DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA This Page Intentionally Left Blank DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA Iii Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA This Page Intentionally Left Blank DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA Iii Table of Contents B L M U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA September 2012 Techren Boulder City Solar Project 69kV Gen-Tie Transmission Line Project NVN-90395 PREPARING OFFICE U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Southern Nevada District Office Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, Nevada 702–515–5172 Office 702–515–5010 Fax Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA This page intentionally left blank DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA iii Table of Contents Glossary ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 1.1. Identifying Information: ................................................................................................... 5 1.1.1. Title, EA number, and type of project: .................................................................. 5 1.1.2. Location of Proposed Action: ................................................................................ 5 1.1.3. Name and Location of Preparing Office: ............................................................... 5 1.1.4. Identify the subject function code, lease, serial, or case file number: ................... 5 1.1.5. Applicant Name: .................................................................................................... 5 1.2. Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................. 5 1.2.1. Background ............................................................................................................ 6 1.2.2. Purpose and Need for the Action ........................................................................... 6 1.2.3. Scope of Analysis and Decisions to be Made ........................................................ 6 1.2.4. Relationship to Laws, Regulations, Policies, and Other Plans .............................. 9 1.2.5. Supplemental Authorities ....................................................................................... 9 1.3. Scoping, Public Involvement and Issues: ....................................................................... 10 2. Proposed Action and Alternatives .......................................................................................... 13 2.1. Description of the Proposed Action: .............................................................................. 15 2.1.1. Non-federal Connected Action ............................................................................ 15 2.2. Overview of Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 .................................................................. 15 2.2.1. Alternative 1 ......................................................................................................... 17 2.2.2. Alternative 2 ......................................................................................................... 18 2.2.3. No Action Alternative .......................................................................................... 18 2.2.4. Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail ........................................... 18 2.3. Proposed Project Facilities .............................................................................................. 18 2.3.1. Site Preparation and Mobilization Activities ....................................................... 19 2.3.2. Waste and Hazardous Materials Management ..................................................... 20 2.3.3. Surface Reclamation ............................................................................................ 20 2.3.4. Best Management Practices ................................................................................. 21 2.4. Project Construction Schedule ........................................................................................ 21 2.5. Conformance ................................................................................................................... 22 3. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures ............ 23 3.1. Proposed Project General Setting ................................................................................... 25 3.2. Air Quality and Climate .................................................................................................. 25 3.2.1. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 25 3.2.2. Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 27 3.2.2.1. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 27 3.2.2.2. Alternative 1 .............................................................................................. 27 3.2.2.3. Alternative 2 .............................................................................................. 28 3.2.2.4. Connected Action ...................................................................................... 28 Table of Contents iv DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2012-0146-EA 3.2.3. Mitigation ............................................................................................................. 31 3.3. Geology, Minerals, and Soils .......................................................................................... 31 3.3.1. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 31 3.3.2. Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 32 3.3.2.1. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 32 3.3.2.2. Alternative 1 .............................................................................................. 32 3.3.2.3. Alternative 2 .............................................................................................. 