National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for management total year

  1. Integrating Total Quality Management (TQM) and hazardous waste management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirk, N.

    1993-11-01

    The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and its subsequent amendments have had a dramatic impact on hazardous waste management for business and industry. The complexity of this law and the penalties for noncompliance have made it one of the most challenging regulatory programs undertaken by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The fundamentals of RCRA include ``cradle to grave`` management of hazardous waste, covering generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. The regulations also address extensive definitions and listing/identification mechanisms for hazardous waste along with a tracking system. Treatment is favored over disposal and emphasis is on ``front-end`` treatment such as waste minimization and pollution prevention. A study of large corporations such as Xerox, 3M, and Dow Chemical, as well as the public sector, has shown that well known and successful hazardous waste management programs emphasize pollution prevention and employment of techniques such as proactive environmental management, environmentally conscious manufacturing, and source reduction. Nearly all successful hazardous waste programs include some aspects of Total Quality Management, which begins with a strong commitment from top management. Hazardous waste management at the Rocky Flats Plant is further complicated by the dominance of ``mixed waste`` at the facility. The mixed waste stems from the original mission of the facility, which was production of nuclear weapons components for the Department of Energy (DOE). A Quality Assurance Program based on the criterion in DOE Order 5700.6C has been implemented at Rocky Flats. All of the elements of the Quality Assurance Program play a role in hazardous waste management. Perhaps one of the biggest waste management problems facing the Rocky Flats Plant is cleaning up contamination from a forty year mission which focused on production of nuclear weapon components.

  2. NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review Presenter: Stacey Rothgeb, NREL View the...

  3. Total Ore Processing Integration and Management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leslie Gertsch; Richard Gertsch

    2006-01-30

    This report outlines the technical progress achieved for project DE-FC26-03NT41785 (Total Ore Processing Integration and Management) during the period 01 July through 30 September of 2005. This ninth quarterly report discusses the activities of the project team during the period 1 July through 30 September 2005. Richard Gertsch's unexpected death due to natural causes while in Minnesota to work on this project has temporarily slowed progress. Statistical analysis of the Minntac Mine data set for late 2004 is continuing. Preliminary results raised several questions that could be amenable to further study. Detailed geotechnical characterization is being applied to improve the predictability of mill and agglomerator performance at Hibtac Mine.

  4. Webtrends Archives by Fiscal Year - EERE Totals | Department of Energy

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Historical EERE office total reports include only Webtrends archives by fiscal year. EERE total reports dating after FY11 can be accessed in EERE's Google Analytics account. Microsoft Office document icon EERE FY07 Microsoft Office document icon EERE FY08 Microsoft Office document icon EERE FY09 Microsoft Office document icon EERE FY10 Microsoft Office document icon EERE FY11 More Documents & Publications Webtrends Archives by Fiscal Year - Information Center Webtrends Archives by Fiscal

  5. NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review Presenter: Stacey Rothgeb, NREL View the Presentation PDF icon NREL: Building America Total Quality Management - 2015 Peer Review More Documents & Publications Home Performance with ENERGY STAR - 2014 BTO Peer Review Residential Buildings Integration Program Overview - 2015 BTO Peer Review LBNL's FLEXLAB test facility, which includes

  6. Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2013 Work Plan | Department...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Fiscal Year 2012 Budget WM-FY13-WP - September 26, 2012 More Documents & Publications Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2012 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year...

  7. Waste management fiscal year 1998 progress report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-12-31

    The Waste Management Program is pleased to issue the Fiscal Year 1998 Progress Report presenting program highlights and major accomplishments of the last year. This year-end update describes the current initiatives in waste management and the progress DOE has made toward their goals and objectives, including the results of the waste management annual performance commitments. One of the most important program efforts continues to be opening the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), located near Carlsbad, New Mexico, for the deep geologic disposal of transuranic waste. A major success was achieved this year by the West Valley Demonstration Project in New York, which in June completed the project`s production phase of high-level waste processing ahead of schedule and under budget. Another significant accomplishment this year was the award of two privatization contracts for major waste management operations, one at Oak ridge for transuranic waste treatment, and one at Hanford for the Tank Waste Remediation System privatization project. DOE is proud of the progress that has been made, and will continue to pursue program activities that allow it to safely and expeditiously dispose of radioactive and hazardous wastes across the complex, while reducing worker, public, and environmental risks.

  8. Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data Validations Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data Validations FIMS...

  9. Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management...

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

    Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data Validations Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data Validations PDF...

  10. Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2012 Work Plan | Department of

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Energy Management Committee Fiscal Year 2012 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2012 Work Plan Topics: TA-21 TA-54 Risk/Benefit Principles Consent Order PDF icon WM-FY12-WP - September 1, 2011 More Documents & Publications Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2013 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2014 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2016 Work Plan

  11. Total..........................................................

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

    Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 2 Fewer than 500... 3.2 Q 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.5 500 to 999......

  12. Total..........................................................

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    2,033 1,618 1,031 791 630 401 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500... 3.2 357 336 113 188 177 59 500 to 999......

  13. Total..........................................................

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    . 111.1 20.6 15.1 5.5 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500... 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.4 500 to 999......

  14. Total..........................................................

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

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500... 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.9 1.0 500 to 999......

  15. Total..........................................................

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500... 3.2 0.5 0.3 Q 500 to 999......

  16. Total............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total................................................................... 111.1 2,033 1,618 1,031 791 630 401 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500............................................... 3.2 357 336 113 188 177 59 500 to 999....................................................... 23.8 733 667 308 343 312 144 1,000 to 1,499................................................. 20.8 1,157 1,086 625 435 409 235 1,500 to 1,999................................................. 15.4 1,592

  17. Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2016 Work Plan | Department of

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Energy 6 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2016 Work Plan Topics: TA-54 WIPP Recovery Operations Waste Stored at Waste Control Specialists Consent Order Deliverables FY'17 Budget National Waste Forum PDF icon WM-FY16-WP - March 9, 2016 More Documents & Publications Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2014 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2013 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2012 Work Plan

  18. Total

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

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases Propane/Propylene Normal Butane/Butylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Fuels Gasoline Blending Components Petroleum Products Finished Motor Gasoline Reformulated Gasoline Conventional Gasoline Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel Kerosene Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil, 15 ppm Sulfur and Under Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 15 ppm to 500 ppm Sulfur

  19. Total

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

    Product: Total Crude Oil Liquefied Petroleum Gases Propane/Propylene Normal Butane/Butylene Other Liquids Oxygenates Fuel Ethanol MTBE Other Oxygenates Biomass-based Diesel Other Renewable Diesel Fuel Other Renewable Fuels Gasoline Blending Components Petroleum Products Finished Motor Gasoline Reformulated Gasoline Conventional Gasoline Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel Kerosene Distillate Fuel Oil Distillate Fuel Oil, 15 ppm Sulfur and Under Distillate Fuel Oil, Greater than 15 ppm to 500 ppm Sulfur

  20. Total..........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.9 0.6 Q Q 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 9.0 4.2 1.5 3.2 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 8.6 4.7 1.5 2.5 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 6.0 2.9 1.2 1.9 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 4.1 2.1 0.7

  1. Total..........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 2.1 0.6 Q 0.4 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 13.6 3.7 3.2 3.2 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 9.5 3.7 3.4 4.2 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 6.6 2.7 2.5 3.6 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 5.0 2.1

  2. Total................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    .. 111.1 86.6 2,522 1,970 1,310 1,812 1,475 821 1,055 944 554 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500............................. 3.2 0.9 261 336 162 Q Q Q 334 260 Q 500 to 999.................................... 23.8 9.4 670 683 320 705 666 274 811 721 363 1,000 to 1,499.............................. 20.8 15.0 1,121 1,083 622 1,129 1,052 535 1,228 1,090 676 1,500 to 1,999.............................. 15.4 14.4 1,574 1,450 945 1,628 1,327 629 1,712 1,489 808 2,000 to

  3. Total..........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    .. 111.1 24.5 1,090 902 341 872 780 441 Total Floorspace (Square Feet) Fewer than 500...................................... 3.1 2.3 403 360 165 366 348 93 500 to 999.............................................. 22.2 14.4 763 660 277 730 646 303 1,000 to 1,499........................................ 19.1 5.8 1,223 1,130 496 1,187 1,086 696 1,500 to 1,999........................................ 14.4 1.0 1,700 1,422 412 1,698 1,544 1,348 2,000 to 2,499........................................ 12.7

  4. Total..........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500................................................... 3.2 0.4 Q Q 0.5 500 to 999........................................................... 23.8 2.5 1.5 2.1 3.7 1,000 to 1,499..................................................... 20.8 1.1 2.0 1.5 2.5 1,500 to 1,999..................................................... 15.4 0.5 1.2 1.2 1.9 2,000 to 2,499..................................................... 12.2 0.7 0.5 0.8 1.4

  5. Total...........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Floorspace (Square Feet) Total Floorspace 1 Fewer than 500.................................... 3.2 0.7 Q 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.3 Q 500 to 999........................................... 23.8 2.7 1.4 2.2 2.8 5.5 5.1 3.0 1.1 1,000 to 1,499..................................... 20.8 2.3 1.4 2.4 2.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 1.6 1,500 to 1,999..................................... 15.4 1.8 1.4 2.2 2.0 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.2 2,000 to 2,499..................................... 12.2 1.4 0.9

  6. Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Validations | Department of Energy Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data Validations Guidance for Fiscal Year 2015 Facilities Information Management System Data Validations PDF icon FIMS VALIDATION GUIDANCE_FY 2015 with MEMO 141120 FINAL.pdf More Documents & Publications Microsoft PowerPoint - FY09_10 Validations_Archiving_090804 Three-year Rolling Timeline Three

  7. Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2014 Work Plan | Department of

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Energy Order TA-49 Remediation TA-21 Remediation Material Disposal Areas PDF icon WM-FY14-WP - September 25, 2013 More Documents & Publications Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee Fiscal Year 2014 Work Plan Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2015 Work Plan Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee Fiscal Year 2015

  8. DOE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2015 YEAR IN REVIEW

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2015 YEAR IN REVIEW "I am proud of all of the work we in EM-both at headquarters and in the field-have accomplished this year. While facing the most complex cleanup challenges, measurable progress was made in 2015-a testament to our skilled workforce. The considerable investment made in cleanup this year has led to strong results across the EM complex. The foundation and planning put in place this year will enable EM to hit the ground running in 2016. I was honored

  9. Oak Ridge Environmental Management: 30 years in 30 minutes | Department of

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

    Energy Oak Ridge Environmental Management: 30 years in 30 minutes Oak Ridge Environmental Management: 30 years in 30 minutes Addthis

  10. Fifty years of federal radioactive waste management: Policies and practices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bradley, R.G.

    1997-04-01

    This report provides a chronological history of policies and practices relating to the management of radioactive waste for which the US Atomic Energy Commission and its successor agencies, the Energy Research and Development Administration and the Department of Energy, have been responsible since the enactment of the Atomic Energy Act in 1946. The defense programs and capabilities that the Commission inherited in 1947 are briefly described. The Commission undertook a dramatic expansion nationwide of its physical facilities and program capabilities over the five years beginning in 1947. While the nuclear defense activities continued to be a major portion of the Atomic Energy Commission`s program, there was added in 1955 the Atoms for Peace program that spawned a multiplicity of peaceful use applications for nuclear energy, e.g., the civilian nuclear power program and its associated nuclear fuel cycle; a variety of industrial applications; and medical research, diagnostic, and therapeutic applications. All of these nuclear programs and activities generated large volumes of radioactive waste that had to be managed in a manner that was safe for the workers, the public, and the environment. The management of these materials, which varied significantly in their physical, chemical, and radiological characteristics, involved to varying degrees the following phases of the waste management system life cycle: waste characterization, storage, treatment, and disposal, with appropriate transportation linkages. One of the benefits of reviewing the history of the waste management program policies and practices if the opportunity it provides for identifying the lessons learned over the years. Examples are summarized at the end of the report and are listed in no particular order of importance.

  11. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    | Department of Energy Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review DOE Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review DOE Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review In December 2015, EM released its 2015 Year-in-Review highlighting the wide array of work performed in the cleanup program this year. The Year-in-Review features detailed major accomplishments achieved

  12. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review

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

    | Department of Energy Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review DOE Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review DOE Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review In December 2015, EM released its 2015 Year-in-Review highlighting the wide array of work performed in the cleanup program this year. The Year-in-Review features detailed major accomplishments achieved

  13. Toward the Development of Multi-Year Total and Special Solar Radiation Budgets at the Three ARM Locales

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    the Development of Multi-Year Total and Special Solar Radiation Budgets at the Three ARM Locales Z. Li and M. C. Cribb Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center University of Maryland College Park, Maryland A. P. Trishchenko Canada Centre for Remote Sensing Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Introduction Over the past decade, an unprecedented amount of high-quality observational data pertaining to atmospheric and surface parameters has been collected at Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) locales

  14. Development of a Total Energy, Environment and Asset Management (TE2AM tm) Curriculum

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2012-12-31

    The University of Wisconsin Department of Engineering Professional Development (EPD) has completed the sponsored project entitled, Development of a Total Energy, Environment and Asset Management (TE2AM) Curriculum. The project involved the development of a structured professional development program to improve the knowledge, skills, capabilities, and competencies of engineers and operators of commercial buildings. TE2AM advances a radically different approach to commercial building design, operation, maintenance, and end-?of-?life disposition. By employing asset management principles to the lifecycle of a commercial building, owners and occupants will realize improved building performance, reduced energy consumption and positive environmental impacts. Through our commercialization plan, we intend to offer TE2AM courses and certificates to the professional community and continuously improve TE2AM course materials. The TE2AM project supports the DOE Strategic Theme 1 -? Energy Security; and will further advance the DOE Strategic Goal 1.4 Energy Productivity. Through participation in the TE2AM curriculum, engineers and operators of commercial buildings will be eligible for a professional certificate; denoting the completion of a prescribed series of learning activities. The project involved a comprehensive, rigorous approach to curriculum development, and accomplished the following goals: 1. Identify, analyze and prioritize key learning needs of engineers, architects and technical professionals as operators of commercial buildings. 2. Design and develop TE2AM curricula and instructional strategies to meet learning needs of the target learning community. 3. Establish partnerships with the sponsor and key stakeholders to enhance the development and delivery of learning programs. 4. Successfully commercialize and sustain the training and certificate programs for a substantial time following the term of the award. The project team was successful in achieving the goals and deliverables set forth in the original proposal. Though attempts were made to adhere to the original project timeline, the team requested, and was granted a 6-?month project extension, during which time the project was completed.

  15. The Office of Environmental Management Celebrates 20 years (1989...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    the weapons complex to adequately plan ahead for how to manage the hazardous waste products it was producing, and the result was high levels of environmental contamination...

  16. DOE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2015 YEAR IN REVIEW

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

    ... are working together efficiently to provide critical support to EM's mission." -Ralph Holland, Director, DOE Office of Environmental Management Consolidated Business Center ENERGY ...

  17. Waste Management Project fiscal year 1998 multi-year work plan, WBS 1.2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jacobsen, P.H.

    1997-09-23

    The Waste Management Project manages and integrates (non-TWRS) waste management activities at the site. Activities include management of Hanford wastes as well as waste transferred to Hanford from other DOE, Department of Defense, or other facilities. This work includes handling, treatment, storage, and disposal of radioactive, nonradioactive, hazardous, and mixed solid and liquid wastes. Major Waste Management Projects are the Solid Waste Project, Liquid Effluents Project, and Analytical Services. Existing facilities (e.g., grout vaults and canyons) shall be evaluated for reuse for these purposes to the maximum extent possible.

  18. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2000

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

    on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2000 December 13, 2002 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES . . . . . . 7 A. Overview of Federal Energy Management Policy and

  19. Waste Management Committee Fiscal Year 2015 Work Plan | Department of

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Energy Order Deliverables FY'17 Budget National Waste Forum PDF icon WM-FY15-WP - November 17, 2014 More Documents & Publications Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee Fiscal Year 2015 Work Plan Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee Fiscal Year 2014 Work Plan Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Committee Fiscal Year 2013

  20. Building Technologies Program Multi-Year Program Plan Program Portfolio Management 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2008-01-01

    Building Technologies Program Multi-Year Program Plan 2008 for program portfolio management, including the program portfolio management process, program analysis, performance assessment, stakeholder interactions, and cross-cutting issues.

  1. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2 YEAR 2014 Males 57 Females 25 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 3 EJ/EK 4 EN 04 2 NN (Engineering) 20 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 53 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 0 African American Male (AA M) 9 African American Female (AA F) 9 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 2 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 1 Hispanic Male (H M) 3 Hispanic Female (H F) 5 White Male (W M) 43 White Female (W F) 10 DIVERSITY TOTAL WORKFORCE

  2. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    YEAR 2014 Males 11 Females 2 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 2 EJ/EK 1 EN 04 1 NN (Engineering) 5 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 4 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 0 African American Male (AA M) 0 African American Female (AA F) 0 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 0 Hispanic Female (H F) 0 White Male (W M) 10 White Female (W F) 2 DIVERSITY TOTAL WORKFORCE GENDER

  3. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    9 YEAR 2014 Males 9 Females 10 YEAR 2014 SES 7 ED 1 EJ/EK 1 EN 05 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 8 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 1 African American Female (AA F) 5 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 0 Hispanic Female (H F) 3 White Male (W M) 7 White Female (W F) 1 PAY PLAN DIVERSITY TOTAL

  4. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 YEAR 2014 Males 7 Females 7 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 7 GS 15 1 GS 14 2 GS 13 2 GS 10 1 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 0 African American Male (AA M) 3 African American Female (AA F) 2 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 0 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 0 Hispanic Female (H F) 0 White Male (W M) 4 White Female (W F) 5 DIVERSITY TOTAL WORKFORCE GENDER

  5. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    16 YEAR 2014 Males 72 Females 144 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 8 EJ/EK 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 198 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 9 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 2 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 2 African American Male (AA M) 10 African American Female (AA F) 38 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 3 Hispanic Male (H M) 15 Hispanic Female (H F) 33 White Male (W M) 44 White Female (W F) 68 DIVERSITY TOTAL

  6. Waste management project fiscal year 1998 multi-year work plan WBS 1.2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Slaybaugh, R.R.

    1997-08-29

    The MYWP technical baseline describes the work to be accomplished by the Project and the technical standards which govern that work. The Waste Management Project manages and integrates (non-TWRS) waste management activities at the site. Activities include management of Hanford wastes as well as waste transferred to Hanford from other DOE, Department of Defense, or other facilities. This work includes handling, treatment, storage, and disposition of radioactive, nonradioactive, hazardous, and mixed solid and liquid wastes. Major Waste Management Projects are the Solid Waste Project (SW), Liquid Effluents Project (LEP), and Analytical Services. Existing facilities (e.g., grout vaults and canyons) shall be evaluated for reuse for these purposes to the maximum extent possible. The paper tabulates the major facilities that interface with this Project, identifying the major facilities that generate waste, materials, or infrastructure for this Project and the major facilities that will receive waste and materials from this Project.

  7. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management's Fiscal Year...

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

    I and II for the years ended September 30, 2010, is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the financial statements. Such information has been...

  8. Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2014-03-01

    Annual reports on Federal energy management respond to section 548 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619), as amended, and provide information on energy consumption in Federal buildings, operations, and vehicles. Compiled by the Federal Energy Management Program, these reports document activities conducted by Federal agencies under the: Energy management and energy consumption requirements of section 543 of NECPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 8253); Energy savings performance contract authority of section 801 of NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 8287-8287d); Renewable energy purchase goal of section 203 of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 15852); Federal building performance standard requirements under Section 109 of EPAct 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 6834(a)); Requirements on the procurement and identification of energy efficient products under section 161 of EPAct 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-486 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 8262g); Sections 431, 432, and 434 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Pub. L. No. 110-140 (42 U.S.C. § 8253) and section 527 of EISA (42 U.S.C. § 17143); Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, 72 Fed. Reg. 3,919 (Jan. 26, 2007); Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 74 Fed. Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 5, 2009).

  9. Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2014-03-01

    Annual reports on Federal energy management respond to section 548 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619), as amended, and provide information on energy consumption in Federal buildings, operations, and vehicles. Compiled by the Federal Energy Management Program, these reports document activities conducted by Federal agencies under the: Energy management and energy consumption requirements of section 543 of NECPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 8253); Energy savings performance contract authority of section 801 of NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 8287-8287d); Renewable energy purchase goal of section 203 of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 15852); Federal building performance standard requirements under Section 109 of EPAct 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 6834(a)); Requirements on the procurement and identification of energy efficient products under section 161 of EPAct 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-486 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 8262g); Sections 431, 432, and 434 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Pub. L. No. 110-140 (42 U.S.C. § 8253) and section 527 of EISA (42 U.S.C. § 17143); Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, 72 Fed. Reg. 3,919 (Jan. 26, 2007); Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 74 Fed. Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 5, 2009).

