National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for mro npcc rfc

  1. Property:EIA/861/NercNpcc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Description: Nerc Npcc Entity conducts business operations within the NPCC region (Y or N) 1 References EIA Form EIA-861 Final Data File for 2008 - F861 File...

  2. Annual Energy Outlook 2015 - Appendix F

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    3 U.S. Energy Information Administration | Annual Energy Outlook 2015 Regional maps Figure F2. Electricity market module regions Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Analysis. 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 6 7 1. ERCT TRE All 2. FRCC FRCC All 3. MROE MRO East 4. MROW MRO West 5. NEWE NPCC New England 6. NYCW NPCC NYC/Westchester 7. NYLI NPCC Long Island 8. NYUP NPCC Upstate NY 9. RFCE RFC East 10. RFCM RFC Michigan 11. RFCW RFC West 12. SRDA

  3. SAS Output

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    A. U.S. Transmission Circuit Outages by Type and NERC region, 2013 Outage Type FRCC MRO NPCC RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC Contiguous U.S. Circuit Outage Counts Automatic Outages...

  4. Glacial Energy Holdings | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    EIA-861 Final Data File for 2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 54871 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC ERCOT Yes NERC MRO Yes NERC NPCC Yes NERC RFC Yes Activity...

  5. Property:EIA/861/NercRfc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    operations within the RFC region (Y or N) 1 References EIA Form EIA-861 Final Data File for 2008 - F861 File Layout-2008.doc Pages using the property "EIA861NercRfc"...

  6. SAS Output

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    0.A. Existing Transmission Capacity by High-Voltage Size, 2014 Voltage Circuit Miles Type Operating (kV) frcc mro npcc rfc serc spp tre wecc Contiguous U.S. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Voltage Circuit Counts Type Operating (kV) frcc mro npcc rfc serc spp tre wecc Contiguous U.S. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Notes: NERC region and reliability assessment area maps are provided on EIA's Electricity Reliability web page: http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia411/eia411.html Circuit miles do not

  7. summer_peak_2005.xls

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

    a . Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 2005 and Projected 2006 through 2010 (Megawatts and 2005 Base Year) Summer Noncoincident Peak Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 2005 758,876 46,396 39,918 58,960 190,200 190,705 41,727 60,210 130,760 Projected Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP

  8. summer_peak_2006.xls

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

    a . Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 (Megawatts and 2006 Base Year) Summer Noncoincident Peak Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 2006 789,475 45,751 42,194 63,241 191,920 199,052 42,882 62,339 142,096 Projected Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC

  9. net_energy_load_2006.xls

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

    1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 (Thousands of Megawatthours and 2006 Base Year) Net Energy For Load (Annual) Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 2006 3,911,914 230,115 222,748 294,319 926,279 1,011,173 201,521 305,672 720,087 Projected Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC

  10. winter_peak_2005.xls

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

    2b . Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 2005 and Projected 2006 through 2010 (Megawatts and 2005 Base Year) Winter Noncoincident Peak Load Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 2005/2006 626,365 42,657 33,748 46,828 151,600 164,638 31,260 48,141 107,493 Contiguous U.S. Projected FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.)

  11. winter_peak_2006.xls

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

    b . Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 (Megawatts and 2006 Base Year) Winter Noncoincident Peak Load Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 2006/2007 640,981 42,526 34,677 46,697 149,631 175,163 30,792 50,402 111,093 Contiguous U.S. Projected FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.)

  12. net_energy_load_2005.xls

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

    2005 and Projected 2006 through 2010 (Thousands of Megawatthours and 2005 Base Year) Net Energy For Load (Annual) Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 2005 3,900,461 226,544 216,633 303,607 1,005,226 962,054 201,548 299,225 685,624 Projected Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) In 2005 for 2006 3,926,389 232,561 220,006 301,893 992,742

  13. ,"Projected Year Base","Year","Summer",,,"Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid",,,"Western Power Grid"

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

    2005 and 2006 through 2010 " ,"(Megawatts and Percent)" ,"Projected Year Base","Year","Summer",,,"Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid",,,"Western Power Grid" ,,,"Contiguous U.S." ,,,,,,"FRCC",,,"MRO",,,"NPCC",,,"RFC",,,"SERC",,,"SPP",,,"ERCOT",,,"WECC" " ",,,"Net Internal Demand

  14. summer_nid_cr_cm_2005.xls

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

    d Form EIA-411 for 2005 Released: February 7, 2008 Next Update: October 2007 Table 4. Summer Historic and Projected Net Internal Demand, Capacity Resources, and Capacity Margins by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 2005 and 2006 through 2010 (Megawatts and Percent) Projected Year Base Year Summer Eastern Power Grid Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO NPCC RFC Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW) Capacity Margin (percent) Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW)

  15. summer_nid_cr_cm_2006.xls

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

    h c Form EIA-411 for 2006 Released: February 7, 2008 Next Update: October 2008 Table 4. Summer Historic and Projected Net Internal Demand, Capacity Resources, and Capacity Margins by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2006 and 2007 throug (Megawatts and Percent) Projected Year Base Year Summer Eastern Power Grid Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO NPCC RFC Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW) Capacity Margin (percent) Net Internal Demand (MW) Capacity Resources (MW)

  16. An RFC 1179 Compatible Remote Print Server for Windows 3.1

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1993-11-09

    Internet RFC 1179 describes the protocol to be used for printing files on a remote printer in a TCP/IP network. The protocol is client/server, meaning that the client initiates the print request, and the server receives the request and performs the actual printing locally. This protocol has been in long use on Unix systems derived from the Berkeley Software Distribution, such as DEC''s Ultrix and Sun''s SunOS. LPD Services implements the server portion of thismore » protocol. It handles both the network communication and conformance with the protocol, and printing using the Microsoft Windows device independent printing interface.« less

  17. Table 8.12a Electric Noncoincident Peak Load and Capacity Margin: Summer Peak Period, 1986-2011 (Megawatts, Except as Noted)

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

    a Electric Noncoincident Peak Load and Capacity Margin: Summer Peak Period, 1986-2011 (Megawatts, Except as Noted) Year Noncoincident Peak Load 1 by North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) 2 Regional Assessment Area Capacity Margin 21 (percent) Eastern Interconnection ERCOT 4 Western Inter- connection All Inter- connections FRCC 5 NPCC 6 Balance of Eastern Region 3 ECAR 7,8 MAAC 8,9 MAIN 8,10 MAPP 11 MISO 12 MRO 13 PJM 14 RFC 8,15 SERC 16 SPP 17 Subtotal TRE 18 WECC 19 Total 20

  18. Table 8.12b Electric Noncoincident Peak Load and Capacity Margin: Winter Peak Period, 1986-2011 (Megawatts, Except as Noted)

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

    b Electric Noncoincident Peak Load and Capacity Margin: Winter Peak Period, 1986-2011 (Megawatts, Except as Noted) Year Noncoincident Peak Load 1 by North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) 2 Regional Assessment Area Capacity Margin 21 (percent) Eastern Interconnection ERCOT 4 Western Inter- connection All Inter- connections FRCC 5 NPCC 6 Balance of Eastern Region 3 ECAR 7,8 MAAC 8,9 MAIN 8,10 MAPP 11 MISO 12 MRO 13 PJM 14 RFC 8,15 SERC 16 SPP 17 Subtotal TRE 18 WECC 19 Total 20

  19. Next Update: October 2009

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

    7 Released: February 2009 Next Update: October 2009 Table 3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region (Megawatts and 2007 Base Year) Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid FRCC MRO NPCC RFC SERC SPP TRE (ERCOT) WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) 2007 613,068

  20. Next Update: October 2010

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

    January 2010 Next Update: October 2010 Table 3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, (Megawatts and 2008 Base Year) Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid FRCC MRO NPCC RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) 2008 635,911 41,705 34,462 46,803

  1. ,"Month","Year","Contiguous U.S.","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid"

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

    3a. January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2005 through 2009 " ,"(Megawatts)",,," " " " ,"Month","Year","Contiguous U.S.","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,,,,"FRCC"," MRO (U.S.)","NPCC (U.S.)","RFC","SERC","SPP","TRE (ERCOT)","WECC

  2. ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid"

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

    b. Historical Net Energy For Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2005 through 2009. " ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours)" ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,,"Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","RFC","SERC","SPP","TRE","WECC

  3. ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid"

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

    e. Historical Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2005 through 2009 " ,"(Megawatts)" ,,,,," " ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,,"Year",,"FRCC"," MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","RFC","SERC","SPP","TRE

  4. ,"Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    2005 and Projected 2006 through 2010 " ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours and 2005 Base Year)" ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","RFC","SERC","SPP","ERCOT","WECC (U.S.) "

  5. ,"Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    2005 and Projected 2006 through 2010 " ,"(Megawatts and 2005 Base Year)" ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","RFC","SERC","SPP","ERCOT","WECC (U.S.) "

  6. ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid"

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

    f. Historical Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2005 through 2010 " ,"(Megawatts)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,,"Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","RFC","SERC","SPP","TRE ","WECC

  7. SAS Output

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    7.A. Net Energy for Load by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Assessment Area, 2004 - 2014, Actual Net Energy (Thousands of Megawatthours) Eastern Interconnection ERCOT Western Interconnection All Interconnections Period FRCC NPCC Balance of Eastern Region ECAR MAAC MAIN MAPP MISO MRO PJM RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC Contiguous U.S. 2004 220,335 292,725 2,313,180 553,236 283,646 274,760 -- -- 152,975 -- -- 856,734 191,829 289,146 682,053 3,797,439 2005 226,544 303,607 2,385,461 -- -- --

  8. SAS Output

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    9.A. Winter Net Internal Demand, Capacity Resources, and Capacity Margins by North American Electric Reliability Assessment Area, 2004 - 2014, Actual Net Internal Demand (Megawatts) -- Winter Eastern Interconnection ERCOT Western Interconnection All Interconnections Period FRCC NPCC Balance of Eastern Region ECAR MAAC MAIN MAPP MISO MRO PJM RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC Contiguous U.S. 2004 / 2005 41,449 47,859 371,011 91,800 45,565 40,618 -- -- 24,446 -- -- 139,486 29,096 44,010 101,002 605,331 2005 /

  9. monthly_peak_2005.xls

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

    3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 2005 and Projected 2006 through 2010 (Megawatts and 2005 Base Year) Projected Monthly Base Year Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid FRCC MRO NPCC RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak

  10. monthly_peak_2006.xls

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

    6 Released: February 7, 2008 Next Update: October 2008 Table 3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region 2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 (Megawatts and 2006 Base Year) Projected Monthly Base Year Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid FRCC MRO NPCC RFC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak

  11. Buildings Energy Data Book: 6.2 Electricity Generation, Transmission, and Distribution

    Buildings Energy Data Book [EERE]

    9 2009 Peak Load and Capacity Margin, Summer and Winter by NERC Region (MW) NERC Region Capacity Margin Capacity Margin TRE 16.7% 19.1% FRCC 6.0% 2.0% MRO (U.S.) 24.6% 26.8% NPCC (U.S.) 29.1% 43.2% RFC 25.2% 33.3% SERC 24.6% 26.2% SPP 16.4% 34.6% WECC 19.4% 29.6% U.S. TOTAL 22.2% 28.5% Note(s): Source(s): 128,245 109,565 725,958 668,818 1) Summer Demand includes the months of June, July, August, and September. 2) Winter Demand includes December of the previous year and January-March of the

  12. Next Update: December 2011 Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region,

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

    . Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2009 and Projected 2010 through 2014 2009 3,832,180 225,966 213,797 285,625 880,377 997,142 202,301 308,278 718,694 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC (U.S.) 3,969,750 223,174 225,167 291,540 961,436 1,027,470 211,438 310,444 719,081 4,084,175 225,498 229,258 292,816 1,024,183 1,051,645 215,333 316,194 729,248 4,203,875 229,393 240,817 295,623 1,081,320 1,072,124

  13. Next Update: December 2011 Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region,

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

    Released: December 2010 Next Update: December 2011 Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2009 and Projected 2010 through 2014 (Megawatts and 2009 Base Year) 2009 725,958 46,550 37,963 55,944 161,241 191,032 41,465 63,518 128,245 Contiguou s U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC (U.S.) 772,089 46,006 42,240 60,215 177,688 201,350 43,395 63,810 137,385 785,069 46,124 42,733 60,820 181,867 205,351

  14. Next Update: December 2011 Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region,

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

    b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2009 and Projected 2010 through 2014 (Megawatts and 2009 Base Year) 2009/2010 668,818 53,022 35,351 44,864 143,827 193,135 32,863 56,191 109,565 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC (U.S.) 639,073 46,235 35,722 46,374 143,040 183,614 31,415 43,823 108,850 646,845 46,821 36,816 46,529 146,591 186,364 33,047 43,823 106,854 657,839 47,558 37,359 46,753

  15. Next Update: October 2009

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

    a . Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2007 and Projected 2008 through 2012 (Megawatts and 2007 Base Year) 2007 782,227 46,676 41,684 58,314 181,700 209,109 43,167 62,188 139,389 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE (ERCOT) WECC (U.S.) 789,915 47,364 41,222 61,779 184,000 204,791 43,800 64,927 142,032 806,672 48,181 43,208 62,647 187,100 209,288 44,784 66,247 145,217 822,889 49,093 44,737 63,399

  16. Next Update: October 2009

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

    b . Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2007 and Projected 2008 through 2012 (Megawatts and 2007 Base Year) 2007/2008 637,905 41,701 33,191 46,795 141,900 179,888 31,322 50,408 112,700 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE (ERCOT) WECC (U.S.) 656,989 49,601 34,100 48,323 147,100 182,055 31,954 47,270 116,586 669,111 50,463 35,085 48,911 149,100 185,850 32,585 48,285 118,832 680,673 51,606 36,298

