More Resources

In the event of a major disruption to its nonnal operations, Bonneville must be prepared to continue its essential functions, particularly its power scheduling, tra~lsmission scheduling, and system operations. In this regard, Bonneville is required to follow Federal Preparedness Circular 65 (FPC 65), as prescribed by the Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency. Under FPC 65, agencies are to develop viable contingency plans. The Circular also provides a number of key steps that agencies should take for continuity of operations. Specifically, it recommends that each agency: ( I ) prepare alternate operating facilities; (2) establish a devolution plan to be implemented if it is incapable of performing essential functions from either its prlmary or alternate facility; and (3) test the capabilities of its continuity of operations program. The objective of the audit was to determine whether Bonrleville had a viable continuity of operations capability for its essential functions.

Continuity of Operations at Bonneville Power Administration

Statement of Patricia A. Hoffman, Deputy Director of R&D and Acting Chief Operating Officer. Office of Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability, Department of Energy. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, November 6, 2007 on the nation’s domestic energy sector workforce.

Saltstone Production and Disposal Facility Website Data - Third Quarter 2007...

Western Area Power Administration proposes to reconductor the existing 61-mile long 230-kilovolt Davis-Mead Transmission Line located in Clark County, Nevada and Mohave COunty, Arizona. Western owns and operates the existing transmission line. THe transmission line is a mjor component of the electric transmisison grad of the western United States.

Davis-Mead 230-kV Transmission Line Reconductor Project, Mohave County, Arizona and Clark County, Nevada

Gilberton Coal-to-Clean Fuels and Power Project

This document is functionally identical to the Environmental Assessment released in support of the Interim Final Rules published on December 4, 2006 (71 FR 70275). No findings or results have been changed. The EA examines the potential environmental impacts of the Final Rule on building habitability and the outdoor environment. To identify the potential environmental impacts that may result from implementing the Final Rule for new Federal commercial and residential buildings, DOE compared the Final Rule with the “no-action alternative” of using the current Federal standards – 10 CFR Part 434 and 10 CFR Part 435 Subpart C (referred to as the “no-action alternative”).