32 3.3.2.4. Connected Action ...................................................................................... 33 3.3.3. Mitigation ............................................................................................................. 33 3.4. Water Resources .............................................................................................................. 33 3.4.1. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 33 3.4.1.1. Groundwater ............................................................................................. 33 3.4.1.2. Surface Water ............................................................................................ 34 3.4.2. Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 34 3.4.2.1. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 34 3.4.2.2. Alternative 1 .............................................................................................. 34 3.4.2.3. Alternative 2 .............................................................................................. 35 3.4.2.4. Connected Action ...................................................................................... 35 3.4.3. Mitigation ............................................................................................................. 35 3.4.3.1. Groundwater ............................................................................................. 35 3.4.3.2. Surface Water ............................................................................................ 36 3.5. Vegetation ....................................................................................................................... 36 3.5.1. Affected Environment .......................................................................................... 36 3.5.2. Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 36 3.5.2.1. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 36 3.5.2.2. Alternative 1 .............................................................................................. 36 3.5.2.3. Alternative 2 .............................................................................................. 37 3.5.2.4. Connected Action ...................................................................................... 37 3.5.3. Mitigation ............................................................................................................. 37 3.6. Special Status Vegetation ................................................................................................ 37 3.6.1. Existing Condition ............................................................................................... 37 3.6.2. Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 38 3.6.2.1. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 38 3.6.2.2. Alternative 1 .............................................................................................. 38 3.6.2.3. Alternative 2 .............................................................................................. 38 3.6.2.4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sustainable Guide to Surfing CONTENTS
    Sustainable Guide To Surfing CONTENTS 1 IntroductIon 03 1.1 What is sustainability? 08 1.2 What is wrong with the planet 08 1.3 How will it affect us as surfers? 12 1.4 Measuring our effect on the planet 17 2 EnErGY 19 2.1 Where does it come from and where does it go? 20 2.2 Energy: what to do? 24 3 TRAVEL 29 3.1 driving 30 3.2 Flying 33 3.3 Travelling: what to do 35 4 STUFF 44 4.1 the life cycle of stuff 45 4.2 Surfwear, marketing and the media 52 4.3 Surfboards 54 4.4 Wetsuits 57 4.5 other surfing gear 59 4.6 Stuff: what to do 61 5 concLusion 69 6 Further ReadInG (And viewinG) 71 7 ReferEnces 72 Thanks to: 1 INTRODUCTION the following two alternatives were written in 1972, in a u.K. magazine called Surf Insight. It’s a beautiful day – the sun clear and strong – sky absolute blue and the air fresh on your nostrils. You wake to a bowl of fresh fruit and two huge farm 1 eggs, grab your board and walk through green, dewy fields to your favourite surf spot. Not another being in sight except for the animals and birds going about their morning’s business. The beach is pure and inviting – you dig your toes into golden sand… It’s a beautiful day? – the sun weak – half obliterated by a perfect morning smog, the sky greyish-blue and the air smarting in your nostrils and choking your lungs… You gasp for another deep breath of sweet industrial smog – a yummy bowl of plastic Krunchy Pops with pasteurized milk and two battery- hen eggs you can hardly taste gobbled down with relish before the long walk through a concrete jungle to your favourite surf spot.
    [Show full text]
  • A Technical Comparison of Coal Pipeline Options
    A TECHNICAL COMPARISON OF COAL PIPELINE OPTIONS By N.T. Cowper1, J. Sobota2 and A.D. Thomas1 1 Slurry Systems Pty Limited, Sydney, Australia. [email protected] 2 Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland Hydrotransport 18 Conference, Rio de Janeiro September 2010 Long distance transportation of coal was commercially proven in the highly successful 440 km Black Mesa Coal Pipeline commissioned in 1970. The economic pumping of coal in water over long distances requires the coal to be reduced to a fine size consist. At the power station the de-watered coal is further reduced to pulverised fuel (pf) size. Another option is to reduce the coal to pf size before transport and pump as a coal-water mixture. For long distance transport of minus 50 mm export size coal, the only viable option is to use a unique Special Vehicle Slurry (SVS) system. The paper compares the technical issues involved in all coal pipeline options. 1. INTRODUCTION The transportation of coal over long distances was commercially proven in the highly successful 440 km Black Mesa Coal Pipeline commissioned Aug. 14, 1970. The Black Mesa pipeline fed the captive Mohave Power Station for over 35 years. Although the use of coal for energy may slowly decrease in the long term, coking coal will still require transportation. The economic pumping of coal in water over long distances requires the particle size of the coal to be reduced to a fine size consist with the Black Mesa pipeline having a top size of 1.4 mm and 18 to 20% minus 45 microns to ensure optimum slurry properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Thermal Energy an Industry Report
