Department of Energy federal obligations in Alabama

The awarding-agency 089 filter plus Alabama

USAspending.gov stores awarding agency and place of performance on the same award rows. Intersecting 089 with AL yields $690,067,508.82 in obligations. The pair is not a statement that Alabama caused Department of Energy to spend, and it is not a census of power plants.

Behind $690,067,508.82 sit 126 award actions (a modest award list). That denominator is why the mean of about $5,476,726.26 can look large or small depending on how many small rows share the cell. The packet does not publish a median or a unique-recipient count.

Open Department of Energy in Alabama for the filtered table, Alabama federal spending for the next hub, Department of Energy for the remaining hub, and All spending ties for other pairs.

Mean obligation of about $5,476,726.26

126 rows and $690,067,508.82 produce a mean of about $5,476,726.26. That ratio is not a typical energy-research or cleanup award and not a payment to a named vendor. Repeat the two packet facts when you reuse the mean; do not round them into a new official statistic.

Do not infer a typical energy-research or cleanup award from the mean. The overlay can show mixed instruments; this page only has the two published numbers and the four internal links.

Place of performance versus Energy headquarters

Two one-sided pages exist so this two-sided page can stay small. Department of Energy in Alabama is the live overlay. 126 awards and $690,067,508.82 belong only to the pair, not to a blended statewide rollup hidden under this slug.

Mailing address and place of performance can differ. An award that lists Alabama geography enters this total; an award that lists Mississippi or Tennessee does not, even if the vendor answers mail in Birmingham. Keep 126 attached to the statewide tag.

The obligation field

Readers sometimes treat obligation totals as checks cleared. The packet does not support that reading. $690,067,508.82 is the commitment sum; outlays are unnamed here.

The source note repeats the same limit: obligations are not outlays. 126 is how many award rows carry both tags, not how many payments left the Treasury.

What the join is not

Do not rank Alabama as a winner or loser on Energy dollars from this page alone. The packet has no comparison table. All spending ties lists other pairs without turning this cell into a scoreboard.

A searcher who arrived from a political query still gets an awarding-agency × state obligation total. 126 awards and $690,067,508.82 stay in that unit. No donor names are in the packet, and none are invented.

Citing $690,067,508.82 without over-reading it

Reuse $690,067,508.82 only with the filters that created it. Agency 089 without Alabama, or Alabama without agency 089, is a different number. About $5,476,726.26 per award stays a derived ratio of the same two facts.

Keep Department of Energy and Alabama in the same sentence whenever you quote $690,067,508.82. Alabama federal spending will look larger because it mixes agencies. Department of Energy will look larger because it mixes states. Department of Energy in Alabama is the pair. All spending ties lists other pairs. Correlation is not causation. Department of Energy in Alabama remains the filtered table for this pair. Alabama federal spending answers a statewide question that mixes agencies. Department of Energy answers an agency question that mixes states. All spending ties is the catalog of other two-sided pages, not a sum of this cell plus its siblings. Nothing in this packet names a contractor, grantee, laboratory, or borrower. Inventing labs to explain $690,067,508.82 would break the facts-only rule. If a recipient appears on the overlay, that row is evidence from USAspending.gov, not from this narrative. The source note is unchanged: USAspending.gov aggregate of federal obligations by state and awarding agency. Obligations are not outlays. Repeating $690,067,508.82 as cash already spent in Alabama is a unit error, not a rounding error. Lab, grid, and environmental-cleanup folklore can be a legitimate research question on another page. Here it is labeled folklore because the packet has no NAICS, CFDA, or program column. Gulf-port and huntsville-lab folklore is the same kind of reader path: useful for search, unused as math.

Questions

What does USAspending show for Energy in Alabama?

USAspending.gov records $690,067,508.82 in obligations for awarding agency 089 (Department of Energy) with Alabama place of performance, covering 126 awards. That is an obligation total, not an outlay total, and not Department of Energy's nationwide budget.

Can I treat the mean as a typical Energy award?

The extract lists 126 award actions totaling $690,067,508.82. Average obligation per award is about $5,476,726.26, a ratio of two packet facts, not a typical energy-research or cleanup award. Unique labs are not published here.

Is place of performance the same as a Birmingham mailing address?

No. $690,067,508.82 and 126 awards are statewide Alabama place of performance. This packet does not split Birmingham from Mobile or Huntsville. Awards coded to Mississippi or Tennessee are outside this cell even if mail is handled in Birmingham.

Where should I go next from this Energy join?

Department of Energy in Alabama is the overlay. Alabama federal spending shows all agencies in the state. Department of Energy shows agency 089 without a state filter. All spending ties lists other pairs. Original filings remain on the source sites.