  17. Next Update: October 2009 Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region,

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

    1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2006 and Projected 2008 through 2012 2007 4,012,728 232,405 217,602 301,766 954,700 1,049,298 210,875 307,064 739,018 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE (ERCOT) WECC (U.S.) 4,085,683 242,923 225,058 301,767 973,800 1,073,081 208,532 313,946 746,575 4,149,201 248,996 230,745 305,223 984,000 1,086,304 212,884 319,355 761,694 4,226,516 255,216 239,483 308,534 999,200

  18. Next Update: October 2010

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

    8 Released: February 2010 Next Update: October 2010 Table 2a . Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2008 and Projected 2009 through 2013 (Megawatts and 2008 Base Year) 2008 752,470 44,836 39,677 58,543 169,155 199,779 43,476 62,174 134,829 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC (U.S.) 779,716 45,734 43,172 61,327 178,100 202,738 44,462 63,491 140,692 790,116 45,794 44,184 61,601 180,400 206,218

  19. Next Update: October 2010

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

    Table 2b . Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2008 and Projected 2009 through 2013 (Megawatts and 2008 Base Year) 2008/2009 643,557 45,275 36,029 46,043 142,395 179,596 32,809 47,806 113,605 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC (U.S.) 642,383 44,446 36,571 47,098 145,800 181,045 32,636 43,463 111,324 651,534 45,099 36,884 47,076 148,000 183,608 33,308 44,463 113,096 664,867 46,140 37,613

  20. Next Update: October 2010 Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region,

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

    Jaunary 2010 Next Update: October 2010 Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2008 and Projected 2009 through 2013 2008 3,989,058 226,874 227,536 297,362 936,201 1,035,390 207,603 312,401 745,691 Contiguous U.S. FRCC MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) RFC SERC SPP TRE WECC (U.S.) 4,025,705 227,690 233,519 295,883 958,792 1,051,350 207,850 312,205 738,416 4,076,698 228,579 239,702 295,753 967,962 1,067,893 211,343 315,065 750,401

  1. JP Morgan | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    NPCC Yes NERC RFC Yes NERC SERC Yes NERC SPP Yes NERC WECC Yes ISO CA Yes ISO Ercot Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NY Yes RTO SPP Yes ISO MISO Yes ISO NE Yes ISO Other Yes Activity Retail...

  2. Kansas Gas & Electric Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    SPP NERC ERCOT Yes NERC MRO Yes NERC RFC Yes NERC SERC Yes NERC SPP Yes ISO Ercot Yes RTO PJM Yes RTO SPP Yes ISO MISO Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes...

  3. Word Pro - Untitled1

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

    ... Data include the U.S. portion of NERC only. 3 Historically, the MRO, RFC, SERC, and SPP ...www.eia.govelectricity. Sources: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), ...

  4. rfc:fsn | NSAC Subcommittee 2012

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

    illustrated in measurements of electric dipole moments (EDM), where the observation of a signal in a given system will not be sufficient to disentangle new possible sources of...

  5. rfc:gen | NSAC Subcommittee 2012

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

    I believe continuing RHIC program is vital for the future science in this country. Logan RIce, 20121130 12:52 CST I am an undergraduate who participated in nuclear physics...

  6. ,"Year",,"Summer",,,"Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid",,,"Western Power Grid"

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

    4b. Summer Historic Net Internal Demand, Capacity Resources, and Capacity Margins by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2005 through 2009 " ,"(Megawatts and Percent)" ,"Year",,"Summer",,,"Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid",,,"Western Power Grid" ,,,"Contiguous U.S." ,,,,,,"FRCC",,,"MRO (U.S.)",,,"NPCC

  7. RFC Sand Creek Development LLC | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Colorado Zip: 80014 Product: Subsidiary of Republic Financial Corporation set up to invest in Sand Creek Energy LLC, a planned gas to liquid facility. Coordinates: 39.325162,...

  8. ,"Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 " ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours and 2006 Base Year)" ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  9. ,"Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    4 and Projected 2005 through 2009 " ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours and 2004 Base Year)" ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP/MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  10. ,"Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 " ,"(Megawatts and 2006 Base Year)" ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  11. ,"Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    4 and Projected 2005 through 2009 " ,"(Megawatts and 2004 Base Year)",,,," " ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP/MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  12. ,"Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2006 and Projected 2007 through 2011 " ,"(Megawatts and 2006 Base Year)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC"," MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  13. ,"Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2007 and Projected 2008 through 2012 " ,"(Megawatts and 2007 Base Year)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC"," MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  14. ,"Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2008 and Projected 2009 through 2013 " ,"(Megawatts and 2008 Base Year)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC"," MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  15. ,"Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2009 and Projected 2010 through 2014 " ,"(Megawatts and 2009 Base Year)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC"," MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  16. ,"Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    4 and Projected 2005 through 2009 " ,"(Megawatts and 2004 Base Year)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP/MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","SERC","SPP","ERCOT","WECC (U.S.)

  17. ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid"

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

    d. Historical Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1990 through 2004 " ,"(Megawatts)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,,"Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP/MRO (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  18. monthly_peak_1996_2004.xls

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

    Next Update: October 2007 Table 3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1996 through 2004 (Megawatts) Month Year Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO NPCC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW)

  19. monthly_peak_2004.xls

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

    Table 3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1996 through 2004 and Projected 2005 through 2006 (Megawatts and 2004 Base Year) Projected Monthly Base Year Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO NPCC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour

  20. winter_peak_2004.xls

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

    b . Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1990 through 2004 and Projected 2005 through 2009 (Megawatts and 2004 Base Year) Winter Noncoincident Peak Load Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990/1991 484,231 67,097 30,800 36,551 32,461 21,113 40,545 86,648 38,949 35,815 94,252 1991/1992 485,761

  1. Property:EIA/861/NercMro | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    + true + Brainerd Public Utilities + true + Brodhead Water & Lighting Comm + true + Brown County Rural Elec Assn + true + Burke-Divide Electric Coop Inc + true + Butler County...

  2. net_energy_load_1990_2004.xls

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

    Not applicable for this table format Table 1a . Historical Net Energy For Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1990 through 2004. (Thousands of Megawatthours) Net Energy For Load (Annual) Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990 2,886,496 442,507 142,502 221,099 197,326 127,102 250,681 485,205 252,037 209,789 558,248 1991 2,941,669 450,586 146,903

  3. net_energy_load_2004.xls

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

    4 and Projected 2005 through 2009 (Thousands of Megawatthours and 2004 Base Year) Net Energy For Load (Annual) Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990 2,886,496 442,507 142,502 221,099 197,326 127,102 250,681 485,205 252,037 209,789 558,248 1991 2,941,669 450,586 146,903 228,588 205,880 129,826 253,701 501,794 257,434 211,568 555,389 1992 2,942,910 450,853

  4. summer_peak_1990_2004.xls

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

    c . Historical Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1990 through 2004 (Megawatts) Summer Noncoincident Peak Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990 546,331 79,258 27,266 42,613 40,740 24,994 44,116 94,677 52,541 42,737 97,389 1991 551,418 81,224 28,818 45,937 41,598 25,498 46,594 95,968 51,885 41,870 92,026 1992 548,707

  5. winter_peak_1990_2004.xls

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

    d . Historical Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1990 through 2004 (Megawatts) Winter Noncoincident Peak Load Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MRO (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990/1991 484,231 67,097 30,800 36,551 32,461 21,113 40,545 86,648 38,949 35,815 94,252 1991/1992 485,761 71,181 31,153 37,983 33,420 21,432 41,866 88,422 38,759 35,448 86,097

  6. SAS Output

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

    the former utility members joined RFC. Reliability First Corporation (RFC) came into existence on January 1, 2006. RFC submitted a consolidated filing covering the historical NERC...

  7. PRESS HARD YOU ARE MAKING MULTIPLE COPIES B. MRO Name, Address...

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

    STEP 5A: PRIMARY SPECIMEN REPORT - COMPLETED BY TEST FACILITY NEGATIVE POSITIVE for: Marijuana Metabolite (9-THCA) 6- Acetylmorphine Methamphetamine MDMA REJECTED FOR TESTING ...

  8. HQ Energy Services (US), Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 21249 Utility Location Yes Ownership W NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NY Yes ISO MISO Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Buying...

  9. Rockland Electric Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 16213 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You...

  10. Energetix | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  11. Village of Solvay, New York (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 17512 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  12. New York Mun Power Agency | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 13539 Utility Location Yes Ownership A NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  13. Vermont Yankee Nucl Pwr Corp | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  14. Town of Boylston, Massachusetts (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 2086 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity...

  15. Energy Coop of New York, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 5880 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can...

  16. Town of Wakefield, Massachusetts (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 19979 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location NPCC NERC NPCC Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  17. City of Sturgis, Michigan (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 18252 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  18. West Penn Power Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 20387 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Wholesale...

  19. City of Orrville, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14194 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  20. Village of Winnetka, Illinois (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 20824 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  1. Pennsylvania Electric Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14711 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity...

  2. Ohio Power Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14006 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  3. PECO Energy Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14940 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Bundled Services...

  4. Potomac Electric Power Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 15270 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity...

  5. Clyde Light & Power | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 3824 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity...

  6. City of St Marys, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 17891 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Buying...

  7. Town of Berlin, Maryland (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 1615 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Buying...

  8. City of Nebraska City, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13334 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Buying...

  9. Nebraska Public Power District | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13337 Utility Location Yes Ownership P NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  10. RAPID/BulkTransmission/Montana | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Western Interconnection power grids and is part of two NERC regions - the Midwest Reliability Organization (MRO) and Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). MRO's...

  11. Analysis of the Clean Energy Standard Act of 2012

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    4 Appendix C: Map of NEMS Electricity Market Module Regions 1 Texas Regional Entity (ERCT) 12 SERC / Delta (SRDA) 2 Florida Reliability Coordinating Council (FRCC) 13 SERC / Gateway (SRGW) 3 Midwest Reliability Organization / East (MROE) 14 SERC / Southeastern (SRSE) 4 Midwest Reliability Organization / West (MROW) 15 SERC / Central (SRCE) 5 NPCC / Northeast (NEWE) 16 SERC / Virginia-Carolina (SRVC) 6 NPCC / NYC-Westchester (NYCW) 17 Southwest Power Pool / North (SPNO) 7 NPCC / Long Island

  12. Massachusetts Bay Trans Auth | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    NPCC Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle2 Yes This...

  13. Sempra Energy Trading Corp | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location NPCC Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes Activity Bundled Services Yes This article is a stub. You can help...

  14. Village of Plymouth, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 15203 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  15. City of Columbiana, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 4061 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  16. Craig-Botetourt Electric Coop | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 4471 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  17. Borough of Olyphant, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14124 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  18. South Central Power Company | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 18085 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle2 Yes This...

  19. Town of Avilla, Indiana (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 1028 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Bundled Services Yes This article is a stub....

  20. The Energy Coop | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 49746 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  1. City of Dowagiac, Michigan (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 5343 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Bundled Services Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  2. Village of Republic, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 15865 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  3. Village of Versailles, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 19805 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  4. Borough of Kutztown, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 10494 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  5. Wabash Valley Power Assn, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Utility Id 40211 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC,SERC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO MISO Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Buying...

  6. Borough of South River, New Jersey (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 17571 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  7. Village of Sycamore, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 18393 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  8. Village of Bloomdale, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 1677 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  9. Virginia Tech Electric Service | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 19882 Utility Location Yes Ownership S NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  10. City of Westerville, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 20477 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You...

  11. Adams Rural Electric Coop, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 118 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  12. Allegheny Electric Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 332 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  13. City of Garrett, Indiana (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 6970 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  14. Paulding-Putman Elec Coop, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14599 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  15. Firelands Electric Coop, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 6335 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  16. City of Seaford, Delaware (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 16852 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  17. City of Niles, Michigan (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13604 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  18. United Electric Coop, Inc (Pennsylvania) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 40219 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  19. South Jersey Energy Company | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 17549 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help...

  20. Sussex Rural Electric Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 40299 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  1. PEPCO Energy Services | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location RFC NERC ERCOT Yes NERC RFC Yes ISO Ercot Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NY Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes Activity Bundled Services...

  2. Pioneer Rural Elec Coop, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 15054 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  3. Borough of Goldsboro, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 7359 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  4. Borough of New Wilmington, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13489 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  5. Northeastern Rural E M C | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 20603 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  6. City of Galion, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 6914 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  7. City of Gas City, Indiana (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 6993 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  8. City of New Martinsville, West Virginia (Utility Company) | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13471 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  9. Borough of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 3329 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  10. Borough of Weatherly, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 20232 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  11. Village of Cygnet, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 4685 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  12. Appalachian Power Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 733 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  13. Union Rural Electric Coop, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 19501 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle2 Yes This...

  14. Guernsey-Muskingum El Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 7891 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  15. Carroll Electric Coop, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 3076 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  16. Central Electric Coop, Inc (Pennsylvania) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 40224 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  17. Village of Beach City, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 1386 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  18. Borough of Park Ridge, New Jersey (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14472 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  19. Frontier Power Company | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 6804 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You...

  20. Easton Utilities Comm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 5625 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  1. PPL Electric Utilities Corp | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 14715 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle Yes Alt...

  2. American Mun Power-Ohio, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 40577 Utility Location Yes Ownership A NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO MISO Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity...