    Solar Thermal Energy an Industry Report . Solar Thermal Technology on an Industrial Scale The Sun is Our Source Our sun produces 400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 watts of energy every second and the belief is that it will last for another 5 billion years. The United States An eSolar project in California. reached peak oil production in 1970, and there is no telling when global oil production will peak, but it is accepted that when it is gone the party is over. The sun, however, is the most reliable and abundant source of energy. This site will keep an updated log of new improvements to solar thermal and lists of projects currently planned or under construction. Please email us your comments at: [email protected] Abengoa’s PS10 project in Seville, Spain. Companies featured in this report: The Acciona Nevada Solar One plant. Solar Thermal Energy an Industry Report . Solar Thermal vs. Photovoltaic It is important to understand that solar thermal technology is not the same as solar panel, or photovoltaic, technology. Solar thermal electric energy generation concentrates the light from the sun to create heat, and that heat is used to run a heat engine, which turns a generator to make electricity. The working fluid that is heated by the concentrated sunlight can be a liquid or a gas. Different working fluids include water, oil, salts, air, nitrogen, helium, etc. Different engine types include steam engines, gas turbines, Stirling engines, etc. All of these engines can be quite efficient, often between 30% and 40%, and are capable of producing 10’s to 100’s of megawatts of power.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropogenic Disturbance and Mojave Desert Tortoise (Gopherus Agassizii) Genetic Connectivity
    University of Nevada, Reno Connecting the Plots: Anthropogenic Disturbance and Mojave Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) Genetic Connectivity A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Geography By Kirsten Erika Dutcher Dr. Jill S. Heaton, Dissertation Advisor May 2020 THE GRADUATE SCHOOL We recommend that the dissertation prepared under our supervision by KIRSTEN ERIKA DUTCHER entitled Connecting the Plots: Anthropogenic Disturbance and Mojave Desert Tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) Genetic Connectivity be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Jill S. Heaton, Ph.D. Advisor Kenneth E. Nussear, Ph.D. Committee Member Scott D. Bassett, Ph.D. Committee Member Amy G. Vandergast, Ph.D. Committee Member Marjorie D. Matocq, Ph.D. Graduate School Representative David W. Zeh, Ph.D., Dean Graduate School May, 2020 i ABSTRACT Habitat disturbance impedes connectivity for native populations by altering natural movement patterns, significantly increasing the risk of population decline. The Mojave Desert historically exhibited high ecological connectivity, but human presence has increased recently, as has habitat disturbance. Human land use primarily occurs in Mojave desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) habitat posing risks to the federally threatened species, which has declined as a result. As threats intensify, so does the need to protect tortoise habitat and connectivity. Functional corridors require appropriate habitat amounts and population densities, as individuals may need time to achieve connectivity and find mates. Developments in tortoise habitat have not been well studied, and understanding the relationship between barriers, corridors, population density, and gene flow is an important step towards species recovery.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Power Satellites
    Solar Power Satellites August 1981 NTIS order #PB82-108846 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 81-600129 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Foreword The energy difficulties the Nation has faced over the past decade have given rise to an increased awareness of the potential long-term, inexhaustible, or renewable energy technologies. This assessment responds to a request by the House Committee on Science and Technology for an evaluation of the energy potential of one of the most ambitious and long-term of these technologies, the solar power satellite (SPS). In assessing SPS, OTA has taken into account the preliminary nature of SPS technology by comparing four alternative SPS systems across a broad range of issues: their technical characteristics, long-term energy supply potential, interna- tional and military implications, environmental impacts, and institutional effects. The SPS options are also compared to potentially competitive future energy technologies in order to identify how choices among them might be made. In addi- tion, OTA developed a set of Federal research and funding options to address the central questions and uncertainties identified in the report. We were greatly aided by the advice of the SPS advisory panel, as well as by the participants in three specialized workshops: one on alternative SPS systems, one on public opinion, and another on competing energy supply technologies. The contri- butions of a number of contractors, who provided important analyses, and of numerous individuals who gave generously of their time and knowledge, are gratefully appreciated. Director . Ill Solar Power Satellites Advisory Panel John P.
