SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
The presentation at 10th Annual Permian Basin Conference & Exhibition provided an overview of Project PARETO tool capabilities to assess challenges and opportunities in the produced water space.
As the focus on home energy efficiency grows, the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) are collaborating with the home energy retrofit industry to support the development of skilled workers. The Installer Badges Toolkit provides a flexible, customizable, and voluntary approach to training and skills recognition for WAP implementers, utility programs, private sector workers, and contractors.
This document is a summary of the point source analytical requirements used to demonstrate compliance for the Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site operations with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,” (NESHAP) Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities,” and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-247, “Radiation Protection – Air Emissions.” This reference collects information from multiple source documents and is not intended to create, supersede, replace or over-ride any existing contractual, DOE, federal or state statutes, regulations, compliance agreements, orders, permits, licenses or other requirements. The requirement source document governs where any difference may exist. The Hanford Mission Integration Solutions (HMIS) Environmental organization has been contracted by DOE to manage and report data collected from the sampling and monitoring of radioactive air emissions point sources, colloquially called stacks. The Environmental organization coordinates the analyses and reporting of samples collected at various facilities across the Hanford Site. These facilities operate approximately 52 stacks that require sampling, monitoring or estimating radioactive air emissions. The stacks are operated by Bechtel National, Inc. (BNI), Central Plateau Cleanup Company (CPCCo), Hanford Tank Waste Operations & Closure (H2C), Hanford Laboratory Management and Integration (HLMI), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). Stack samples from CPCCo, HLMI and H2C facilities are collected by the operating contractor staff, delivered to HMIS, and then shipped to an offsite contracted laboratory for analyses. The field and laboratory sample data uploaded into the Sample Management and Analytical Results Tracking (SMART) database are used to calculate sample volumes and concentrations. Sample concentrations are evaluated for compliance with federal and state regulations, permits, and license requirements. The SMART database also calculates total curies released for sampled point sources and stacks. Point source effluent concentrations and releases are published annually in publicly available reports. The BNI and PNNL operate several DOE-Hanford Field Office (HFO) stacks subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 61, Subpart H and WAC 246-247. The concentrations, curies released and dose modeling evaluation for these stacks are included in the DOE-HFO annual radionuclide NESHAP report. The sample collection, analyses and emissions estimates for these stacks are outside the scope of HMIS contracted responsibilities and not addressed further in this document.
The global cement manufacturing industry is a major contributor to carbon dioxide emissions. The International Energy Agency's "Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario" identifies CCS as a major strategy for meeting that goal. This project is among the first attempts to transfer capture technology developed at coal-fired power plants to the cement industry. The main objective of the project is to execute and complete a front-end engineering and design (FEED) studies for commercial-scale, carbon capture projects that separates 95% of the total CO2 emissions at the Holcim (US) Ste. Genevieve cement manufacturing facility using Air Liquide’s Pressure Swing Adsorption system (PSA) assisted Cryocap™ technology. The Holcim Ste. Genevieve cement plant in Missouri, US, boasts one of the largest single cement production lines in the world, with a capacity of approximately 12,000 t/day. The plant currently uses traditional fuels, namely coal and petcoke. The captured CO2 will be pipeline and geological storage grade. The industrial host site emits approximately 3.0 million tonne CO2/yr. Air Liquide’s Cryocap™ technology has been developed over the last 18+ years for CO2 capture applications. It has been shown to be applicable to a variety of industrial applications (e.g., steel, cement, SMR, Fluidized Catalytic Crackers (FCCs)). Cryocap™ FG consists of a Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) unit coupled with a Cryogenic System. The PSA pre-concentrates the CO2 from the flue gas, while the cryogenic unit enables the CO2 purity to be increased to the desired level. The project team is led by the Prairie Research Institute at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The tasks include: complete FEED study for retrofitting the industrial facility with a carbon capture system to support developing a detailed cost estimate; business case analysis outlining the anticipated revenue and credits if projects was built and operated; technoeconomic analysis (TEA) outlining how capture system achieves DOE capture goals; and life cycle (LCA) analysis demonstrating zero net carbon emissions. The FEED study was successfully completed. This includes completing the process basis of design; preliminary engineering; outside battery limits (OSBL) detailed engineering including a Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) wastewater treatment system; inside battery limits (ISBL) detailed engineering [1]. An overall project capital cost estimate within a -20%/+30% accuracy was developed. The major contributors to the Total Plant Cost (TPC), by system, are the costs associated with the Outside Battery Limit (OSBL) section of the