  3. City of Dover, Delaware (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 5335 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  4. Borough of Mifflinburg, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 12523 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  5. City of Mishawaka, Indiana (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 12674 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  6. Village of New Bremen, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13420 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  7. Borough of Quakertown, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 15541 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  8. CECG Maine, LLC | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    4166 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility Rate...

  9. CinCap V LLC | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Location Yes Ownership W NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility Rate...

  10. Prospect Corporation | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 15432 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility Rate...

  11. Dublin Municipal Electric Util | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  12. CinCap IV, LLC | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 3575 Utility Location Yes Ownership W NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  13. DTE Energy Trading, Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 25262 Utility Location Yes Ownership W NERC Location RFC NERC ERCOT Yes NERC RFC Yes ISO Ercot Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NY Yes ISO MISO Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing...

  14. Village of Eldorado, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 5752 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes ISO MISO Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a...

  15. PEPCO Energy Services | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 14405 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location RFC NERC ERCOT Yes NERC RFC Yes ISO Ercot Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NY Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes Activity...

  16. Miami Power Corporation | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 12323 Utility Location Yes Ownership I NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes ISO MISO Yes Activity Transmission Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  17. Borough of Girard, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 7256 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC ERCOT Yes NERC RFC Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a...

  18. Village of Centuria, Wisconsin (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    EIA-861 Final Data File for 2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 3298 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes...

  19. Village of Wharton, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 20471 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This...

  20. Village of Georgetown, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 7131 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can...

  1. Village of Carey, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    EIA-861 Final Data File for 2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 3008 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC NERC RFC Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity...

  2. South Central Public Pwr Dist | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 17548 Utility Location Yes Ownership P NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes RTO SPP Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub....

  3. City of Hastings, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 8245 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  4. Basin Electric Power Coop | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location WECC&MRO NERC MRO Yes NERC SPP Yes NERC WECC Yes RTO SPP Yes ISO MISO Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity...

  5. City of Crete, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 4527 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes NERC SPP Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  6. North Central Public Pwr Dist | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13698 Utility Location Yes Ownership P NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes RTO SPP Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  7. Verendrye Electric Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - File1a1 Energy Information Administration Form 8262 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 19790 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes Activity Distribution...

  8. Rushmore Electric Pwr Coop Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    MRO NERC MRO Yes Activity Transmission Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  9. Consumers Energy | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 11788 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes ISO MISO Yes Activity Distribution Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle Yes Alt Fuel Vehicle2 Yes This...

  10. Village of Mullen, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 13090 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC MRO Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity...

  11. Microsoft Word - Fuel Substitution Elasticities final.docx

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

    results for Florida Reliability Coordinating Council (FRCC) ...... 16 Table A 2. Estimation results for Midwest Reliability Organization (MRO) ...

  12. NYSEG Solutions Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Utility Id 26650 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC NPCC Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  13. Application for Presidential Permit OE Docket No. PP-400 TDI-NE- New England Clean Power Link Project: Motion to Intervene of The Northeast Power Coordinating Council, Inc.

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Northeast Power Coordinating Council, Inc. (NPCC) submits its Motion to Intervene the New England Clean Power Link Project pursuant to Rules 212 and 214 of the Rules of Practice and Procedures of...

  14. AES Eastern Energy LP | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    NPCC Yes ISO NY Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  15. Connecticut Municipal Electric Energy Cooperative | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    NPCC Yes ISO NE Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it....

  16. Agway Energy Services, LLC | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 113 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location NPCC ISO NY Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can...

  17. Major Energy Electric Services | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 56504 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location NPCC ISO NY Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can...

  18. Robison Energy, LLC | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    EIA-861 Final Data File for 2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 16177 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC NPCC Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a...

  19. City of Bedford, Virginia (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 1456 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFO NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Buying...

  20. Responses Posted to DOE Inaugural National Collegiate Wind Competition RFP Questions

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The RFP and responses to technical questions (Amendment 1) are available on the Federal Business Opportunities website, solicitation number RFC-3-23003.

  1. Responses to Collegiate Wind Competition 2016 RFP Questions

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Responses to technical questions are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website, solicitation number RFC-5-52004. Proposals are due December 15, 2014.

  2. Renewable Fuels Consulting | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Consulting Jump to: navigation, search Name: Renewable Fuels Consulting Place: Mason City, Iowa Sector: Renewable Energy Product: RFC specializes in providing technical solutions...

  3. Village of Spalding, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 17727 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC SPP Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  4. City of Wisner, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 20880 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC SPP Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Distribution Yes...

  5. City of Franklin, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 6723 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC SPP Yes RTO SPP Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Bundled...

  6. Village of Hampton, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    M NERC Location MRO Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes Activity Bundled Services Yes This article is a stub. You can help...

  7. Village of Minster, Ohio (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 12660 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location ECAR NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  8. Conectiv Energy Supply Inc. | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 4318 Utility Location Yes Ownership W NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO NY Yes ISO MISO Yes ISO NE Yes Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity...

  9. Washington Gas Energy Services | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 20659 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC RFC Yes RTO PJM Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  10. Old Dominion Electric Coop | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 40229 Utility Location Yes Ownership C NERC Location SERC NERC RFC Yes NERC SERC Yes RTO PJM Yes Operates Generating Plant Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  11. Champion Energy Services | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Id 54862 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC ERCOT Yes NERC RFC Yes ISO Ercot Yes RTO PJM Yes ISO MISO Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help...

  12. CMS Energy Resource Management Corp | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Utility Id 3991 Utility Location Yes Ownership R NERC Location RFC Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  13. Arapahoe County, Colorado: Energy Resources | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Inc New West Technologies LLC PV Solar Planet ProLogis ProtoFlex Corp formerly Alpha Optics Inc RFC Sand Creek Development LLC Simplicity Energy Farms Inc Tru-Lite Versa Power...

  14. Borough of Duncannon, Pennsylvania (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location RFC Activity Distribution Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  15. Panel 3, Giner Overview

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

    High efficiency Low Cap Ex 15 N , 210 Nm 3 h Energy Storage Low Cap Ex Rapid Response time MW Stacks, 2 MW - 5 MW Systems RFC Electrolyzers UUV 20 Nm 3 Backup Power 2 ...

  16. NSAC Subcommittee 2012

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

    nsac-2012-rfcdoku.phpdefaultsidebarleft?rev1337463090&dodiff * Index * GEN * LEP * RHI * MEP * FSN * THE * FAC texthtml 2012-05-19T16:30:41-06:00 burch rfc:mep -...

  17. Northwest Rural Pub Pwr Dist | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 13805 Utility Location Yes Ownership P NERC Location WECC NERC MRO Yes RTO SPP Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  18. Nick's Utility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Ownership F NERC Location WECC, MAPP NERC MRO Yes NERC SPP Yes NERC WECC Yes ISO CA Yes RTO SPP Yes ISO MISO Yes ISO Other Yes Activity Generation Yes Activity Transmission Yes...

  19. City of Spencer, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 17787 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO NERC SPP Yes RTO SPP Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Bundled Services Yes This article is a stub....

  20. Loup Valleys Rural P P D | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Data Utility Id 11250 Utility Location Yes Ownership P NERC Location MRO NERC SPP Yes RTO SPP Yes Activity Distribution Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  1. Materials Flows through Industry (MFI) Tool … AMO Analysis Review

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

    ... 0% SEP; national grid o Scenario B - HH Wetted Cathode (TRL - 7 ) Process; 0% SEP; ... 0% 0% 0% ELECTRICITY GRID, MRO 0% 0% 0% HH WETTED CATHODE 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% ...

  2. Burt County Public Power Dist | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    NERC Location MRO Activity Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility Rate...

  3. Village of Wilcox, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    861 Data Utility Id 20641 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO Activity Wholesale Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility...

  4. City of Holdrege, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Location MRO Activity Buying Transmission Yes Activity Distribution Yes Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by expanding it. Utility Rate...

  5. Village of Brainard, Nebraska (Utility Company) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2010 - File1a1 EIA Form 861 Data Utility Id 2120 Utility Location Yes Ownership M NERC Location MRO Activity Retail Marketing Yes This article is a stub. You can help OpenEI by...

  6. Ultra-High Efficiency and Low-Emissions Combustion Technology for Manufacturing Industries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Atreya, Arvind

    2013-04-15

    The purpose of this research was to develop and test a transformational combustion technology for high temperature furnaces to reduce the energy intensity and carbon footprint of U.S. manufacturing industries such as steel, aluminum, glass, metal casting, and petroleum refining. A new technology based on internal and/or external Flue Gas Recirculation (FGR) along with significant enhancement in flame radiation was developed. It produces "Radiative Flameless Combustion (RFC)" and offers tremendous energy efficiency and pollutant reduction benefits over and above the now popular "flameless combustion." It will reduce the energy intensity (or fuel consumption per unit system output) by more than 50% and double the furnace productivity while significantly reducing pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions (10^3 times reduction in NOx and 10 times reduction in CO & hydrocarbons and 3 times reduction in CO2). Product quality improvements are also expected due to uniform radiation, as well as, reduction in scale/dross formation is expected because of non-oxidative atmosphere. RFC is inexpensive, easy to implement, and it was successfully tested in a laboratory-scale furnace at the University of Michigan during the course of this work. A first-ever theory with gas and particulate radiation was also developed. Numerical programs were also written to design an industrial-scale furnace. Nine papers were published (or are in the process of publication). We believe that this early stage research adequately proves the concept through laboratory experiments, modeling and computational models. All this work is presented in the published papers. Important conclusions of this work are: (1) It was proved through experimental measurements that RFC is not only feasible but a very beneficial technology. (2) Theoretical analysis of RFC was done in (a) spatially uniform strain field and (b) a planar momentum jet where the strain rate is neither prescribed nor uniform. Four important non-dimensional parameters controlling RFC in furnaces were identified. These are: (i) The Boltzmann number; (ii) The Damkohler number, (iii) The dimensionless Arrhenius number, and (iv) The equivalence ratio. Together they define the parameter space where RFC is possible. It was also found that the Damkohler number must be small for RFC to exist and that the Boltzmann number expands the RFC domain. The experimental data obtained during the course of this work agrees well with the predictions made by the theoretical analysis. Interestingly, the equivalence ratio dependence shows that it is easier to establish RFC for rich mixtures than for lean mixtures. This was also experimentally observed. Identifying the parameter space for RFC is necessary for controlling the RFC furnace operation. It is hoped that future work will enable the methodology developed here to be applied to the operation of real furnaces, with consequent improvement in efficiency and pollutant reduction. To reiterate, the new furnace combustion technology developed enables intense radiation from combustion products and has many benefits: (i) Ultra-High Efficiency and Low-Emissions; (ii) Uniform and intense radiation to substantially increase productivity; (iii) Oxygen-free atmosphere to reduce dross/scale formation; (iv) Provides multi-fuel capability; and (v) Enables carbon sequestration if pure oxygen is used for combustion.

  7. SAVANNAH RIVER NATIONAL LABORATORYREGENERATIVE FUEL CELL PROJECT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Motyka, T

    2008-11-11

    A team comprised of governmental, academic and industrial partners led by the Savannah River National Laboratory developed and demonstrated a regenerative fuel cell system for backup power applications. Recent market assessments have identified emergency response and telecommunication applications as promising near-term markets for fuel cell backup power systems. The Regenerative Fuel Cell System (RFC) consisted of a 2 kg-per-day electrolyzer, metal-hydride based hydrogen storage units and a 5 kW fuel cell. Coupling these components together created a system that can produce and store its own energy from the power grid much like a rechargeable battery. A series of test were conducted to evaluate the performance of the RFC system under both steady-state and transit conditions that might be encountered in typical backup power applications. In almost all cases the RFC functioned effectively. Test results from the demonstration project will be used to support recommendations for future fuel cell and hydrogen component and system designs and support potential commercialization activities. In addition to the work presented in this report, further testing of the RFC system at the Center for Hydrogen Research in Aiken County, SC is planned including evaluating the system as a renewable system coupled with a 20kW-peak solar photovoltaic array.

  8. A Network Client Using the Gopher Information Discovery Protocol

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1993-10-05

    WSGOPHER uses the protocol known as Gopher, which is described in Internet RFC 1436. Specifically Gopher is a client/server protocol. Gopher servers provide information across the network to Gopher clients. WSGOPHER is an implementation of a Gopher client for Microsoft Windows 3.1 and Windows Sockets version 1.1.

  9. GPU-based relative fuzzy connectedness image segmentation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhuge Ying; Ciesielski, Krzysztof C.; Udupa, Jayaram K.; Miller, Robert W. [Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (United States); Department of Mathematics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506 (United States) and Medical Image Processing Group, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 (United States); Medical Image Processing Group, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 (United States); Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (United States)

    2013-01-15

    Purpose:Recently, clinical radiological research and practice are becoming increasingly quantitative. Further, images continue to increase in size and volume. For quantitative radiology to become practical, it is crucial that image segmentation algorithms and their implementations are rapid and yield practical run time on very large data sets. The purpose of this paper is to present a parallel version of an algorithm that belongs to the family of fuzzy connectedness (FC) algorithms, to achieve an interactive speed for segmenting large medical image data sets. Methods: The most common FC segmentations, optimizing an Script-Small-L {sub {infinity}}-based energy, are known as relative fuzzy connectedness (RFC) and iterative relative fuzzy connectedness (IRFC). Both RFC and IRFC objects (of which IRFC contains RFC) can be found via linear time algorithms, linear with respect to the image size. The new algorithm, P-ORFC (for parallel optimal RFC), which is implemented by using NVIDIA's Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) platform, considerably improves the computational speed of the above mentioned CPU based IRFC algorithm. Results: Experiments based on four data sets of small, medium, large, and super data size, achieved speedup factors of 32.8 Multiplication-Sign , 22.9 Multiplication-Sign , 20.9 Multiplication-Sign , and 17.5 Multiplication-Sign , correspondingly, on the NVIDIA Tesla C1060 platform. Although the output of P-ORFC need not precisely match that of IRFC output, it is very close to it and, as the authors prove, always lies between the RFC and IRFC objects. Conclusions: A parallel version of a top-of-the-line algorithm in the family of FC has been developed on the NVIDIA GPUs. An interactive speed of segmentation has been achieved, even for the largest medical image data set. Such GPU implementations may play a crucial role in automatic anatomy recognition in clinical radiology.