  10. ENERGY STAR PortfolioManager Baseline Year Instructions

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

    Baseline Year" Time frame Select "Multiple Properties" Using filters, choose properties to include in report Check box to Select all filtered properties Select these reporting items for the template Generate a new report using the template you created Once the report has been generated, download it as an Excel file Open downloaded "Baseline Year" report, select all and copy In report spreadsheet, choose the "Baseline

  11. ENERGY STAR PortfolioManager Current Year Instructions

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

    Current Year" Time frame Select "Multiple Properties" Using filters, choose properties to include in report Check box to Select all filtered properties Select these reporting items for the template Generate a new report using the template you created Once the report has been generated, download it as an Excel file Open downloaded "Current Year" report, select all and copy In report spreadsheet, choose the "Current

  12. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    25 Females 10 YEAR 2014 SES 1 EN 04 11 NN (Engineering) 8 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 13 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 1 African American Female (AA F) 3 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 0 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 0 Hispanic Female (H F) 0 White Male (W M) 24 White Female (W F) 6 TOTAL WORKFORCE GENDER Kansas City

  13. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    17 Females 18 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 EJ/EK 3 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 30 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 1 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 2 African American Male (AA M) 3 African American Female (AA F) 7 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 2 Hispanic Female (H F) 6 White Male (W M) 10 White Female (W F) 3 DIVERSITY TOTAL WORKFORCE GENDER Associate

  14. Annual Report on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2010

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

    Annual Report on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2010 Report to Congress March 2014 United States Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Department of Energy |March 2014 Message from the Assistant Secretary We are enclosing the Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs, Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. This report on Federal energy management for FY 2010 provides information on energy consumption in Federal

  15. Purchasing and Materials Management Organization, Sandia National Laboratories annual report, fiscal year 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martin, D.R.

    1994-02-01

    This report summarizes the purchasing and transportation activities of the Purchasing and Materials Management Organization for Fiscal Year 1993. Activities for both the New Mexico and California locations are included.

  16. DOE's Rocky Flats Cleanup Site Named 2006 Project of the Year By Project Management Institute

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that the Project Management Institute (PMI) has awarded its 2006 Project of the Year to DOE's Rocky Flats Environmental...

  17. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2005

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

    on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2005 September 26, 2006 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................E-1 I. Overview of Federal Energy Consumption and Costs ................................................1 A. Standard

  18. ORISE: ORAU-managed beryllium lab marks outstanding year in 2013

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    ORAU-managed beryllium lab marks outstanding year in 2013 Lab managed for DOE achieves zero error rate in beryllium lymphocyte proliferation test FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 3, 2014 FY14-16 OAK RIDGE, Tenn.-For the second time in recent years, the Beryllium Testing Laboratory, managed by ORAU for the Department of Energy, performed flawlessly by processing nearly 4,100 beryllium lymphocyte proliferation tests (BeLPTs) in 2013, without a single error. The laboratory is one of only three

  19. Oak Ridge National Laboratory Waste Management Plan, fiscal year 1994. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Turner, J.W.

    1993-12-01

    US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5820.2A was promulgated in final form on September 26, 1988. The order requires heads of field organizations to prepare and to submit updates on the waste management plans for all operations under their purview according to the format in Chap. 6, {open_quotes}Waste Management Plan Outline.{close_quotes} These plans are to be submitted by the DOE Oak Ridge Operations Office (DOE-ORO) in December of each year and distributed to the DP-12, ES&H-1, and other appropriate DOE Headquarters (DOE-HQ) organizations for review and comment. This document was prepared in response to this requirement for fiscal year (FY) 1994. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) waste management mission is reduction, collection, storage, treatment, and disposal of DOE wastes, generated primarily in pursuit of ORNL missions, in order to protect human health and safety and the environment. In carrying out this mission, waste management staff in the Waste Management and Remedial Action Division (WMRAD) will (1) guide ORNL in optimizing waste reduction and waste management capabilities and (2) conduct waste management operations in a compliant, publicly acceptable, technically sound, and cost-efficient manner. Waste management requirements for DOE radioactive wastes are detailed in DOE Order 5820.2A, and the ORNL Waste Management Program encompasses all elements of this order. The requirements of this DOE order and other appropriate DOE orders, along with applicable Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and regulations, provide the principal source of regulatory guidance for waste management operations at ORNL. The objective of this document is compilation and consolidation of information on how the ORNL Waste Management Program is conducted, which waste management facilities are being used to manage wastes, what activities are planned for FY 1994, and how all of the activities are documented.

  20. Re-engineering the Federal planning process: A total Federal planning strategy, integrating NEPA with modern management tools

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eccleston, C.H.

    1997-09-05

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 was established by Congress more than a quarter of a century ago, yet there is a surprising lack of specific tools, techniques, and methodologies for effectively implementing these regulatory requirements. Lack of professionally accepted techniques is a principal factor responsible for many inefficiencies. Often, decision makers do not fully appreciate or capitalize on the true potential which NEPA provides as a platform for planning future actions. New approaches and modem management tools must be adopted to fully achieve NEPA`s mandate. A new strategy, referred to as Total Federal Planning, is proposed for unifying large-scale federal planning efforts under a single, systematic, structured, and holistic process. Under this approach, the NEPA planning process provides a unifying framework for integrating all early environmental and nonenvironmental decision-making factors into a single comprehensive planning process. To promote effectiveness and efficiency, modem tools and principles from the disciplines of Value Engineering, Systems Engineering, and Total Quality Management are incorporated. Properly integrated and implemented, these planning tools provide the rigorous, structured, and disciplined framework essential in achieving effective planning. Ultimately, the goal of a Total Federal Planning strategy is to construct a unified and interdisciplinary framework that substantially improves decision-making, while reducing the time, cost, redundancy, and effort necessary to comply with environmental and other planning requirements. At a time when Congress is striving to re-engineer the governmental framework, apparatus, and process, a Total Federal Planning philosophy offers a systematic approach for uniting the disjointed and often convoluted planning process currently used by most federal agencies. Potentially this approach has widespread implications in the way federal planning is approached.

  1. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Notice_LEHR_CERCLA_FiveYearReview

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    > Notice_LEHR_CERCLA_FiveYearReview Notice of LEHR CERCLA Five-Year Review The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) is conducting the first Five-Year Review of the remedies for the environmental cleanup of the DOE areas of the former Laboratory for Energy-Related Health Research (LEHR) at the University of California, Davis, under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). DOE successfully completed removal actions at DOE

  2. Management Challenges at the Department of Energy … Fiscal Year 2012, IG-0858

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Special Report Management Challenges at the Department of Energy DOE/IG-0858 November 2011 Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 November 10, 2011 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM: Gregory H. Friedman Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: "Management Challenges at the Department of Energy - Fiscal Year 2012" INTRODUCTION Responsible for executing some of the Nation's most complex and technologically advanced missions, the Department of Energy faces an array of challenges that

  3. Savannah River Site`s Site Specific Plan. Environmental restoration and waste management, fiscal year 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-08-01

    This Site Specific Plan (SSP) has been prepared by the Savannah River Site (SRS) in order to show the Environmental Restoration and Waste Management activities that were identified during the preparation of the Department of Energy-Headquarters (DOE-HQ) Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Five-Year Plan (FYP) for FY 1992--1996. The SSP has been prepared in accordance with guidance received from DOE-HQ. DOE-SR is accountable to DOE-HQ for the implementation of this plan. The purpose of the SSP is to develop a baseline for policy, budget, and schedules for the DOE Environmental Restoration and Waste Management activities. The plan explains accomplishments since the Fiscal Year (FY) 1990 plan, demonstrates how present and future activities are prioritized, identifies currently funded activities and activities that are planned to be funded in the upcoming fiscal year, and describes future activities that SRS is considering.

  4. Office of Legacy Management: The First Five Years FY 2004¬タモ2008

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    S . D E PA R T M E NT O F U. S . D E PA R T M E NT O F ENERGY ENERGY Managing Today's Change, Protecting Tomorrow's Future Managing Today's Change, Protecting Tomorrow's Future DOE/LM-1461 Office of Legacy Management FY 2004-2008 The First Five Years Front cover photos top to bottom: Rocky Flats, Colorado, site and the Fernald Preserve Visitors Center in Ohio. Back cover photos top to bottom: Pinellas, Florida, site and the Rifle, Colorado, site. This report covers the time period from December

  5. DOE Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review | Department of

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Energy DOE Office of Environmental Management 2015 Year in Review Version Available for Download "I am proud of all of the work we in EM-both at headquarters and in the field-have accomplished this year. While facing the most complex cleanup challenges, measurable progress was made in 2015-a testament to our skilled workforce. The considerable investment made in cleanup this year has led to strong results across the EM complex. The foundation and planning put in place this year will

  6. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    69 YEAR 2014 Males 34 Females 35 YEAR 2014 SES 5 EJEK 1 EN 05 8 EN 04 5 NN (Engineering) 27 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 22 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska...

  7. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    42 YEAR 2014 Males 36 Females 6 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 2 EJEK 5 EN 05 7 EN 04 6 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 15 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 6 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male...

  8. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 YEAR 2012 Males 65 Females 29 YEAR 2012 SES 3 EJEK 5 EN 04 3 NN (Engineering) 21 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 61 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American...

  9. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 YEAR 2011 Males 21 Females 23 YEAR 2011 SES 3 EJEK 1 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 3 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 31 NU (TechAdmin Support) 5 YEAR 2011 American Indian Male 0 American...

  10. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    92 YEAR 2012 Males 52 Females 40 YEAR 2012 SES 1 EJEK 7 EN 04 13 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 27 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 38 NU (TechAdmin Support) 5 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0...

  11. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    558 YEAR 2013 Males 512 Females 46 YEAR 2013 SES 2 EJEK 2 EN 04 1 NN (Engineering) 11 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 220 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 NV (Nuc Mat Courier) 321 YEAR 2013...

  12. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    11 YEAR 2012 Males 78 Females 33 YEAR 2012 SES 2 EJEK 9 EN 05 1 EN 04 33 NN (Engineering) 32 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 31 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 2...

  13. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    300 YEAR 2011 Males 109 Females 191 YEAR 2011 SES 9 EJEK 1 NN (Engineering) 2 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 203 NU (TechAdmin Support) 38 NF (Future Ldrs) 47 YEAR 2011 American Indian...

  14. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    02 YEAR 2011 Males 48 Females 54 YEAR 2011 SES 5 EJEK 1 NN (Engineering) 13 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 80 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2011 American Indian Male 0 American Indian...

  15. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 YEAR 2013 Males 27 Females 11 YEAR 2013 SES 1 EN 05 1 EN 04 11 NN (Engineering) 8 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 15 NU (TechAdmin Support) 2 YEAR 2013 American Indian Alaska Native Male...

  16. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    31 YEAR 2013 Males 20 Females 11 YEAR 2013 SES 2 EN 04 4 NN (Engineering) 12 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 12 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2013 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,...

  17. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    16 YEAR 2012 Males 84 Females 32 YEAR 2012 SES 26 EJEK 2 EN 05 9 NN (Engineering) 39 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 30 NU (TechAdmin Support) 10 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American...

  18. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    34 YEAR 2012 Males 66 Females 68 YEAR 2012 SES 6 NN (Engineering) 15 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 110 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 1 American Indian Female 2...

  19. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    86 YEAR 2012 Males 103 Females 183 YEAR 2012 SES 7 EJEK 1 NN (Engineering) 1 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 202 NU (TechAdmin Support) 30 NF (Future Ldrs) 45 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male...

  20. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    80 YEAR 2012 Males 51 Females 29 YEAR 2012 SES 1 EJEK 22 EN 04 21 NN (Engineering) 14 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 21 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American...

  1. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    1 YEAR 2012 Males 30 Females 11 YEAR 2012 SES 1 EN 05 1 EN 04 11 NN (Engineering) 9 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 17 NU (TechAdmin Support) 2 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American...

  2. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    96 YEAR 2013 Males 69 Females 27 YEAR 2013 SES 1 EJEK 9 EN 04 27 NN (Engineering) 26 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 30 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2013 American Indian Alaska Native Male...

  3. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    31 YEAR 2012 Males 19 Females 12 YEAR 2012 SES 2 EN 04 4 NN (Engineering) 12 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 12 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American Indian...

  4. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    0 YEAR 2013 Males 48 Females 32 YEAR 2013 SES 2 EJEK 7 EN 04 11 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 23 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 33 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2013 American Indian Alaska...

  5. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    40 YEAR 2011 Males 68 Females 72 YEAR 2011 SES 5 EJEK 1 NN (Engineering) 16 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 115 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2011 American Indian Male 1 American Indian...

  6. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    00 YEAR 2012 Males 48 Females 52 YEAR 2012 SES 5 EJEK 1 NN (Engineering) 11 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 80 NU (TechAdmin Support) 3 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American Indian...

  7. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    137 YEAR 2013 Males 90 Females 47 YEAR 2013 SES 2 SL 1 EJEK 30 EN 04 30 EN 03 2 NN (Engineering) 23 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 45 NU (TechAdmin Support) 4 YEAR 2013 American Indian...

  8. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    of Employees 14 GENDER YEAR 2012 Males 9 Females 5 YEAR 2012 SES 2 EJEK 2 NN (Engineering) 4 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 6 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American Indian Female 0...

  9. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    3 YEAR 2012 Males 21 Females 22 YEAR 2012 SES 3 EJEK 1 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 3 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 30 NU (TechAdmin Support) 5 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 0 American...

  10. Determination of total and isotopic uranium by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry at the Fernald Environmental Management Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miller, F.L.; Bolin, R.N.; Feller, M.T.; Danahy, R.J.

    1995-04-01

    At the Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) in southwestern Ohio, ICP-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), with sample introduction by peristaltic pumping, is used to determine total and isotopic uranium (U-234, U-235, U-236 and U-238) in soil samples. These analyses are conducted in support of the environmental cleanup of the FEMP site. Various aspects of the sample preparation and instrumental analysis will be discussed. Initial sample preparation consists of oven drying to determine moisture content, and grinding and rolling to homogenize the sample. This is followed by a nitric/hydrofluoric acid digestion to bring the uranium in the sample into solution. Bismuth is added to the sample prior to digestion to monitor for losses. The total uranium (U-238) content of this solution and the U{sup 235}/U{sup 238} ratio are measured on the first pass through the ICP-MS. To determine the concentration of the less abundant U{sup 234} and U{sup 236} isotopes, the digestate is further concentrated by using Eichrom TRU-Spec extraction columns before the second pass through the ICP-MS. Quality controls for both the sample preparation and instrumental protocols will also be discussed. Finally, an explanation of the calculations used to report the data in either weight percent or activity units will be given.

  11. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2004

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

    and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2004 February 24, 2006 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Overview of Federal Energy Consumption and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 A. Standard Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 B. Industrial, Laboratory and Other Energy Intensive

  12. Fiscal Year 2013 Trails Management Program Mitigation Action Plan Annual Report, October 2013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pava, Daniel S.

    2015-03-25

    This Trails Management Program Mitigation Action Plan Annual Report (Trails MAPAR) has been prepared for the Department of Energy (DOE)/National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) as part of implementing the 2003 Final Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Los Alamos National Laboratory Trails Management Program (DOE 2003). The Trails Mitigation Action Plan (MAP) is now a part of the Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of Los Alamos National Laboratory (DOE/EIS 0380) Mitigation Action Plan (2008 SWEIS MAP) (DOE 2008). The MAP provides guidance for the continued implementation of the Trails Management Program at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and integration of future mitigation actions into the 2008 SWEIS MAP to decrease impacts associated with recreational trails use at LANL. This eighth MAPAR includes a summary of Trails Management Program activities and actions during Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, from October 2012 through September 2013.

  13. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Males 139 Females 88 YEAR 2012 SES 13 EX 1 EJEK 8 EN 05 23 EN 04 20 EN 03 2 NN (Engineering) 91 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 62 NU (TechAdmin Support) 7 YEAR 2012 American Indian...

  14. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    563 YEAR 2012 Males 518 Females 45 YEAR 2012 SES 1 EJEK 2 EN 04 1 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 12 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 209 NU (TechAdmin Support) 2 NV (Nuc Mat Courier) 335 YEAR 2012...

  15. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    7 YEAR 2012 Males 64 Females 33 YEAR 2012 SES 2 EJEK 3 EN 05 1 EN 04 30 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 26 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 32 NU (TechAdmin Support) 2 YEAR 2012 American Indian...

  16. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 YEAR 2012 Males 37 Females 7 YEAR 2012 SES 1 EJEK 6 EN 05 5 EN 04 7 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 17 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 6 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male 2...

  17. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    7 YEAR 2011 Males 38 Females 9 YEAR 2011 SES 1 EJEK 6 EN 05 5 EN 04 7 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 19 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 7 NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 YEAR 2011 American Indian Male 2...

  18. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 YEAR 2013 Males 62 Females 26 YEAR 2013 SES 1 EJEK 3 EN 05 1 EN 04 28 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 25 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 27 NU (TechAdmin Support) 2 YEAR 2013 American Indian...

  19. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    6 YEAR 2012 Males 64 Females 32 YEAR 2012 SES 1 EJEK 5 EN 05 3 EN 04 23 EN 03 9 NN (Engineering) 18 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 33 NU (TechAdmin Support) 4 YEAR 2012 American Indian...

  20. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5 YEAR 2013 Males 58 Females 27 YEAR 2013 SES 1 EJEK 4 EN 05 3 EN 04 21 EN 03 8 NN (Engineering) 16 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 28 NU (TechAdmin Support) 4 YEAR 2013 American Indian...

  1. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    78 YEAR 2012 Males 57 Females 21 YEAR 2012 SES 2 SL 1 EJEK 12 EN 04 21 EN 03 2 NN (Engineering) 12 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 24 NU (TechAdmin Support) 4 YEAR 2012 American Indian Male...

  2. Year

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

    Note: Total may not equal sum of components because of independent rounding. Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration, Form 7000-2, 'Quarterly Mine ...

  3. Hanford Site Environmental Safety and Health Fiscal Year 2001 Budget-Risk management summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    REEP, I.E.

    1999-05-12

    The Hanford Site Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Budget-Risk Management Summary report is prepared to support the annual request to sites in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Complex by DOE, Headquarters. The request requires sites to provide supplementary crosscutting information related to ES&H activities and the ES&H resources that support these activities. The report includes the following: (1) A summary status of fiscal year (FY) 1999 ES&H performance and ES&H execution commitments; (2)Status and plans of Hanford Site Office of Environmental Management (EM) cleanup activities; (3) Safety and health (S&H) risk management issues and compliance vulnerabilities of FY 2001 Target Case and Below Target Case funding of EM cleanup activities; (4) S&H resource planning and crosscutting information for FY 1999 to 2001; and (5) Description of indirect-funded S&H activities.

  4. Total quality management (TQM) and the future of the environmental industry: Integration of quality tools and techniques among competing interests

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bicknell, B.A.; Bicknell, K.D. )

    1993-01-01

    One of the most difficult problems facing industry, regulators, consultants and attorneys involved in the environmental arena is the lack of a functional method of prioritization of the seemingly unreconcilable interests of the varying entities involved in waste reduction, elimination and cleanup. This paper and presentation will address this problem by presenting methodology for problem solving that can be adopted by the competing interests to form a unified systems analysis that has enjoyed widespread use and success in both commercial business and industry, and other regulated government industries such as defense, aerospace and communication. The authors will employ specific examples of case studies with focus on hazardous waste reduction and how the quality tools and techniques commonly referred to as Total Quality Management (such as Quality Function Deployment, Experimental Design, Statistical Process Control and Functional Analysis) are and can be utilized in the process. The authors will illustrate the application of TQM techniques to areas such as process integration (e.g. implementation of the NEPA decision-making), as well as functional implementation in risk assessment, cost analysis and concurrent engineering (in the case of waste minimization technology development).

  5. Management Challenges at the Department of Energy … Fiscal Year 2014

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    4 DOE/IG-0899 November 2013 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audits & Inspections Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 November 26, 2013 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM: Gregory H. Friedman Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: Special Report on "Management Challenges at the Department of Energy - Fiscal Year 2014" BACKGROUND The Department of Energy executes some of the Nation's most complex and technologically advanced missions. Since the

  6. Management Challenges at the Department of Energy … Fiscal Year 2015

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    5 DOE/IG-0924 October 2014 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audits and Inspections Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 October 7, 2014 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM: Gregory H. Friedman Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: "Management Challenges at the Department of Energy - Fiscal Year 2015" INTRODUCTION The Department of Energy is responsible for executing some of the Nation's most complex and technologically advanced missions. These

  7. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2012 Males 149 Females 115 YEAR 2012 SES 17 EX 1 EJEK 7 EN 05 2 EN 04 9 EN 03 2 NN (Engineering) 56 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 165 NU (TechAdmin Support) 4 GS 13 1 YEAR 2012 American...

  8. Annual report to Congress on Federal Government energy management and conservation programs, Fiscal year 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-10-06

    This report provides sinformation on energy consumption in Federal buildings and operations and documents activities conducted by Federal agencies to meet statutory requirements of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act. It also describes energy conservation and management activities of the Federal Government under section 381 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. Implementation activities undertaken during FY94 by the Federal agencies under the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and Executive Orders 12759 and 12902 are also described. During FY94, total (gross) energy consumption of the US Government, including energy consued to produce, process, and transport energy, was 1.72 quadrillion Btu. This represents {similar_to}2.0% of the total 85.34 quads used in US.