    [Show full text]
  • CSP Technologies
    CSP Technologies Solar Solar Power Generation Radiation fuel Concentrating the solar radiation in Concentrating Absorbing Storage Generation high magnification and using this thermal energy for power generation Absorbing/ fuel Reaction Features of Each Types of Solar Power PTC Type CRS Type Dish type 1Axis Sun tracking controller 2 Axis Sun tracking controller 2 Axis Sun tracking controller Concentrating rate : 30 ~ 100, ~400 oC Concentrating rate: 500 ~ 1,000, Concentrating rate: 1,000 ~ 10,000 ~1,500 oC Parabolic Trough Concentrator Parabolic Dish Concentrator Central Receiver System CSP Technologies PTC CRS Dish commercialized in large scale various types (from 1 to 20MW ) Stirling type in ~25kW size (more than 50MW ) developing the technology, partially completing the development technology development is already commercialized efficiency ~30% reached proper level, diffusion level efficiency ~16% efficiency ~12% CSP Test Facilities Worldwide Parabolic Trough Concentrator In 1994, the first research on high temperature solar technology started PTC technology for steam generation and solar detoxification Parabolic reflector and solar tracking system were developed <The First PTC System Installed in KIER(left) and Second PTC developed by KIER(right)> Dish Concentrator 1st Prototype: 15 circular mirror facets/ 2.2m focal length/ 11.7㎡ reflection area 2nd Prototype: 8.2m diameter/ 4.8m focal length/ 36㎡ reflection area <The First(left) and Second(right) KIER’s Prototype Dish Concentrator> Dish Concentrator Two demonstration projects for 10kW dish-stirling solar power system Increased reflection area(9m dia. 42㎡) and newly designed mirror facets Running with Solo V161 Stirling engine, 19.2% efficiency (solar to electricity) <KIER’s 10kW Dish-Stirling System in Jinhae City> Dish Concentrator 25 20 15 (%) 10 발전 효율 5 Peak.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Solar Lease Revenues
    LIVE WORK PLAY RETIRE TURNING LAND INTO REVENUES: UNDERSTANDING SOLAR LEASE REVENUES Reprint Date: August 25, 2020 Mayor Kiernan McManus Council Member Council Member Council Member Council Member Mayor pro tem Claudia Bridges Tracy Folda Judith A. Hoskins James Howard Adams City Manager Finance Director Alfonso Noyola, ICMA-CM Diane Pelletier, CPA Boulder City Revenue Overview Table of Contents Unlike most other municipalities and counties in Nevada, the revenue stream for Boulder City does not include the lucrative Some History . gaming tax. Prior to the recession of 2007 - 2009, the City’s • 4 • revenue stream did not have a sizable amount of monies from land leases. With the recent focus by California and more Charter/Ordinance Requirements recently at the national level on renewable energy development, • 4 • the City was in a key position to take advantage of its unique Land Lease Process position for solar development by leasing city-owned land for • 6 • energy production. Because of those prudent actions, today the Energy Lease Revenue History solar lease revenues equate to roughly 28% to 34% of the City’s • 7 • overall revenue stream to support vital governmental functions. Energy Lease Revenue Projections • • But is Land Lease Revenue Stable? 9 A common question posed to our City Council surrounds the Energy Lease Revenue Potential stability of land lease revenues. Traditional commercial or • 9 • residential land leases have many risks, as the tenants are Overall Energy Lease Revenue subject to market conditions or changes in employment. And History and Projections with recessions, these types of leases are common casualties • 10 • of a downturn in the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Energia - Motorul Dezvoltării Economice Şi Sociale
    Energia - motorul dezvoltării economice şi sociale Noţiuni introductive În aceeaşi măsură în care un organism biologic are nevoie de hrană pentru a trăi şi a se dezvolta, o regiune are nevoie de energie pentru a se dezvolta din punct de vedere economic şi social. Pentru a ilustra diversitatea de modalităţi în care se poate asigura necesarul de energie al unei zone, a fost ales exemplul regiunii Las Vegas din statul Nevada, S.U.A., o regiune aridă, izolată şi înapoiată din punct de vedere economic, în care de-a lungul timpului s-au valorificat diverse resurse locale în vederea producerii de energie. În figurile alăturate sunt prezentate celebrul marcaj amplasat la intrarea în Las Vegas şi o imagine aeriană care sugerează nivelul ridicat al consumului de energie în Las Vegas. Las Vegas - imagine aeriană nocturnă https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Las_Vegas_at_night_(9118927988).jpg Intrarea în Las Vegas https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Welcome_to_Fabulous_Las_Vega