plant which includes a new river water intake structure and a Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) system. By cost category, the major contributors to the TPC are equipment and subcontractor costs, followed closely by engineering, construction management, home office and contractor fees. The TEA has been created to reflect the findings of the project. It analyzes the economic performance of the Cryocap™ technology by reviewing the estimated capital costs, operating cost, and revenue. The Cost of Capture (COC) associated with the Cryocap™ technology for 95% CO2 capture, when considering NETL 2018 economic assumptions (42/58 debt/equity ratio, 5.15% interest on debt and 1.42% return on equity in real dollars) and 2022 economic assumptions (42/58 debt/equity ratio, 8.82% interest on debt and 4.90% return on equity in real dollars) was found to be much lower than that for the DOE-NETL’s base-line cases. The highest contributors to the COC are annualized capital expenditures (CAPEX) and electricity consumption which can be offset by using lower cost renewable sources. The LCA was conducted using OpenLCA which is an open-source software that is recommended by NETL. The database utilized for this study was a modified version of TRACI 2.1 (developed by the US. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory and modified by NETL). The Cryocap™ FG technology does not consume fuels in significant quantities and does not utilize specialized chemical solvents subject to decomposition, such as those utilized in amine-based carbon capture systems. The Cryocap™ FG technology mainly utilizes electricity as its energy input; hence, its calculated emissions are mainly associated with the generation of electricity offsite and are dependent on the energy matrix of the grid at the time of project implementation. The water consumption impact of the Cryocap™ FG is mostly for makeup of the water lost by evaporation in the cooling tower; however, the carbon capture plant will be equipped with a ZLD system to avoid effluent streams and minimize water consumption. The successful construction and operation of this plant based on this study results will provide a means to demonstrate an economically attractive and transformational capture technology that can be used to retrofit existing plants and be deployed at new plants.
This Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to estimate the cost to capture and compress 90% of the CO 2 from an existing natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) in Denver City, Texas, USA. The FEED used the PZAS (Piperazine with the Advanced Stripper) 2G amine scrubbing technology developed and modeled by The University of Texas at Austin. This FEED is unique in providing more public cost details than other FEEDs funded by DOE. The primary objective of the FEED was to provide a comprehensive estimate for the total installed cost of the capture plant. The estimated capital cost of NGCC at the Mustang Station is $\$727$ million for a capacity of 460 MW and 1.6 million tonnes CO 2 /yr. This includes a contingency of $\$104.6$ million and a contractor’s profit of $\$60.1$ million. The total direct field cost is $\$384.1$ million. With an optimistic fuel value of $\$3$/MMBtu, the estimated cost of capture varies from $\$85$/t at 4% IRR/85% load to $\$170$/t at 10% IRR/52% load. Air cooling is technically feasible but expensive. The air cooling systems for the water wash and pump-around intercooling account for 23.4% of the direct cost. The gas-fired boilers represent only 4% of the direct costs, but steam extraction would reduce energy cost, free up cooling water, and reduce the direct costs of processing additional flue gas and CO 2 from the boilers. The absorbers represent 9.6% of the direct cost in this FEED with no direct contact cooler and only 7.6 m of packing. Furthermore, the solvent cross exchangers are less expensive than expected (2.5% of direct costs). Doubling the number of these exchangers could reduce the heat duty from 3.0 to 2.5 GJ/t CO 2 .
Groundwater pump-and-treat (P and T) systems are a common remediation strategy for sites with contaminated groundwater within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM). Currently, there are six DOE-EM sites with active P and T systems, but integrated information on individual systems is only primarily available in separate annual reports. To provide a broad view of both current and historical P and T operations, data has been collected on all of the P and T systems. This summary information not only includes capital and average annual costs, but also identifies contaminants treated and forecasted P and T closure dates. Principal contaminants of concern treated with P and T systems include trichloroethylene, chromium (VI), strontium-90, technetium-99, and uranium. DOE-EM is continuing to create a web-based mapping tool that compiles information on groundwater contaminants, remediation strategies and, current data related to plumes and cleanup progress within all DOE-EM sites. The information collected on P and T systems will be added to the TRAC (Tracking Restoration and Closure) tool using interactive maps to quickly access and share information. This information sharing supports the transition from active to passive remediation methods and long-term monitoring approaches. TRAC can ensure that managers, stakeholders, regulators, and contractors remain up to date on cleanup progress for all sites within the complex. The information on P and T systems expands the use of TRAC and can assist in project monitoring and budget planning and support potential shifts in management plans based on plume data. (authors)
The purpose of this document is to develop feedstock price values to be used in the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) energy systems studies. This version of the QGESS incorporates electricity and biomass fuel costs; it updates the coal costs; and it updates and expands the natural gas costs.