  9. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5 YEAR 2014 Males 61 Females 24 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 EJ/EK 8 EN 04 22 NN (Engineering) 23 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 28 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 2 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 3 African American Male (AA M) 0 African American Female (AA F) 0 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 3 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 13 Hispanic Female (H F) 10 White Male (W M) 43 White Female (W F) 11

  10. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    93 YEAR 2014 Males 50 Females 43 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 EJ/EK 3 NN (Engineering) 13 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 74 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 2 African American Male (AA M) 5 African American Female (AA F) 6 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 0 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 6 Hispanic Female (H F) 14 White Male (W M) 39 White Female (W F) 21 DIVERSITY

  11. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5 YEAR 2014 Males 92 Females 43 YEAR 2014 SES 8 EX 1 EJ/EK 4 EN 05 9 EN 04 12 EN 03 2 NN (Engineering) 57 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 42 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 1 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 9 African American Female (AA F) 11 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 4 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 2 Hispanic Male (H M) 12 Hispanic Female (H F) 7 White Male (W M) 66 White Female (W F) 22 PAY PLAN

  12. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    563 YEAR 2014 Males 517 Females 46 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 2 EJ/EK 2 EN 04 1 NN (Engineering) 11 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 218 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 NV (Nuc Mat Courier) 327 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 14 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 2 African American Male (AA M) 18 African American Female (AA F) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 8 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 2 Hispanic Male (H M) 76 Hispanic Female (H F) 21 White Male

  13. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    89 YEAR 2014 Males 98 Females 91 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 14 EX 1 EJ/EK 3 EN 05 1 EN 04 4 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 32 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 130 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 GS 15 1 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 1 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 0 African American Male (AA M) 5 African American Female (AA F) 14 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 3 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 7 Hispanic Male (H M) 7 Hispanic Female (H F) 10 White Male

  14. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    43 YEAR 2014 Males 162 Females 81 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 26 EJ/EK 3 EN 05 7 NN (Engineering) 77 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 108 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 22 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 5 African American Female (AA F) 9 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 2 Hispanic Female (H F) 0 White Male (W M) 154 White Female (W F)

  15. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    74 YEAR 2014 Males 96 Females 78 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 8 EJ/EK 4 EN 04 11 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 34 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 113 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 2 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 3 African American Female (AA F) 11 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 5 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 25 Hispanic Female (H F) 25 White Male (W M) 61 White

  16. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    26 YEAR 2014 Males 81 Females 45 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 SL 1 EJ/EK 25 EN 04 26 EN 03 2 NN (Engineering) 23 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 44 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 4 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 3 African American Female (AA F) 7 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 4 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 1 Hispanic Male (H M) 6 Hispanic Female (H F) 6 White Male (W M) 68 White

  17. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    1 YEAR 2014 Males 48 Females 33 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 EJ/EK 8 EN 04 10 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 27 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 29 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 5 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 3 African American Male (AA M) 0 African American Female (AA F) 2 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 2 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 12 Hispanic Female (H F) 12 White Male (W M) 34 White Female

  18. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 YEAR 2014 Males 18 Females 10 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 EN 05 1 EN 04 4 NN (Engineering) 12 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 9 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 4 African American Female (AA F) 4 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 0 Hispanic Male (H M) 0 Hispanic Female (H F) 0 White Male (W M) 13 White Female (W F) 5

  19. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 YEAR 2014 Males 18 Females 20 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 3 EJ/EK 1 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 3 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 28 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 0 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 0 African American Male (AA M) 1 African American Female (AA F) 1 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 0 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 1 Hispanic Male (H M) 4 Hispanic Female (H F) 7 White Male (W M) 13 White Female (W F) 11

  20. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    9 Females 24 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 EJ/EK 4 EN 05 3 EN 04 22 EN 03 8 NN (Engineering) 15 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 27 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 2 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 5 African American Female (AA F) 2 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 21 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 2 Hispanic Male (H M) 5 Hispanic Female (H F) 3 White Male (W M) 26 White Female (W F) 16

  1. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 Females 25 PAY PLAN YEAR 2014 SES 1 EJ/EK 3 EN 05 1 EN 04 25 EN 03 1 NN (Engineering) 25 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 25 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 YEAR 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN M) 1 American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN F) 1 African American Male (AA M) 3 African American Female (AA F) 3 Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI M) 2 Asian American Pacific Islander Female (AAPI F) 2 Hispanic Male (H M) 6 Hispanic Female (H F) 6 White Male (W M) 46 White Female (W F) 13

  2. Fuel Cell Technologies Program Multi-Year Research, Development and Demonstration Plan - Section 6.0 Program Management

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

    Program Management Multi-Year Research, Development and Demonstration Plan Page 6 - 1 6.0 Program Management and Operations The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program (the Program) is composed of activities within the Offices of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE); Fossil Energy (FE); Nuclear Energy (NE); and Science (SC). EERE's Fuel Cell Technologies Program (FCT Program) represents the major component of this effort. The FCT Program Manager manages the

  3. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    -9.09% YEAR 2012 2013 SES 1 1 0.00% EN 05 1 1 0.00% EN 04 11 11 0.00% NN (Engineering) 8 8 0.00% NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 17 14 -17.65% NU (TechAdmin Support) 2 2...

  4. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Females 863 YEAR 2013 SES 102 EX 3 SL 1 EJEK 89 EN 05 41 EN 04 170 EN 03 18 NN (Engineering) 448 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 1249 NU (TechAdmin Support) 76 NV (Nuc Mat Courier) 321...

  5. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Females 942 YEAR 2012 SES 108 EX 4 SL 1 EJEK 96 EN 05 45 EN 04 196 EN 03 20 NN (Engineering) 452 NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 1291 NU (TechAdmin Support) 106 NV (Nuc Mat Courier) 335...

  6. YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    YEAR 2012 2013 SES 2 1 -50.00% EN 05 0 1 100.00% EN 04 4 4 0.00% NN (Engineering) 13 12 -7.69% NQ (ProfTechAdmin) 13 9 -30.77% NU (TechAdmin Support) 1 1...

  7. A History of the Environmental Management Advisory Board: 20 Years of Service and Partnership - 13219

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ellis, Kristen; Schmitt, Elizabeth

    2013-07-01

    The Environmental Management Advisory Board (EMAB or Board) was chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) in 1992 to provide the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM) with independent and external advice, information, and recommendations on corporate issues relating to accelerated site clean-up and risk reduction throughout the EM complex. Over the course of the past 20 years, the composition and focus of the Board have varied widely to address the changing needs of the program. EMAB began as the Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Advisory Committee, formed to provide advice on an EM Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. In 1994, the Board was restructured to function more as an executive-level, limited member advisory board whose membership provides insight of leading industry experts and the viewpoints of representatives from critical stakeholder constituencies. Throughout the 20 years of its existence, EMAB has covered a wide variety of topics and produced nearly 200 recommendations. These recommendations have resulted in several policy changes and improvements within EM. Most recently, EMAB has been credited for its contribution to the EM Energy Park Initiative, forerunner of the DOE Asset Revitalization Initiative; creation of the EM Offices of Communications and External Affairs; improvement of acquisition and project management strategies and culture; and several recommendations related to the Waste Treatment Plant and the tank waste programs at Hanford and the Savannah River Site. The wealth of experience and knowledge the Assistant Secretary can leverage through utilization of the Board continues to support fulfillment of EM's mission. In commemoration of EMAB's 20. anniversary, this paper will provide further context for the evolution of the Board, the role FACA plays in its administration, and a look at the members' current objectives and EM's expectations for the future. (authors)

  8. Annual report: Purchasing and Materials Management Organization, Sandia National Laboratories, fiscal year 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zaeh, R.A.

    1993-04-01

    This report summarizes the purchasing and transportation activities of the Purchasing and Materials Management Organization for Fiscal Year 1992. Activities for both the New Mexico and California locations are included. Topics covered in this report include highlights for fiscal year 1992, personnel, procurements (small business procurements, disadvantaged business procurements, woman-owned business procurements, New Mexico commercial business procurements, Bay area commercial business procurements), commitments by states and foreign countries, and transportation activities. Also listed are the twenty-five commercial contractors receiving the largest dollar commitments, commercial contractors receiving commitments of $1,000 or more, integrated contractor and federal agency commitments of $1,000 or more from Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico and California, and transportation commitments of $1,000 or more from Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico and California.

  9. Science to Support DOE Site Cleanup: The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Environmental Management Science Program Awards-Fiscal Year 1999 Mid-Year Progress Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Peurrung, L.M.

    1999-06-30

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was awarded ten Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) research grants in fiscal year 1996, six in fiscal year 1997, and eight in fiscal year 1998. This section summarizes how each grant addresses significant U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) cleanup issues, including those at the Hanford Site. The technical progress made to date in each of these research projects is addressed in more detail in the individual progress reports contained in this document. This research is focused primarily in five areas: Tank Waste Remediation, Decontamination and Decommissioning, Spent Nuclear Fuel and Nuclear Materials, Soil and Groundwater Clean Up, and Health Effects.

  10. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bush, S.

    2010-10-22

    The mission of the Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Environmental Management (EM) is to clean up the environmental legacy of nuclear weapons research and production during the Cold War. That mission includes cleaning up nuclear waste, contaminated groundwater and soil, nuclear materials, and contaminated facilities covering two million acres of land in thirty-five states. EM's principal program goals include timely completion of tank waste treatment facilities, reduction of the life-cycle costs and acceleration of the cleanup of the Cold War legacy, and reduction of the EM footprint. The mission of the EM Technology Innovation and Development program is to transform science and innovation into practical solutions to achieve the EM mission. During fiscal year 2010 (October 2009-September 2010), EM focused upon accelerating environmental cleanup by expeditiously filling identified gaps in available knowledge and technology in the EM program areas. This report describes some of the approaches and transformational technologies in tank waste processing, groundwater and soil remediation, nuclear materials disposition, and facility deactivation and decommissioning developed during fiscal year 2010 that will enable EM to meet its most pressing program goals.

  11. Science to support DOE site cleanup: The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Environmental Management Science Program awards. Fiscal year 1998 mid-year progress report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-05-01

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was awarded ten (10) Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) research grants in Fiscal Year 1996 and six (6) in Fiscal Year 1997. This section summarizes how each grant addresses significant US Department of Energy (DOE) cleanup issues, including those at the Hanford Site. The technical progress made to date in each of these research projects is addressed in more detail in the individual progress reports contained in this document. This research is focused primarily in four areas: Tank Waste Remediation, Spent Nuclear Fuel and Nuclear Materials, Soil and Groundwater Cleanup, and Health Effects.

  12. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2001

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

    1 February 4, 2004 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES . . . . . . 9 A. Overview of Federal Energy Management Policy and Legislative Mandates . . 9 B. Overall Federal Energy Consumption, Costs, and Carbon

  13. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2002

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

    2 September 29, 2004 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES . . . . . . 9 A. Overview of Federal Energy Management Policy and Legislative Mandates . . 9 B. Overall Federal Energy Consumption, Costs, and

  14. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs, Fiscal Year 1999

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

    1999 January 11, 2001 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES . . 7 A. Overview of Federal Energy Management Policy and Legislative Mandates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

  15. Fiscal Year 2007 Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Fee Adequacy Assessment Report

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    U.S. Department of Energy Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Fee Adequacy Assessment Report is to present an analysis of the adequacy of the fee being paid by nuclear power utilities...

  16. Science to Support DOE Site Cleanup: The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Environmental Management Science Program Awards -- Fiscal Year 2002 Mid-Year Progress Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bredt, Paul R.; Ainsworth, Calvin C.; Brockman, Fred J.; Camaioni, Donald M.; Egorov, Oleg B.; Felmy, Andrew R.; Gorby, Yuri A.; Grate, Jay W.; Greenwood, Margaret S.; Hay, Benjamin P.; Hess, Nancy J.; Hubler, Timothy L.; Icenhower, Jonathan P.; Mattigod, Shas V.; McGrail, B. Peter; Meyer, Philip D.; Murray, Christopher J.; Panetta, Paul D.; Pfund, David M.; Rai, Dhanpat; Su, Yali; Sundaram, S. K.; Weber, William J.; Zachara, John M.

    2002-06-11

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has been awarded a total of 80 Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) research grants since the inception of the program in 1996. The Laboratory has collaborated on an additional 14 EMSP awards with funding received through other institution. This report describes how each of the projects awarded in 1999, 2000, and 2001 addresses significant U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) cleanup issues, including those at the Hanford Site. The technical progress made to date in each of these research projects is addressed in the individual project reports included in this document. Projects are under way in three main areas: Tank Waste Remediation, Decontamination and Decommissioning, and Soil and Groundwater Cleanup.

  17. 40 Years Of Dogger Aquifer Management In Ile-De-France, Paris...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    in the Paris Basin for more than 40 years. The most serious difficulties have been corrosion and scaling related problems that occurred in many geothermal loops in the...

  18. Annual Report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs Fiscal Year 2003

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

    3 August 9, 2005 U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Federal Energy Management Program Washington, DC 20585 i TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Overview of Federal Energy Consumption and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 A. Standard Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 B. Industrial, Laboratory and Other Energy Intensive Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C. Exempt

  19. Information management fiscal year 1996 site support program plan, WBS 6.4. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-09-01

    In the recent past, information resource management (IRM) was a neatly separable component of the overall DOE mission, concerned primarily with procuring and implementing automatic data processing (ADP) systems. As the DOE missions have shifted from producing product to managing processes, those clear lines have blurred. Today, IRM is firmly embedded in all aspects of the DOE mission. BCS Richland, Inc., (BCSR) provides IRM for the Hanford Site. The main focus in executing this mission is to meet customer goals by providing high-quality, timely, and cost-effective electronic communication, computing, and information services. Information resources provide the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL) and the Hanford Site contractors the ability to generate, store, access, and communicate information quickly, reliably, and cost effectively. BCSR plans, implements, and operates electronic communication, computing and information management systems that enable effective operation of the Hanford Site. Five strategic initiatives to encompass the vision provide guidance and focus to the information technology (IT) direction for developing the BCSR program plan. These strategic initiatives are the program vision and are as follows: primary focus; fast response; accessible information; world class information management infrastructure; powerful desktop. The business directions that guide the development of the BCSR Program Plan are: (1) emphasize providing cost-effective and value-added communication, computing, and information systems products and services to the Site missions; (2) strengthen the alignment of products and services with Site projects and programs and eliminate duplications Sitewide; (3) focus on the effective resolution of critical Site information management (IM) issues.

  20. Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Site-Specific Plan for Fiscal Year 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-03-01

    The Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) is a US Department of Energy (DOE) multiprogram laboratory whose primary mission has been to research nuclear technologies. Working with these technologies and conducting other types of research generates waste, including radioactive and/or hazardous wastes. While most of the waste treatment, storage, and disposal practices have been effective, some practices have led to the release of contaminants to the environment. As a result, DOE has developed (1) an Environmental Restoration (ER) Program to identify and, where necessary, cleanup releases from inactive waste sites and (2) a Waste Management (WM) Program to safely treat, store, and dispose of DOE wastes generated from current and future activities in an environmentally sound manner. This document describes the plans for FY 1993 for the INEL`s ER and WM programs as managed by DOE`s Idaho Field Office (DOE-ID).

  1. Annual report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs, Fiscal Year 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1999-08-13

    In fulfillment of statutory requirements, this report provides information on energy consumption in Federal buildings and operations and also documents activities conducted by Federal agencies in fulfilling those requirements during Fiscal Year 1997.

  2. Annual report to Congress on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs, Fiscal Year 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2000-03-20

    In fulfillment of statutory requirements, this report provides information on energy consumption in Federal buildings and operations and also documents activities conducted by Federal agencies in fulfilling those requirements during Fiscal Year 1998.

  3. Annual Report on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs, Fiscal Year 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2014-03-01

    Annual reports on Federal energy management respond to section 548 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619), as amended, and provide information on energy consumption in Federal buildings, operations, and vehicles. Compiled by the Federal Energy Management Program, these reports document activities conducted by Federal agencies under the: Energy management and energy consumption requirements of section 543 of NECPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 8253); Energy savings performance contract authority of section 801 of NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 8287-8287d); Renewable energy purchase goal of section 203 of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 15852); Federal building performance standard requirements under Section 109 of EPAct 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 6834(a)); Requirements on the procurement and identification of energy efficient products under section 161 of EPAct 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-486 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 8262g); Sections 431, 432, and 434 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Pub. L. No. 110-140 (42 U.S.C. § 8253) and section 527 of EISA (42 U.S.C. § 17143); Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, 72 Fed. Reg. 3,919 (Jan. 26, 2007); Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 74 Fed. Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 5, 2009).

  4. Annual Report on Federal Government Energy Management and Conservation Programs, Fiscal Year 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2014-03-01

    Annual reports on Federal energy management respond to section 548 of the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619), as amended, and provide information on energy consumption in Federal buildings, operations, and vehicles. Compiled by the Federal Energy Management Program, these reports document activities conducted by Federal agencies under the: Energy management and energy consumption requirements of section 543 of NECPA, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 8253); Energy savings performance contract authority of section 801 of NECPA, Pub. L. No. 95-619, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 8287-8287d); Renewable energy purchase goal of section 203 of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 15852); Federal building performance standard requirements under Section 109 of EPAct 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 6834(a)); Requirements on the procurement and identification of energy efficient products under section 161 of EPAct 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-486 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 8262g); Sections 431, 432, and 434 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Pub. L. No. 110-140 (42 U.S.C. § 8253) and section 527 of EISA (42 U.S.C. § 17143); Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management, 72 Fed. Reg. 3,919 (Jan. 26, 2007); Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, 74 Fed. Reg. 52,117 (Oct. 5, 2009).

  5. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Fiscal Year 1994 annual report to Congress

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-05-01

    The events of Fiscal Year 1994 made it a notable year in OCRWN`s history. Highlights include formulation of a new program approach; intensive consultation with other parties to build confidence in that approach; the delivery, assembly, and initial testing of the tunnel boring machine that is now digging into Yucca Mountain; steps toward acquisition of a standardized multipurpose canister system and planning for the accompanying environmental impact statement; and solicitation, through a Federal Register notice, of utilities` and other interested parties` recommendations toward resolving key waste-acceptance issues.

  6. 2012-01 "Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request for LANL Environmental Management Work"

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Approved March 12, 2012 It is the intent of the NNMCAB to support FY 2014 funding for LANL at the full baseline level and to support additional funding from Headquarters/DOE through fiscal year 2015, in order to complete scope on the Consent Order schedule requirements, and to meet DOE/EM goals. It is also the intent of this Recommendation to comply with Teresa Tyborowskis (Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Program Planning and Budget) Memorandum for distribution, Fiscal Years 2014 through 2018 Initial Budget Formulation "Kick off", dated March 12, 2012.

  7. Waste Management at the Nevada Test Site Year 2002: Current Status

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, Bruce, D.; Gertz, Carl, P.; Clayton, Wendy, A.; Carilli, Jhon, T.; Crowe, Bruce M.

    2003-02-24

    The performance attributes of the U. S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office Low-level Radioactive Waste (LLW) disposal facilities located at the Nevada Test Site transcend those of any other LLW disposal site in the United States. Situated at the southern end of the Great Basin, 244 meters (800 feet) above the water table, the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) has utilized a combination of engineered shallow land disposal cells and deep augured shafts to dispose a variety of waste streams. These include high volume low-activity waste, classified material, and high-specific activity special case waste. Fifteen miles north of Area 5 is the Area 3 RWMS. Here bulk LLW disposal takes place in subsidence craters formed from underground testing of nuclear weapons. Earliest records indicate that documented LLW disposal activities have occurred at the Area 5 and Area 3 RWMSs since 1961 and 1968, respectively. However, these activities have only been managed under a formal program since 1978. This paper describes the technical attributes of the facilities, present and future capacities and capabilities, and provides a description of the process from waste approval to final disposition. The paper also summarizes the current status of the waste disposal operations.

  8. Waste Management at the Nevada Test Site Fiscal Year 2001 Current Status

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    B. D. Becker; W. A. Clayton; B. M. Crowe

    2002-05-01

    The performance objectives of the U. S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office (NNSA/NV) Low-level Radioactive Waste (LLW) disposal facilities located at the Nevada Test Site transcend those of any other radioactive waste disposal site in the United States. Situated at the southern end of the Great Basin, 244 meters (800 feet) above the water table, the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) has utilized a combination of engineered shallow land disposal cells and deep augured shafts to dispose a variety of waste streams. These include high volume low-activity waste, classified radioactive material, and high-specific-activity special case waste. Fifteen miles north of Area 5 is the Area 3 RWMS. Here bulk LLW disposal takes place in subsidence craters formed from underground testing of nuclear weapons. Earliest records indicate that documented LLW disposal activities have occurred at the Area 5 and Area 3 RWMSs since 1961 and 1 968, respectively. However, these activities have only been managed under a formal program since 1978. This paper describes the technical attributes of the facilities, present and future capacities and capabilities, and provides a description of the process from waste approval to final disposition. The paper also summarizes the current status of the waste disposal operations.

  9. Environmental Management at the Nevada Test Site Year 2001 Current Status

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, B. D.; Gertz, C. P.; Clayton, W. A.; Carilli, J. T.; DiSanza, E. F.; Wycoff, R. C.; Crowe, B. M.