s.jpg/788px-Welcome_to_Fabulous_Las_Vegas.jpg Statul Nevada, face parte din grupul statelor montane, alături de Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah şi Arizona. În perioada în care se puneau bazele expansiunii regiunii Las Vegas, statele montane reprezentau o zonă nedezvoltată. Acest teritoriu care reprezintă o pondere semnificativă din suprafaţa SUA, producea în acea perioadă, sub 5 % din electricitatea consumată în SUA. Această zonă, din jurul Munţilor Stâncoşi, este evidenţiată pe harta prezentată în imaginea alăturată. Zona statelor montane din SUA https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/US_map- Observaţie: Statele evidenţiate prin culoare uniformă sunt Mountain_states.png întotdeauna incluse în zona montană, în timp ce statele evidenţiate prin haşurare (Arizona în stânga şi New Observaţie: Nevada (regiunea evidenţiată) este statul din Mexico în dreapta) sunt considerate cel mai adesea, dar SUA cu cel mai redus nivel de precipitaţii anuale, iar nu întotdeauna, ca făcând parte din această zonă.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Geological Association Publication 30.Pub
    Utah Geological Association Publication 30 - Pacific Section American Association of Petroleum Geologists Publication GB78 239 CENOZOIC EVOLUTION OF THE NORTHERN COLORADO RIVER EXTEN- SIONAL CORRIDOR, SOUTHERN NEVADA AND NORTHWEST ARIZONA JAMES E. FAULDS1, DANIEL L. FEUERBACH2*, CALVIN F. MILLER3, 4 AND EUGENE I. SMITH 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 178, Reno, NV 89557 2Department of Geology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 *Now at Exxon Mobil Development Company, 16825 Northchase Drive, Houston, TX 77060 3Department of Geology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235 4Department of Geoscience, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV 89154 ABSTRACT The northern Colorado River extensional corridor is a 70- to 100-km-wide region of moderately to highly extended crust along the eastern margin of the Basin and Range province in southern Nevada and northwestern Arizona. It has occupied a criti- cal structural position in the western Cordillera since Mesozoic time. In the Cretaceous through early Tertiary, it stood just east and north of major fold and thrust belts and also marked the northern end of a broad, gently (~15o) north-plunging uplift (Kingman arch) that extended southeastward through much of central Arizona. Mesozoic and Paleozoic strata were stripped from the arch by northeast-flowing streams. Peraluminous 65 to 73 Ma granites were emplaced at depths of at least 10 km and exposed in the core of the arch by earliest Miocene time. Calc-alkaline magmatism swept northward through the northern Colorado River extensional corridor during early to middle Miocene time, beginning at ~22 Ma in the south and ~12 Ma in the north.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021-2022 Block 4 Schedule
    Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University 2021-2022 Block 4 Schedule ECC Approved 06.23.2021 (Updated 07.12.2021) Required attendance sessions are highlighted in red. INDIVIDUAL COURSE SYLLABI TAKE PRECEDENCE OF THIS SCHEDULE FOR ATTENDANCE POLICIES. STUDENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING AWARE OF AND ADHERING TO ALL SYLLABUS-LISTED POLICIES. Students are expected to be available 8:00 am-5:00 pm, Monday through Friday The schedule is subject to change in the event of emergencies Ignore room numbers listed on virtual sessions Yellow highlights indicate Path lab sessions which are splitting with certain Psych sessions Block 4 – Week 1 ver 14 07/12/2021 SYST 9100 HEMATOLOGY AND RENAL Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 08-02-21 08-03-21 08-04-21 08-05-21 08-06-21 8:00 8:00-8:50 2S04 8:00-8:50 2S04 8:00-8:50 2S04 8:00-8:50 2S04 CLINAPP 1 PATH 3 CLINAPP 2 PATH 7 Block 4 Intro; Clinical Hematology Hematology Hematology 8:30 Reasoning RBC: Anemia - Anemia CASES WBC: Lymphomas Destruction 2 9:00 9:00-9:50 2S04 9:00-9:50 2S04 9:00-9:50 2S04 9:00-9:50 2S04 PATH 1 PATH 4 PATH 5 CLINAPP 3 ORIENTATION Hematology Hematology Hematology Hematology 9:30 RBC: Hematopoiesis; RBC: Anemia - Production WBC: Overview; Tools for White Cell Disorders Hemoglobin; Tools for Deficits Diagnosis; Reactive WBC CASES evaluation Proliferation 10:00 10:00-10:50 2S04 10:00-11:30 10:00-10:50 2S04 10:00-10:50 2S04 PATH 2 Ethics 9 PATH 6 PATH 8 Hematology 2S04, 2E100 Hematology Hematology RBC: Anemia - WBC: Hematology WBC: Myeloproliferative 10:30 Destruction 1 Neoplasms Overview; and Myelodysplastic Leukemia Disease; Plasma cell Disease 11:00 11:00-11:50 2S04 11:00-12:20 2S04 11:00-11:50 2S04 Psych 1 FoD2 2 Psych 2 11:50-12:40 2S04 Overview Value-Based Care Flipped Classroom.