  10. ,"Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    3 and Projected 2004 through 2008 " ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours and 2003 Base Year)" ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  11. ,"Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    3 and Projected 2004 through 2008 " ,"(Megawatts and 2003 Base Year)",,,," " ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.)

  12. ,"Table 2b. Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, "

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

    3 and Projected 2004 through 2008 " ,"(Megawatts and 2003 Base Year)" ,"Winter Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"ECAR","FRCC","MAAC","MAIN","MAPP (U.S.) ","NPCC (U.S.) ","SERC","SPP","ERCOT","WECC (U.S.)

  13. monthly_peak_2003.xls

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

    O Form EIA-411 for 2005 Released: February 7, 2008 Next Update: October 2007 Table 3a . January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1996 through 2003 and Projected 2004 through 2005 (Megawatts and 2003 Base Year) Projected Monthly Base Year Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP/MR NPCC SERC SPP ERCOT WECC Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW) Peak Hour Demand (MW)

  14. winter_peak_2003.xls

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

    ) Form EIA-411 for 2005 Released: February 7, 2008 Next Update: October 2007 Table 2b . Noncoincident Winter Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Council Region, 1990 through 2003 and Projected 2004 through 2008 (Megawatts and 2003 Base Year) Winter Noncoincident Peak Load Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP (U.S. NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990/1991 484,231 67,097

  15. Preparation and characterization of composites based on poly(lactic acid) and CaCO{sub 3} nanofiller

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moreno, Janaína Fernandes; Silva, Ana Lúcia N. da E-mail: ananazareth@ima.ufrj.br; Sousa, Ana Maria F. de

    2015-05-22

    In recent years, extensive studies have been conducted on the study of the poly(lactic acid) (PLA) properties, because of its being a typical biobased and biodegradable polymer, with good mechanical properties. However, its toughness and gas barrier properties are not satisfactory and can be improved by the addition of nanofillers, such as calcium carbonate (n-CaCO{sub 3}). The present work PLA composites with nano-sized precipitated calcium carbonate (n-NPCC) were prepared by melt extrusion. Thermal, mechanical and flow properties of the composites were evaluated by using a factorial design.The results showed that the addition of the nanofiller in the PLA matrix didn’t improve thethermal and mechanical properties of the matrix significantly. This behavior is probably due to the presence of the stearic acid that is coating on the n-NPCC particles, resulting in a weak polymer-particle interaction. Beyond this, it was also observed a decrease in MFI of the composites when nanofiller was added and at a higher screw speed.

  16. Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project Monitoring and Evaluation, Final Report For the Performance Period May 1, 2008 through April 30, 2009.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sampson, Melvin R.

    2009-07-30

    The Yakima-Klickitat Fisheries Project (YKFP) is a joint project of the Yakama Nation (lead entity) and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and is sponsored in large part by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) with oversight and guidance from the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC). It is among the largest and most complex fisheries management projects in the Columbia Basin in terms of data collection and management, physical facilities, habitat enhancement and management, and experimental design and research on fisheries resources. Using principles of adaptive management, the YKFP is attempting to evaluate all stocks historically present in the Yakima subbasin and apply a combination of habitat restoration and hatchery supplementation or reintroduction, to restore the Yakima Subbasin ecosystem with sustainable and harvestable populations of salmon, steelhead and other at-risk species. The original impetus for the YKFP resulted from the landmark fishing disputes of the 1970s, the ensuing legal decisions in United States versus Washington and United States versus Oregon, and the region's realization that lost natural production needed to be mitigated in upriver areas where these losses primarily occurred. The YKFP was first identified in the NPCC's 1982 Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) and supported in the U.S. v Oregon 1988 Columbia River Fish Management Plan (CRFMP). A draft Master Plan was presented to the NPCC in 1987 and the Preliminary Design Report was presented in 1990. In both circumstances, the NPCC instructed the Yakama Nation, WDFW and BPA to carry out planning functions that addressed uncertainties in regard to the adequacy of hatchery supplementation for meeting production objectives and limiting adverse ecological and genetic impacts. At the same time, the NPCC underscored the importance of using adaptive management principles to manage the direction of the Project. The 1994 FWP reiterated the importance of proceeding with the YKFP because of the added production and learning potential the project would provide. The YKFP is unique in having been designed to rigorously test the efficacy of hatchery supplementation. Given the current dire situation of many salmon and steelhead stocks, and the heavy reliance on artificial propagation as a recovery tool, YKFP monitoring results will have great region-wide significance. Supplementation is envisioned as a means to enhance and sustain the abundance of wild and naturally-spawning populations at levels exceeding the cumulative mortality burden imposed on those populations by habitat degradation and by natural cycles in environmental conditions. A supplementation hatchery is properly operated as an adjunct to the natural production system in a watershed. By fully integrating the hatchery with a naturally-producing population, high survival rates for the component of the population in the hatchery can raise the average abundance of the total population (hatchery component + naturally-producing component) to a level that compensates for the high mortalities imposed by human development activities and fully seeds the natural environment. The objectives of the YKFP are to: use Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment (EDT) and other modeling tools to facilitate planning for project activities, enhance existing stocks, re-introduce extirpated stocks, protect and restore habitat in the Yakima Subbasin, and operate using a scientifically rigorous process that will foster application of the knowledge gained about hatchery supplementation and habitat restoration throughout the Columbia River Basin. The YKFP is still in the early stages of evaluation, and as such the data and findings presented in this report should be considered preliminary until results are published in the peer-reviewed literature. The following is a brief summary of current YKFP activities by species.

  17. NIST cooperative laboratory for OSI routing technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Montgomery, D.

    1994-05-23

    This document is one of two reports on the Integrated ISIS protocol. Required by the IAB/IESG in order for an Internet routing protocol to advance to Draft Standard Status. Integrated ISIS is an Interior Gateway Protocol and is designed to carry both IP and ISO CLNP routing information. Integrated ISIS is currently designated as a Proposed Standard. The protocol was first published in RFC 1195. Internet Draft was published subsequently to RFC 1195 and documents the current version of the protocol. This report documents experience with Integrated ISIS. This includes reports on interoperability testing, field experience and the current state of Integrated ISIS implementations. It also presents a summary of the Integrated ISIS Management Information Base (MIB), and a summary of the Integrated ISIS authentication mechanism.

  18. Responses by CPower, Inc. to DOE RFI | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Questions | Department of Energy Responses Posted to DOE Inaugural National Collegiate Wind Competition RFP Questions Responses Posted to DOE Inaugural National Collegiate Wind Competition RFP Questions January 30, 2013 - 12:00am Addthis The RFP and responses to technical questions (Amendment 1) are available on the Federal Business Opportunities website, solicitation number RFC-3-23003. The deadline is February 19 at 5 p.m. Mountain Time. On January 8, 2013, the U.S. Department of Energy's

  19. Responses to IT-related Questions from the Transition Team | Department of

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Energy Responses to Collegiate Wind Competition 2016 RFP Questions Responses to Collegiate Wind Competition 2016 RFP Questions November 18, 2014 - 11:15am Addthis Responses to technical questions are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website, solicitation number RFC-5-52004. Proposals are due December 15, 2014. On October 30, 2014, the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking teams of students to participate in

  20. BBHRP_poster_ARM08.ppt

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

    Radiative Flux Closure Under Cloudy Conditions from a "Shadow" Dataset L. Oreopoulos 1 , E. Mlawer 2 , T. Shippert 3 , and J. Delamere 2 , 1. JCET- University of Maryland Baltimore County 2. Atmospheric and Environmental Research Inc. 3. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory To learn when and why we succeed or fail to achieve radiative flux closure (RFC) under cloudy conditions in BBHRP. Our goal Ice vs. mixed vs. liquid clouds How do we learn from such an approach? Specific tests If

  1. ,"Projected Year Base","Year","Summer",,,"Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid",,,"Western Power Grid"

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

    4. Summer Historic and Projected Net Internal Demand, Capacity Resources, and Capacity Margins by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, 2008 and 2009 through 2013 " " ","(Megawatts and Percent)" ,"Projected Year Base","Year","Summer",,,"Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,"Texas Power Grid",,,"Western Power Grid" ,,,"Contiguous U.S." ,,,,,,"FRCC",,,"MRO

  2. Impact of deformation on the atomic structures and dynamics of a Cu-Zr metallic glass: A molecular dynamics study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Y.; Mendelev, M. I.; Wang, C. Z.; Ott, R.; Zhang, F.; Besser, M. F.; Ho, K. M.; Kramer, M. J.

    2014-11-03

    Despite numerous studies on the atomic structures of Cu-Zr metallic glasses (MGs), their inherent structural ordering, e.g., medium-range order (MRO), remains difficult to describe. Specifically lacking is an understanding of how the MRO responds to deformation and the associated changes in atomic mobility. In this paper, we focus on the impact of deformation on MRO and associated effect on diffusion in a well-relaxed Cu64.5Zr35.5 MG by molecular dynamics simulations. The Cu-Zr MG exhibits a larger elastic limit of 0.035 and a yield stress of 3.5 GPa. The cluster alignment method was employed to characterize the icosahedral short-range order (ISRO) and Bergman-type medium-range order (BMRO) in the models upon loading and unloading. From this analysis, we find the disruption of both ISRO and BMRO occurs as the strain reaches about 0.02, well below the elastic limit. Within the elastic limit, the total fractions of ISRO or BMRO can be fully recovered upon unloading. The diffusivity increases six to eight times in regions undergoing plastic deformation, which is due to the dramatic disruption of the ISRO and BMRO. As a result, by mapping the spatial distributions of the mobile atoms, we demonstrate the increase in atomic mobility is due to the extended regions of disrupted ISRO and more importantly BMRO.

  3. Impact of deformation on the atomic structures and dynamics of a Cu-Zr metallic glass: A molecular dynamics study

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Zhang, Y.; Mendelev, M. I.; Wang, C. Z.; Ott, R.; Zhang, F.; Besser, M. F.; Ho, K. M.; Kramer, M. J.

    2014-11-03

    Despite numerous studies on the atomic structures of Cu-Zr metallic glasses (MGs), their inherent structural ordering, e.g., medium-range order (MRO), remains difficult to describe. Specifically lacking is an understanding of how the MRO responds to deformation and the associated changes in atomic mobility. In this paper, we focus on the impact of deformation on MRO and associated effect on diffusion in a well-relaxed Cu64.5Zr35.5 MG by molecular dynamics simulations. The Cu-Zr MG exhibits a larger elastic limit of 0.035 and a yield stress of 3.5 GPa. The cluster alignment method was employed to characterize the icosahedral short-range order (ISRO) andmore » Bergman-type medium-range order (BMRO) in the models upon loading and unloading. From this analysis, we find the disruption of both ISRO and BMRO occurs as the strain reaches about 0.02, well below the elastic limit. Within the elastic limit, the total fractions of ISRO or BMRO can be fully recovered upon unloading. The diffusivity increases six to eight times in regions undergoing plastic deformation, which is due to the dramatic disruption of the ISRO and BMRO. As a result, by mapping the spatial distributions of the mobile atoms, we demonstrate the increase in atomic mobility is due to the extended regions of disrupted ISRO and more importantly BMRO.« less

  4. table01.chp:Corel VENTURA

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    2. Noncoincident Peak Load, by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Assessment Area, 1990-2010 Actual, 2011-2015 Projected (Megawatts) Interconnection NERC Regional Assesment Area 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 FRCC 27,266 28,818 30,601 32,823 32,904 34,524 35,444 35,375 38,730 37,493 37,194 39,062 40,696 40,475 42,383 46,396 45,751 46,676 44,836 NPCC 44,116 46,594 43,658 46,706 47,581 47,705 45,094 49,269 49,566 52,855

  5. Next Update: November 2013

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

    Next Update: November 2013 megawatts January NERC Regional Assesment Area 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 FRCC 39,860 37,127 27,122 38,581 37,521 40,258 39,675 45,033 35,545 41,247 34,464 38,352 41,705 44,945 53,093 46,086 NPCC 41,680 41,208 40,009 44,199 45,227 43,553 42,039 45,987 66,215 47,041 43,661 45,002 46,803 45,047 43,849 45,395 Balance of Eastern Region 322,095 335,954 307,784 343,981 347,724 349,937 340,525 377,419 371,550 381,698

  6. monthly_peak_bymonth_2010.xls

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

    A.1. January Monthly Peak Hour Demand, by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Assesment Area, 1996-2010 Actual, 2011-2012 Projected (Megawatts) January NERC Regional Assesment Area 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011E 2012E FRCC 39,860 37,127 27,122 38,581 37,521 40,258 39,675 45,033 35,545 41,247 34,464 38,352 41,705 44,945 53,093 46,839 47,613 NPCC 41,680 41,208 40,009 44,199 45,227 43,553 42,039 45,987 66,215 47,041 43,661 45,002 46,803