This Department of Energy (DOE) funded project was executed with the goal of preparing a Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) for the capture and compression of 90% of the CO2 that would normally be emitted from an existing natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plant. The FEED focused on the application of the piperazine advanced stripper (PZAS) process at Mustang Station of the Golden Spread Electric Cooperative (GSEC), which consists of two gas turbines with common heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). The University of Texas at Austin (UT) served as the prime contractor, and subcontracted AECOM Technical Services and Trimeric Corporation to support FEED development. This project team has worked together to advance PZAS for more than a decade. ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Total provided project co-funding. The objectives of this work included: 1. To advance engineering design such that a comprehensive estimate for the total installed cost of a full-scale PZAS CO2 Capture Plant with CO2 compression can be developed on an existing NGCC power plant. a. These detailed costs can also be used to qualify PZAS and other related second generation (2G) amine scrubbing processes for use on cogeneration facilities in refineries and chemical plants that use gas turbines with HRSGs to produce steam. b. These detailed costs will help qualify 2G amine scrubbing for use on NGCC power plants and establish a more accurate baseline cost to be used as a target by other capture technologies. 2. To provide cost details to be used in the economic optimization of the process features of PZAS and other 2G amine scrubbing processes. 3. To provide DOE with a more detailed understanding of carbon capture costs in a commercial application, enabling DOE to better design its R&D program to improve the economics for carbon capture. 4. To provide the host site and cost share partners with the information necessary to determine whether a commercial project to capture and use CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) or for sequestration can be justified (when accounting for the 45Q tax credit). A key component of the FEED is the estimated total installed cost, which provides a basis for the likely capital investment necessary to implement the PZAS carbon capture process at this location and scale. In combination with the included economic analysis, which accounts for potential revenue from the produced CO2, potential avenues to profitability are explored. The major findings of the FEED are as follows: The Mustang Station PZAS CO2 Capture Plant estimated total project cost of $698 MM of which $384 MM was direct costs. The annual operating costs were $32.6 MM. The total investment for a PZAS facility at Mustang Station is $725 MM. This estimate includes owner’s cost of $25 million and a contingency of $110 MM. • The study estimated the CO2 capture plant at Mustang Station would generate CO2 at $110/tonne for EOR, assuming a 12% IRR (internal rate of return) and an 85% capacity factor. For CO2 storage, the same case would achieve a 12% IRR at about $114/tonne. At a capacity factor of 52%, the storage and EOR cases would break even when carbon is priced ~$150/tonne. The economic analysis determined that the capacity factor and utility pricing, among other variable factors, had a significant effect on the economics and will need additional studied. • The energy penalty of the PZAS plant would be about 46 MW in connected power and 35 MW in operating load. The natural gas requirement (for the Gas Boiler package) would be about 354 MMBTU/hr. • The FEED revealed no major risks in process maturity. However, some areas were outlined for further engineering during detailed design, which included the Gas Boiler system, general arrangement and site layout, air coolers, schedule development, and optimization of the process for higher CO2 removal. • If PZAS were to be implemented at another host site, additional opportunities for cost reduction for would include cost reduction through use of cooling water and steam extraction.
TerraPower, LLC (TerraPower, Participant) and other private industry partners endeavor to design, license, construct, and operate a sodium-cooled fast-spectrum nuclear reactor technology demonstration plant called Natrium. This demonstration plant is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP; DE-FOA-0002271). TerraPower, together with its technology co-developer GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) and engineering and construction partner Bechtel, submitted a proposal under the program’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Pathway for its Natrium reactor and energy system and recently received an award. TerraPower is partnering with Battelle Memorial Institute, the Management and Operating Contractor of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL, Contractor) under the Natrium project to provide critical research outcomes necessary to demonstrate the reactor technology. Over the expected five-year timeframe of the project, PNNL will provide TerraPower and its partners with vital support in the areas of post-irradiation examination (PIE) of specimens irradiated in test reactors. These efforts will be combined and managed as a program titled “Natrium Demonstration Reactor Support.”
