National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for non-annualized 2016-20p 2008p

  1. GAO-11-879T Federal Real Property: Overreliance on Leasing Contributed...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    enhance the use of real property by leasing nonexcess property to an individual or entity Food Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, P. L. No. 110-246, Section 7409 Department of...

  2. GRID Alternatives

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    GNEP Partners and Observers GNEP Partners and Observers A list of GNEP partners and observers. GNEP Partners and Observers (45.67 KB) More Documents & Publications Microsoft PowerPoint - GNEP PARTNERS CANDIDATE PARTNERS AND OBSERVERS.PPT Senior Delegation Officials From All GNEP Participants Meeting Materials: April 21, 2008 <p>GNEP-IAEA_Conference_Announcement.pdf GNEP-IAEA_Conference_Announcement.pdf (50.82 KB) More Documents & Publications Secretary Bodman To Travel to Vienna, Austria

  3. Microsoft Word - Updated By-Laws for EM QA Corporate Board from October 2014-FOR VOTE

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    TSLCC 2007_5_05_08 rev 1.doc Microsoft Word - TSLCC 2007_5_05_08 rev 1.doc Microsoft Word - TSLCC 2007_5_05_08 rev 1.doc (792.51 KB) More Documents & Publications FY 2007 Total System Life Cycle Cost, Pub 2008 Microsoft Word - TSLCC 2007_5_05_08 rev 1.doc FY 2007 Fee Adequacy, Pub 2008 <p>3, 2010 [Address] Dear (Lab/Facility Director): I am writing to ask you to support and promote the technology transfer partnership ombudsman that has been appointed in your laboratory/facility. The role of

  4. Microsoft Word - Permit Change 10-23-08

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

    CCSP.doc Microsoft Word - PeerReview_CCSP.doc Microsoft Word - PeerReview_CCSP.doc (13.58 KB) More Documents & Publications Microsoft Word - PeerReview_SAR.doc EIS-0402: Advance Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement URTAC Meeting - January 2008 <p>SAR.doc Microsoft Word - PeerReview_SAR.doc Microsoft Word - PeerReview_SAR.doc (13.47 KB) More Documents & Publications Microsoft Word - PeerReview_CCSP.doc Microsoft Word - Cross Reference Matrix Introduction.doc

  5. Influence of fatigue on the nanohardness of NiTiCr-wires

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Frotscher, M.; Young, M. L.; Bei, Hongbin; George, Easo P; Neuking, K.; Eggeler, G.

    2009-01-01

    Testing parameters, such as rotational speed and bending radius, have a strong influence on the fatigue life of pseudoelastic NiTi shape-memory alloys during bending rotation fatigue (BRF) experiments [M. F. X. Wagner, Int. J. Mat. Res. 97 (2006), p. 1687-1696. and M. Frotscher, et al., Thermomechanical processing, microstructure and bending rotation fatigue of ultra-fine grained NiTiCr-wires, Proceedings of the International Conference for Shape Memory and Superelastic Technologies (SMST 2007), Tsukuba, Japan, ASM International, (2008), p. 149-158.]. Previous studies showed a decrease in the fatigue life for smaller bending radius (i.e. higher equivalent strain) and larger rotational speed. This observation is associated with an increase of dislocation density, the stabilization of stressinduced martensite during cycling, and an increase of the plateau stresses due to self-heating. In the present study, we examine the influence of these fatigue parameters on the nanohardness and shape recovery of pseudoelastic NiTiCr shape-memory alloy wires by nanoindentation. We show that nanoindentation is a suitable method for the characterization of fatigue-related microstructural changes, which affect the mechanical properties.

  6. Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Volume1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2011-01-01

    Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723).DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations:Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho;Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

  7. Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Summary and Guide for Stakeholders

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2011-01-01

    Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723). DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations: Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

  8. Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2011-01-01

    Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723). DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations: Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.