  7. net_energy_load_2003.xls

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

    3 and Projected 2004 through 2008 (Thousands of Megawatthours and 2003 Base Year) Net Energy For Load (Annual) Contiguous U.S. Eastern Power Grid Texas Power Grid Western Power Grid Projected Year Base Year ECAR FRCC MAAC MAIN MAPP (U.S.) NPCC (U.S.) SERC SPP ERCOT WECC (U.S.) 1990 2,886,496 442,507 142,502 221,099 197,326 127,102 250,681 485,205 252,037 209,789 558,248 1991 2,941,669 450,586 146,903 228,588 205,880 129,826 253,701 501,794 257,434 211,568 555,389 1992 2,942,910 450,853 147,464

  8. net_energy_load_2010.xls

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

    1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Assessment Area, 1990-2010 Actual, 2011-2015 Projected (Thousands of Megawatthours) Interconnection NERC Regional Assesment Area 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 FRCC 142,502 146,903 147,464 153,468 159,861 169,021 173,377 175,557 188,384 188,598 196,561 200,134 211,116 NPCC 250,681 253,701 252,256 257,447 259,947 261,235 263,125 264,464 268,309 277,902 281,518 282,670

  9. peak_load_2010.xls

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

    2. Noncoincident Peak Load, by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Assessment Area, 1990-2010 Actual, 2011-2015 Projected (Megawatts) Interconnection NERC Regional Assesment Area 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 FRCC 27,266 28,818 30,601 32,823 32,904 34,524 35,444 35,375 38,730 37,493 37,194 39,062 40,696 40,475 42,383 46,396 45,751 46,676 44,836 NPCC 44,116 46,594 43,658 46,706 47,581 47,705 45,094 49,269 49,566 52,855

  10. summer_capacity_2010.xls

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

    Interconnection NERC Regional Assesment Area 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 FRCC 27,162 27,773 28,898 29,435 30,537 31,649 31,868 32,874 34,562 34,832 35,666 38,932 37,951 40,387 42,243 45,950 45,345 46,434 44,660 46,263 NPCC 46,016 45,952 46,007 46,380 47,465 48,290 48,950 50,240 51,760 53,450 54,270 55,888 55,164 53,936 51,580 57,402 60,879 58,221 59,896 55,730 Balance of Eastern Region 332,679 337,297 341,869 349,984

  11. Flow Cells for Energy Storage Workshop Summary Report | Department of

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

    Energy Summary Report Flow Cells for Energy Storage Workshop Summary Report Workshop summary report from the Flow Cell Workshop held March 7-8, 2012, in Washington, D.C., to investigate how a redow flow cell (RFC) can be a grid-scale electricalenergy-storage system and the associated technological needs. The specific objectives of the workshop were to understand the needs for applied research in RFCs; identify the grand challenges and prioritize R&D needs; and gather input for future

  12. ,"Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2006 and Projected 2008 through 2012 " ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours and 2007 Base Year)",,,,,,,,,,,," " ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.)

  13. ,"Table 1. Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    . Net Energy For Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2009 and Projected 2010 through 2014" ,"(Thousands of Megawatthours and 2009 Base Year)",,,,,,,,,,,," " ,"Net Energy For Load (Annual)",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid" ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.)

  14. ,"Table 2a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, "

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

    a. Noncoincident Summer Peak Load, Actual and Projected by North American Electric Reliability Corporation Region, " ,"2007 and Projected 2008 through 2012 " ,"(Megawatts and 2007 Base Year)" ,"Summer Noncoincident Peak Load",,"Contiguous U.S. ","Eastern Power Grid",,,,,,"Texas Power Grid","Western Power Grid",,,," " ,"Projected Year Base","Year",,"FRCC","MRO (U.S.)

  15. Plant maintenance and outage management issue, 2005

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Agnihotri, Newal (ed.)

    2005-01-15

    The focus of the January-February issue is on plant maintenance and outage managment. Major articles/reports in this issue include: Dawn of a new era, by Joe Colvin, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI); Plant profile: Beloyarsk NPP, Russia, by Nikolai Oshkanov, Beloyarsk NPP, Russia; Improving economic performance, by R. Spiegelberg-Planner, John De Mella, and Marius Condu, IAEA; A model for improving performance, by Pet Karns, MRO Software; ASME codes and standards, by Shannon Burke, ASME International; and, Refurbishment programs, by Craig S. Irish, Nuclear Logistics, Inc.

  16. Resident Fish Stock above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams; 2002 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Connor, Jason M.; McLellan, Jason G.; Butler, Chris

    2003-09-01

    In 1980, the United States Congress enacted the Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act (PL 96-501, 1980), which established the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC), formerly the Northwest Power Planning Council. The NPCC was directed by Congress to develop a regional Power Plan and also the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) to restore or replace losses of fish caused by construction and operation of hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River Basin. In developing the FWP, Congress specifically directed NPCC to solicit recommendations for measures to be included in the Program from the region's fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes. All measures adopted by the Council were also required to be consistent with the management objectives of the agencies and tribes [Section 4.(h)(6)(A)], the legal rights of Indian tribes in the region [Section 4.(h)(6)(D)] and be based upon and supported by the best available scientific knowledge [Section 4.(h)(6)(B)]. The Resident Fish Stock Status above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams Project, also known as the Joint Stock Assessment Project (JSAP) specifically addresses NPPC Council measure 10.8B.26 of the 1994 program. The Joint Stock Assessment Project is a management tool using ecosystem principles to manage artificial fish assemblages and native fish in altered environments existing in the Columbia River System above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (Blocked Area). A three-phase approach of this project will enhance the fisheries resources of the Blocked Area by identifying data gaps, filling data gaps with research, and implementing management recommendations based on research results. The Blocked Area fisheries information is housed in a central location, allowing managers to view the entire system while making decisions, rather than basing management decisions on isolated portions of the system. The JSAP is designed and guided jointly by fisheries managers in the Blocked Area. The initial year of the project (1997) identified the need for a central data storage and analysis facility, coordination with the StreamNet project, compilation of Blocked Area fisheries information, and a report on the ecological condition of the Spokane River System. These needs were addressed in 1998 by acquiring a central location with a data storage and analysis system, coordinating a pilot project with StreamNet, compiling fisheries distribution data throughout the Blocked Area, identifying data gaps based on compiled information, and researching the ecological condition of the Spokane River. In order to ensure that any additional information collected throughout the life of this project will be easily stored and manipulated by the central storage facility, it was necessary to develop standardized methodologies between the JSAP fisheries managers. Common collection and analytical methodologies were developed in 1999. In 1999, 2000, and 2001 the project began addressing some of the identified data gaps throughout the Blocked Area. Data collection of established projects and a variety of newly developed sampling projects are ongoing. Projects developed and undertaken by JSAP fisheries managers include investigations of the Pend Orielle River and its tributaries, the Little Spokane River and its tributaries, and water bodies within and near the Spokane Indian Reservation. Migration patterns of adfluvial and reservoir fish in Box Canyon Reservoir and its tributaries, a baseline assessment of Boundary Reservoir and its tributaries, ecological assessment of mountain lakes in Pend Oreille County, and assessments of streams and lakes on the Spokane Indian Reservation were completed by 2001. Assessments of the Little Spokane River and its tributaries, tributaries to the Pend Oreille River, small lakes in Pend Oreille County, WA, and water bodies within and near the Spokane Indian Reservation were conducted in 2002. This work was done in accordance with the scope of work approved by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA).

  17. Resident Fish Stock Status above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams; 2002-2003 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Connor, Jason M.; McLellan, Jason G.; Butler, Chris

    2006-02-01

    In 1980, the United States Congress enacted the Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act (PL 96-501, 1980), which established the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC), formerly the Northwest Power Planning Council. The NPCC was directed by Congress to develop a regional Power Plan and also the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) to restore or replace losses of fish caused by construction and operation of hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River Basin. In developing the FWP, Congress specifically directed NPCC to solicit recommendations for measures to be included in the Program from the region's fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes. All measures adopted by the Council were also required to be consistent with the management objectives of the agencies and tribes [Section 4.(h)(6)(A)], the legal rights of Indian tribes in the region [Section 4.(h)(6)(D)] and be based upon and supported by the best available scientific knowledge [Section 4.(h)(6)(B)]. The Resident Fish Stock Status above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams Project, also known as the Joint Stock Assessment Project (JSAP) specifically addresses NPPC Council measure 10.8B.26 of the 1994 program. The Joint Stock Assessment Project is a management tool using ecosystem principles to manage artificial and native fish assemblages in altered environments existing in the Columbia River System above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (Blocked Area). A three-phase approach of this project will enhance the fisheries resources of the Blocked Area by identifying data gaps, filling data gaps with research, and implementing management recommendations based on research results. The Blocked Area fisheries information is housed in a central location, allowing managers to view the entire system while making decisions, rather than basing management decisions on isolated portions of the system. The JSAP is designed and guided jointly by fisheries managers in the Blocked Area. The initial year of the project (1997) identified the need for a central data storage and analysis facility, coordination with the StreamNet project, compilation of Blocked Area fisheries information, and a report on the ecological condition of the Spokane River System. These needs were addressed in 1998 by acquiring a central location with a data storage and analysis system, coordinating a pilot project with StreamNet, compiling fisheries distribution data throughout the Blocked Area, identifying data gaps based on compiled information, and researching the ecological condition of the Spokane River. In order to ensure that any additional information collected throughout the life of this project will be easily stored and manipulated by the central storage facility, it was necessary to develop standardized methodologies between the JSAP fisheries managers. Common collection and analytical methodologies were developed in 1999. The project began addressing identified data gaps throughout the Blocked Area in 1999. Data collection of established projects and a variety of newly developed sampling projects are ongoing. Projects developed and undertaken by JSAP fisheries managers include investigations of the Pend Orielle River and its tributaries, the Little Spokane River and its tributaries, and water bodies within and near the Spokane Indian Reservation. Migration patterns of adfluvial and reservoir fish in Box Canyon Reservoir and its tributaries, a baseline assessment of Boundary Reservoir and its tributaries, ecological assessment of mountain lakes in Pend Oreille County, and assessments of streams and lakes on the Spokane Indian Reservation were completed by 2001. Assessments of the Little Spokane River and its tributaries, Spokane River below Spokane Falls, tributaries to the Pend Oreille River, small lakes in Pend Oreille County, WA, and water bodies within and near the Spokane Indian Reservation were conducted in 2002 and 2003. This work was done in accordance with the scope of work approved by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA).

  18. Resident Fish Stock above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams; 2003-2004 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Connor, Jason M.; McLellan, Jason G.; Butler, Chris

    2005-11-01

    In 1980, the United States Congress enacted the Northwest Power Planning and Conservation Act (PL 96-501, 1980), which established the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC), formerly the Northwest Power Planning Council. The NPCC was directed by Congress to develop a regional Power Plan and also the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) to restore or replace losses of fish caused by construction and operation of hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River Basin. In developing the FWP, Congress specifically directed NPCC to solicit recommendations for measures to be included in the Program from the region's fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes. All measures adopted by the Council were also required to be consistent with the management objectives of the agencies and tribes [Section 4.(h)(6)(A)], the legal rights of Indian tribes in the region [Section 4.(h)(6)(D)] and be based upon and supported by the best available scientific knowledge [Section 4.(h)(6)(B)]. The Resident Fish Stock Status above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams Project, also known as the Joint Stock Assessment Project (JSAP) specifically addresses NPPC Council measure 10.8B.26 of the 1994 program. The Joint Stock Assessment Project is a management tool using ecosystem principles to manage artificial and native fish assemblages in altered environments existing in the Columbia River System above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams (Blocked Area). A three-phase approach of this project will enhance the fisheries resources of the Blocked Area by identifying data gaps, filling data gaps with research, and implementing management recommendations based on research results. The Blocked Area fisheries information is housed in a central location, allowing managers to view the entire system while making decisions, rather than basing management decisions on isolated portions of the system. The JSAP is designed and guided jointly by fisheries managers in the Blocked Area. The initial year of the project (1997) identified the need for a central data storage and analysis facility, coordination with the StreamNet project, compilation of Blocked Area fisheries information, and a report on the ecological condition of the Spokane River System. These needs were addressed in 1998 by acquiring a central location with a data storage and analysis system, coordinating a pilot project with StreamNet, compiling fisheries distribution data throughout the Blocked Area, identifying data gaps based on compiled information, and researching the ecological condition of the Spokane River. In order to ensure that any additional information collected throughout the life of this project will be easily stored and manipulated by the central storage facility, it was necessary to develop standardized methodologies between the JSAP fisheries managers. Common collection and analytical methodologies were developed in 1999. The project began addressing identified data gaps throughout the Blocked Area in 1999. Data collection of established projects and a variety of newly developed sampling projects are ongoing. Projects developed and undertaken by JSAP fisheries managers include investigations of the Pend Orielle River and its tributaries, the Little Spokane River and its tributaries, and water bodies within and near the Spokane Indian Reservation. Migration patterns of adfluvial and reservoir fish in Box Canyon Reservoir and its tributaries, a baseline assessment of Boundary Reservoir and its tributaries, ecological assessment of mountain lakes in Pend Oreille County, and assessments of streams and lakes on the Spokane Indian Reservation were completed by 2001. Assessments of the Little Spokane River and its tributaries, Spokane River below Spokane Falls, tributaries to the Pend Oreille River, small lakes in Pend Oreille County, WA, and water bodies within and near the Spokane Indian Reservation were conducted in 2002 and 2003. This work was done in accordance with the scope of work approved by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA).