    2002-02-26

    The performance objectives of the U. S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office Low-level Radioactive Waste (LLW) disposal facilities located at the Nevada Test Site transcend those of any other radioactive waste disposal site in the United States. Situated at the southern end of the Great Basin, 244 meters (800 feet) above the water table, the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) has utilized a combination of engineered shallow land disposal cells and deep augured shafts to dispose a variety of waste streams. These include high volume low-activity waste, classified material, and high-specific-activity special case waste. Fifteen miles north of Area 5 is the Area 3 RWMS. Here bulk LLW disposal takes place in subsidence craters formed from underground testing of nuclear weapons. Earliest records indicate that documented LLW disposal activities have occurred at the Area 5 and Area 3 RWMSs since 1961 and 1968, respectively. However, these activities have only been managed under a formal program since 1978. This paper describes the technical attributes of the facilities, present and future capacities and capabilities, and provides a description of the process from waste approval to final disposition. The paper also summarizes the current status of the waste disposal operations. Additionally, the Nevada Operations Office Environmental Restoration Division is responsible for identifying the nature and extent of contamination; determining its potential risk to the public and the environment; and performing the necessary corrective actions in compliance with guidelines and requirements. This paper summarizes just a few of the successes of the Nevada Operations Office projects.

  10. Stabilization Wedges and the Management of Global Carbon for the next 50 years

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Socolow, Robert [Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States

    2009-09-01

    More than 40 years after receiving a Ph.D. in physics, I am still working on problems where conservation laws matter. In particular, for the problems I work on now, the conservation of the carbon atom matters. I will tell the saga of an annual flow of 8 billion tons of carbon associated with the global extraction of fossil fuels from underground. Until recently, it was taken for granted that virtually all of this carbon will move within weeks through engines of various kinds and then into the atmosphere. For compelling environmental reasons, I and many others are challenging this complacent view, asking whether the carbon might wisely be directed elsewhere. To frame this and similar discussions, Steve Pacala and I introduced the 'stabilization wedge' in 2004 as a useful unit for discussing climate stabilization. Updating the definition, a wedge is the reduction of CO2 emissions by one billion tons of carbon per year in 2057, achieved by any strategy generated as a result of deliberate attention to global carbon. Each strategy uses already commercialized technology, generally at much larger scale than today. Implementing seven wedges should enable the world to achieve the interim goal of emitting no more CO2 globally in 2057 than today. This would place humanity, approximately, on a path to stabilizing CO2 at less than double the pre-industrial concentration, and it would put those at the helm in the following 50 years in a position to drive CO2 emissions to a net of zero in the following 50 years. Arguably, the tasks of the two half-centuries are comparably difficult.

  11. Management Letter on the Western Federal Power System's Fiscal Year 2013 Financial Statement Audit

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Letter on the Western Federal Power System's Fiscal Year 2013 Financial Statement Audit OAS-FS-15-04 December 2014 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audits and Inspections KPMG LLP Suite 800 1225 17th Street Denver, CO 80202-5598 KPMG LLP is a Delaware limited liability partnership, the U.S. member firm of KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International"), a Swiss entity. September 5, 2014 The Administrator of Western Area Power Administration and the

  12. Texas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's...

  13. Connecticut Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Connecticut Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  14. New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New York Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9...

  15. Texas Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Texas Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  16. North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet...

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  17. New York Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) New York Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8...

  18. West Virginia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries ...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) West Virginia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  19. Connecticut Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Connecticut Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  20. North Carolina Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) North Carolina Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7...

  1. 21 briefing pages total

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

    1 briefing pages total p. 1 Reservist Differential Briefing U.S. Office of Personnel Management December 11, 2009 p. 2 Agenda - Introduction of Speakers - Background - References/Tools - Overview of Reservist Differential Authority - Qualifying Active Duty Service and Military Orders - Understanding Military Leave and Earnings Statements p. 3 Background 5 U.S.C. 5538 (Section 751 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, March 11, 2009) (Public Law 111-8) Law requires OPM to consult with DOD Law

  2. management

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5%2A en Management and Budget http:www.nnsa.energy.govaboutusouroperationsmanagementandbudget

  3. HPSS Yearly Network Traffic

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    HPSS Yearly Network Traffic HPSS Yearly Network Traffic Yearly Summary of IO Traffic Between Storage and Network Destinations These bar charts show the total transfer traffic for...

  4. management

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5%2A en Management and Budget http:nnsa.energy.govaboutusouroperationsmanagementandbudget

    P...

  5. Performance Assurance for Multi-Year Contracts Under the Utility Incentive Program; Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) Fact Sheet

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

    Program Federal Energy Management Program Leading by example, saving energy and taxpayer dollars in federal facilities Fact Sheet Section 152(f) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT) Public Law 102-486 autho- rized and encouraged Federal agencies to participate in programs to increase energy efficiency and for water conservation or the management of electricity demand conducted by gas, water, or electric utili- ties. Additionally Title 10 Section 2913 and 10 USC 2866 (a) authorizes and

  6. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE CHERNOBYL EXCLUSION ZONE - 25 YEARS SINCE THE CHERNOBYL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ACCIDENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farfan, E.; Jannik, T.

    2011-10-01

    Radioactive waste management is an important component of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant accident mitigation and remediation activities of the so-called Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. This article describes the localization and characteristics of the radioactive waste present in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone and summarizes the pathways and strategy for handling the radioactive waste related problems in Ukraine and the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, and in particular, the pathways and strategies stipulated by the National Radioactive Waste Management Program. The brief overview of the radioactive waste issues in the ChEZ presented in this article demonstrates that management of radioactive waste resulting from a beyond-designbasis accident at a nuclear power plant becomes the most challenging and the costliest effort during the mitigation and remediation activities. The costs of these activities are so high that the provision of radioactive waste final disposal facilities compliant with existing radiation safety requirements becomes an intolerable burden for the current generation of a single country, Ukraine. The nuclear accident at the Fukushima-1 NPP strongly indicates that accidents at nuclear sites may occur in any, even in a most technologically advanced country, and the Chernobyl experience shows that the scope of the radioactive waste management activities associated with the mitigation of such accidents may exceed the capabilities of a single country. Development of a special international program for broad international cooperation in accident related radioactive waste management activities is required to handle these issues. It would also be reasonable to consider establishment of a dedicated international fund for mitigation of accidents at nuclear sites, specifically, for handling radioactive waste problems in the ChEZ. The experience of handling Chernobyl radioactive waste management issues, including large volumes of radioactive soils and complex structures of fuel containing materials can be fairly useful for the entire world's nuclear community and can help make nuclear energy safer.

  7. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    & Project Management (NA-APM) Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER PAY PLAN Change DIVERSITY Change 4.9% 1.8% 6.7% 0.6% 1.2% 19.5% 63.4% 1.8% Pay Plan...

  8. Barge Truck Total

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Barge Truck Total delivered cost per short ton Shipments with transportation rates over total shipments Total delivered cost per short ton Shipments with transportation rates over...

  9. Wanaket Wildlife Area Management Plan : Five-Year Plan for Protecting, Enhancing, and Mitigating Wildlife Habitat Losses for the McNary Hydroelectric Facility.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Wildlife Program

    2001-09-01

    The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) propose to continue to protect, enhance, and mitigate wildlife and wildlife habitat at the Wanaket Wildlife Area. The Wanaket Wildlife Area was approved as a Columbia River Basin Wildlife Mitigation Project by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) in 1993. This management plan will provide an update of the original management plan approved by BPA in 1995. Wanaket will contribute towards meeting BPA's obligation to compensate for wildlife habitat losses resulting from the construction of the McNary Hydroelectric facility on the Columbia River. By funding the enhancement and operation and maintenance of the Wanaket Wildlife Area, BPA will receive credit towards their mitigation debt. The purpose of the Wanaket Wildlife Area management plan update is to provide programmatic and site-specific standards and guidelines on how the Wanaket Wildlife Area will be managed over the next five years. This plan provides overall guidance on both short and long term activities that will move the area towards the goals, objectives, and desired future conditions for the planning area. The plan will incorporate managed and protected wildlife and wildlife habitat, including operations and maintenance, enhancements, and access and travel management. Specific project objectives are related to protection and enhancement of wildlife habitats and are expressed in terms of habitat units (HU's). Habitat units were developed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP), and are designed to track habitat gains and/or losses associated with mitigation and/or development projects. Habitat Units for a given species are a product of habitat quantity (expressed in acres) and habitat quality estimates. Habitat quality estimates are developed using Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI). These indices are based on quantifiable habitat features such as vegetation height, shrub cover, or other parameters, which are known to provide life history requisites for mitigation species. Habitat Suitability Indices range from 0 to 1, with an HSI of 1 providing optimum habitat conditions for the selected species. One acre of optimum habitat provides one Habitat Unit. The objective of continued management of the Wanaket Wildlife Mitigation Area, including protection and enhancement of upland and wetland/wetland associated cover types, is to provide and maintain 2,334 HU's of protection credit and generate 2,495 HU's of enhancement credit by the year 2004.

  10. Federal Offshore -- Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption...

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

    -- Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Federal Offshore -- Gulf of Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  11. Audit Report - Management Letter on the Audit of the Department of Energy's Consolidated Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 2012, OAS-FS-13-08

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    2 OAS-FS-13-08 January 2013 i MANAGEMENT LETTER December 17, 2012 Mr. Gregory Friedman Inspector General U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 5D-039 Washington, DC 20585 Dear Mr. Friedman: We have audited the consolidated financial statements and special-purpose financial statements of the United States Department of Energy (Department or DOE) as of and for the year ended September 30, 2012, and have issued our reports thereon dated November 14, 2012. In planning and

  12. Total Crude by Pipeline

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

    Product: Total Crude by All Transport Methods Domestic Crude by All Transport Methods Foreign Crude by All Transport Methods Total Crude by Pipeline Domestic Crude by Pipeline Foreign Crude by Pipeline Total Crude by Tanker Domestic Crude by Tanker Foreign Crude by Tanker Total Crude by Barge Domestic Crude by Barge Foreign Crude by Barge Total Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Domestic Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Foreign Crude by Tank Cars (Rail) Total Crude by Trucks Domestic Crude by Trucks Foreign

  13. Technical and management support for the development of Small Wind Systems. Fiscal year 1980 annual report, October 1, 1979-September 30, 1980

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-08-01

    The status and achievements of a program for the development, testing, and commercialization of wind energy systems rated under 100 kilowatts are described. The organization structure and task definition used to promote the production, marketing, and acceptance of small systems are described, and the Work Breakdown Structure under which the program is organized is detailed. Reports are given which describe the status of contracts funded by the Federal Wind Energy Program and managed by the Rocky Flats Wind Systems Program. These project reports, sequenced according to the Department of Energy Work Breakdown Structure, name the principal investigators involved, and discuss achievements and progress made during Fiscal Year 1980. Of fourty-four projects, seven were completed during the Fiscal Year. The Work Breakdown Structure Index details the organization sequence.

  14. ,"Total Natural Gas Consumption

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

    Gas Consumption (billion cubic feet)",,,,,"Natural Gas Energy Intensity (cubic feetsquare foot)" ,"Total ","Space Heating","Water Heating","Cook- ing","Other","Total ","Space...

  15. HPSS Yearly Network Traffic

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    HPSS Yearly Network Traffic HPSS Yearly Network Traffic Yearly Summary of I/O Traffic Between Storage and Network Destinations These bar charts show the total transfer traffic for each year between storage and network destinations (systems within and outside of NERSC). Traffic for the current year is an estimate derived by scaling the known months traffic up to 12 months. The years shown are calendar years. The first graph shows the overall growth in network traffic to storage over the years.

  16. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration...

  17. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    . Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per...

  18. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

    0. Fuel Oil Consumption (gallons) and Energy Intensities by End Use for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,,"Fuel Oil Energy Intensity...

  19. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    4. Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region, 1999" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per Gallon",,,,"per Square Foot"...

  20. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Revised: December, 2008 Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other All Buildings...

  1. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other All Buildings*...

  2. ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures

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

    A. Fuel Oil Expenditures by Census Region for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Expenditures (million dollars)",,,,"Fuel Oil Expenditures (dollars)" ,,,,,"per Gallon",,,,"per...

  3. ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption

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

    A. Fuel Oil Consumption (gallons) and Energy Intensities by End Use for All Buildings, 2003" ,"Total Fuel Oil Consumption (million gallons)",,,,,"Fuel Oil Energy Intensity...

  4. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    3 First Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Improvement Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2013 Target FY 2013 Final FY 2013 Pre- & Post-CAP Final Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 83% Construction 86% Cleanup 80% 70% Pre-CAP 84% Post-CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY11 to FY13). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  5. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Fourth Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Primary Performance Metrics FY 2010 Target FY 2010 Actual FY 2010 Pre- & Post-CAP Comment 1a. Capital Asset Line Item Projects: (Pre-RCA/CAP) 90% of projects completed within 110% of CD-2 TPC by FY11. 1b. Capital Asset Line Item Projects: (Post-RCA/CAP) 85% Line Item 69% Line Item 67% Pre-CAP 100% Post-CAP This is based on a 3-year rolling average (FY08 to FY10). TPC is Total

  6. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    First Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Primary Performance Metrics FY 2011 Target FY 2011 Actual & Forecast FY 2011 Pre- & Post-CAP Comment 1a. Capital Asset Line Item Projects: (Pre-RCA/CAP) Projects completed within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 1b. Capital Asset Line Item Projects: (Post-RCA/CAP) 90% Line Item 79% Line Item 71% Pre-CAP 100% Post-CAP This is based on a 3-year rolling average (FY09 to FY11). TPC is Total

  7. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    First Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Improvement Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2012 Target FY 2012 Forecast FY 2012 Pre- & Post-CAP Forecast Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 84% Construction 83% Cleanup 85% 77% Pre-CAP 86% Post- CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY10 to FY12). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  8. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Second Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Improvement Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2012 Target FY 2012 Forecast FY 2012 Pre- & Post-CAP Forecast Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 88% Construction 87% Cleanup 89% 77% Pre-CAP 92% Post- CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY10 to FY12). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  9. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Third Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Improvement Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2012 Target FY 2012 Forecast FY 2012 Pre- & Post-CAP Forecast Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 87% Construction 87% Cleanup 87% 77% Pre-CAP 90% Post- CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY10 to FY12). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  10. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Fourth Quarter Overall Contract and Project Management Improvement Performance Metrics and Targets 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2012 Target FY 2012 Final FY 2012 Pre- & Post-CAP Final Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 86% Construction 87% Cleanup 84% 77% Pre-CAP 89% Post-CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY10 to FY12). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Alaska - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S2. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alaska, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 269 277 185 R 159 170 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 127,417 112,268

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Connecticut - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S7. Summary statistics for natural gas - Connecticut, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 District of Columbia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S9. Summary statistics for natural gas - District of Columbia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Indiana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S16. Summary statistics for natural gas - Indiana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 620 914 819 R 921 895 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 6,802 9,075

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Maryland - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S22. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maryland, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7 8 9 7 7 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 43 34 44 32 20 From Oil

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Massachusetts - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S23. Summary statistics for natural gas - Massachusetts, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Minnesota - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S25. Summary statistics for natural gas - Minnesota, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Nebraska - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S29. Summary statistics for natural gas - Nebraska, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 276 322 270 R 357 310 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 2,092 1,854

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 New Hampshire - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S31. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Hampshire, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 North Carolina - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S35. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Carolina, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    50 North Dakota - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S36. Summary statistics for natural gas - North Dakota, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 188 239 211 200 200 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 South Carolina - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S42. Summary statistics for natural gas - South Carolina, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Washington - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S49. Summary statistics for natural gas - Washington, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    80 Wisconsin - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S51. Summary statistics for natural gas - Wisconsin, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  5. Parallel Total Energy

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2004-10-21

    This is a total energy electronic structure code using Local Density Approximation (LDA) of the density funtional theory. It uses the plane wave as the wave function basis set. It can sue both the norm conserving pseudopotentials and the ultra soft pseudopotentials. It can relax the atomic positions according to the total energy. It is a parallel code using MP1.

  6. Summary Max Total Units

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Summary Max Total Units *If All Splits, No Rack Units **If Only FW, AC Splits 1000 52 28 28 2000 87 59 35 3000 61 33 15 4000 61 33 15 Totals 261 153 93 ***Costs $1,957,500.00 $1,147,500.00 $697,500.00 Notes: added several refrigerants removed bins from analysis removed R-22 from list 1000lb, no Glycol, CO2 or ammonia Seawater R-404A only * includes seawater units ** no seawater units included *** Costs = (total units) X (estimate of $7500 per unit) 1000lb, air cooled split systems, fresh water

  7. Total Space Heat-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heat- ing Cool- ing Venti- lation Water Heat- ing Light- ing Cook- ing Refrig- eration Office Equip- ment Com- puters Other...

  8. ARM - Measurement - Total carbon

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    carbon 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 Measurement : Total carbon The total concentration of carbon in all its organic and non-organic forms. Categories Aerosols, Atmospheric Carbon Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a list of all available measurements, including

  9. FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Analysis of the Total System Life Cycle Cost (TSLCC) of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program presents the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management’s (OCRWM) May 2007 total...

  10. Total U.S......................................................

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

    ... Below Poverty Line Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption ... Below Poverty Line Age of Most-Used Refrigerator Less than 2 Years......

  11. WFR Totals by Fiscal Year of Employee Termination Date

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    323 1995 17,149 2,631 1994 21,039 56 1993 23,284 1,124 1992 24,591 1 1991 24,553 0 The work force at Savannah River Site has fluctuated in number due to changing missions and...

  12. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    93 504 619 838 259 22 YEARS OF FEDERAL SERVICE 16.8 874 535 594 308 24 EDUCATION J.D.Ph.DSc.D Degrees 91 Masters Degrees 737 Bachelors Degrees 792 715 National Nuclear...

  13. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    105 515 633 823 263 25 YEARS OF FEDERAL SERVICE 16.7 876 566 552 344 26 EDUCATION J.D.Ph.DSc.D Degrees 95 Masters Degrees 761 Bachelors Degrees 801 707 National Nuclear...

  14. Executive Branch Management Scorecard | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Branch Management Scorecard Executive Branch Management Scorecard PDF icon Executive Branch Management Scorecard More Documents & Publications Executive Branch Management Scorecard Slide 1 Three Year Rolling Timeline

  15. Implementing a Corporate Energy Management System

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

    Implementing a Corporate Energy Management System" Steve Schultz Corporate Energy Manager 3M Presented at the U.S. Department of Energy Industrial Technologies Program June 3, 2010 Webcast 3M - Solving Problems Everywhere  Operate companies in more than 65 countries  35 international companies with manufacturing operations, 35 with laboratories  In the United States, operations in 28 states  R&D and related expenditures total $6.861 billion for the last five years  More

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Alabama - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S1. Summary statistics for natural gas - Alabama, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,026 7,063 6,327 R 6,165 6,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Arkansas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S4. Summary statistics for natural gas - Arkansas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,397 8,388 8,538 R 9,843 10,150 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 California - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S5. Summary statistics for natural gas - California, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,580 1,308 1,423 R 1,335 1,118 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Colorado - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S6. Summary statistics for natural gas - Colorado, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 28,813 30,101 32,000 R 32,468 38,346 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Florida - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S10. Summary statistics for natural gas - Florida, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 17,182 16,459 19,742

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Georgia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S11. Summary statistics for natural gas - Georgia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Illinois - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S15. Summary statistics for natural gas - Illinois, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 50 40 40 R 34 36 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells E 1,697 2,114

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Iowa - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S17. Summary statistics for natural gas - Iowa, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0 0

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Kansas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S18. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kansas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 22,145 25,758 24,697 R 23,792 24,354 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Kentucky - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S19. Summary statistics for natural gas - Kentucky, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 17,670 14,632 17,936 R 19,494 19,256 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Louisiana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S20. Summary statistics for natural gas - Louisiana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 19,137 21,235 19,792 R 19,528 19,251 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  7. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Maine - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S21. Summary statistics for natural gas - Maine, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells 0 0

  8. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Michigan - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S24. Summary statistics for natural gas - Michigan, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 10,100 11,100 10,900 R 10,550 10,500 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  9. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Mississippi - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S26. Summary statistics for natural gas - Mississippi, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 1,979 5,732 1,669 R 1,967 1,645 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  10. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Missouri - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S27. Summary statistics for natural gas - Missouri, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 53 100 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 R 8 8 From

  11. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Montana - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S28. Summary statistics for natural gas - Montana, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,059 6,477 6,240 5,754 5,754 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  12. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Nevada - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S30. Summary statistics for natural gas - Nevada, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 R 4 4 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 3 From Oil Wells

  13. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 New Jersey - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S32. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Jersey, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil

  14. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 New Mexico - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S33. Summary statistics for natural gas - New Mexico, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,748 32,302 28,206 R 27,073 27,957 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From

  15. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 New York - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S34. Summary statistics for natural gas - New York, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,736 6,157 7,176 R 6,902 7,119 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  16. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Ohio - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S37. Summary statistics for natural gas - Ohio, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 34,931 46,717 35,104 R 32,664 32,967 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  17. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Oklahoma - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S38. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oklahoma, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,000 41,238 40,000 39,776 40,070 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas

  18. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Oregon - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S39. Summary statistics for natural gas - Oregon, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 26 24 27 R 26 28 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 1,407 1,344 770 770

