Inspectors Special Assignment Sources [PDF]
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Alexander Livnat, Ph.D. 12/18/2014 This Is the Second out of Five
Alexander Livnat, Ph.D. 12/18/2014 This is the second out of five volumes describing EPA’s current state of knowledge of CCR damage cases. This volume comprises 42 damage case-specific modules. Each module contains background information on the host power plant, type and design of the CCR management unit(s), their hydrogeologic setting and status of groundwater monitoring system, evidence for impact, regulatory actions pursued by the state and remedial measures taken, litigation, and rationale for the site’s current designation as a potential damage case in reference to pre-existing screenings. Ample footnotes and a list of references provide links to sources of information. IIa. CCR Damage Case Reassessment December 2014 IIa. Coal Combustion Residuals Potential Damage Cases (Reassessed, Formerly Published); (Cases PTa01 to PTa42) 1 IIa. CCR Damage Case Reassessment December 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS PTa01. TVA Colbert Fossil Fuel Plant, Colbert County, Alabama ............................................................. 4 PTa02. TVA Widows Creek Steam Fossil Fuel Plant, Stevenson, Jackson County, Alabama ................. 10 PTa03. Arizona Public Service Co. Cholla Steam Electric Generating Station, Navajo County, Arizona 14 PTa04. Florida Power & Light Lansing Smith Plant, Bay County, Florida .............................................. 18 PTa05. Ameren (formerly: Central Illinois Light Co.) Duck Creek Station, Canton, Fulton County, Illinois ........................................................................................................................................................ -
Nuclear and Coal in the Postwar US Dissertation Presented in Partial
Power From the Valley: Nuclear and Coal in the Postwar U.S. Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Megan Lenore Chew, M.A. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2014 Dissertation Committee: Steven Conn, Advisor Randolph Roth David Steigerwald Copyright by Megan Lenore Chew 2014 Abstract In the years after World War II, small towns, villages, and cities in the Ohio River Valley region of Ohio and Indiana experienced a high level of industrialization not seen since the region’s commercial peak in the mid-19th century. The development of industries related to nuclear and coal technologies—including nuclear energy, uranium enrichment, and coal-fired energy—changed the social and physical environments of the Ohio Valley at the time. This industrial growth was part of a movement to decentralize industry from major cities after World War II, involved the efforts of private corporations to sell “free enterprise” in the 1950s, was in some cases related to U.S. national defense in the Cold War, and brought some of the largest industrial complexes in the U.S. to sparsely populated places in the Ohio Valley. In these small cities and villages— including Madison, Indiana, Cheshire, Ohio, Piketon, Ohio, and Waverly, Ohio—the changes brought by nuclear and coal meant modern, enormous industry was taking the place of farms and cornfields. These places had been left behind by the growth seen in major metropolitan areas, and they saw the potential for economic growth in these power plants and related industries. -
Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country
September 2005 Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country NCPIRG Education Fund Made in the U.S.A. Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country September 2005 NCPIRG Education Fund Acknowledgements Written by Supryia Ray, Clean Air Advocate with NCPIRG Education Fund. © 2005, NCPIRG Education Fund The author would like to thank Alison Cassady, Research Director at NCPIRG Education Fund, and Emily Figdor, Clean Air Advocate at NCPIRG Education Fund, for their assistance with this report. To obtain a copy of this report, visit our website or contact us at: NCPIRG Education Fund 112 S. Blount St, Ste 102 Raleigh, NC 27601 (919) 833-2070 www.ncpirg.org Made in the U.S.A. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary...............................................................................................................4 Background: Toxic Mercury Emissions from Power Plants ..................................................... 6 The Bush Administration’s Mercury Regulations ................................................................... 8 Findings: Power Plant Mercury Emissions ........................................................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by State........................................................................ 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by County and Zip Code ............................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by Facility.................................................................... 15 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by Company -
DRR Source List June 23, 2016