  19. Evaluation of the Biological Effects of the Northwest Power Conservation Council's Mainstem Amendment on the Fisheries Upstream and Downstream of Libby Dam, Montana, 2007-2008 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sylvester, Ryan; Stephens, Brian; Tohtz, Joel

    2009-04-03

    A new project began in 2005 to monitor the biological and physical effects of improved operations of Hungry Horse and Libby Dams, Montana, called for by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) Mainstem Amendment. This operating strategy was designed to benefit resident fish impacted by hydropower and flood control operations. Under the new operating guidelines, July through September reservoir drafts will be limited to 10 feet from full pool during the highest 80% of water supply years and 20 feet from full pool during the lowest 20% of water supply (drought) years. Limits were also established on how rapidly discharge from the dams can be increased or decreased depending on the season. The NPCC also directed the federal agencies that operate Libby and Hungry Horse Dams to implement a new flood control strategy (VARQ) and directed Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks to evaluate biological responses to this operating strategy. The Mainstem Amendment operating strategy has not been fully implemented at the Montana dams as of June 2008 but the strategy will be implemented in 2009. This report highlights the monitoring methods used to monitor the effects of the Mainstem Amendment operations on fishes, habitat, and aquatic invertebrates upstream and downstream of Libby Dam. We also present initial assessments of data and the effects of various operating strategies on physical and biological components of the systems upstream and downstream of Libby Dam. Annual electrofishing surveys in the Kootenai River and selected tributaries, along with gill net surveys in the reservoir, are being used to quantify the impacts of dam operations on fish populations upstream and downstream of Libby Dam. Scales and otoliths are being used to determine the age structure and growth of focal species. Annual population estimates and tagging experiments provide estimates of survival and growth in the mainstem Kootenai River and selected tributaries. Radio telemetry will be used to validate an existing Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) model developed for the Kootenai River and will also be used to assess the effect of changes in discharge on fish movements and habitat use downstream of Libby Dam. Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags will be injected into rainbow, bull, and cutthroat trout throughout the mainstem Kootenai River and selected tributaries to provide information on growth, survival, and migration patterns in relation to abiotic and biotic variables. Model simulations (RIVBIO) are used to calculate the effects of dam operations on the wetted perimeter and benthic biomass in the Kootenai River below Libby Dam. Additional models (IFIM) will also be used to evaluate the impacts of dam operations on the amount of available habitat for different life stages of rainbow and bull trout in the Kootenai River.

  20. Next Update: November 2016

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

    megawatts January NERC Regional Assesment Area 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 FRCC 39,860 37,127 27,122 38,581 37,521 40,258 39,675 45,033 35,545 41,247 34,464 38,352 41,705 44,945 53,093 46,086 38,518 36,733 38,895 NPCC 41,680 41,208 40,009 44,199 45,227 43,553 42,039 45,987 66,215 47,041 43,661 45,002 46,803 45,047 43,849 45,395 43,827 45,545 47,072 Balance of Eastern Region 322,095 335,954 307,784 343,981 347,724 349,937 340,525

  1. Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam, 2004-2005 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, Jay; Garrow, Larry (Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Libby, MT)

    2005-06-01

    ''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine the biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP) uses a combination of techniques to collect physical and biological data within the Kootenai River Basin. These data serve several purposes including: the development and refinement of models used in management of water resources and operation of Libby Dam; investigations into the limiting factors of native fish populations, gathering basic life history information, tracking trends in endangered and threatened species, and the assessment of restoration or management activities designed to restore native fishes and their habitats.

  2. DESIGN AND TEST OF AN INSTRUMENT FOR MEASURING MICROTHERMAL SEEING ON THE MAGDALENA RIDGE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jorgensen, A. M.; Klinglesmith, D. A.; Speights, J.; Clements, A.; Patel, J.

    2009-05-15

    We have constructed and operated an automated instrument for measuring ground-level microthermal seeing at the Magdalena Ridge Observatory (MRO). The MRO is located at an altitude of 10500' in the Cibola National Forest in New Mexico, USA. It is the planned site for the MRO Optical Interferometer (MROI) planned for up to 10 collecting elements, each with a diameter of 1.4 m, and baselines eventually up to approximately 400 m. As part of the preparation for construction we deployed a system to characterize the ground-level seeing across the observatory site. The instrument is built largely of off-the-shelf components, with only the sensor head and power supply requiring electronic board assembly. Even in those cases the board architecture is very simple. The first proof-of-concept system was deployed for several weeks in the autumn of 2004, and has since undergone several iterations. The latest configuration operates entirely off batteries, incorporates wireless data acquisition, and is thus able to operate in an area with no shelter, power, or communications. In this paper we present the design of the instrument, and show initial data. The microthermal tower has four sensor pairs at heights from 0.8 to 4.41 m, significantly lower than other microthermal experiments, because of the need to characterize the seeing near the ground. We find significant variation in the contribution of this range of heights to the seeing, contributing up to 0.''3 of the seeing at some times and only 0.''02 at other times. The individual sensor power spectra have a slope in the range of 1.4--1.5, which is lower than the 1.67 slope predicted by Kolmogorov turbulence theory. We measure the well known effect of improved seeing immediately around sunset. While we find significant variation in the microthermal seeing, we did not find a pattern of corresponding variations in weather conditions, suggesting that a complicated set of factors control microthermal turbulence.

  3. inet

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2006-03-10

    INET's was developed in the 80's when the Internet was in it's infancy and various vendors were attempting to get into the ball game with half baked code that indicated a lack of understanding about basic IP standards in the area of IP and ICMP. Various test applications were written to test conformance to the early Internet RFC's especially ICMP. The INET program allows the user to exercise various minor internet services provided by amore » specified service host. See the DDN Protocol Handbook, Volume Two, Section 8 for a detailed description of various minor applications which one might attempt to exercise. The unix network daemon "inetd" was the inspiration for the name "inet". A simple C library generated at the time was recently used to build a program called 'dp' shich GROK uses to transfer BAG session information to some backend data collector such as DISARM (LA-CC number 05-D47)« less

  4. National and Regional Water and Wastewater Rates For Use inCost-Benefit Models and Evaluations of Water Efficiency Programs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fisher, Diane C.; Whitehead, Camilla Dunham; Melody, Moya

    2006-09-01

    Calculating the benefits and costs of water conservation orefficiency programs requires knowing the marginal cost of the water andwastewater saved by those programs. Developing an accurate picture of thepotential cost savings from water conservation requires knowing the costof the last few units of water consumed or wastewater released, becausethose are the units that would be saved by increased water efficiency.This report describes the data we obtained on water and wastewater ratesand costs, data gaps we identified, and other issues related to using thedata to estimate the cost savings that might accrue from waterconservation programs. We identified three water and wastewater ratesources. Of these, we recommend using Raftelis Financial Corporation(RFC) because it: a) has the most comprehensive national coverage; and b)provides greatest detail on rates to calculate marginal rates. The figurebelow shows the regional variation in water rates for a range ofconsumption blocks. Figure 1A Marginal Rates of Water Blocks by Regionfrom RFC 2004Water and wastewater rates are rising faster than the rateof inflation. For example, from 1996 to 2004 the average water rateincreased 39.5 percent, average wastewater rate increased 37.8 percent,the CPI (All Urban) increased 20.1 percent, and the CPI (Water andSewerage Maintenance) increased 31.1 percent. On average, annualincreases were 4.3 percent for water and 4.1 percent for wastewater,compared to 2.3 percent for the All Urban CPI and 3.7 percent for the CPIfor water and sewerage maintenance. If trends in rates for water andwastewater rates continue, water-efficient products will become morevaluable and more cost-effective.

  5. Slide 1

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

    - Our National Treasure 2013 EIA Energy Conference June 17-18, 2013 Washington, DC Jim Tramuto Vice President Governmental & Regulatory Strategies - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 XOM CHK APC DVN SWN BP SWN ECA COP BHP SWN RDSA CVX WPX SWN COG EOG APA EQT OXY SWN RRC QEP UPL EP XCO CNX SWN NBL PXD SM NFX XEC MRO SD KWK PXP EGN CRK BBG FST SWN Ranked 5 th in U.S. Gas Production US Lower 48 Gas Production Sorted by 1Q13 (MMcf/d) SWN is 5 th overall as of 1Q13 1Q12 1Q09 1Q10 1Q11

  6. Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam, 2003-2004 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, Jay; Garrow, Larry

    2004-06-01

    ''Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam'' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating for damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine the biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan. Montana FWP uses a combination of diverse techniques to collect a variety of physical and biological data within the Kootenai River Basin. These data serve several purposes including: the development and refinement of models used in management of water resources and operation of Libby Dam; investigations into the limiting factors of native fish populations, gathering basic life history information, tracking trends in endangered, threatened species, and the assessment of restoration or management activities intended to restore native fishes and their habitats.

  7. Medium-range structure and glass forming ability in Zr–Cu–Al bulk metallic glasses

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Zhang, Pei; Maldonis, Jason J.; Besser, M. F.; Kramer, M. J.; Voyles, Paul M.

    2016-03-05

    Fluctuation electron microscopy experiments combined with hybrid reverse Monte Carlo modeling show a correlation between medium-range structure at the nanometer scale and glass forming ability in two Zr–Cu–Al bulk metallic glass (BMG) alloys. Both Zr50Cu35Al15 and Zr50Cu45Al5 exhibit two nanoscale structure types, one icosahedral and the other more crystal-like. In Zr50Cu35Al15, the poorer glass former, the crystal-like structure is more stable under annealing below the glass transition temperature, Tg, than in Zr50Cu45Al5. Variable resolution fluctuation microscopy of the MRO clusters show that in Zr50Cu35Al15 on sub-Tg annealing, the crystal-like clusters shrink even as they grow more ordered, while icosahedral-like clustersmore » grow. Furthermore, the results suggest that achieving better glass forming ability in this alloy system may depend more on destabilizing crystal-like structures than enhancing non-crystalline structures.« less

  8. DEVELOPMENT OF GLASS MATRICES FOR HLW RADIOACTIVE WASTES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jantzen, C.

    2010-03-18

    Vitrification is currently the most widely used technology for the treatment of high level radioactive wastes (HLW) throughout the world. Most of the nations that have generated HLW are immobilizing in either borosilicate glass or phosphate glass. One of the primary reasons that glass has become the most widely used immobilization media is the relative simplicity of the vitrification process, e.g. melt waste plus glass forming frit additives and cast. A second reason that glass has become widely used for HLW is that the short range order (SRO) and medium range order (MRO) found in glass atomistically bonds the radionuclides and governs the melt properties such as viscosity, resistivity, sulphate solubility. The molecular structure of glass controls contaminant/radionuclide release by establishing the distribution of ion exchange sites, hydrolysis sites, and the access of water to those sites. The molecular structure is flexible and hence accounts for the flexibility of glass formulations to waste variability. Nuclear waste glasses melt between 1050-1150 C which minimizes the volatility of radioactive components such as Tc{sup 99}, Cs{sup 137}, and I{sup 129}. Nuclear waste glasses have good long term stability including irradiation resistance. Process control models based on the molecular structure of glass have been mechanistically derived and have been demonstrated to be accurate enough to control the world's largest HLW Joule heated ceramic melter in the US since 1996 at 95% confidence.

  9. Selected Area Fishery Evaluation Project Economic Analysis Study Final Report, Final Draft Revision 4: November 10, 2006.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bonneville Power Administration; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

    2006-11-01

    The purpose of this Study is to provide an economic review of current and proposed changes to the Select Area Fishery Evaluation Project (SAFE or Project). The Study results are the information requested in comments made on the Project by a joint review dated March 2005 by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) and Independent Economic Analysis Board (IEAB). North et al. (2006) addressed technical questions about operations and plans, and this report contains the response information for comments concerning Project economics. This report can be considered an economic feasibility review meeting guidelines for cost-effective analysis developed by the IEAB (2003). It also contains other economic measurement descriptions to illustrate the economic effects of SAFE. The SAFE is an expansion of a hatchery project (locally called the Clatsop Economic Development Council Fisheries Project or CEDC) started in 1977 that released an early run coho (COH) stock into the Youngs River. The Youngs River entrance to the Columbia River at River Mile 12 is called Youngs Bay, which is located near Astoria, Oregon. The purpose of the hatchery project was to provide increased fishing opportunities for the in-river commercial fishing gillnet fleet. Instead of just releasing fish at the hatchery, a small scale net pen acclimation project in Youngs Bay was tried in 1987. Hirose et al. (1998) found that 1991-1992 COH broodstock over-wintered at the net pens had double the smolt-to-adult return rate (SAR) of traditional hatchery release, less than one percent stray rates, and 99 percent fishery harvests. It was surmised that smolts from other Columbia River hatcheries could be hauled to the net pens for acclimation and release to take advantage of the SAR's and fishing rates. Proposals were tendered to Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and other agencies to fund the expansion for using other hatcheries smolts and other off-channel release sites. The BPA, who had been providing funds to the Project since 1982, greatly increased their financial participation for the experimental expansion of the net pen operations in 1993. Instead of just being a funding partner in CEDC operations, the BPA became a major financing source for other hatchery production operations. The BPA has viewed the 10 plus years of funding since then as an explorative project with two phases: a 'research' phase ending in 1993, and a 'development' phase ending in 2006. The next phase is referred to in proposals to BPA for continued funding as an 'establishment' phase to be started in 2007. There are three components of SAFE: (1) The CEDC owns and operates the net pens in the Columbia River estuary on the Oregon side. The CEDC also owns and operates a hatchery on the South Fork Klaskanine River. (2) There are many other hatcheries contributing smolts to the net pen operations. The present suite of hatcheries are operated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). The WDFW owns and operates the net pens at Deep River on the Washington side of the Columbia River. (3) The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) responsibilities are performed by employees of WDFW and ODFW. BPA provides funding for all three components as part of NPCC Project No. 199306000. The CEDC and other contributing hatcheries have other sources of funds that also support the SAFE. BPA's minor share (less than 10 percent) of CEDC funding in 1982 grew to about 55 percent in 1993 with the beginning of the development phase of the Project. The balance of the CEDC budget over the years has been from other federal, state, and local government programs. It has also included a 10 percent fee assessment (five percent of ex-vessel value received by harvesters plus five percent of purchase value made by processors) on harvests that take place in off-channel locations near the release sites. The CEDC total annual budget in the last several years has been in the $600 to $700 thousand range. The Project over the years also has relied on heavy volunteer participation and other agency in-kind support. The CEDC budget is exclusive of WDFW and ODFW M&E costs, and all non-CEDC hatchery smolt production costs. The annual estimated operation and management costs for SAFE except for the value of volunteer time and donated materials is in the $2.4 million range. Of this amount, BPA annual funding has been in the $1.6 million or two thirds range in recent years. Depreciation on capital assets (or an equivalent amount for annual contributions to a capital improvement fund) would be in addition to these operation and management costs. North et al. (2006) documented results through the second of three phases and described potential capacities. Full capacity as defined in early planning for the project (TRG 1996) was not reached by the time the second phase ended.