  19. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Pennsylvania - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S40. Summary statistics for natural gas - Pennsylvania, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 44,500 54,347 55,136 R 53,762 70,400 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  20. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Rhode Island - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S41. Summary statistics for natural gas - Rhode Island, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From

  1. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    6 Tennessee - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S44. Summary statistics for natural gas - Tennessee, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 230 210 212 R 1,089 1,024 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 5,144

  2. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 Texas - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S45. Summary statistics for natural gas - Texas, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 95,014 100,966 96,617 97,618 98,279 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  3. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0 Utah - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S46. Summary statistics for natural gas - Utah, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 6,075 6,469 6,900 R 7,030 7,275 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 328,135

  4. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2 Vermont - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S47. Summary statistics for natural gas - Vermont, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 0 0 0 0 0 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells 0 0 0 0 0 From Oil Wells

  5. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Virginia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S48. Summary statistics for natural gas - Virginia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 7,470 7,903 7,843 R 7,956 7,961 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells

  6. Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    8 West Virginia - Natural Gas 2014 Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Million Cu. Feet Percent of National Total Total Net Movements: - Industrial: Dry Production: Vehicle Fuel: Deliveries to Consumers: Residential: Electric Power: Commercial: Total Delivered: Table S50. Summary statistics for natural gas - West Virginia, 2010-2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Number of Producing Gas Wells at End of Year 52,498 56,813 50,700 R 54,920 60,000 Production (million cubic feet) Gross Withdrawals

  7. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 2 1 4 9 4 0 20 25 57 37 PAY PLAN SES 7 EJ/EK 3 EN 04 11 EN 00 3 NN (Engineering) 30 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 102 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 Associate Administrator for Acquistion & Project Management (NA-APM) As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 159 87 54.7% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 45.3% SES EJ/EK EN 04 EN 00 NN NQ NU 4.4% 1.9% 6.9% 1.9% 18.9% 64.2% 1.9% 1.3% 0.6%

  8. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    7 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 2 2 6 1 0 0 5 9 4 PAY PLAN SES 1 EJ/EK 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 27 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 Associate Administrator for Information Management & Chief Information Officer (NA-IM) As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 30 13 43.3% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 56.7% SES EJ/EK NQ NU 3.3% 3.3% 90.0% 3.3% 3.3% 6.7% 6.7% 20.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 16.7% 30.0% 13.3% SUPERVISORS

  9. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 2 2 11 31 1 3 18 35 46 63 PAY PLAN SES 9 EJ/EK 1 EN 04 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 194 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 7 DIVERSITY 212 78 36.8% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 63.2% Associate Administrator for Management & Budget (NA-MB) As of March 21, 2015 SES EJ/EK EN 04 NQ NU 4.2% 0.5% 0.5% 91.5% 3.3% 0.9% 0.9% 5.2% 14.6% 0.5% 1.4% 8.5% 16.5% 21.7% 29.7% SUPERVISORS

  10. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    77 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 2 1 5 12 4 0 20 27 54 37 PAY PLAN SES 4 EJ/EK 2 EN 04 11 EN 03 3 EN 00 6 NN (Engineering) 29 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 104 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 Associate Administrator for Acquistion & Project Management (NA-APM) As of September 5, 2015 DIVERSITY 162 85 52.5% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 47.5% SES EJ/EK EN 04 EN 03 EN 00 NN NQ NU 2.5% 1.2% 6.8% 1.9% 3.7%

  11. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 2 2 4 1 0 0 5 10 4 PAY PLAN SES 1 EJ/EK 1 EN 05 1 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 25 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 DIVERSITY 29 14 48.3% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 51.7% Associate Administrator for Information Management & Chief Information Officer (NA-IM) As of September 5, 2015 SES EJ/EK EN 05 NQ NU 3.4% 3.4% 3.4% 86.2% 3.4% 3.4% 6.9% 6.9% 13.8% 3.4% 0.0% 0.0% 17.2%

  12. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    31 Females Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 2 11 31 1 4 18 34 45 60 PAY PLAN SES 8 EJ/EK 1 EN 04 2 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 189 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 7 DIVERSITY 207 76 36.7% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 63.3% Associate Administrator for Management & Budget (NA-MB) As of September 5, 2015 SES EJ/EK EN 04 NQ NU 3.9% 0.5% 1.0% 91.3% 3.4% 0.5% 1.0% 5.3% 15.0% 0.5% 1.9% 8.7% 16.4% 21.7% 29.0% Prepared by

  13. Total Sales of Kerosene

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

    End Use: Total Residential Commercial Industrial Farm All Other Period: Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: End Use Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 269,010 305,508 187,656 81,102 79,674 137,928 1984-2014 East Coast (PADD 1) 198,762 237,397 142,189 63,075 61,327 106,995 1984-2014 New England (PADD 1A) 56,661 53,363 38,448 15,983 15,991 27,500 1984-2014 Connecticut 8,800 7,437

  14. U.S. Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Deliveries (Percent) U.S. Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2000's 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 2010's 100 100 100 100 100 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages: Share of Total U.S. Natural Gas

  15. TotalView Training 2015

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    TotalView Training 2015 TotalView Training 2015 NERSC will host an in-depth training course on TotalView, a graphical parallel debugger developed by Rogue Wave Software, on...

  16. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Second Quarter Overall Root Cause Analysis (RCA)/Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Performance Metrics 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2013 Target FY 2013 Forecast FY 2013 Pre- & Post-CAP* Forecast Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 83% Construction 85% Cleanup 80% 70% Pre-CAP 84% Post-CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY11 to FY13). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  17. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    3 Third Quarter Overall Root Cause Analysis (RCA)/Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Performance Metrics 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2013 Target FY 2013 Forecast FY 2013 Pre- & Post-CAP* Forecast Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90%* 83% Construction 85% Cleanup 80% 70% Pre-CAP 84% Post-CAP This is based on a 3- year rolling average (FY11 to FY13). TPC is Total Project Cost.

  18. Contract/Project Management

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Fourth Quarter Overall Root Cause Analysis (RCA)/Corrective Action Plan (CAP) Performance Metrics 1 Contract/Project Management Performance Metric FY 2013 Target FY 2013 Actual FY 2013 Pre- & Post-CAP* Actual Comment Capital Asset Project Success: Complete 90% of capital asset projects at original scope and within 110% of CD-2 TPC. 90% 83% Construction 84% Cleanup 82% 70% Pre-CAP 84% Post-CAP Based on 3-year rolling period (FY11 to FY13) of 93 projects. TPC is Total Project Cost.

  19. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    1 3 0 0 0 0 23 6 PAY PLAN SES 1 EN 05 1 EN 04 10 NN (Engineering) 7 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 15 Kansas City Field Office As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 34 24 70.6% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 29.4% SES EN 05 EN 04 NN NQ 2.9% 2.9% 29.4% 20.6% 44.1% 0.0% 2.9% 2.9% 8.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 67.6% 17.6% SUPERVISORS DISABILITY 2 SUPERVISORS RATIO VETERANS 9 RETIREMENT AGE 49.2 1 5 8 16 4 0 YEARS OF FEDERAL SERVICE 16.7 11 8 13 2 0 EDUCATION

  20. TOTAL WORKFORCE Males

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2 4 1 0 0 0 12 5 PAY PLAN SES 1 EN 05 1 EN 04 3 NN (Engineering) 10 NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 9 NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 Savannah River Field Office As of March 21, 2015 DIVERSITY 25 15 60.0% American Indian Alaska Native African American Asian American Pacific Islander Hispanic White 40.0% SES EN 05 EN 04 NN NQ NU 4.0% 4.0% 12.0% 40.0% 36.0% 4.0% 0.0% 4.0% 8.0% 16.0% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 48.0% 20.0% SUPERVISORS DISABILITY 1 SUPERVISORS RATIO VETERANS 4 RETIREMENT AGE 49.7 1 5 3 13 3 0 YEARS OF

  1. Management Letter on the Department of Energy's Isotope Development and Production for Research and Applications Program's Fiscal Year 2009 Balance Sheet Audit, OAS-FS-12-09

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    09 Balance Sheet Audit OAS-FS-12-09 June 2012 January 30, 2012 Mr. Gregory Friedman, Inspector General Dr. Jehanne Gillo, Director, Facilities and Project Management Division, Office of Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Dear Mr. Friedman and Dr. Gillo: We have audited the balance sheet of the United States Department of Energy's (Department or DOE) Isotope Development and Production for Research and Applications Program (the Program) (a component of the Department)

  2. Determination of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Using Total Carbon Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ekechukwu, A.A.

    2002-05-10

    Several methods have been proposed to replace the Freon(TM)-extraction method to determine total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) content. For reasons of cost, sensitivity, precision, or simplicity, none of the replacement methods are feasible for analysis of radioactive samples at our facility. We have developed a method to measure total petroleum hydrocarbon content in aqueous sample matrixes using total organic carbon (total carbon) determination. The total carbon content (TC1) of the sample is measured using a total organic carbon analyzer. The sample is then contacted with a small volume of non-pokar solvent to extract the total petroleum hydrocarbons. The total carbon content of the resultant aqueous phase of the extracted sample (TC2) is measured. Total petroleum hydrocarbon content is calculated (TPH = TC1-TC2). The resultant data are consistent with results obtained using Freon(TM) extraction followed by infrared absorbance.

  3. Geothermal Technologies Program Multi-Year Research, Development...

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

    Management Geothermal Technologies Program Multi-Year Research, Development and Demonstration Plan: Program Management The Geothermal Technologies Program Multi-Year Research,...

  4. Building America Teams Technical Quality Management

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

    Building America Teams Technical Quality Management 2015 Building Technologies Office Peer Review Stacey Rothgeb, stacey.rothgeb@nrel.gov National Renewable Energy Laboratory Project Summary Timeline: Start date: October 1, 2009 (FY10) Planned end date: September 30, 2014 Key Milestones 1. FY2014 Annual Report; 9/30/2014 2. Monthly Status Reporting; 15 th of the month Budget: Total DOE $ in FY15: $1,200,000 Total DOE $ from FY10-FY14: $6,440,000 Total future DOE $: $7,685,000 for 3 years

  5. Teaching Managers How to Manage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hylko, J.M.

    2006-07-01

    Following graduation from a college or university with a technical degree, or through years of experience, an individual's training and career development activities typically focus on enhancing technical problem-solving skills. However, as these technical professionals, herein referred to as 'Techies', advance throughout their careers, they may be required to accept and adapt to the role of being a manager, and must undergo a transition to learn and rely on new problem-solving skills. However, unless a company has a specific manager-trainee class to address this subject and develop talent from within, an employee's management style is learned and developed 'on the job'. Both positive and negative styles are nurtured by those managers having similar qualities. Unfortunately, a negative style often contributes to the deterioration of employee morale and ultimate closing of a department or company. This paper provides the core elements of an effective management training program for 'Teaching Managers How to Manage' derived from the Department of Energy's Integrated Safety Management System and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration 's Voluntary Protection Program. Discussion topics and real-life examples concentrate on transitioning an employee from a 'Techie' to a manager; common characteristics of being a manager; the history and academic study of management; competition, change and the business of waste management; what to do after taking over a department by applying Hylko's Star of Success; command media; the formal and informal organizational charts; chain of command; hiring and developing high-degree, autonomous employees through effective communication and delegation; periodic status checks; and determining if the program is working successfully. These common characteristics of a strong management/leadership culture and practical career tips discussed herein provide a solid foundation for any company or department that is serious about developing an effective management training program for its employees. In turn, any employee in any work environment can begin using this information immediately if they want to become a better manager. (authors)

  6. U.S. Total Exports

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

    Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Buffalo, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Sweetgrass, MT Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Egypt Freeport, TX Total to India Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Japan Cameron, LA Freeport, TX Kenai, AK Port Nikiski, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Mexico Douglas, AZ Nogales, AZ Sasabe, AZ Calexico, CA Ogilby Mesa, CA Otay Mesa, CA San

  7. U.S. Total Exports

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

    Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Buffalo, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Sweetgrass, MT Total to Chile Sabine Pass, LA Total to China Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Egypt Freeport, TX Total to India Freeport, TX Sabine Pass, LA Total to Japan Cameron, LA Kenai, AK Sabine Pass, LA Total to Mexico Douglas, AZ Nogales, AZ Sasabe, AZ Calexico, CA Ogilby Mesa, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX Clint, TX Del Rio, TX Eagle Pass,

  8. Google Archives by Fiscal Year — FEMP

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    From the EERE Web Statistics Archive: Federal Energy Management Program, retired Google Analytics profiles for the sites by fiscal year.

  9. Total Eolica | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Eolica Jump to: navigation, search Name: Total Eolica Place: Spain Product: Project developer References: Total Eolica1 This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding...

  10. Total........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    111.1 24.5 1,090 902 341 872 780 441 Census Region and Division Northeast............................................. 20.6 6.7 1,247 1,032 Q 811 788 147 New England.................................... 5.5 1.9 1,365 1,127 Q 814 748 107 Middle Atlantic.................................. 15.1 4.8 1,182 978 Q 810 800 159 Midwest................................................ 25.6 4.6 1,349 1,133 506 895 810 346 East North Central............................ 17.7 3.2 1,483 1,239 560 968 842 351

  11. Total...........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Q Table HC3.2 Living Space Characteristics by Owner-Occupied Housing Units, 2005 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Million U.S. Housing Units Owner- Occupied Housing Units (millions) Type of Owner-Occupied Housing Unit Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units Apartments in Buildings With-- Living Space Characteristics Detached Attached Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Table HC3.2 Living Space

  12. Total...........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Q Million U.S. Housing Units Renter- Occupied Housing Units (millions) Type of Renter-Occupied Housing Unit U.S. Housing Units (millions Single-Family Units Apartments in Buildings With-- Living Space Characteristics Detached Attached Table HC4.2 Living Space Characteristics by Renter-Occupied Housing Units, 2005 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Energy Information Administration 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Preliminary Housing Characteristics Tables Million U.S. Housing

  13. Total............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

  14. Total.............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer........... 35.5 17.1 10.8 4.2 1.8 1.6 10.3 20.6 Use a Personal Computer....................... 75.6 9.6 18.0 16.4 11.3 20.3 6.4 17.9 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model.................................. 58.6 7.6 14.2 13.1 9.2 14.6 5.0 14.5 Laptop Model...................................... 16.9 2.0 3.8 3.3 2.1 5.7 1.3 3.5 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2 Hours..............................

  15. Total..............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ,171 1,618 1,031 845 630 401 Census Region and Division Northeast................................................... 20.6 2,334 1,664 562 911 649 220 New England.......................................... 5.5 2,472 1,680 265 1,057 719 113 Middle Atlantic........................................ 15.1 2,284 1,658 670 864 627 254 Midwest...................................................... 25.6 2,421 1,927 1,360 981 781 551 East North Central.................................. 17.7 2,483 1,926 1,269

  16. Total..............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................ 17.8 5.3 4.7 2.8 1.9 3.1 3.6 7.5 Have Cooling Equipment............................. 93.3 21.5 24.1 17.8 11.2 18.8 13.0 31.1 Use Cooling Equipment.............................. 91.4 21.0 23.5 17.4 11.0 18.6 12.6 30.3 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............. 1.9 0.5 0.6 0.4 Q Q 0.5 0.8 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.......................................... 65.9 11.0 16.5 13.5 8.7 16.1 6.4 17.2 Without a Heat

  17. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    20.6 25.6 40.7 24.2 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 6.9 8.1 14.2 6.4 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 13.7 17.5 26.6 17.8 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 9.3 11.9 18.2 11.0 2.......................................................... 16.2 2.9 3.5 5.5 4.4 3 or More............................................. 9.0 1.5 2.1 2.9 2.5 Number of Laptop PCs

  18. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 14.2 7.2 2.8 4.2 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 26.6 14.5 4.1 7.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 18.2 10.0 2.9 5.3 2.......................................................... 16.2 5.5 3.0 0.7 1.8 3 or More............................................. 9.0 2.9 1.5 0.5 0.8 Number of Laptop PCs

  19. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    26.7 28.8 20.6 13.1 22.0 16.6 38.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 17.1 10.8 4.2 1.8 1.6 10.3 20.6 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 9.6 18.0 16.4 11.3 20.3 6.4 17.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 8.3 14.2 11.4 7.2 9.2 5.3 14.2 2.......................................................... 16.2 0.9 2.6 3.7 2.9 6.2 0.8 2.6 3 or More............................................. 9.0 0.4 1.2

  20. Total...............................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    47.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ........... 35.5 16.9 6.5 4.6 7.6 Use a Personal Computer......................... 75.6 30.3 12.5 18.1 14.7 Number of Desktop PCs 1.......................................................... 50.3 21.1 8.3 10.7 10.1 2.......................................................... 16.2 6.2 2.8 4.1 3.0 3 or More............................................. 9.0 2.9 1.4 3.2 1.6 Number of Laptop PCs

  1. Total.................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    49.2 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................... 93.3 31.3 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Use Cooling Equipment................................ 91.4 30.4 14.6 15.4 11.1 6.9 5.2 7.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............... 1.9 1.0 0.5 Q Q Q Q Q Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................... 17.8 17.8 N N N N N N Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System............................................. 65.9 3.9 15.1 15.6 11.1 7.0 5.2 8.0 Without a Heat

  2. Total.................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment........ 1.2 N Q Q 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment........... 109.8 14.7 7.4 12.4 12.2 18.5 18.3 17.1 9.2 Use Main Space Heating Equipment............. 109.1 14.6 7.3 12.4 12.2 18.2 18.2 17.1 9.1 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It............... 0.8 Q Q Q Q 0.3 Q N Q Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas................................................... 58.2 9.2 4.9 7.8 7.1 8.8 8.4 7.8 4.2 Central

  3. Total..................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    78.1 64.1 4.2 1.8 2.3 5.7 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 11.3 9.3 0.6 Q 0.4 0.9 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 66.8 54.7 3.6 1.7 1.9 4.8 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 65.8 54.0 3.6 1.7 1.9 4.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 1.1 0.8 Q N Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................. 65.9 51.7 43.9 2.5 0.7 1.6 3.1 Without a Heat

  4. Total..................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    33.0 8.0 3.4 5.9 14.4 1.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 6.5 1.6 0.9 1.3 2.4 0.2 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 26.5 6.5 2.5 4.6 12.0 1.0 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 25.7 6.3 2.5 4.4 11.7 0.8 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 0.8 Q Q 0.2 0.3 Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................. 65.9 14.1 3.6 1.5 2.1 6.4 0.6 Without a Heat

  5. Total..................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    . 111.1 14.7 7.4 12.5 12.5 18.9 18.6 17.3 9.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment..................... 17.8 3.9 1.8 2.2 2.1 3.1 2.6 1.7 0.4 Have Cooling Equipment................................. 93.3 10.8 5.6 10.3 10.4 15.8 16.0 15.6 8.8 Use Cooling Equipment.................................. 91.4 10.6 5.5 10.3 10.3 15.3 15.7 15.3 8.6 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it................. 1.9 Q Q Q Q 0.6 0.4 0.3 Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central

  6. Total...................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    15.2 7.8 1.0 1.2 3.3 1.9 For Two Housing Units............................. 0.9 Q N Q 0.6 N Heat Pump.................................................. 9.2 7.4 0.3 Q 0.7 0.5 Portable Electric Heater............................... 1.6 0.8 Q Q Q 0.3 Other Equipment......................................... 1.9 0.7 Q Q 0.7 Q Fuel Oil........................................................... 7.7 5.5 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.2 Steam or Hot Water System........................ 4.7 2.9 Q 0.7 0.8 N For One Housing

  7. Total...................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System............................................... 65.9 47.5 4.0 2.8 7.9 3.7 Without a Heat Pump.................................. 53.5 37.8 3.4 2.2 7.0 3.1 With a Heat Pump....................................... 12.3 9.7 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.6 Window/Wall Units.......................................... 28.9 14.9 2.3 3.5 6.0 2.1 1 Unit........................................................... 14.5 6.6 1.0 1.6 4.2 1.2 2

  8. Total...................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................. 65.9 47.5 4.0 2.8 7.9 3.7 Without a Heat Pump.................................. 53.5 37.8 3.4 2.2 7.0 3.1 With a Heat Pump....................................... 12.3 9.7 0.6 0.5 1.0 0.6 Window/Wall Units........................................ 28.9 14.9 2.3 3.5 6.0 2.1 1 Unit........................................................... 14.5 6.6 1.0 1.6 4.2 1.2 2

  9. Total.......................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.6 15.1 5.5 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 6.9 5.3 1.6 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 13.7 9.8 3.9 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 9.3 6.8 2.5 2.................................................................. 16.2 2.9 1.9 1.0 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 1.5 1.1 0.4 Number of Laptop PCs

  10. Total.......................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 8.1 5.6 2.5 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 17.5 12.1 5.4 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 11.9 8.4 3.4 2.................................................................. 16.2 3.5 2.2 1.3 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 2.1 1.5 0.6 Number of Laptop PCs

  11. Total.......................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer ................... 35.5 6.4 2.2 4.2 Use a Personal Computer................................ 75.6 17.8 5.3 12.5 Number of Desktop PCs 1.................................................................. 50.3 11.0 3.4 7.6 2.................................................................. 16.2 4.4 1.3 3.1 3 or More..................................................... 9.0 2.5 0.7 1.8 Number of Laptop PCs

