,614 939,828 4,505,443 5,215,683 Alabama.................. 194,339 0 194,339 NA NA NA 194,339 Alaska..................... 85,606 236,404 322,010 0 0 0 322,010 California................. 0 6,866 6,866 1,731 56,363 58,095 64,961 Gulf of Mexico......... 0 0 0 3,563,883 883,465 4,447,348 4,447,348 Louisiana ................ 123,939 9,517 133,456 NA NA NA 133,456 Texas...................... 52,206 1,363 53,569 NA NA NA 53,569 2004 Total ................ 401,662 279,249 680,911 3,214,488 840,852 4,055,340 4,736,252 Alabama.................. 165,630 0 165,630 NA NA NA 165,630 Alaska..................... 73,457 260,667 334,125

482

Microsoft Word - table_25.doc  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

8 8 Table 25. Average price of natural gas delivered to residential and commercial sector consumers by local distribution and marketers in selected states, 2011-2012 (dollars per thousand cubic feet) Georgia 11.98 16.38 15.72 15.1 12.47 16.82 16.23 13.5 New York 13.52 14.22 13.71 72.4 12.72 13.59 12.97 71.2 Ohio 10.32 11.09 10.78 40.8 8.75 10.42 9.91 30.9 Residential 2011 2012 State Local Distribution Company Average Price a Marketer Average Price b Combined Average Price c Percent Sold by Local Distribution Company Local Distribution Company Average Price a Marketer Average Price b Combined Average Price c Percent Sold by Local Distribution Company a Price derived from Form EIA-176, "Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas Supply and Disposition."

483

Request Log Closedl Date Yes  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

6 FOIA 6 FOIA - Request Log Closedl Date Yes 01 127106 Yes 02/23/06 Yes 04/05/06 Yes 04/03/06 Yes 04/03/06 Yes 05/22/06 Yes 35/30/06 - No. - 00 1 - 002 - 003 - 004 005 006 - 307 - Dated 01 125106 0211 6106 03/29/06 03/31 106 14/03/06 1511 8/06 )5/22/06 Date Rec'd 0 I I2 5/06 02/23/06 03130/06 0313 1 106 04/03/06 05/22/06 05/22/06 HQ or Dir. Direct Transfer from HQ Direct Trans from HQ Direct Direct Transfer 'rom HQ Subject Requesting a list of all your Procurement card holders Requesting copies of any and all Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted to the Department of Energy (DOE) by Donna Wright, the Bradenton Herald, or any other individual that requested documentation or information pertaining to the Loral American Beryllium Corporation (also known as the

484

EIA - Reference Case Projection Tables 1990-2030  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Tables (1990-2030) Tables (1990-2030) International Energy Outlook 2006 Reference Case Projections Tables (1990-2030) Formats Data Table Titles (1 to 14 complete) Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A1 World Total Primary Energy Consumption by Region, Reference Case Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800. Table A2 World Total Energy Consumption by Region and Fuel, Reference Case Reference Case Projections Tables. Need help, contact the National Energy Information Center at 202-586-8800.

485

FY 2005 Control Table by Organization  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Organization Organization (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 2 National Nuclear Security Administration..................................................... 3 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.................................................... 4 Electric Transmission and Distribution......................................................... 4 Fossil Energy................................................................................................ 5 Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology...................................................

486

Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey -- Publication and Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Overview > Publication and Tables Overview > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Percent of FBSS Buildings and Floorspace by Selected Agencies, FY 1993 Percent of FBSS buildings and floorspace by selected agencies, FY 1993 Sources: Energy Information Administration, Energy Markets and End Use, 1993 Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey. Separater Bar Separater Bar You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Federal Buildings Supplemental Survey, 1993 (file size 1.15 MB) pages: 183 Selected Sections Main Text (file size 161,775 bytes) pages: 17. - Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader Contacts Preface Contents Introduction At a Glance Highlights on Federal Buildings Detailed Tables Appendices Appendix A. How the Survey Was Conducted (file size 45,191 bytes) pages: 8.