DRR Source List June 23, 2016 State Facility Name County/Parish Alabama Tennessee Valley Authority- Colbert Fossil Plant Colbert Alabama Alabama Power - Gadsden Electric Generating Plant Etowah Alabama Alabama Power - Greene County Electric Generating Plant Greene Alabama Tennessee Valley Authority - Widows Creek Fossil Plant Jackson Alabama Alabama Power - William Crawford Gorgas Electric Generating Plant Walker Alabama International Paper Company - Prattville Mill Autauga Alabama Escambia Operating Company Big Escambia Creek Plant Escambia Alabama Azko Nobel Functional Chemicals - LeMoyne Site Mobile Alabama Alabama Power Company- James M. Barry Electric Generating Plant Mobile Alabama Ascend Performance Materials -Decatur Plant Morgan Alabama Sanders Lead Company Pike Alabama Continental Carbon Company- Phenix City Plant Russell Alabama Alabama Power Company - Ernest C. Gaston Electric Generating Plant Shelby Alabama Lhoist North America of Alabama - Montevallo Plant Shelby Alabama PowerSouth Energy Cooperative - Charles R. Lowman Power Plant Washington Arizona Tucson Electric Power Company - Springerville Generating Station Apache Arizona Arizona Electric Power Cooperative - Apache Generating Station Cochise Arizona Arizona Public Service Electric Company - Cholla Navajo Arkansas Flint Creek Power Plant (SWEPCO) Benton Arkansas Entergy Arkansas - Independence Independence Arkansas Futurefuel Chemical Company Independence Arkansas Entergy Arkansas - White Bluff Jefferson Arkansas Plum Point Energy Station Mississippi California Shell Martinez Refinery (Part of cluster) Contra Costa California Solvay USA Incorporated (Part of cluster) Contra Costa California Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company (Part of cluster) Contra Costa Colorado Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCO) - Cherokee Power Plant Adams Colorado Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) - Martin Drake Power Plant El Paso Colorado CSU - Ray D Nixon El Paso Colorado Colorado Energy Nations Company (CENC) - Golden Jefferson Colorado Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. -
65 Years of Cooperative Partnership
65 YEARS OF COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIP An Illustrated History of Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative 65 YEARS OF COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIP An Illustrated History of Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc. P.O. Box 908 Bloomington, IN 47402-0908 www.hepn.com Copyright © 2014 by Hoosier Energy All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or writing, without permission from the publisher. PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ......................................................................................vii HOOSIER ENERGY POWER NETWORK ...........................................viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................ix HOOSIER ENERGY TODAY ..................................................................1 “I’LL DO ANYTHING IN THIS WORLD TO GET ELECTRICITY” ...........5 THE EARLY YEARS: COOPERATION AMONG COOPERATIVES ........17 THE BATTLE FOR RATTS STATION ..................................................30 COOPERATION AMONG UTILITIES ..................................................44 POWER THROUGH TEAMWORK ......................................................59 PEOPLE DELIVER THE POWER ......................................................71 MAKING LIFE BETTER .....................................................................81 THE POWER OF PARTNERSHIP ......................................................94 -
Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category
United States Office of Water EPA-821-R-15-006 Environmental Protection Washington, DC 20460 September 2015 Agency Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category Environmental Assessment for the Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category EPA-821-R-15-006 September 2015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4303T) Engineering and Analysis Division 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Acknowledgements and Disclaimer This report was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Neither the United States Government nor any of its employees, contractors, subcontractors, or their employees make any warrant, expressed or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any third party’s use of or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this report, or represents that its use by such party would not infringe on privately owned rights. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................. VIII GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................................... XI SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1-1 SECTION -
Filed Planned Savings