  12. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q 0.7 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 20.5 25.6 40.3 23.4 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 20.5 25.6 40.1 22.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N Q 0.6 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 11.4 18.4 13.6 14.7 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 6.1

  13. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 20.5 15.1 5.4 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 20.5 15.1 5.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 11.4 9.1 2.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 6.1 5.3 0.8 For One Housing

  14. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q N Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 25.6 17.7 7.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 25.6 17.7 7.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 18.4 13.1 5.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 16.2 11.6 4.7 For One Housing

  15. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q N Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 40.3 21.4 6.9 12.0 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 40.1 21.2 6.9 12.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 Q Q N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 13.6 5.6 2.3 5.7 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 11.0 4.4

  16. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 0.7 Q 0.7 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 23.4 7.5 16.0 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 22.9 7.4 15.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 0.6 Q 0.5 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 14.7 4.6 10.1 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 11.4 4.0 7.4 For One

  17. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 Q Q Q 0.2 Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 7.1 6.8 7.9 11.9 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 7.1 6.6 7.9 11.4 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 N Q N 0.5 Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 3.8 0.4 3.8 8.4 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7 1.8 Q 3.1 6.0

  18. Total........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Do Not Have Space Heating Equipment............... 1.2 0.7 Q 0.2 Q Have Main Space Heating Equipment.................. 109.8 46.3 18.9 22.5 22.1 Use Main Space Heating Equipment.................... 109.1 45.6 18.8 22.5 22.1 Have Equipment But Do Not Use It...................... 0.8 0.7 Q N N Main Heating Fuel and Equipment Natural Gas.......................................................... 58.2 27.0 11.9 14.9 4.3 Central Warm-Air Furnace................................ 44.7

  19. Total...........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.6 15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 4.0 2.4 1.7 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 16.5 12.8 3.8 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 16.3 12.6 3.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 0.3 Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 6.0 5.2 0.8 Without a Heat

  20. Total...........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 2.1 1.8 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 23.5 16.0 7.5 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 23.4 15.9 7.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 Q Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 17.3 11.3 6.0 Without a Heat

  1. Total...........................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................. 17.8 10.3 3.1 7.3 Have Cooling Equipment.......................................... 93.3 13.9 4.5 9.4 Use Cooling Equipment........................................... 91.4 12.9 4.3 8.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it.......................... 1.9 1.0 Q 0.8 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 10.5 3.9 6.5 Without a Heat

  2. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 4.0 2.1 1.4 10.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 16.5 23.5 39.3 13.9 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 16.3 23.4 38.9 12.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.3 Q 0.5 1.0 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5 Without a Heat

  3. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 1.2 1.0 0.2 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 4.0 2.7 1.2 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 7.9 5.4 2.5 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 6.0 4.8 1.2 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.6 0.5 Q Less Than Once a

  4. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 1.4 1.0 0.4 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 5.8 3.5 2.3 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 10.7 7.8 2.9 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 5.6 4.0 1.6 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.9 0.6 0.3 Less Than Once a

  5. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 2.1 1.8 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 23.5 16.0 7.5 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 23.4 15.9 7.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 Q Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 17.3 11.3 6.0 Without a Heat

  6. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 39.3 20.9 6.7 11.8 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 38.9 20.7 6.6 11.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.5 Q Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a Heat

  7. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Cooking Appliances Frequency of Hot Meals Cooked 3 or More Times A Day......................................... 8.2 2.6 0.7 1.9 2 Times A Day...................................................... 24.6 6.6 2.0 4.6 Once a Day........................................................... 42.3 8.8 2.9 5.8 A Few Times Each Week...................................... 27.2 4.7 1.5 3.1 About Once a Week.............................................. 3.9 0.7 Q 0.6 Less Than Once a

  8. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 10.3 3.1 7.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 13.9 4.5 9.4 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 12.9 4.3 8.5 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 1.0 Q 0.8 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 10.5 3.9 6.5 Without a Heat

  9. Total.............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Do Not Have Cooling Equipment............................... 17.8 8.5 2.7 2.6 4.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................................ 93.3 38.6 16.2 20.1 18.4 Use Cooling Equipment............................................. 91.4 37.8 15.9 19.8 18.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................ 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................ 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5 Without a Heat

  10. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    20.6 25.6 40.7 24.2 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 4.0 2.1 1.4 10.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 16.5 23.5 39.3 13.9 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 16.3 23.4 38.9 12.9 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.3 Q 0.5 1.0 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 6.0 17.3 32.1 10.5

  11. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.7 21.7 6.9 12.1 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 39.3 20.9 6.7 11.8 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 38.9 20.7 6.6 11.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.5 Q Q Q Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 32.1 17.6 5.2 9.3 Without a

  12. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    111.1 7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer .......................... 35.5 3.0 2.0 2.7 3.1 Use a Personal Computer....................................... 75.6 4.2 5.0 5.3 9.0 Number of Desktop PCs 1......................................................................... 50.3 3.1 3.4 3.4 5.4 2......................................................................... 16.2 0.7 1.1 1.2 2.2 3 or More............................................................ 9.0 0.3

  13. Total..............................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................ 17.8 8.5 2.7 2.6 4.0 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 38.6 16.2 20.1 18.4 Use Cooling Equipment.............................................. 91.4 37.8 15.9 19.8 18.0 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System........................................................... 65.9 25.8 10.9 16.6 12.5

  14. Total.................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ... 111.1 20.6 15.1 5.5 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................. 17.8 4.0 2.4 1.7 Have Cooling Equipment............................................. 93.3 16.5 12.8 3.8 Use Cooling Equipment............................................... 91.4 16.3 12.6 3.7 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................. 1.9 0.3 Q Q Type of Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.......................................................... 65.9 6.0 5.2 0.8 Without a Heat

  15. Total.................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Do Not Have Cooling Equipment................................... 17.8 1.8 Q Q 4.9 Have Cooling Equipment................................................ 93.3 5.3 7.0 7.8 7.2 Use Cooling Equipment................................................. 91.4 5.3 7.0 7.7 6.6 Have Equipment But Do Not Use it............................... 1.9 Q N Q 0.6 Air-Conditioning Equipment 1, 2 Central System.............................................................. 65.9 1.1 6.4 6.4 5.4 Without a

  16. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    25.6 40.7 24.2 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 6.9 8.1 14.2 6.4 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 13.7 17.5 26.6 17.8 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 10.4 14.1 20.5 13.7 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 3.3 3.4 6.1 4.1 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  17. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    5.6 17.7 7.9 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 8.1 5.6 2.5 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 17.5 12.1 5.4 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 14.1 10.0 4.0 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 3.4 2.1 1.3 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  18. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 14.2 7.2 2.8 4.2 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 26.6 14.5 4.1 7.9 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 20.5 11.0 3.4 6.1 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 6.1 3.5 0.7 1.9 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  19. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4.2 7.6 16.6 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 6.4 2.2 4.2 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 17.8 5.3 12.5 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 13.7 4.2 9.5 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 4.1 1.1 3.0 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  20. Total....................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    111.1 47.1 19.0 22.7 22.3 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer.................................. 35.5 16.9 6.5 4.6 7.6 Use a Personal Computer.............................................. 75.6 30.3 12.5 18.1 14.7 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model......................................................... 58.6 22.9 9.8 14.1 11.9 Laptop Model............................................................. 16.9 7.4 2.7 4.0 2.9 Hours Turned on Per Week Less than 2

  1. Total.........................................................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    ..... 111.1 7.1 7.0 8.0 12.1 Personal Computers Do Not Use a Personal Computer...................................... 35.5 3.0 2.0 2.7 3.1 Use a Personal Computer.................................................. 75.6 4.2 5.0 5.3 9.0 Most-Used Personal Computer Type of PC Desk-top Model............................................................. 58.6 3.2 3.9 4.0 6.7 Laptop Model................................................................. 16.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 2.4 Hours Turned on Per Week Less

  2. Total..........................................................

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    ... 2.0 0.4 Q 0.3 Basements Basement in Single-Family Homes and Apartments in 2-4 Unit Buildings Yes......

  3. Total..........................................................

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Housing Units Living Space Characteristics Attached 2 to 4 Units 5 or More Units Mobile Homes Apartments in Buildings With-- Housing Units (millions) Single-Family Units Detached...

  4. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Living Space Characteristics Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 Million ... Living Space Characteristics Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 Million ...

  5. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More 60,000 to 79,999 ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More 60,000 to 79,999 ...

  6. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC7.4 Space Heating Characteristics by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 80,000 or More Space Heating ...

  7. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC7.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by Household Income, 2005 Below Poverty Line ... Below Poverty Line Eligible for Federal Assistance 1 40,000 to 59,999 60,000 to 79,999 ...

  8. Total..........................................................

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

    Income Relative to Poverty Line Below 100 Percent......1.3 1.2 0.8 0.4 1. Below 150 percent of poverty line or 60 percent of median State ...

  9. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC13.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by South Census Region, 2005 Million U.S. Housing Units South Census Region Home Appliances Usage Indicators South Atlantic East ...

  10. Total..........................................................

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

    ... Table HC8.10 Home Appliances Usage Indicators by UrbanRural Location, 2005 Million U.S. Housing Units UrbanRural Location (as Self-Reported) Housing Units (millions) Home ...

  11. Total..............................................

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

    ... 14.8 10.5 2,263 1,669 1,079 1,312 1,019 507 N N N ConcreteConcrete Block... 5.3 3.4 2,393 1,660 1,614 Q Q Q Q Q Q Composition...

  12. EERE Fiscsal Year 2014 Annual Report

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

    28 WEB HOSTING AND CONTENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS EERE COMMUNICATIONS | 05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WEBSITE TRANSITION GOVERNANCE EERE TOTAL ENERGY SAVER NEWS SOCIAL MEDIA VIDEO WEB ...

  13. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Million Barrels) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Alaska (with Total Offshore) Crude Oil Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's NA NA 806 932 2000's 511 389 546 734 707 595 442 400 529 633 2010's 622 566 802 639 548 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 11/19/2015

  14. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Reserves (Million Barrels) Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 10 1980's 0 0 0 0 19 1 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 36 16 0 2 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  15. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Based Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 0 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1990's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000's 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010's 0 20 20 16 0 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  16. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Expected Future Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 13 1980's 11 10 9 8 0 382 381 418 401 380 1990's 340 360 347 321 301 306 337 631 320 299 2000's 277 405 405 387 369 352 338 325 312 299 2010's 288 288 288 288 241 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  17. Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Production (Million Barrels) Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Alaska (with Total Offshore) Natural Gas Plant Liquids, Reserves Based Production (Million Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 1 1980's 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 16 20 17 1990's 18 24 27 27 26 30 33 35 24 21 2000's 22 20 20 18 18 17 14 13 13 13 2010's 11 11 11 11 17 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual

  18. Single-Center Experience and 1-Year Follow-up Results of 'Sandwich Technique' in the Management of Common Iliac Artery Aneurysms During EVAR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ricci, Carmelo; Ceccherini, Claudio Cini, Marco; Vigni, Francesco; Leonini, Sara; Tommasino, Giulio; Muzzi, Luigi; Tucci, Enrico; Benvenuti, Antonio; Neri, Eugenio

    2012-10-15

    Purpose: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) accompanied by common iliac artery (CIA) aneurysms requires a more demanding procedure owing to the difficulties in obtaining an adequate distal landing zone for the stent-graft limb(s), a potential site of endoleak. The 'sandwich technique' is a procedure to increase EVAR feasibility in the setting of adverse or challenging CIA anatomy. Its main advantages include no restrictions in terms of CIA diameter or length or internal iliac artery (IIA) diameter, no need to wait for a specific stent-graft. Our purpose is to describe our single-center experience and one year follow-up results of this new procedure. Materials and Methods: From April 2009 to June 2010, the sandwich technique was performed in our institution in 7 patients treated for AAA and unilateral CIA aneurysms (n. 5) or bilateral CIA aneurysms (n. 2). Inclusion criteria were the presence of unilateral or bilateral CIA aneurysm (independently from its diameter), IIA artery measuring up to 9 mm in its maximum diameter, not dilatation of IIA and EIA. Results: The mean follow-up length was 15 months (range: 14-20 months). All stent-implanted iliac branches remained patent on 1 year follow-up and IIA flow was preserved. None of the patients had symptoms of pelvic ischemia. CT scan follow-up showed aneurysm shrinkage in five patients, without any sign of endoleaks in all cases. Conclusions: In selected cases, the 'sandwich technique' showed good outcomes confirming to be a safe and easy to perform way to overcome anatomical constraints and expanding the limits of EVAR.

  19. Geothermal Technologies Program Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request Presentation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DOE

    2012-03-13

    Geothermal Technologies Program fiscal year 2103 budget request presentation by Doug Hollett, Program Manager.

  20. Small business report to Congress for fiscal year 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-01

    This report describes the various programs of the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization designed to ensure small businesses have an equitable opportunity to do business with the Department of Energy. In addition, this report covers 33 organizational components of the Department and details the extent to which small business firms are participating in the procurement process as well as efforts taken to ensure continued involvement. During fiscal year 1992, the Department met or exceeded its percentage and dollar goals for 8(a) concerns, labor surplus area set-asides, and for-subcontracting to small businesses. The Department`s contract awards to small businesses totaled $3.1 billion (17.3 percent of the 18.1 billion the Department spent on contracts), which consisted of Departmental prime contracts and management and operating contracts. During fiscal year 1992, the Department awarded contracts totaling $307 million to small disadvantaged businesses under Section 8(a) of the U.S. Small Business Act. This total represents 1.7 percent of all prime contracts over $25,000 awarded by the Department during that period. The Department and its management and operating contractors awards to women-owned businesses and labor surplus area set-asides totaled $327 million and $596 million, respectively. The achievements in small business subcontracting for fiscal year 1992 was $234 million, including $23 million to small disadvantaged firms.

  1. Federal Energy and Water Management Awards 2014

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    total of more than 160,000 through 2015. Top Left: DMAFB Utility Manager, TSgt Gus Gonzales and Resource Efficiency Manager, Rick Whitaker, discuss energy projects. Bottom...

  2. Women of Waste Management

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    PHOENIX - For the seventh year at the Waste Management Conference, EM contractor Fluor hosted a discussion on the expanding role of women in environmental management this month in a panel session attended by more than 250 people.

  3. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    2 40 -4.76% YEAR 2013 2014 Males 37 35 -5.41% Females 5 5 0% YEAR 2013 2014 SES 2 2 0% EJEK 5 4 -20.00% EN 05 5 7 40.00% EN 04 6 6 0% EN 03 1 1 0% NN...

  4. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    79 67 -15.19% YEAR 2013 2014 Males 44 34 -22.73% Females 35 33 -5.71% YEAR 2013 2014 SES 6 4 -33.33% EJEK 1 1 0% EN 05 9 8 -11.11% EN 04 6 5 -16.67% NN...

  5. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    5 79 -7.06% YEAR 2013 2014 Males 59 57 -3.39% Females 26 22 -15.38% YEAR 2013 2014 SES 1 0 -100% EJEK 4 3 -25.00% EN 05 3 2 -33.33% EN 04 22 22 0% EN 03...

  6. Minnesota Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Minnesota Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.49 2.52 2.65 2.72 2.59 2.44 2.52 2000's 2.60 2.62 2.77 2.72 2.73 2.66 2.68 2.73 2.85 2.79 2010's 2.57 2.66 2.63 2.86 2.88 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  7. Mississippi Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Mississippi Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.57 0.56 0.56 0.58 0.55 0.55 0.52 2000's 0.54 0.59 0.54 0.52 0.50 0.51 0.49 0.47 0.49 0.49 2010's 0.57 0.52 0.47 0.51 0.56 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  8. Missouri Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Missouri Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.71 2.53 2.58 2.62 2.56 2.45 2.37 2000's 2.31 2.44 2.34 2.26 2.25 2.21 2.18 2.15 2.33 2.22 2010's 2.25 2.18 2.00 2.17 2.27 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  9. Montana Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Montana Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.41 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 2000's 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.45 0.42 0.44 0.46 2010's 0.44 0.46 0.46 0.42 0.42 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  10. Nebraska Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Nebraska Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.97 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.90 0.86 2000's 0.85 0.98 0.90 0.83 0.79 0.79 0.82 0.82 0.87 0.84 2010's 0.84 0.84 0.75 0.84 0.83 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  11. Nevada Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Nevada Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.43 0.51 0.66 0.61 2000's 0.60 0.68 0.65 0.65 0.75 0.75 0.87 0.81 0.79 0.81 2010's 0.82 0.86 0.89 0.85 0.69 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  12. New Hampshire Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) New Hampshire Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 2000's 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.14 0.15 2010's 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  13. New Jersey Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) New Jersey Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 3.95 4.47 4.01 4.25 4.35 4.35 4.43 2000's 4.40 4.51 4.29 4.80 4.77 4.79 4.51 4.83 4.51 4.73 2010's 4.58 4.53 4.61 4.62 4.87 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  14. New Mexico Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) New Mexico Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.64 0.64 0.59 0.64 0.74 0.79 0.75 2000's 0.72 0.73 0.69 0.62 0.71 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.69 0.68 2010's 0.74 0.73 0.78 0.74 0.64 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  15. Ohio Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Ohio Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 7.14 7.08 7.38 7.15 7.11 6.56 6.73 2000's 6.88 6.47 6.57 6.75 6.59 6.69 6.23 6.34 6.27 6.12 2010's 5.93 6.07 6.05 6.07 6.30 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  16. Oklahoma Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Oklahoma Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.58 1.43 1.42 1.46 1.44 1.47 1.30 2000's 1.34 1.35 1.37 1.29 1.22 1.23 1.21 1.27 1.35 1.30 2010's 1.37 1.30 1.18 1.35 1.36 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  17. Oregon Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Oregon Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.60 0.60 0.58 0.63 0.65 0.76 0.82 2000's 0.78 0.80 0.79 0.73 0.79 0.82 0.94 0.91 0.92 0.94 2010's 0.85 0.99 1.04 0.94 0.81 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  18. Pennsylvania Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Pennsylvania Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 5.43 5.54 5.40 5.32 5.27 4.82 5.11 2000's 5.26 5.01 4.89 5.22 5.09 5.08 4.71 4.90 4.69 4.76 2010's 4.68 4.66 4.76 4.73 5.01 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  19. Colorado Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Colorado Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.14 2.05 2.15 2.12 2.32 2.45 2.37 2000's 2.33 2.59 2.64 2.45 2.48 2.57 2.73 2.77 2.74 2.70 2010's 2.74 2.76 2.79 2.76 2.60 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  20. Delaware Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Delaware Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.19 2000's 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 2010's 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  1. District of Columbia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    (Percent) % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) District of Columbia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.33 0.32 0.29 0.30 2000's 0.31 0.27 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.26 0.28 0.27 0.28 2010's 0.28 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.28 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  2. Florida Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Florida Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.26 0.31 0.29 2000's 0.30 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.33 0.33 0.36 0.32 0.32 0.32 2010's 0.39 0.35 0.35 0.31 0.33 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  3. Georgia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Georgia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.33 2.18 2.36 2.42 2.30 2.38 2.09 2000's 2.82 2.51 2.59 2.56 2.60 2.58 2.52 2.37 2.44 2.48 2010's 2.90 2.40 2.35 2.48 2.64 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  4. Hawaii Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Hawaii Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 2000's 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 2010's 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  5. Idaho Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Idaho Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.25 0.25 0.27 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.38 2000's 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.37 0.42 0.45 0.51 0.50 0.56 0.53 2010's 0.50 0.57 0.58 0.56 0.48 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  6. Illinois Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Illinois Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 9.99 9.77 10.33 10.28 9.98 9.07 9.42 2000's 9.35 8.95 9.40 9.32 9.11 9.07 9.12 9.17 9.52 9.21 2010's 8.71 8.87 8.70 9.24 9.42 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  7. Indiana Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Indiana Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 3.31 3.25 3.32 3.43 3.39 3.10 3.21 2000's 3.23 3.09 3.21 3.10 3.05 3.08 2.92 3.02 3.12 2.92 2010's 2.89 2.80 2.78 2.95 3.08 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  8. Iowa Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Iowa Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.68 1.61 1.70 1.68 1.64 1.52 1.51 2000's 1.48 1.49 1.46 1.46 1.40 1.39 1.42 1.43 1.54 1.47 2010's 1.43 1.42 1.35 1.48 1.51 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  9. Kansas Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Kansas Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.71 1.53 1.56 1.63 1.39 1.55 1.44 2000's 1.41 1.47 1.45 1.39 1.34 1.35 1.31 1.34 1.44 1.49 2010's 1.40 1.39 1.22 1.39 1.40 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  10. Kentucky Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Kentucky Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.35 1.29 1.36 1.34 1.33 1.23 1.25 2000's 1.29 1.19 1.21 1.22 1.16 1.16 1.08 1.09 1.12 1.08 2010's 1.14 1.08 1.04 1.11 1.13 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  11. Louisiana Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Louisiana Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.14 1.09 1.09 1.08 1.06 1.05 0.95 2000's 1.00 1.03 1.01 0.93 0.88 0.85 0.77 0.79 0.76 0.76 2010's 0.95 0.84 0.77 0.79 0.87 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  12. Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 3,838,521 4,600,197 4,750,119 1980's 4,617,585 4,584,491 4,246,464 3,635,942 4,070,279 3,542,827 3,279,165 3,610,041 3,633,594 3,577,685 1990's 3,731,764 3,550,230 3,442,437 3,508,112 3,673,494 3,554,147 3,881,697 3,941,802 3,951,997 3,896,569 2000's 3,812,991 153,871 137,192 133,456