487

Precision Flow Table | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Table Table Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Flow Table Overseeing Organization United States Army Corp of Engineers (ERDC) Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type Flow Table Length(m) 2.4 Beam(m) 1.2 Water Type Freshwater Cost(per day) Contact POC Towing Capabilities Towing Capabilities None Wavemaking Capabilities Wavemaking Capabilities None Channel/Tunnel/Flume Channel/Tunnel/Flume Yes Wind Capabilities Wind Capabilities None Control and Data Acquisition Description Automated data acquisition and control system Cameras None Available Sensors Flow, Pressure Range(psi), Turbulence, Velocity, Wave Probe Data Generation Capability Real-Time No Test Services Test Services Yes Past Pertinent Test Experience Users are District Engineers, Planners, and Engineering Consultants

488

FY 2005 Control Table by Appropriation  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Appropriation Appropriation (dollars in thousands - OMB Scoring) Table of Contents Summary...................................................................................................... 1 Mandatory Funding....................................................................................... 3 Energy Supply.............................................................................................. 4 Non-Defense site acceleration completion................................................... 5 Uranium enrichment D&D fund.................................................................... 5 Non-Defense environmental services.......................................................... 5 Science.........................................................................................................

489

Commercial Buildings Characteristics 1992 - Publication and Tables  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

Buildings Characteristics Data > Publication and Tables Buildings Characteristics Data > Publication and Tables Publication and Tables Percent of Buildings and Floorspace by Census Region, 1992 figure on percent of building and floorspace by census region, 1992 separater bar To View and/or Print Reports (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader) - Download Adobe Acrobat Reader If you experience any difficulties, visit our Technical Frequently Asked Questions. You have the option of downloading the entire report or selected sections of the report. Full Report - Commercial Buildings Characteristics, 1992 with only selected tables (file size 1.34 MB) pages: 157 Selected Sections: Main Text (file size 883,980 bytes) pages: 28, includes the following: Contacts Contents Executive Summary Introduction Background Organization of the report

490

ii Colorado Climate Table of Contents  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

#12;ii Colorado Climate Table of Contents Web: http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu Colorado Climate Spring 2002 Vol. 3, No. 2 Lightning in Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Colorado Climate in Review

491

TableHC11.12.xls  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

... 2.8 0.3 Q 0.2 Million U.S. Housing Units Home Electronics Usage Indicators Table HC11.12 Home Electronics Usage Indicators by Northeast Census Region,...

492

TableHC6.13.xls  

Annual Energy Outlook 2012 (EIA)

Q 5 or More... 0.3 N Q Q Q Q Lighting Usage Indicators 4 Members 5 or More Members Table HC6.13 Lighting Usage Indicators by...

493

TABLES3.CHP:Corel VENTURA  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

S3. Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Imports, 1988 - Present (Thousand Barrels per Day) See footnotes at end of table. 1988 Average ... 300 58 345 343 92 80 0 0 1989...

494

Table of Contents Resilient Sustainable Communities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

..................................... 5 Onondaga County: Sustainable Development Plan....................... 9 Comparison of the Hazard Mitigation Plan and Onondaga County Sustainable Development Plan DraftTable of Contents Resilient Sustainable Communities: Integrating Hazard Mitigation & Sustainability

495

Table of Contents Chapter and Content Pages  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

#12;Page 2 Table of Contents Chapter and Content Pages 1. Field Trip Itinerary ................................................................................. 7 4. Geologic Framework of the Netherlands Antilles 5. Coral Reefs of the Netherlands Antilles

Fouke, Bruce W.

496

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

2 2 State Energy Data 2011: Consumption Table C9. Electric Power Sector Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Nuclear Electric Power Hydroelectric Power b Biomass Geothermal Solar/PV d Wind Net Electricity Imports e Total f Distillate Fuel Oil Petroleum Coke Residual Fuel Oil Total Wood and Waste c Alabama ............. 586.1 349.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 411.8 86.3 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,439.3 Alaska ................. 6.0 42.3 3.3 0.0 1.5 4.8 0.0 13.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 (s) 66.3 Arizona ............... 449.9 183.9 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 327.3 89.1 2.4 0.0 0.8 2.5 1.5 1,057.9 Arkansas ............. 300.5 109.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.6 148.5 28.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 588.9 California ............ 19.7 630.1 0.4 11.1 (s) 11.5 383.6 413.4 69.0 122.0 8.4 75.3 20.1 1,753.1 Colorado ............. 362.4 88.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 20.2 0.9