  10. Amorphous and nanocrystalline phase formation in highly-driven Al-based binary alloys

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kalay, Yunus Eren

    2008-10-15

    Remarkable advances have been made since rapid solidification was first introduced to the field of materials science and technology. New types of materials such as amorphous alloys and nanostructure materials have been developed as a result of rapid solidification techniques. While these advances are, in many respects, ground breaking, much remains to be discerned concerning the fundamental relationships that exist between a liquid and a rapidly solidified solid. The scope of the current dissertation involves an extensive set of experimental, analytical, and computational studies designed to increase the overall understanding of morphological selection, phase competition, and structural hierarchy that occurs under far-from equilibrium conditions. High pressure gas atomization and Cu-block melt-spinning are the two different rapid solidification techniques applied in this study. The research is mainly focused on Al-Si and Al-Sm alloy systems. Silicon and samarium produce different, yet favorable, systems for exploration when alloyed with aluminum under far-from equilibrium conditions. One of the main differences comes from the positions of their respective T{sub 0} curves, which makes Al-Si a good candidate for solubility extension while the plunging T{sub 0} line in Al-Sm promotes glass formation. The rapidly solidified gas-atomized Al-Si powders within a composition range of 15 to 50 wt% Si are examined using scanning and transmission electron microscopy. The non-equilibrium partitioning and morphological selection observed by examining powders at different size classes are described via a microstructure map. The interface velocities and the amount of undercooling present in the powders are estimated from measured eutectic spacings based on Jackson-Hunt (JH) and Trivedi-Magnin-Kurz (TMK) models, which permit a direct comparison of theoretical predictions. For an average particle size of 10 {micro}m with a Peclet number of {approx}0.2, JH and TMK deviate from each other. This deviation indicates an adiabatic type solidification path where heat of fusion is reabsorbed. It is interesting that this particle size range is also consistent with the appearance of a microcellular growth. While no glass formation is observed within this system, the smallest size powders appear to consist of a mixture of nanocrystalline Si and Al. Al-Sm alloys have been investigated within a composition range of 34 to 42 wt% Sm. Gas atomized powders of Al-Sm are investigated to explore the morphological and structural hierarchy that correlates with different degrees of departure from full equilibrium conditions. The resultant powders show a variety of structural selection with respect to amount of undercooling, with an amorphous structure appearing at the highest cooling rates. Because of the chaotic nature of gas atomization, Cu-block melt-spinning is used to produce a homogeneous amorphous structure. The as-quenched structure within Al-34 to 42 wt% Sm consists of nanocrystalline fcc-Al (on the order of 5 nm) embedded in an amorphous matrix. The nucleation density of fcc-Al after initial crystallization is on the order of 10{sup 22}-10{sup 23} m{sup -3}, which is 10{sup 5}-10{sup 6} orders of magnitude higher than what classical nucleation theory predicts. Detailed analysis of liquid and as-quenched structures using high energy synchrotron X-ray diffraction, high energy transmission electron microscopy, and atom probe tomography techniques revealed an Al-Sm network similar in appearance to a medium range order (MRO) structure. A model whereby these MRO clusters promote the observed high nucleation density of fcc-Al nanocrystals is proposed. The devitrification path was identified using high temperature, in-situ, high energy synchrotron X-ray diffraction techniques and the crystallization kinetics were described using an analytical Johnson-Mehl-Avrami (JMA) approach.

  11. Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Project (CSMEP) - Year 5 : Annual Report for FY 2008.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marmorek, David R.; Porter, Marc; Pickard, Darcy; Wieckowski, Katherine

    2008-11-19

    The Collaborative Systemwide Monitoring and Evaluation Project (CSMEP) is a coordinated effort to improve the quality, consistency, and focus of fish population and habitat data to answer key monitoring and evaluation questions relevant to major decisions in the Columbia River Basin. CSMEP was initiated by the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA) in October 2003. The project is funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) through the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's Fish and Wildlife Program (NPCC). CSMEP is a major effort of the federal state and Tribal fish and wildlife managers to develop regionally integrated monitoring and evaluation (M&E) across the Columbia River Basin. CSMEP has focused its work on five monitoring domains: status and trends monitoring of populations and action effectiveness monitoring of habitat, harvest, hatcheries, and the hydrosystem. CSMEP's specific goals are to: (1) interact with federal, state and tribal programmatic and technical entities responsible for M&E of fish and wildlife, to ensure that work plans developed and executed under this project are well integrated with ongoing work by these entities; (2) document, integrate, and make available existing monitoring data on listed salmon, steelhead, bull trout and other fish species of concern; (3) critically assess strengths and weaknesses of these data for answering key monitoring questions; and (4) collaboratively design, implement and evaluate improved M&E methods with other programmatic entities in the Pacific Northwest. During FY2008 CSMEP biologists continued their reviews of the strengths and weaknesses (S&W) of existing subbasin inventory data for addressing monitoring questions about population status and trends at different spatial and temporal scales. Work was focused on Lower Columbia Chinook and steelhead, Snake River fall Chinook, Upper Columbia Spring Chinook and steelhead, and Middle Columbia River Chinook and steelhead. These FY2008 data assessments and others assembled over the years of the CSMEP project can be accessed on the CBFWA public website. The CSMEP web database (http://csmep.streamnet.org/) houses metadata inventories from S&W assessments of Columbia River Basin watersheds that were completed prior to FY2008. These older S&W assessments are maintained by StreamNet, but budget cutbacks prevented us from adding the new FY2008 assessments into the database. Progress was made in FY2008 on CSMEP's goals of collaborative design of improved M&E methods. CSMEP convened two monitoring design workshops in Portland (December 5 and 6, 2007 and February 11 and 12, 2008) to continue exploration of how best to integrate the most robust features of existing M&E programs with new approaches. CSMEP continued to build on this information to develop improved designs and analytical tools for monitoring the status and trends of fish populations and the effectiveness of hatchery and hydrosystem recovery actions within the Columbia River Basin. CSMEP did not do any new work on habitat or harvest effectiveness monitoring designs in FY2008 due to budget cutbacks. CSMEP presented the results of the Snake Basin Pilot Study to the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) in Portland on December 7, 2008. This study is the finalization of CSMEP's pilot exercise of developing design alternatives across different M&E domains within the Snake River Basin spring/summer Chinook ESU. This work has been summarized in two linked reports (CSMEP 2007a and CSMEP 2007b). CSMEP participants presented many of the analyses developed for the Snake Basin Pilot work at the Western Division American Fisheries Society (AFS) conference in Portland on May 4 to 7, 2008. For the AFS conference CSMEP organized a symposium on regional monitoring and evaluation approaches. A presentation on CSMEP's Cost Integration Database Tool and Salmon Viability Monitoring Simulation Model developed for the Snake Basin Pilot Study was also given to the Pacific Northwest Aquatic monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) stee

  12. Libby Mitigation Program, 2007 Annual Progress Report: Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dunnigan, James; DeShazer, J.; Garrow, L.

    2009-05-26

    Libby Reservoir was created under an International Columbia River Treaty between the United States and Canada for cooperative water development of the Columbia River Basin (Columbia River Treaty 1964). Libby Reservoir inundated 109 stream miles of the mainstem Kootenai River in the United States and Canada, and 40 miles of tributary streams in the U.S. that provided habitat for spawning, juvenile rearing, and migratory passage (Figure 1). The authorized purpose of the dam is to provide power (91.5%), flood control (8.3%), and navigation and other benefits (0.2%; Storm et al. 1982). The Pacific Northwest Power Act of 1980 recognized possible conflicts stemming from hydroelectric projects in the northwest and directed Bonneville Power Administration to 'protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife to the extent affected by the development and operation of any hydroelectric project of the Columbia River and its tributaries' (4(h)(10)(A)). Under the Act, the Northwest Power Planning Council was created and recommendations for a comprehensive fish and wildlife program were solicited from the region's federal, state, and tribal fish and wildlife agencies. Among Montana's recommendations was the proposal that research be initiated to quantify acceptable seasonal minimum pool elevations to maintain or enhance the existing fisheries (Graham et al. 1982). Research to determine how operations of Libby Dam affect the reservoir and river fishery and to suggest ways to lessen these effects began in May 1983. The framework for the Libby Reservoir Model (LRMOD) was completed in 1989. Development of Integrated Rule Curves (IRCs) for Libby Dam operation was completed in 1996 (Marotz et al. 1996). The Libby Reservoir Model and the IRCs continue to be refined (Marotz et al 1999). Initiation of mitigation projects such as lake rehabilitation and stream restoration began in 1996. The primary focus of the Libby Mitigation project now is to restore the fisheries and fish habitat in basin streams and lakes. 'Mitigation for the Construction and Operation of Libby Dam' is part of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) resident fish and wildlife program. The program was mandated by the Northwest Planning Act of 1980, and is responsible for mitigating damages to fish and wildlife caused by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin. The objective of Phase I of the project (1983 through 1987) was to maintain or enhance the Libby Reservoir fishery by quantifying seasonal water levels and developing ecologically sound operational guidelines. The objective of Phase II of the project (1988 through 1996) was to determine the biological effects of reservoir operations combined with biotic changes associated with an aging reservoir. The objectives of Phase III of the project (1996 through present) are to implement habitat enhancement measures to mitigate for dam effects, to provide data for implementation of operational strategies that benefit resident fish, monitor reservoir and river conditions, and monitor mitigation projects for effectiveness. This project completes urgent and high priority mitigation actions as directed by the Kootenai Subbasin Plan.

  13. The Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project, 2008 Annual Progress Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Contor, Craig R.; Harris, Robin; King, Marty

    2009-06-10

    The Umatilla Basin Natural Production Monitoring and Evaluation Project (UBNPMEP) is funded by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) as directed by section 4(h) of the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 (P.L.96-501). This project is in accordance with and pursuant to measures 4.2A, 4.3C.1, 7.1A.2, 7.1C.3, 7.1C.4 and 7.1D.2 of the Northwest Power Planning Council's (NPPC) Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1994). Work was conducted by the Fisheries Program of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR). The UBNPMEP is coordinated with two Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) research projects that also monitor and evaluate the success of the Umatilla Fisheries Restoration Plan. This project deals with the natural production component of the plan, and the ODFW projects evaluate hatchery operations (project No. 1990-005-00, Umatilla Hatchery M & E) and smolt outmigration (project No. 1989-024-01, Evaluation of Juvenile Salmonid Outmigration and Survival in the Lower Umatilla River). Collectively these three projects monitor and evaluate natural and hatchery salmonid production in the Umatilla River Basin. The need for natural production monitoring has been identified in multiple planning documents including Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit Volume I, 5b-13 (CRITFC 1996), the Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan (CTUIR & ODFW 1990), the Umatilla Basin Annual Operation Plan, the Umatilla Subbasin Summary (CTUIR & ODFW 2001), the Subbasin Plan (CTUIR & ODFW 2004), and the Comprehensive Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Plan (CTUIR and ODFW 2006). Natural production monitoring and evaluation is also consistent with Section III, Basinwide Provisions, Strategy 9 of the 2000 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPPC 1994, NPCC 2004). The Umatilla Basin M&E plan developed along with efforts to restore natural populations of spring and fall Chinook salmon, (Oncorhynchus tshawytsha), coho salmon (O. kisutch), and enhance summer steelhead (O. mykiss). The need for restoration began with agricultural development in the early 1900's that extirpated salmon and reduced steelhead runs (Bureau of Reclamation, BOR 1988). The most notable development was the construction and operation of Three Mile Falls Dam (TMD) and other irrigation projects which dewatered the Umatilla River during salmon migrations. CTUIR and ODFW developed the Umatilla Hatchery Master Plan to restore fisheries to the basin. The plan was completed in 1990 and included the following objectives which were updated in 1999: (1) Establish hatchery and natural runs of Chinook and coho salmon. (2) Enhance existing summer steelhead populations through a hatchery program. (3) Provide sustainable tribal and non-tribal harvest of salmon and steelhead. (4) Maintain the genetic characteristics of salmonids in the Umatilla River Basin. (5) Increase annual returns to Three Mile Falls Dam to 31,500 adult salmon and steelhead. In the past the M&E project conducted long-term monitoring activities as well as two and three-year projects that address special needs for adaptive management. Examples of these projects include adult passage evaluations, habitat assessment surveys (Contor et al. 1995, Contor et al. 1996, Contor et al. 1997, Contor et al. 1998), and genetic monitoring (Currens & Schreck 1995, Narum et al. 2004). The project's goal is to provide quality information to managers and researchers working to restore anadromous salmonids to the Umatilla River Basin. The status of completion of each of BPA's standardized work element was reported in 'Pisces'(March 2008) and is summarized.