  13. Maine Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Maine Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 2000's 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 2010's 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  14. Maryland Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Maryland Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.55 1.58 1.58 1.63 1.56 1.51 1.58 2000's 1.68 1.48 1.64 1.79 1.77 1.78 1.63 1.77 1.66 1.73 2010's 1.75 1.65 1.70 1.70 1.78 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  15. Massachusetts Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Massachusetts Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.45 2.47 2.18 2.18 2.25 2.26 2.24 2000's 2.28 2.24 2.24 2.48 2.32 2.46 2.38 2.44 2.71 2.78 2010's 2.63 2.74 2.78 2.39 2.49 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  16. Michigan Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Michigan Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 7.46 7.52 7.84 7.62 7.62 7.07 7.42 2000's 7.36 7.20 7.52 7.59 7.44 7.43 7.23 6.95 6.99 6.84 2010's 6.36 6.75 6.67 6.82 6.97 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  17. Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 0 9 13 1990's 19,861 32,603 191,605 218,023 349,380 356,598 361,068 409,091 392,320 376,435 2000's 361,289 200,862 202,002 194,339 165,630 152,902 145,762 134,451 125,502 109,214 2010's 101,487 84,270 87,398 75,660 70,827 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W =

  18. Alaska Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Alaska Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.28 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.35 0.37 2000's 0.32 0.35 0.33 0.33 0.37 0.37 0.47 0.42 0.44 0.42 2010's 0.39 0.43 0.52 0.39 0.35 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  19. Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 72,813 71,946 1980's 63,355 71,477 66,852 68,776 68,315 62,454 63,007 69,656 101,440 122,595 1990's 144,064 171,665 216,377 233,198 224,301 113,552 126,051 123,854 133,111 125,841 2000's 263,958 262,937 293,580 322,010 334,125 380,568 354,816 374,204 388,188 357,490 2010's 370,148 364,702

  20. Arizona Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Arizona Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.57 0.61 0.55 0.53 0.62 0.80 0.70 2000's 0.70 0.76 0.72 0.71 0.78 0.74 0.83 0.81 0.79 0.73 2010's 0.79 0.82 0.84 0.81 0.64 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  1. Arkansas Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Arkansas Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.92 0.86 0.85 0.88 0.85 0.85 0.77 2000's 0.85 0.78 0.80 0.75 0.71 0.70 0.72 0.69 0.73 0.70 2010's 0.76 0.72 0.63 0.71 0.75 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  2. California Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) California Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 10.11 10.75 9.85 9.03 9.61 12.17 12.03 2000's 10.34 10.75 10.45 9.80 10.52 10.02 11.26 10.43 10.00 10.06 2010's 10.35 10.87 11.52 9.84 7.81 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  3. California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Feet) Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 5,417 19,929 20,394 1980's 19,980 26,692 31,904 38,084 60,207 84,062 77,355 67,835 60,308 59,889 1990's 58,055 59,465 62,473 58,635 60,765 60,694 73,092 80,516 81,868 84,547 2000's 83,882 78,209 74,884 64,961 61,622 60,773 47,217 52,805 51,931 47,281 2010's 46,755 41,742

  4. Rhode Island Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Rhode Island Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.40 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.35 2000's 0.37 0.38 0.36 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.37 2010's 0.35 0.36 0.38 0.37 0.39 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  5. South Carolina Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) South Carolina Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.49 0.48 0.52 0.56 0.52 0.56 0.54 2000's 0.58 0.58 0.56 0.57 0.60 0.59 0.57 0.53 0.55 0.57 2010's 0.68 0.57 0.55 0.58 0.63 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  6. South Dakota Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) South Dakota Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.25 2000's 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.28 2010's 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.28 0.28 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  7. Tennessee Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Tennessee Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.19 1.18 1.24 1.34 1.29 1.31 1.28 2000's 1.37 1.43 1.42 1.37 1.34 1.37 1.40 1.29 1.41 1.38 2010's 1.55 1.43 1.30 1.45 1.54 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  8. Kentucky Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 227,931 205,129 218,399 2000's 225,168 208,974 227,920 223,226 225,470 234,080 211,049 229,799 225,295 206,833 2010's 232,099 223,034 225,924 229,983 254,244 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  9. Louisiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,661,061 1,569,190 1,495,478 2000's 1,536,725 1,219,013 1,341,444 1,233,505 1,281,428 1,254,370 1,217,871 1,289,421 1,238,661 1,189,744 2010's 1,354,641 1,420,264 1,482,343 1,396,261 1,460,031 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  10. Maine Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maine Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 6,290 5,716 6,572 2000's 44,779 95,733 101,536 70,832 72,565 57,835 49,605 63,183 70,146 70,334 2010's 77,575 71,690 68,266 64,091 60,661 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  11. Maryland Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 212,017 188,552 196,350 2000's 212,133 178,376 196,276 197,024 194,725 202,509 182,294 201,053 196,067 196,510 2010's 212,020 193,986 208,946 197,356 207,527 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  12. Massachusetts Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 402,629 358,846 344,790 2000's 343,314 349,103 393,194 403,991 372,532 378,068 370,664 408,704 406,719 395,852 2010's 432,297 449,194 416,350 421,001 418,526 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  13. Michigan Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 994,342 876,444 951,143 2000's 963,136 906,001 966,354 924,819 916,629 913,827 803,336 798,126 779,602 735,340 2010's 746,748 776,466 790,642 814,635 850,974 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  14. Minnesota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 354,092 330,513 344,591 2000's 362,025 340,911 371,583 371,261 359,898 367,825 352,570 388,335 425,352 394,136 2010's 422,968 420,770 422,263 467,874 473,310 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  15. Mississippi Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 255,475 241,342 306,733 2000's 300,652 332,589 343,890 265,842 282,051 301,663 307,305 364,067 355,006 364,323 2010's 438,733 433,538 494,016 420,594 412,979 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  16. Missouri Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 283,294 258,652 265,798 2000's 284,763 283,793 275,629 262,529 263,945 268,040 252,697 272,536 296,058 264,867 2010's 280,181 272,583 255,875 276,967 296,605 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  17. Montana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 59,851 59,840 62,129 2000's 67,955 65,051 69,532 68,473 66,829 68,355 73,879 73,822 76,422 75,802 2010's 72,025 78,217 73,399 79,670 78,010 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  18. Nebraska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 132,221 130,730 121,487 2000's 126,962 121,984 120,333 118,922 115,011 119,070 129,885 150,808 171,005 163,474 2010's 168,944 171,777 158,757 173,376 172,749 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  19. Nevada Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Nevada Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 132,128 148,539 154,689 2000's 189,170 176,835 176,596 185,846 214,984 227,149 249,608 254,406 264,596 275,468 2010's 259,251 249,971 273,502 272,965 252,097 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  20. New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Hampshire Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 20,848 19,127 20,313 2000's 24,950 23,398 24,901 54,147 61,172 70,484 62,549 62,132 71,179 59,950 2010's 60,378 69,978 72,032 54,028 57,017 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  1. California Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) California Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,146,211 2,309,883 2,339,521 2000's 2,508,797 2,464,565 2,273,193 2,269,405 2,406,889 2,248,256 2,315,721 2,395,674 2,405,266 2,328,504 2010's 2,273,128 2,153,186 2,403,494 2,415,571 2,344,977 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company

  2. Colorado Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Colorado Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 314,486 330,259 333,085 2000's 367,920 463,738 459,397 436,253 440,378 470,321 450,832 504,775 504,783 523,726 2010's 501,350 466,680 443,750 467,798 480,747 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  3. Delaware Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Delaware Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 46,511 40,809 56,013 2000's 48,387 50,113 52,216 46,177 48,057 46,904 43,190 48,155 48,162 50,148 2010's 54,825 79,715 101,676 95,978 100,776 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  4. District of Columbia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) District of Columbia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 34,105 30,409 32,281 2000's 33,468 29,802 32,898 32,814 32,227 32,085 29,049 32,966 31,880 33,177 2010's 33,251 32,862 28,561 32,743 34,057 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  5. Florida Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Florida Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 522,116 503,844 559,366 2000's 541,847 543,143 689,337 689,986 734,178 778,209 891,611 917,244 942,699 1,055,340 2010's 1,158,452 1,217,689 1,328,463 1,225,676 1,231,957 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  6. Georgia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Georgia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 371,376 368,579 337,576 2000's 413,845 351,109 383,546 379,761 394,986 412,560 420,469 441,107 425,043 462,799 2010's 530,030 522,897 615,771 625,283 652,230 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  7. Hawaii Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Hawaii Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2,894 2,654 3,115 2000's 2,841 2,818 2,734 2,732 2,774 2,795 2,783 2,850 2,702 2,607 2010's 2,627 2,619 2,689 2,855 2,928 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  8. Idaho Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Idaho Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 68,669 69,277 70,672 2000's 72,697 80,279 71,481 69,868 75,335 74,540 75,709 81,937 88,515 85,197 2010's 83,326 82,544 89,004 104,783 91,514 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  9. Illinois Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1,077,139 957,254 1,004,281 2000's 1,030,604 951,616 1,049,878 998,486 953,207 969,642 893,997 965,591 1,000,501 956,068 2010's 966,678 986,867 940,367 1,056,826 1,092,999 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date:

  10. Indiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 556,624 521,748 556,932 2000's 570,558 501,711 539,034 527,037 526,701 531,111 496,303 535,796 551,424 506,944 2010's 573,866 630,669 649,921 672,751 710,838 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  11. Iowa Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 254,489 232,057 230,691 2000's 232,565 224,336 226,457 230,161 226,819 241,340 238,454 293,274 325,772 315,186 2010's 311,075 306,909 295,183 326,140 330,433 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  12. Kansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 338,231 326,674 302,932 2000's 312,369 272,500 304,992 281,346 256,779 255,123 264,253 286,538 282,904 286,973 2010's 275,184 279,724 262,316 283,177 285,969 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  13. U.S. Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels)

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

    Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) U.S. Natural Gas Total Liquids Extracted (Thousand Barrels) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1980's 569,968 599,518 584,160 571,256 587,502 594,306 569,913 1990's 573,054 602,734 626,320 634,481 635,983 649,149 689,314 690,999 668,011 686,862 2000's 721,895 682,873 681,646 622,291 657,032 619,884 637,635 658,291 673,677 720,612 2010's 749,095 792,481 873,563 937,591 1,124,416 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not

  14. Utah Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Utah Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.05 1.01 1.01 1.04 1.17 1.26 1.17 2000's 1.11 1.15 1.21 1.08 1.24 1.20 1.37 1.28 1.35 1.36 2010's 1.38 1.49 1.44 1.44 1.23 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  15. Vermont Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Vermont Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 2000's 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07 2010's 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  16. Virginia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Virginia Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.32 1.34 1.42 1.45 1.48 1.40 1.46 2000's 1.60 1.47 1.54 1.68 1.70 1.77 1.64 1.71 1.63 1.77 2010's 1.84 1.68 1.70 1.75 1.82 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  17. Washington Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Washington Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.08 1.10 1.09 1.20 1.24 1.37 1.52 2000's 1.44 1.77 1.50 1.40 1.46 1.53 1.73 1.70 1.73 1.76 2010's 1.58 1.81 1.93 1.70 1.55 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  18. Wisconsin Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Wisconsin Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.63 2.64 2.80 2.82 2.73 2.57 2.70 2000's 2.70 2.63 2.81 2.80 2.78 2.72 2.76 2.78 2.87 2.79 2010's 2.58 2.75 2.71 2.92 2.96 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  19. Wyoming Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Wyoming Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.26 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.28 0.26 2000's 0.24 0.23 0.27 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.26 2010's 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.26 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  20. Alabama Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 324,158 329,134 337,270 2000's 353,614 332,693 379,343 350,345 382,367 353,156 391,093 418,512 404,157 454,456 2010's 534,779 598,514 666,712 615,407 634,678 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  1. Alaska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 425,393 434,871 422,816 2000's 427,288 408,960 419,131 414,234 406,319 432,972 373,850 369,967 341,888 342,261 2010's 333,312 335,458 343,110 332,298 327,428 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  2. Arizona Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arizona Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 134,706 158,355 165,076 2000's 205,235 240,812 250,734 272,921 349,622 321,584 358,069 392,954 399,188 369,739 2010's 330,914 288,802 332,068 332,073 307,946 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  3. Arkansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 260,113 266,485 252,853 2000's 251,329 227,943 242,325 246,916 215,124 213,609 233,868 226,439 234,901 244,193 2010's 271,515 284,076 296,132 282,120 268,453 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  4. Tennessee Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 282,395 279,070 278,841 2000's 270,658 255,990 255,515 257,315 231,133 230,338 221,626 221,118 229,935 216,945 2010's 257,443 264,231 277,127 279,441 303,996 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  5. Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Gross Withdrawals Total Offshore (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1970's 88,258 418,474 760,566 1980's 949,177 1,010,772 1,120,830 992,041 1,021,260 942,413 1,169,038 1,330,604 1,376,093 1,457,841 1990's 1,555,568 1,494,494 1,411,147 1,355,333 1,392,727 1,346,674 1,401,753 1,351,067 1,241,264 1,206,045 2000's 1,177,257 53,649 57,063 53,569 44,946 36,932 24,785

  6. New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Jersey Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 717,011 679,619 715,630 2000's 605,275 564,923 598,602 612,890 620,806 602,388 547,206 618,965 614,908 620,790 2010's 654,458 660,743 652,060 682,247 762,200 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  7. New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 256,464 245,823 236,264 2000's 266,469 266,283 235,098 221,021 223,575 220,717 223,636 234,236 246,665 241,194 2010's 241,137 246,418 243,961 245,502 246,178 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  8. North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) North Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 56,179 49,541 56,418 2000's 56,528 60,819 66,726 60,907 59,986 53,050 53,336 59,453 63,097 54,564 2010's 66,395 72,463 72,740 81,593 83,330 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  9. Ohio Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 897,693 811,384 841,966 2000's 890,962 804,243 830,955 848,388 825,753 825,961 742,359 806,350 792,247 740,925 2010's 784,293 823,548 842,959 912,403 1,000,231 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  10. Oklahoma Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 567,050 575,855 538,329 2000's 538,563 491,458 508,298 540,103 538,576 582,536 624,400 658,379 687,989 659,305 2010's 675,727 655,919 691,661 658,569 640,607 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  11. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 706,230 644,017 688,740 2000's 702,847 634,794 675,583 689,992 696,175 691,591 659,754 752,401 749,884 809,707 2010's 879,365 965,742 1,037,979 1,121,696 1,203,418 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016

  12. Rhode Island Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Rhode Island Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 117,707 130,751 118,001 2000's 88,419 95,607 87,805 78,456 72,609 80,764 77,204 87,972 89,256 92,743 2010's 94,110 100,455 95,476 85,537 88,673 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  13. South Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Carolina Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 153,917 159,458 162,926 2000's 160,436 141,785 184,803 146,641 163,787 172,032 174,806 175,701 170,077 190,928 2010's 220,235 229,497 244,850 232,297 231,863 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  14. South Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) South Dakota Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 36,115 33,042 35,794 2000's 37,939 37,077 41,577 43,881 41,679 42,555 40,739 53,938 65,258 66,185 2010's 72,563 73,605 70,238 81,986 79,964 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date:

  15. Wyoming Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 100,950 109,188 96,726 2000's 101,314 98,569 112,872 115,358 107,060 108,314 108,481 140,912 142,705 142,793 2010's 150,106 156,455 153,333 149,820 135,678 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  16. Utah Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 165,253 169,776 159,889 2000's 164,557 159,299 163,379 154,125 155,891 160,275 187,399 219,700 224,188 214,220 2010's 219,213 222,227 223,039 247,285 242,457 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  17. Vermont Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Vermont Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 8,061 7,735 8,033 2000's 10,426 7,919 8,367 8,400 8,685 8,372 8,056 8,867 8,624 8,638 2010's 8,443 8,611 8,191 9,602 10,678 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  18. Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 248,960 260,332 276,793 2000's 268,770 237,853 258,202 262,970 277,434 299,746 274,175 319,913 299,364 319,134 2010's 375,421 373,444 410,106 418,506 419,615 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  19. Washington Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 256,366 290,229 287,302 2000's 286,653 312,114 233,716 249,599 262,485 264,754 263,395 272,613 298,140 310,428 2010's 285,726 264,589 264,540 318,292 307,021 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  20. West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 159,504 142,860 139,961 2000's 147,854 141,090 146,455 126,986 122,267 117,136 113,084 115,974 111,480 109,652 2010's 113,179 115,361 129,753 142,082 150,766 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  1. Wisconsin Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Wisconsin Natural Gas Total Consumption (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 400,651 368,022 380,560 2000's 393,601 359,784 385,310 394,711 383,316 410,250 372,462 398,370 409,377 387,066 2010's 372,898 393,734 402,656 442,544 462,627 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next

  2. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    for Naval Reactors (NA-30) Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER 21.4% 2.7% 8.0% 42.0% 23.2% 2.7% Pay Plan Males 75.0% Females 25.0% Gender AIAN, M...

  3. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    PAY PLAN Change DIVERSITY Change Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER Nevada Field Office 1.3% 3.8% 1.3% 30.0% 0.0% 31.3% 30.0% 2.5% Pay Plan Males 71.3%...

  4. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Deputy Administrator (DP) (NA-10) Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER 5.2% 0.6% 2.6% 6.5% 9.0% 3.2% 40.6% 32.3% Pay Plan Males 68.4% Females 31.6% Gender...

  5. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    PAY PLAN Change DIVERSITY Change Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER 3.8% 0.2% 0.0% 3.1% 1.7% 6.6% 0.9% 0.3% 17.5% 50.0% 2.4% 13.5% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Pay...

  6. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    for Secure Transportation (NA-15) Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER PAY PLAN Change DIVERSITY Change 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 2.0% 39.5% 0.4% 57.3% Pay Plan...

  7. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    PAY PLAN Change DIVERSITY Change Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER 2.5% 9.9% 27.2% 24.7% 32.1% 3.7% Pay Plan Males 69.1% Females 30.9% Gender AIAN, M...

  8. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Office of the Administrator (NA-1) Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER 33.3% 9.5% 4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 38.1% 4.8% 0.0% Pay Plan Males 38.1% Females 61.9% Gender...

  9. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    of the Deputy Administrator (NN) Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER 7.2% 0.6% 1.7% 0.6% 1.1% 0.6% 1.7% 15.0% 70.0% 1.1% 0.6% 0.0% Pay Plan Males 49.4%...

  10. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    0% White Female (W,F) 16 16 0% Change As of September 25, 2014 TOTAL WORKFORCE Change GENDER Sandia Field Office PAY PLAN Change DIVERSITY Change 1.2% 8.4% 10.8% 1.2% 32.5%...

  11. Characteristics RSE Column Factor: Total

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

    and 1994 Vehicle Characteristics RSE Column Factor: Total 1993 Family Income Below Poverty Line Eli- gible for Fed- eral Assist- ance 1 RSE Row Factor: Less than 5,000 5,000...

  12. Management's Discussion & Analysis Profile

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Adjusted Net Revenue is net revenue after removing the effects of certain debt management actions, in particular the Debt Service Reassignment, from prior years. These debt...