497

Microsoft Word - table_03.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

9 9 Table 3. Gross withdrawals and marketed production of natural gas by state and the Gulf of Mexico, 2007-2011 (million cubic feet) 2007 Total R 14,991,891 R 5,681,871 R 1,999,748 1,990,145 24,663,656 3,662,685 143,457 661,168 20,196,346 930,320 19,266,026 2008 Total R 15,134,644 R 5,609,425 R 2,022,228 R 2,869,960 25,636,257 3,638,622 166,909 718,674 21,112,053 953,451 20,158,602 2009 Total R 14,414,287 R 5,674,120 R 2,010,171 R 3,958,315 26,056,893 3,522,090 165,360 721,507 21,647,936 1,024,082 20,623,854 2010 Total R 13,247,498 R 5,834,703 1,916,762 5,817,122 R 26,816,085 3,431,587 165,928 836,698 R 22,381,873 R 1,066,366 R 21,315,507 2011 Total 12,291,070 5,907,919 1,779,055 8,500,983 28,479,026 3,365,313 209,439 867,922 24,036,352 1,134,473 22,901,879

498

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural gas delivered to commercial consumers for the account of others by state, 2008-2012 (volumes in million cubic feet) Alabama 4,999 19.8 5,160 21.2 5,494 20.3 5,313 21.1 5,126 23.8 Alaska 4,274 25.1 2,448 14.7 1,951 12.3 2,208 R 11.4 1,005 5.1 Arizona 2,258 6.9 3,866 12.0 3,605 11.3 3,988 12.2 4,213 13.4 Arkansas 13,112 35.5 14,776 40.6 17,862 44.4 19,402 48.5 24,772 59.8 California 108,738 43.3 111,702 45.1 113,903 45.9 R 112,448 45.7 126,571 50.0 Colorado 3,132 4.8 3,240 5.2 3,118 5.4 3,457 6.2 4,061 7.8 Connecticut 11,032 29.3 12,324 31.0 14,068 34.6 15,519 34.6 14,774 34.9 Delaware 2,611 29.4 5,438 46.5 6,117 50.2 4,879 46.6 5,647 56.3 District of Columbia 15,110 82.1 15,550 83.1 15,507 83.6 14,029

499

Microsoft Word - table_18.doc  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

5 5 Table 18. Natural gas delivered to commercial consumers for the account of others by state, 2007-2011 (volumes in million cubic feet) Alabama 4,722 20.2 4,999 19.8 5,160 21.2 5,494 R 20.3 5,313 21.1 Alaska 4,499 24.0 4,274 25.1 2,448 14.7 1,951 12.3 2,208 13.3 Arizona 2,172 6.6 2,258 6.9 3,866 12.0 3,605 11.3 3,988 12.2 Arkansas 9,534 29.6 13,112 35.5 14,776 40.6 17,862 44.4 19,402 48.5 California 98,776 39.3 108,738 43.3 111,702 45.1 113,903 45.9 112,561 45.7 Colorado 2,721 4.3 3,132 4.8 3,240 5.2 R 3,118 5.4 3,457 6.2 Connecticut 10,252 28.5 11,032 29.3 12,324 31.0 14,068 34.6 15,519 34.6 Delaware 2,178 25.2 2,611 29.4 5,438 46.5 6,117 50.2 4,879 46.6 District of Columbia 15,703 81.4 15,110 82.1 15,550 83.1 15,507 83.6 14,029

500

All Consumption Tables.vp  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

State State Energy Data 2011: Consumption 11 Table C8. Transportation Sector Energy Consumption Estimates, 2011 (Trillion Btu) State Coal Natural Gas a Petroleum Retail Electricity Sales Net Energy Electrical System Energy Losses e Total Aviation Gasoline Distillate Fuel Oil Jet Fuel b LPG c Lubricants Motor Gasoline d Residual Fuel Oil Total Alabama ............. 0.0 23.5 0.4 124.4 13.4 0.3 2.3 316.3 6.7 463.7 0.0 487.2 0.0 487.2 Alaska ................. 0.0 3.5 0.8 44.4 118.2 (s) 0.4 32.9 0.4 197.2 0.0 200.7 0.0 200.7 Arizona ............... 0.0 15.6 1.0 111.3 21.5 0.8 1.6 318.2 0.0 454.5 0.0 470.1 0.0 470.1 Arkansas ............. 0.0 11.5 0.4 99.7 5.9 0.4 2.0 171.3 0.0 279.8 (s) 291.2 (s) 291.2 California ............ 0.0 25.7 1.9 440.9 549.7 3.8 13.3 1,770.1 186.9 2,966.5 2.8 2,995.1 5.5 3,000.5 Colorado ............. 0.0 14.7 0.6 83.2 58.3 0.3