SOUTHERN INDIANA GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY D/B/A VECTREN ENERGY DELIVERY OF INDIANA, INC. CAUSE NO. 45052 VERIFIED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW A. RICE DIRECTOR, RESEARCH AND ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES SPONSORING PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT NO. 5, ATTACHMENT MAR-1 (CONFIDENTIAL) Petitioner’s Exhibit No. 5 VERIFIED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF MATTHEW A. RICE DIRECTOR, RESEARCH AND ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES 1 Q. Please state your name and business address. 2 A. My name is Matthew Rice, and my business address is One Vectren Square, Evansville, 3 Indiana 47708. 4 Q. By whom are you employed and in what capacity? 5 A. I am employed by Vectren Utility Holdings, Inc. (“VUHI”), the immediate parent company 6 of Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company d/b/a Vectren Energy Delivery of 7 Indiana, Inc. (“Vectren South” or “Company”), Indiana Gas Company, Inc. d/b/a Vectren 8 Energy Delivery of Indiana, Inc. (“Vectren North”) and Vectren Energy Delivery of Ohio, 9 Inc. (“VEDO”). I am the Director of Research and Energy Technologies for VUHI. 10 Q. What is your educational background? 11 A. I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration from the University 12 of Southern Indiana in 1999. I also received a Master of Business Administration from 13 the University of Southern Indiana in 2008. 14 Q. What is your business experience? 15 A. Prior to working for VUHI, I worked as a Market Research Analyst for American General 16 Finance for six years working primarily on customer segmentation, demographic 17 analysis, and site location analysis. I was hired by VUHI in 2007 as a Market Research 18 Analyst, and have been promoted to Senior Analyst, Manager of Market Research, and 19 most recently Director of Research and Energy Technologies. -
2020 Report to the 21St Century Energy Policy Development Task Force
2020 Report to the 21st Century Energy Policy Development Task Force Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission August 14, 2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Following the passage of House Enrolled Act 1278 (2019), the Commission contracted with three organizations to assist in its study for the 21st Century Energy Policy Development Task Force. These three entities included: the State Utility Forecasting Group (SUFG), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), and Indiana University Public Policy Institute. The Commission is grateful for the work of the researchers at each organization for their work over the last several months on this initiative. Specifically, the Commission would like to thank the following: Indiana University Tom Guevara, Director, Public Policy Institute Tim Slaper, Co-director, Indiana Business Research Center Sanya Carley, Professor, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Matt Kinghorn, Senior Demographic Analyst, Indiana Business Research Center Drew Klacik, Senior Policy Analyst, Public Policy Institute Jamie Palmer, Senior Policy Analyst, Public Policy Institute Kevin Martyn, Visiting Lecturer, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Madeline Mohrman, Research Assistant, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Claire Williamson, Research Assistant, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs State Utility Forecasting Group (SUFG) Dr. Doug Gotham Tim Phillips Marco Velastegui Fang Wu Liwei Lu David Nderitu Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL)1 Juan Pablo Carvallo Joscha Mueller Christoph Gehbauer Peter H. Larsen Myles T. Collins Stephanie Bieler In addition to the experts at the aforementioned organizations, the Commission also recognizes and appreciates the time taken by the external stakeholders in providing feedback, comments, and guidance on the issues at hand. -
Laying the Groundwork
Laying the groundwork 2012 Annual Report and Form 10-K Financial and Operating Highlights Year ended December 31, In millions, except per share amounts 2012 2011 2010 Net income $ 159.0 $141.6 $133.7 Return on average common shareholders’ equity (ROE) 10.6% 9.8% 9.4% Shares outstanding at year-end 82.2 81.9 81.7 Average shares outstanding for basic earnings 82.1 81.8 80.2 Per Common Share Basic earnings $ 1.94 $ 1.73 $ 1.65 Dividends paid $ 1.405 $ 1.385 $ 1.365 Annual dividend rate at year-end $ 1.42 $ 1.40 $ 1.38 Book value $ 18.57 $ 17.89 $ 17.61 Market price at year-end $ 29.40 $ 30.23 $ 25.38 Dividends Earnings Book Value Per Share Per Share Per Share $ 1.50 $ 2.00 $ 19.00 1.40 1.90 18.50 1.30 1.80 18.00 1.20 1.70 17.50 1.10 1.60 17.00 1.00 1.50 16.50 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 Table of Contents Letter to Shareholders ................................................... 1 5-Year Financial Review ............................................. 126 Vectren at a Glance ....................................................... 8 Performance Chart .................................................... 127 Form 10-K ..................................................................... 9 Shareholder Information ............................................ 128 Management’s Discussion and Analysis .................. 34 Financial Statements and Notes .............................. 67 Directors and Officers ................................................ IBC Letter to Shareholders 2012 secured the advancement of many of Vectren’s strategic initiatives and proved it was a year in which we focused on laying the groundwork – literally and figuratively – for our company’s continued success. The combination of accomplishments for the year and initiatives that are now beginning to bear fruit in our utility and nonutility companies demonstrate why our financial performance exceeded shareholder expectations and why investing in our company for the long term is a prudent decision. -