  13. ARM - Measurement - Total cloud water

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    cloud water 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 Measurement : Total cloud water The total concentration (mass/vol) of ice and liquid water particles in a cloud; this includes condensed water content (CWC). Categories Cloud Properties Instruments The above measurement is considered scientifically relevant for the following instruments. Refer to the datastream (netcdf) file headers of each instrument for a

  14. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    7 35 -5.41% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 27 25 -7.41% ↓ Females 10 10 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 SES 1 1 0% / EN 05 1 1 0% / EN 04 11 10 -9.09% ↓ NN (Engineering) 8 8 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 14 15 7.14% ↑ NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 0 -100% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 0 0 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 1 1 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 1 1 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 3 3 0% / Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 0 0 0% /

  15. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 79 -5.95% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 59 55 -6.78% ↓ Females 25 24 -4.00% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 SES 3 3 0% / EJ/EK 4 4 0% / EN 04 2 1 -50.00% ↓ NN (Engineering) 20 20 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 55 51 -7.27% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 0 0 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 0 0 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 10 10 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 9 8 -11.11% ↓ Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 2 2 0% / Asian American Pacific

  16. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 87 -1.14% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 46 46 0% / Females 42 41 -2.38% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 SES 1 0 -100% ↓ EJ/EK 4 2 -50.00% ↓ NN (Engineering) 12 12 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 68 70 2.94% ↑ NU (Tech/Admin Support) 3 3 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 0 0 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 2 2 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 5 5 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 5 6 20.00% ↑ Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 0 0 0% / Asian

  17. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    1 14 27.27% ↑ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 9 12 33.33% ↑ Females 2 2 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 SES 2 2 0% / EJ/EK 1 1 0% / EN 04 0 1 100% ↑ EN 00 0 1 100% ↑ NN (Engineering) 5 5 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 3 4 33.33% ↑ YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 0 0 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 0 0 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 0 0 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 0 0 0% / Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 1 1 0% / Asian American Pacific

  18. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    40 36 -10.00% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 18 18 0% / Females 22 18 -18.18% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 SES 3 2 -33.33% ↓ EJ/EK 1 1 0% / EN 03 1 1 0% / NN (Engineering) 3 3 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 30 27 -10.00% ↓ NU (Tech/Admin Support) 2 2 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 0 0 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 0 0 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 1 1 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 1 1 0% / Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 0 0 0% /

  19. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4 30 -11.76% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 16 14 -12.50% ↓ Females 18 16 -11.11% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 SES 1 1 0% / EJ/EK 3 1 -66.67% ↓ NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 29 27 -6.90% ↓ NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 1 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 1 1 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 2 2 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 3 3 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 7 6 -14.29% ↓ Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 1 1 0% / Asian American Pacific Islander

  20. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    9 209 -8.73% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 76 76 0% / Females 153 133 -13.07% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 SES 9 6 -33.33% ↓ EJ/EK 1 1 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 208 194 -6.73% ↓ NU (Tech/Admin Support) 11 8 -27.27% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 2 2 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 3 2 -33.33% ↓ African American Male (AA,M) 10 10 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 39 36 -7.69% ↓ Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 1 1 0% / Asian American

  1. Y YEAR

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    8 27 -3.57% ↓ YEAR 2013 2014 Males 18 17 -5.56% ↓ Females 10 10 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 SES 1 1 0% / EN 05 1 1 0% / EN 04 4 3 -25.00% ↓ NN (Engineering) 12 12 0% / NQ (Prof/Tech/Admin) 9 9 0% / NU (Tech/Admin Support) 1 1 0% / YEAR 2013 2014 American Indian Alaska Native Male (AIAN,M) 0 0 0% / American Indian Alaskan Native Female (AIAN,F) 1 1 0% / African American Male (AA,M) 4 4 0% / African American Female (AA,F) 3 4 33.33% ↑ Asian American Pacific Islander Male (AAPI,M) 1 1 0% / Asian

  2. Fiscal year 1999 Battelle performance evaluation and fee agreement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DAVIS, T.L.

    1998-10-22

    Fiscal Year 1999 represents the third fill year utilizing a results-oriented, performance-based evaluation for the Contractor's operations and management of the DOE Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (here after referred to as the Laboratory). However, this is the first year that the Contractor's fee is totally performance-based utilizing the same Critical Outcomes. This document describes the critical outcomes, objectives, performance indicators, expected levels of performance, and the basis for the evaluation of the Contractor's performance for the period October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999, as required by Clauses entitled ''Use of Objective Standards of Performance, Self Assessment and Performance Evaluation'' and ''Performance Measures Review'' of the Contract DE-ACO6-76RL01830. Furthermore, it documents the distribution of the total available performance-based fee and the methodology set for determining the amount of fee earned by the Contractor as stipulated within the causes entitled ''Estimated Cost and Annual Fee,'' ''Total Available Fee'' and ''Allowable Costs and Fee.'' In partnership with the Contractor and other key customers, the Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters (HQ) and Richland Operations Office (RL) has defined four critical outcomes that serve as the core for the Contractor's performance-based evaluation and fee determination. The Contractor also utilizes these outcomes as a basis for overall management of the Laboratory.

  3. Report to Congress on the U.S. Department of Energy`s Environmental Management Science Program: Research funded and its linkages to environmental cleanup problems, and high out-year cost environmental management project descriptions. Volume 3 of 3 -- Appendix C

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-04-01

    The Department of Energy`s Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) serves as a catalyst for the application of scientific discoveries to the development and deployment of technologies that will lead to reduction of the costs and risks associated with cleaning up the nation`s nuclear complex. Appendix C provides details about each of the Department`s 82 high cost projects and lists the EMSP research awards with potential to impact each of these projects. The high cost projects listed are those having costs greater than $50 million in constant 1998 dollars from the year 2007 and beyond, based on the March 1998 Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure Draft data, and having costs of quantities of material associated with an environmental management problem area. The high cost project information is grouped by operations office and organized by site and project code. Each operations office section begins with a list of research needs associated with that operations office. Potentially related research awards are listed by problem area in the Index of Research Awards by Environmental Management Problem Area, which can be found at the end of appendices B and C. For projects that address high risks to the public, workers, or the environment, refer also the Health/Ecology/Risk problem area awards. Research needs are programmatic or technical challenges that may benefit from knowledge gained through basic research.

  4. Fractionated total body irradiation for metastatic neuroblastoma

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kun, L.E.; Casper, J.T.; Kline, R.W.; Piaskowski, V.D.

    1981-11-01

    Twelve patients over one year old with neuroblastoma (NBL) metastatic to bone and bone marrow entered a study of adjuvant low-dose, fractionated total body irradiation (TBI). Six children who achieved a ''complete clinical response'' following chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and adriamycin) and surgical resection of the abdominal primary received TBI (10 rad/fraction to totals of 100-120 rad/10-12 fx/12-25 days). Two children received concurrent local irradiation for residual abdominal tumor. The intervals from cessation of chemotherapy to documented progression ranged from 2-16 months, not substatially different from patients receiving similar chemotherapy and surgery without TBI. Three additional children with progressive NBL received similar TBI (80-120 rad/8-12 fx) without objective response.

  5. A total risk assessment methodology for security assessment.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aguilar, Richard; Pless, Daniel J.; Kaplan, Paul Garry; Silva, Consuelo Juanita; Rhea, Ronald Edward; Wyss, Gregory Dane; Conrad, Stephen Hamilton

    2009-06-01

    Sandia National Laboratories performed a two-year Laboratory Directed Research and Development project to develop a new collaborative risk assessment method to enable decision makers to fully consider the interrelationships between threat, vulnerability, and consequence. A five-step Total Risk Assessment Methodology was developed to enable interdisciplinary collaborative risk assessment by experts from these disciplines. The objective of this process is promote effective risk management by enabling analysts to identify scenarios that are simultaneously achievable by an adversary, desirable to the adversary, and of concern to the system owner or to society. The basic steps are risk identification, collaborative scenario refinement and evaluation, scenario cohort identification and risk ranking, threat chain mitigation analysis, and residual risk assessment. The method is highly iterative, especially with regard to scenario refinement and evaluation. The Total Risk Assessment Methodology includes objective consideration of relative attack likelihood instead of subjective expert judgment. The 'probability of attack' is not computed, but the relative likelihood for each scenario is assessed through identifying and analyzing scenario cohort groups, which are groups of scenarios with comparable qualities to the scenario being analyzed at both this and other targets. Scenarios for the target under consideration and other targets are placed into cohort groups under an established ranking process that reflects the following three factors: known targeting, achievable consequences, and the resources required for an adversary to have a high likelihood of success. The development of these target cohort groups implements, mathematically, the idea that adversaries are actively choosing among possible attack scenarios and avoiding scenarios that would be significantly suboptimal to their objectives. An adversary who can choose among only a few comparable targets and scenarios (a small comparable target cohort group) is more likely to choose to attack the specific target under analysis because he perceives it to be a relatively unique attack opportunity. The opposite is also true. Thus, total risk is related to the number of targets that exist in each scenario cohort group. This paper describes the Total Risk Assessment Methodology and illustrates it through an example.

  6. Total Number of Operable Refineries

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

    Data Series: Total Number of Operable Refineries Number of Operating Refineries Number of Idle Refineries Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/CD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operable Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Operating Capacity (B/SD) Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Idle Capacity (B/SD) Vacuum Distillation Downstream Charge

  7. Total Energy Outcome City Pilot

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

    Total Energy Outcome City Pilot 2014 Building Technologies Office Peer Review Targeted Energy Outcomes A New City Energy Policy for Buildings Ken Baker - kbaker@neea.org Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance Project Summary Timeline: Key Partners: Start date: 09/01/2012 Planned end date: 08/31/2015 Key Milestones 1. Produce outcome based marketing collateral; 04/03/14 New Buildings Institute Two to three NW cities 2. Quantify and define participating city actions; 04/03/14 3. Quantify ongoing

  8. Total Estimated Contract Cost: Performance Period Total Fee Paid

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Total Fee Paid FY2008 $134,832 FY2009 $142,578 FY2010 $299,878 FY2011 $169,878 Cumulative Fee Paid $747,166 Contract Period: September 2007 - October 2012 $31,885,815 C/P/E Environmental Services, LLC DE-AM09-05SR22405/DE-AT30-07CC60011/SL14 Contractor: Contract Number: Contract Type: Cost Plus Award Fee $357,223 $597,797 $894,699 EM Contractor Fee Site: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) Contract Name: SLAC Environmental Remediation December 2012 $1,516,646 Fee Available $208,620 Fee

  9. West Hackberry Strategic Petroleum Reserve site brine disposal monitoring, Year I report. Volume V. Supporting data for estuarine hydrology, discharge plume analysis, chemical oceanography, biological oceanography, and data management. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DeRouen, L.R.; Hann, R.W.; Casserly, D.M.; Giammona, C.; Lascara, V.J.

    1983-02-01

    This project centers around the Strategic Petroleum Site (SPR) known as the West Hackberry salt dome which located in southwestern Louisiana, and which is designed to store 241 million barrels of crude oil. Oil storage caverns are formed by injecting water into salt deposits, and pumping out the resulting brine. Studies described in this report were designed as follow-on studies to three months of pre-discharge characterization work, and include data collected during the first year of brine leaching operations. The objectives were to: (1) characterize the environment in terms of physical, chemical and biological attributes; (2) determine if significant adverse changes in ecosystem productivity and stability of the biological community are occurring as a result of brine discharge; and (3) determine the magnitude of any change observed. Volume V contains appendices for the following: supporting data for estuarine hydrology and hydrography; supporting data analysis of discharge plume; supporting data for water and sediment chemistry; CTD/DO and pH profiles during biological monitoring; supporting data for nekton; and supporting data for data management.

  10. Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent)

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

    Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent) Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Electric Utility Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.17 0.13 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.60 0.53 2000's 0.81 1.29 1.98 1.68 2.14 1.79 2.34 2.57 2.46 3.30 2010's 3.81 4.53 4.40 4.08 4.23 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016

  11. Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent)

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

    Residential Deliveries (Percent) Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Residential Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.08 0.97 1.03 0.90 2000's 0.95 1.03 0.95 0.92 0.90 0.87 0.87 0.75 0.77 0.75 2010's 0.88 0.78 0.66 0.72 0.77 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  12. Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Vehicle Fuel Deliveries (Percent)

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

    Vehicle Fuel Deliveries (Percent) Alabama Natural Gas % of Total Vehicle Fuel Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.44 0.20 0.15 0.08 0.71 0.57 0.57 2000's 0.57 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.67 0.47 0.36 0.32 0.29 2010's 0.37 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.63 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring Pages:

  13. Alabama Natural Gas Percentage Total Commercial Deliveries (Percent)

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

    Commercial Deliveries (Percent) Alabama Natural Gas Percentage Total Commercial Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 0.90 0.88 0.87 0.92 1.01 0.86 0.91 2000's 0.80 0.87 0.80 0.80 0.85 0.84 0.86 0.78 0.80 0.78 2010's 0.87 0.80 0.74 0.77 0.79 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  14. Alabama Natural Gas Percentage Total Industrial Deliveries (Percent)

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

    Industrial Deliveries (Percent) Alabama Natural Gas Percentage Total Industrial Deliveries (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 1990's 2.28 2.23 2.38 2.27 2.36 2.39 2.53 2000's 2.46 2.11 2.13 2.22 2.25 2.29 2.30 2.26 2.13 2.13 2010's 2.12 2.19 2.38 2.42 2.46 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  15. U.S. Total Stocks

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Stock Type: Total Stocks Strategic Petroleum Reserve Non-SPR Refinery Tank Farms and Pipelines Leases Alaskan in Transit Bulk Terminal Pipeline Natural Gas Processing Plant Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Product Stock Type Area Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History Crude Oil and Petroleum Products 1,968,618 1,991,182 2,001,135 2,009,097 2,021,553 2,014,788 1956-2015 Crude Oil

  16. U.S. Total Exports

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

    International Falls, MN Noyes, MN Warroad, MN Babb, MT Havre, MT Port of Del Bonita, MT Port of Morgan, MT Sweetgrass, MT Whitlash, MT Portal, ND Sherwood, ND Pittsburg, NH Champlain, NY Grand Island, NY Massena, NY Niagara Falls, NY Waddington, NY Sumas, WA Highgate Springs, VT North Troy, VT U.S. Pipeline Total from Mexico Ogilby, CA Otay Mesa, CA Alamo, TX El Paso, TX Galvan Ranch, TX Hidalgo, TX McAllen, TX Penitas, TX LNG Imports from Algeria Cove Point, MD Everett, MA Lake Charles, LA LNG

  17. Carlsbad Field Office Manager Selected

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Carlsbad Field Office Manager Selected CARLSBAD, N.M., November 10, 2011 - The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Richland Operations Office (RL) Assistant Manager for the River Corridor Joe Franco was selected as Manager for the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO), which oversees the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). CBFO Deputy Manager Ed Ziemianski has been acting in the CBFO Manager's position for the past year and will continue to serve as Deputy Manager. In operation since 1999, WIPP is a DOE

  18. Waste Management | Department of Energy

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

    Management Waste Management Oak Ridge has an onsite CERCLA disposal facility, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility, that reduces cleanup and transportation costs. Oak Ridge has an onsite CERCLA disposal facility, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility, that reduces cleanup and transportation costs. Years of diverse research and uranium and isotope production led to numerous forms of waste in Oak Ridge. However, our EM program has worked to identify,

  19. Commercial Algae Management | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Algae Management Jump to: navigation, search Name: Commercial Algae Management Address: 320 Arbor Lane Place: Franklin, NC Zip: 28734 Year Founded: 2002 Phone Number: 828-634-7070...

  20. ORAU Wins DOE Facility Management Contractor Small Business Achievemen...

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

    ORAU Wins DOE Facility Management Contractor Small Business Achievement of the Year ORAU Wins DOE Facility Management Contractor Small Business Achievement of the Year September ...

  1. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 View History U.S. Total 4,471 6,479 7,281 4,217 5,941 6,842 1936-2015 PAD District 1 1,854 1,956 4,571 2,206 2,952 3,174 1981-2015 Connecticut 1995-2015 Delaware 204 678 85 1995-2015 Florida 677 351 299 932 836 1995-2015 Georgia 232 138 120 295 1995-2015 Maine 50 1995-2015 Maryland 1995-2015 Massachusetts 1995-2015 New Hampshire 1995-2015 New Jersey 1,328 780 1,575 400 1,131 1,712 1995-2015 New York 7 6 1,475 998 350 322 1995-2015 North Carolina

  2. 2014 Total Electric Industry- Customers

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Customers (Data from forms EIA-861- schedules 4A, 4B, 4D, EIA-861S and EIA-861U) State Residential Commercial Industrial Transportation Total New England 6,243,013 862,269 28,017 8 7,133,307 Connecticut 1,459,239 155,372 4,648 4 1,619,263 Maine 706,952 91,541 3,023 0 801,516 Massachusetts 2,720,128 398,717 14,896 3 3,133,744 New Hampshire 606,883 105,840 3,342 0 716,065 Rhode Island 438,879 58,346 1,884 1 499,110 Vermont 310,932 52,453 224 0 363,609 Middle Atlantic 15,806,914 2,247,455 44,397 17

  3. Total Adjusted Sales of Kerosene

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

    End Use: Total Residential Commercial Industrial Farm All Other Period: Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: End Use Area 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 View History U.S. 269,010 305,508 187,656 81,102 79,674 137,928 1984-2014 East Coast (PADD 1) 198,762 237,397 142,189 63,075 61,327 106,995 1984-2014 New England (PADD 1A) 56,661 53,363 38,448 15,983 15,991 27,500 1984-2014 Connecticut 8,800 7,437

  4. Total Imports of Residual Fuel

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

    2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 View History U.S. Total 133,646 119,888 93,672 82,173 63,294 68,265 1936-2015 PAD District 1 88,999 79,188 59,594 33,566 30,944 33,789 1981-2015 Connecticut 220 129 1995-2015 Delaware 748 1,704 510 1,604 2,479 1995-2015 Florida 15,713 11,654 10,589 8,331 5,055 7,013 1995-2015 Georgia 5,648 7,668 6,370 4,038 2,037 1,629 1995-2015 Maine 1,304 651 419 75 317 135 1995-2015 Maryland 3,638 1,779 1,238 433 938 539 1995-2015 Massachusetts 123 50 78 542 88 1995-2015 New

  5. Price of Lake Charles, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Total Imports (Dollars per

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

    Thousand Cubic Feet) Liquefied Natural Gas Total Imports (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Price of Lake Charles, LA Liquefied Natural Gas Total Imports (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 5.00 5.61 9.05 6.64 6.88 7.63 3.32 2010's 4.05 4.18 2.10 -- -- - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release

  6. U.S. Natural Gas % of Total Residential Consumers Delivered for the Account

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

    of Others (Percent) % of Total Residential Consumers Delivered for the Account of Others (Percent) U.S. Natural Gas % of Total Residential Consumers Delivered for the Account of Others (Percent) Decade Year-0 Year-1 Year-2 Year-3 Year-4 Year-5 Year-6 Year-7 Year-8 Year-9 2000's 9 10 11 2010's 12 12 13 14 14 - = No Data Reported; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not Available; W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data. Release Date: 2/29/2016 Next Release Date: 3/31/2016 Referring

  7. Mound, Ohio, Second Five-Year Review

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Report Second Five-Year Review for the Mound, Ohio, Site Miamisburg, Ohio September 2006 Office of Legacy Management DOE M/1308-2006 -L Work Performed Under DOE Contract No. for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management. DE-AC01-02GJ79491 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Office of Legacy Management Office of Legacy Management Office of Legacy Management U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Energy Mound, Ohio, Second Five-Year Review September 2006

  8. Webtrends Archives by Fiscal Year - FEMP | Department of Energy

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

    FEMP Webtrends Archives by Fiscal Year - FEMP From the EERE Web Statistics Archive: Federal Energy Management Program, Webtrends archives by fiscal year. Microsoft Office document ...

  9. WPN 14-1: Program Year 2014 Weatherization Grant Guidance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue grant guidance and management information for the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) for Program Year (PY) 2014.

  10. WPN 02-1: Program Year 2002 Weatherization Grant Guidance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue grant guidance and management information for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program for Program Year 2002.

  11. WPN 05-1: Program Year 2005 Weatherization Grant Guidance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue grant guidance and management information for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program (Weatherization) for Program Year 2005.

  12. WPN 00-1- Program Year 2000 Weatherization Grant Guidance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue grant guidance and management information for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program for Program Year 2000.

  13. WPN 04-1: Program Year 2004 Weatherization Grant Guidance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue grant guidance and management information for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program for Program Year 2004.

  14. WPN 03-1: Program Year 2003 Weatherization Grant Guidance

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    To issue grant guidance and management information for the low-income Weatherization Assistance Program for Program Year 2003.

  15. WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CALENDARY YEAR 2001

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2002-09-30

    THE ANNUAL (CALENDAR YEAR 2001) SITE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY.

  16. Calendar Year 2012 | Department of Energy

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

    2 Calendar Year 2012 December 21, 2012 Audit Report: OAS-L-13-03 The Management of the Plateau Remediation Contract December 21, 2012 Audit Report: IG-0879 Naval Reactors Information Technology System Development Efforts December 17, 2012 Audit Report: OAS-FS-13-08 Management Letter on the Audit of the Department of Energy's Consolidated Financial Statements for Fiscal Year 2012 December 11, 2012 Audit Report: IG-0878 Follow-up Audit of the Department's Cyber Security Incident Management Program

  17. Total-derivative supersymmetry breaking

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haba, Naoyuki; Uekusa, Nobuhiro

    2010-05-15

    On an interval compactification in supersymmetric theory, boundary conditions for bulk fields must be treated carefully. If they are taken arbitrarily following the requirement that a theory is supersymmetric, the conditions could give redundant constraints on the theory. We construct a supersymmetric action integral on an interval by introducing brane interactions with which total-derivative terms under the supersymmetry transformation become zero due to a cancellation. The variational principle leads equations of motion and also boundary conditions for bulk fields, which determine boundary values of bulk fields. By estimating mass spectrum, spontaneous supersymmetry breaking in this simple setup can be realized in a new framework. This supersymmetry breaking does not induce a massless R axion, which is favorable for phenomenology. It is worth noting that fermions in hyper-multiplet, gauge bosons, and the fifth-dimensional component of gauge bosons can have zero-modes (while the other components are all massive as Kaluza-Klein modes), which fits the gauge-Higgs unification scenarios.

  18. EERE Fiscal Year 2013 Website Annual Report

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

    Saver facebook 29 Videos 32 Widgets 35 WEB HOSTING AND CONTENT mANAGEmENT SYSTEmS 28 ... EErE total EnErGy SavEr nEWS Social mEdia multimEdia WEb HoStinG and contEnt manaGEmEnt ...

  19. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Energy End-Use Consumption Tables Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing...

  20. Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook-

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Released: September, 2008 Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other Total Space Heating Water Heating Cook- ing Other All Buildings* ... 1,870 1,276...