  14. Spinning Reserve From Responsive Loads

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirby, B.J.

    2003-04-08

    Responsive load is the most underutilized reliability resource available to the power system today. It is currently not used at all to provide spinning reserve. Historically there were good reasons for this, but recent technological advances in communications and controls have provided new capabilities and eliminated many of the old obstacles. North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Northeast Power Coordinating Council (NPCC), New York State Reliability Council (NYSRC), and New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) rules are beginning to recognize these changes and are starting to encourage responsive load provision of reliability services. The Carrier ComfortChoice responsive thermostats provide an example of these technological advances. This is a technology aimed at reducing summer peak demand through central control of residential and small commercial air-conditioning loads. It is being utilized by Long Island Power Authority (LIPA), Consolidated Edison (ConEd), Southern California Edison (SCE), and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E). The technology is capable of delivering even greater response in the faster spinning reserve time frame (while still providing peak reduction). Analysis of demand reduction testing results from LIPA during the summer of 2002 provides evidence to back up this claim. It also demonstrates that loads are different from generators and that the conventional wisdom, which advocates for starting with large loads as better ancillary service providers, is flawed. The tempting approach of incrementally adapting ancillary service requirements, which were established when generators were the only available resources, will not work. While it is easier for most generators to provide replacement power and non-spinning reserve (the slower response services) than it is to supply spinning reserve (the fastest service), the opposite is true for many loads. Also, there is more financial reward for supplying spinning reserve than for supplying the other reserve services as a result of the higher spinning reserve prices. The LIPAedge program (LIPA's demand reduction program using Carrier ComfortChoice thermostats) provides an opportunity to test the use of responsive load for spinning reserve. With potentially 75 MW of spinning reserve capability already installed, this test program can also make an important contribution to the capacity needs of Long Island during the summer of 2003. Testing could also be done at ConEd ({approx}30 MW), SCE ({approx}15 MW), and/or SDG&E ({approx}15 MW). This paper is divided into six chapters. Chapter 2 discusses the contingency reserve ancillary services, their functions in supporting power system reliability, and their technical requirements. It also discusses the policy and tariff requirements and attempts to distinguish between ones that are genuinely necessary and ones that are artifacts of the technologies that were historically used to provide the services. Chapter 3 discusses how responsive load could provide contingency reserves (especially spinning reserve) for the power system. Chapter 4 specifically discusses the Carrier ComfortChoice responsive thermostat technology, the LIPAedge experience with that technology, and how the technology could be used to supply spinning reserve. Chapter 5 discusses a number of unresolved issues and suggests areas for further research. Chapter 6 offers conclusions and recommendations.

  15. Using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling to address nonlinear kinetics and changes in rodent physiology and metabolism due to aging and adaptation in deriving reference values for propylene glycol methyl ether and propylene glycol methyl ether acetate.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirman, C R.; Sweeney, Lisa M.; Corley, Rick A.; Gargas, M L.

    2005-04-01

    Reference values, including an oral reference dose (RfD) and an inhalation reference concentration (RfC), were derived for propylene glycol methyl ether (PGME), and an oral RfD was derived for its acetate (PGMEA). These values were based upon transient sedation observed in F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice during a two-year inhalation study. The dose-response relationship for sedation was characterized using internal dose measures as predicted by a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model for PGME and its acetate. PBPK modeling was used to account for changes in rodent physiology and metabolism due to aging and adaptation, based on data collected during weeks 1, 2, 26, 52, and 78 of a chronic inhalation study. The peak concentration of PGME in richly perfused tissues was selected as the most appropriate internal dose measure based upon a consideration of the mode of action for sedation and similarities in tissue partitioning between brain and other richly perfused tissues. Internal doses (peak tissue concentrations of PGME) were designated as either no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) or lowest-observed-adverse-effect levels (LOAELs) based upon the presence or absence of sedation at each time-point, species, and sex in the two year study. Distributions of the NOAEL and LOAEL values expressed in terms of internal dose were characterized using an arithmetic mean and standard deviation, with the mean internal NOAEL serving as the basis for the reference values, which was then divided by appropriate uncertainty factors. Where data were permitting, chemical-specific adjustment factors were derived to replace default uncertainty factor values of ten. Nonlinear kinetics are were predicted by the model in all species at PGME concentrations exceeding 100 ppm, which complicates interspecies and low-dose extrapolations. To address this complication, reference values were derived using two approaches which differ with respect to the order in which these extrapolations were performed: (1) uncertainty factor application followed by interspecies extrapolation (PBPK modeling); and (2) interspecies extrapolation followed by uncertainty factor application. The resulting reference values for these two approaches are substantially different, with values from the former approach being 7-fold higher than those from the latter approach. Such a striking difference between the two approaches reveals an underlying issue that has received little attention in the literature regarding the application of uncertainty factors and interspecies extrapolations to compounds where saturable kinetics occur in the range of the NOAEL. Until such discussions have taken place, reference values based on the latter approach are recommended for risk assessments involving human exposures to PGME and PGMEA.

  16. Secure IRC Server

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    2003-08-25

    The IRCD is an IRC server that was originally distributed by the IRCD Hybrid developer team for use as a server in IRC message over the public Internet. By supporting the IRC protocol defined in the IRC RFC, IRCD allows the users to create and join channels for group or one-to-one text-based instant messaging. It stores information about channels (e.g., whether it is public, secret, or invite-only, the topic set, membership) and users (who ismore » online and what channels they are members of). It receives messages for a specific user or channel and forwards these messages to the targeted destination. Since server-to-server communication is also supported, these targeted destinations may be connected to different IRC servers. Messages are exchanged over TCP connections that remain open between the client and the server. The IRCD is being used within the Pervasive Computing Collaboration Environment (PCCE) as the 'chat server' for message exchange over public and private channels. After an LBNLSecureMessaging(PCCE chat) client has been authenticated, the client connects to IRCD with its assigned nickname or 'nick.' The client can then create or join channels for group discussions or one-to-one conversations. These channels can have an initial mode of public or invite-only and the mode may be changed after creation. If a channel is public, any one online can join the discussion; if a channel is invite-only, users can only join if existing members of the channel explicity invite them. Users can be invited to any type of channel and users may be members of multiple channels simultaneously. For use with the PCCE environment, the IRCD application (which was written in C) was ported to Linux and has been tested and installed under Linux Redhat 7.2. The source code was also modified with SSL so that all messages exchanged over the network are encrypted. This modified IRC server also verifies with an authentication server that the client is who he or she claims to be and that this user is authorized to ain access to the IRCD.« less

  17. Columbia River Hatchery Reform System-Wide Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Warren, Dan

    2009-04-16

    The US Congress funded the Puget Sound and Coastal Washington Hatchery Reform Project via annual appropriations to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) beginning in fiscal year 2000. Congress established the project because it recognized that while hatcheries have a necessary role to play in meeting harvest and conservation goals for Pacific Northwest salmonids, the hatchery system was in need of comprehensive reform. Most hatcheries were producing fish for harvest primarily to mitigate for past habitat loss (rather than for conservation of at-risk populations) and were not taking into account the effects of their programs on naturally spawning populations. With numerous species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), conservation of salmon in the Puget Sound area was a high priority. Genetic resources in the region were at risk and many hatchery programs as currently operated were contributing to those risks. Central to the project was the creation of a nine-member independent scientific review panel called the Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG). The HSRG was charged by Congress with reviewing all state, tribal and federal hatchery programs in Puget Sound and Coastal Washington as part of a comprehensive hatchery reform effort to: conserve indigenous salmonid genetic resources; assist with the recovery of naturally spawning salmonid populations; provide sustainable fisheries; and improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of hatchery programs. The HSRG worked closely with the state, tribal and federal managers of the hatchery system, with facilitation provided by the non-profit organization Long Live the Kings and the law firm Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell, to successfully complete reviews of over 200 hatchery programs at more than 100 hatcheries across western Washington. That phase of the project culminated in 2004 with the publication of reports containing the HSRG's principles for hatchery reform and recommendations for Puget Sound/Coastal Washington hatchery programs, followed by the development in 2005 of a suite of analytical tools to support application of the principles (all reports and tools are available at www.hatcheryreform.us). In 2005, Congress directed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-Fisheries (NOAA Fisheries) to replicate the Puget Sound and Coastal Washington Hatchery Reform Project in the Columbia River Basin. The HSRG was expanded to 14 members to include individuals with specific knowledge about the Columbia River salmon and steelhead populations. This second phase was initially envisioned as a one-year review, with emphasis on the Lower Columbia River hatchery programs. It became clear however, that the Columbia River Basin needed to be viewed as an inter-connected ecosystem in order for the review to be useful. The project scope was subsequently expanded to include the entire Basin, with funding for a second year provided by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) under the auspices of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's (NPCC) Fish and Wildlife Program. The objective of the HSRG's Columbia River Basin review was to change the focus of the Columbia River hatchery system. In the past, these hatchery programs have been aimed at supplying adequate numbers of fish for harvest as mitigation primarily for hydropower development in the Basin. A new, ecosystem-based approach is founded on the idea that harvest goals are sustainable only if they are compatible with conservation goals. The challenge before the HSRG was to determine whether or not conservation and harvest goals could be met by fishery managers and, if so, how. The HSRG determined that in order to address these twin goals, both hatchery and harvest reforms are necessary. The HSRG approach represents an important change of direction in managing hatcheries in the region. It provides a clear demonstration that current hatchery programs can indeed be redirected to better meet both conservation and harvest goals. For each Columbia River Basin Environmentally Significant Unit (ESU), Distinct Population Segment (MPG) or Major Population Group (MPG) reviewed, the HSRG presents its findings and recommendations in the form of an HSRG solution. This package of recommended changes to current hatchery and harvest program design and operation is intended to demonstrate how the programs could be managed to significantly increase the likelihood of meeting the managers goals for both harvest and conservation of the ESU/DPS/MPG. The 'HSRG solution' also highlights the biological principles that the HSRG believes must form the foundation for successful use of hatcheries and fisheries as management tools.

  18. Comparative Survival Study (CSS) of PIT-Tagged Spring/Summer Chinook and Summer Steelhead : 2008 Annual Report.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Comparative Survival Study Oversight Committee and Fish Passage Center

    2008-12-02

    The Comparative Survival Study (CSS; BPA Project 199602000) began in 1996 with the objective of establishing a long term dataset of the survival rate of annual generations of salmon from their outmigration as smolts to their return to freshwater as adults to spawn (smolt-to-adult return rate; SAR). The study was implemented with the express need to address the question whether collecting juvenile fish at dams and transporting them downstream in barges and trucks and releasing them downstream of Bonneville Dam was compensating for the effect of the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) on survival of Snake Basin spring/summer Chinook salmon migrating through the hydrosystem. The Completion of this annual report for the CSS signifies the 12th outmigration year of hatchery spring/summer Chinook salmon marked with Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags as part of the CSS and the 9th complete brood year return as adults of those PIT-tagged fish (report covers adult returns from 1997-2006 hatchery Chinook juvenile migrations). In addition, the CSS has provided PIT-tags to on-going tagging operations for wild Chinook since 2002 (report covers adult returns from 1994-2006 wild Chinook juvenile migrations). The CSS tags wild steelhead on the lower Clearwater River and utilized wild and hatchery steelhead from other tagging operations in evaluations of transportation (report covers adult returns from 1997-2005 wild and hatchery steelhead migrations). The primary purpose of this report is to update the time series of smolt-to-adult survival rate data and related parameters with additional years of data since the completion of the CSS 10-yr retrospective analysis report (Schaller et al 2007). The 10-yr report provided a synthesis of the results from this ongoing study, the analytical approaches employed, and the evolving improvements incorporated into the study as reported in CSS annual progress reports. This current report specifically addresses the constructive comments of the most recent regional technical review conducted by the Independent Scientific Advisory Board and Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISAB and ISRP 2007). This report completes the 3-salt returns from migration years 2004 for wild and hatchery Chinook and steelhead (all returns are to Lower Granite Dam). For wild and hatchery Chinook, this report also provides 3-salt returns from migration year 2005 and 2-salt returns from migration year 2006 through a cutoff date of August 13, 2008. For wild and hatchery steelhead, it provides completed 2-salt returns for wild and hatchery steelhead that outmigrated in 2005 (any 3-salt returns of PIT-tagged steelhead are few, but will occur after July 1, 2008). All of the Chinook salmon evaluated in the CSS study exhibit a stream-type life history. All study fish used in this report were uniquely identifiable based on a PIT-tag implanted in the body cavity during (or before) the smolt life stage and retained through their return as adults. These tagged fish can then be detected as juveniles and adults at several locations of the Snake and Columbia rivers. Reductions in the number of individuals detected as the tagged fish grow older provide estimates of survival. This allows comparisons of survival over different life stages between fish with different experiences in the hydrosystem (e.g. transportation vs. in-river migrants and migration through various numbers of dams) as illustrated in Figure 1.1. The CSS is a long term study within the Northwest Power and Conservation Council's Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (NPCC FWP) and is funded by Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). Study design and analyses are conducted through a CSS Oversight Committee with representation from Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC), Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG), Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). The Fish Passage Center (FPC) coordinates the PIT-tagging efforts, data management and preparation