    [Show full text]
  • The Status of CSP Development
    The Status of CSP Development DISH STIRLING POWER TOWER CLFR Tom Mancini CSP Program Manager Sandia National Laboratories PARABOLIC TROUGH 505.844.8643 DISH STIRLING [email protected] [email protected] 1 Presentation Content • Brief Overview of Sandia National Laboratories • Background information • Examples of CSP Technologies − Parabolic Trough Systems − Power Tower Systems − Thermal Energy Storage − Dish Stirling Systems • Status of CSP Technologies • Cost of CSP and Resource Availability • Deployments • R & D Directions [email protected] 2 Four Mission Areas Sandia’s missions meet national needs in four key areas: • Nuclear Weapons • Defense Systems and Assessments • Energy, Climate and Infrastructure Security • International, Homeland, and Nuclear Security [email protected] 3 Research Drives Capabilities High Performance Nanotechnologies Extreme Computing & Microsystems Environments Computer Materials Engineering Micro Bioscience Pulsed Power Science Sciences Electronics Research Disciplines 4 People and Budget . On-site workforce: 11,677 FY10 operating revenue . Regular employees: 8,607 $2.3 billion 13% . Over 1,500 PhDs and 2,500 MS/MA 13% 43% 31% Technical staff (4,277) by discipline: (Operating Budget) Nuclear Weapons Defense Systems & Assessments Energy, Climate, & Infrastructure Security International, Homeland, and Nuclear Security Computing 16% Math 2% Chemistry 6% Physics 6% Other science 6% Other fields 12% Electrical engineering 21% Mechanical engineering 16% Other engineering 15% 5 Sandia’s NSTTF Dish Engine Engine Test Rotating Testing Facility Platform Established in 1976, we provide ………. • CSP R&D NSTTF • Systems analysis and FMEA • System and Tower Testing Solar Furnace component testing and support NATIONAL SOLAR THERMAL TEST FACILITY [email protected] 6 Labs Support the DOE Program The CSP Programs at Sandia and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) support the DOE Solar Energy Technology Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations for Modeling Long Range Transport Impacts
    United States Office of Air Quality EPA-454/R-98-019 Environmental Protection Planning and Standards December 1998 Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 AIR EPA INTERAGENCY WORKGROUP ON AIR QUALITY MODELING (IWAQM) PHASE 2 SUMMARY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MODELING LONG RANGE TRANSPORT IMPACTS Air Q of ua ice li ff ty O Clean Air Pla s nn ard in nd g and Sta EPA-454/R-98-019 INTERAGENCY WORKGROUP ON AIR QUALITY MODELING (IWAQM) PHASE 2 SUMMARY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MODELING LONG-RANGE TRANSPORT IMPACTS U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Air Quality Modeling Group (MD-14) Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 National Park Service Air Resources Division Denver, Colorado 80225 USDA Forest Service Air Program Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Air Quality Branch Denver, Colorado 80225 December, 1998 NOTICE The information in this document has been reviewed in its entirety by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey, and should not be interpreted as conveying official EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation. i PREFACE The Interagency Workgroup on Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) was formed to provide a focus for development of technically sound recommendations regarding assessment of air pollutant source impacts on Federal Class I and Wilderness areas. Meetings were held with personnel from interested Federal agencies, viz. the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Forest Service, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The purpose of these meetings was to review respective modeling programs, to develop an organizational framework, and to formulate reasonable objectives and plans that could be presented to management for support and commitment.
    [Show full text]