The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup, necessarily involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for the DOE-ID in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” Its purpose is to: • Present the INL Site, mission, and programs • Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations • Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities • Summarize results of environmental monitoring • Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site • Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park • Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data • Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).
Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs)are a contractual mechanism that allow a federal agency to procure energy savings and facility improvements without upfront capital costs to reduce costs and resiliency. ESPCs are covered under FAR Part 23.2, and 42 USC § 8287. Section 8287(a)(2)(A) of Title 42 of the U.S. Code requires that each energy savings performance contract (ESPC) undergo an annual energy audit, resulting in a separate audit report for every project. The objective of the present report is to compile and analyze all annual ESPC audit reports issued between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024, for projects awarded under Generations 1, 2, and 3 of DOE’s ESPC IDIQ contracts. During this period, 205 measurement and verification (M&V) reports were produced for 200 projects; the total number of reports exceeds the number of projects because some projects generated more than one report(for example, a few projects measure savings twice per year and produce two audit reports annually, each covering a different six-month period). By aggregating the results from these individual audits, the report determines the portfolio-wide realization rate of energy and cost savings for all active ESPC projects awarded under DOE’s IDIQ program. For all 205audit reports, sufficient information was available to compare project-level estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. Reported cost savings accounted for ESCO verified savings per each project’s M&V plan. The total reported cost savings for the period addressed were $\$$647.8million,compared with the total guaranteed cost savings of $\$$601.6million. On average across the reported projects: •ESPC contractors guaranteed 92.8% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 100.0% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 107.7% of the guaranteed cost savings. The M&V performed for the period indicated adjustments for government operations and maintenance impacts to savings amount to$\$$43.9millionandcould be restored with the original operational parameters for impacted projects. Accounting for this potential cost savings impact, these projects still realized 100.4% of the guaranteed cost savings. The information on estimated and reported energy savings was collected and compared for all 205of the reports examined. Based on site energy, estimated savings totaled 14.88million MMBtu, and reported savings were 15.33million MMBtu; 3.1% greater than the estimated energy savings. All of the reports examined contained sufficient information to calculate source energy savings. Based on site-adjusted source energy, total estimated energy savings were 20.90 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 21.22million MMBtu, 101.5% of the estimated energy savings. For water savings, the estimated savings were 11,539,055 kGal and the reported savings were 13,315,930 kGal. This means 1,776,875 kGal more water was saved than estimated, which is about 15% higher than the estimate. These results indicate that, overall, the reported energy savings slightly exceeded the estimated values, while estimated water savings significantly exceeded estimated values, suggesting that the projects achieved greater cost savings than originally projected. The total annual expense for the ESCOs to perform annual M&V audits and reporting was $\$$10.02million. Through this effort, $\$$647.8 million in annual cost savings was verified. The M&V results indicated that $\$$43.9 million of these verified savings reflected adjustments due to government operations A-6and maintenance impacts, which could be restored under the original operational parameters for the affected projects. These findings show the value of M&V that only costs 1.7%of the guaranteed cost savings to ensure guarantees are met.
Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration. The National Nuclear Security Administration’s Sandia Field Office administers the contract and oversees contractor operations at Sandia National Laboratories, California. Activities at this multiprogram engineering and science laboratory support the nuclear weapons stockpile program, energy and environmental research, homeland security, micro- and nanotechnologies, and basic science and engineering research. The U.S. Department of Energy and its management and operating contractor are committed to safeguarding the environment, assessing sustainability practices, and ensuring the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data presented in this annual site environmental report. This report provides a summary of environmental monitoring information and compliance activities that occurred at Sandia National Laboratories, California during calendar year 2022 unless noted otherwise. General site and environmental program information is also included. This report was prepared in accordance with DOE O 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.
Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration. The National Nuclear Security Administration’s Sandia Field Office administers the Prime Contract and oversees contractor operations at Sandia National Laboratories, California. Activities at this multi-program engineering and science laboratory support the nuclear weapons stockpile program, energy and environmental research, homeland security, micro-and nanotechnologies, and basic science and engineering research. The U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration and its management and operating contractor are committed to safeguarding the environment, assessing sustainability practices, and ensuring the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data presented in this annual site environmental report. This report provides a summary of environmental monitoring of information and compliance activities that occurred at Sandia National Laboratories, California during calendar year 2023 unless noted otherwise. General site and environmental program information is also included. This report was prepared in accordance with DOE O 231.1B, Admin Change 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.
Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration. The National Nuclear Security Administration’s Sandia Field Office administers the Prime Contract and oversees contractor operations at Sandia National Laboratories, California. Activities at this multi-program engineering and science laboratory support the nuclear weapons stockpile program, energy and environmental research, homeland security, micro- and nanotechnologies, and basic science and engineering research. The U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration and its management and operating contractor are committed to fulfilling regulatory obligations, safeguarding the environment, assessing sustainability practices, and ensuring the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data presented in this annual site environmental report (ASER). This report provides a summary of environmental monitoring and compliance activities that occurred at Sandia National Laboratories, California, during calendar year 2024, unless noted otherwise. General site and environmental program information is also included. This report was prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B, Admin Change 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy Windows and Building Envelope Research and Development Roadmap for Emerging Technologies, building envelope wall energy loss in the United States accounts for about 5.9 x 1010 kWh or 2 quads of energy annually, costing homeowners and occupants billions of dollars. Enclosure retrofits targeting these losses can save significant energy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and save occupants millions of dollars over time. Older homes, built before 1992 when DOE’s Building Energy Codes Program was established, represent approximately 68 percent of the residential building stock in the country, often having significant air leakage and inadequate insulation. Homes with little to no air sealing or insulation have heating and cooling losses that can represent a substantial portion of utility bills.High-performance building envelope retrofit systems are rarely selected for retrofit applications. Current solutions are expensive and/or unfamiliar to many designers, builders, contractors, and code officials and therefore are perceived as risky. The dominant perceived risk is durability specifically related to condensation and moisture accumulation in the building envelope component.The Building Science Advisor (BSA) is a rule-based expert system web-based tool that was originally developed to assist building professionals in designing energy efficient and durable wall systems for new construction. With the present focus being placed on upgrading the existing building stock, a retrofit module has been developed that, based on the location, existing construction, and planned retrofit strategy, provides recommendations on how to address the retrofit in a manner that will perform in accordance with IECC 2018 building code and not create a durability problem. This paper will describe the development of this tool and demonstrate its features and capabilities.
The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup mission involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” The purpose of the report is to provide the following: (1) Present the INL Site, mission, and programs, (2) Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, (3) Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities, (4) Summarize results of environmental monitoring, (5) Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site, (6) Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park, (7) Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data, and (8) Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).
Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration. The National Nuclear Security Administration’s Sandia Field Office administers the contract and oversees contractor operations at Sandia National Laboratories, Tonopah Test Range (SNL/TTR) in Nevada and Sandia National Laboratories, Kaua‘i Test Facility (SNL/KTF) in Hawai‘i. Activities at SNL/TTR are conducted in support of U.S. Department of Energy weapons programs and have operated at the site since 1957. SNL/KTF has operated as a rocket preparation launching and tracking facility since 1962. The U.S. Department of Energy and its management and operating contractor are committed to safeguarding the environment, assessing sustainability practices, and ensuring the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data presented in this Annual Site Environmental Report. This report summarizes the environmental protection, restoration, and monitoring programs in place at SNL/TTR and SNL/KTF during calendar year 2020. Environmental topics include air quality, ecology, environmental restoration, oil storage, site sustainability, terrestrial surveillance, waste management, water quality, and implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act. This report is prepared in accordance with and as required by DOE O 231.1B, Admin Change 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting , and has been approved for public distribution.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Hanford Field Office (HFO) conducts ecological monitoring on the DOE-managed portion of Hanford Site (hereby referred to as Central Hanford) to collect and track data needed to ensure compliance with an array of environmental laws, regulations, and policies governing HFO activities. Ecological monitoring data provides baseline information about the plants, animals, and habitat under HFO stewardship on the Hanford Site, which is required for accurate ecological impact assessment decision making under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. In addition, ecological monitoring helps ensure that HFO, its contractors, and other entities conducting activities on the Hanford Site are in compliance with DOE/EIS-0222-F, Final Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement. HFO places priority on monitoring plant and animal species or habitats that have specific regulatory protections or requirements; that are rare and/or declining (federal or state listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species); or are of significant interest to federal, state, or tribal governments or to the public.