Vectren Corporation 2015 Annual Report & Form 10-K
VECTREN CORPORATION 2015 ANNUAL REPORT & FORM 10-K FINANCIAL AND OPERATING HIGHLIGHTS Year ended December 31, In millions, except per share amounts 2015 2014 2013 Net income1 $ 197.3 $ 188.0 $ 174.1 Return on average common shareholders’ equity (ROE) 1 12.0% 11.9% 11.3% Shares outstanding at year-end 82.8 82.6 82.4 Weighted average shares outstanding for basic earnings 82.7 82.5 82.3 Per Common Share Basic earnings1 $ 2.39 $ 2.28 $ 2.12 Dividends paid $ 1.54 $ 1.46 $ 1.425 Annual dividend rate at year-end $ 1.60 $ 1.52 $ 1.44 Book value $ 20.34 $ 19.45 $ 18.86 Market price at year-end $ 42.42 $ 46.23 $ 35.50 Earnings Annual Dividend Rate Book Value Per Share Per Share Per Share $ 2.40 $ 1.60 $ 20.50 2.20 1.50 20.00 2.00 1.40 19.50 1.80 1.30 19.00 1.60 1.20 18.50 1.40 1.10 18.00 1 1 2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015 1 Excludes a $21.1 million, or $0.26 per share, after-tax loss from Coal Mining in 2014, the year of disposition. Reported results for 2014 were net income of $166.9 million, or $2.02 per share. Based upon reported results, the return on average shareholders’ equity for 2014 was 10.6%. Excludes a $37.5 million, or $0.46 per share, after-tax loss from ProLiance in 2013, the year of disposition of its gas marketing assets. -
Economic, Fiscal, and Social Impacts of the Transition of Electricity Generation Resources in Indiana AUGUST 2020 | 20-C11 101 W
Economic, Fiscal, and Social Impacts of the Transition of Electricity Generation Resources in Indiana AUGUST 2020 | 20-C11 101 W. Ohio Street, Suite 400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 policyinstitute.iu.edu Economic, Fiscal, and Social Impacts of the Transition of Electricity Generation Resources in Indiana AUTHORS Tom Guevara, Director, Public Policy Institute Tim Slaper, Co-director, Indiana Business Research Center Sanya Carley, Professor, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Matt Kinghorn, Senior Demographic Analyst, Indiana Business Research Center Drew Klacik, Senior Policy Analyst, Public Policy Institute Jamie Palmer, Senior Policy Analyst, Public Policy Institute Kevin Martyn, Visiting Lecturer, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Madeline Mohrman, Research Assistant, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Claire Williamson, Research Assistant, O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs The IU Public Policy Institute (PPI) produces unbiased, high-quality research, analyses and policy guidance to effect positive change and improve the quality of life in communities across Indiana and the nation. As a multidisciplinary institute within the IU O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, PPI supports the Center for Health and Justice Research, the Center for Research on Inclusion & Social Policy, the Manufacturing Policy Initiative, and the Indiana Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Established in 1925, the Indiana Business Research Center (IBRC) is an integral unit in the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. The IBRC provides and interprets the economic information needed by the state’s business, government and nonprofit organizations, as well as users of such information throughout the nation. In addition, the Center conducts original research to generate needed information when existing data are not available or sufficient. -
Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country
September 2005 Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center Made in the U.S.A. Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country September 2005 Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center Acknowledgements Written by Supryia Ray, Clean Air Advocate with Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center. © 2005, Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center The author would like to thank Alison Cassady, Research Director at Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center Fund, and Emily Figdor, Clean Air Advocate at Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center, for their assistance with this report. To obtain a copy of this report, visit our website or contact us at: Environment Colorado Research & Policy Center 1536 Wynkoop Street, Suite 100 Denver, CO 80202 (303) 573-3871 www.environmentcolorado.org Made in the U.S.A. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary...............................................................................................................4 Background: Toxic Mercury Emissions from Power Plants ..................................................... 6 The Bush Administration’s Mercury Regulations ................................................................... 8 Findings: Power Plant Mercury Emissions ........................................................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by State........................................................................ 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by County and Zip Code ..............................................