DOCSLIB.ORG

2016 Ten-Year Site Plans of Florida’S Electric Utilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2016 Ten-Year Site Plans of Florida’S Electric Utilities APPENDIX A REVIEW OF THE 2016 TEN-YEAR SITE PLANS OF FLORIDA’S ELECTRIC UTILITIES NOVEMBER 2016 Ten-Year Site Plan Comments State Agencies Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission- General Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission- Gulf Department of Environmental Protection Regional Planning Councils Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council Water Management Districts Southwest Florida Water Management District St. Johns Water Management District Local Governments Charlotte County Environmental Groups Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Sierra Club 1 2 June 21, 2016 Moniaishi Mtenga Division of Engineering Public Service Commission Florida Fish 2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard and Wildlife Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850 Conservation [email protected] Commission Commissioners RE: 2016 Ten-Year Power Plant Site Plans Brian Yablonski Chairman Tallahassee Dear Mr. Mtenga: Aliese P. “Liesa” Priddy Vice Chairman Immokalee Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) staff has reviewed the 2016 Ten- Ronald M. Bergeron Year Power Plant Site Plans submitted to the Public Service Commission (PSC). We will be Fort Lauderdale providing comments on the Gulf Power Company (GULF) Ten-Year Site Plan in a subsequent Richard Hanas letter. However, we are submitting this letter to notify you that we have reviewed the following Oviedo plans and have no comments regarding fish and wildlife resources: Bo Rivard Panama City Charles W. Roberts III Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU) Tallahassee Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC) Robert A. Spottswood City of Tallahassee Utilities (TAL) Key West Jacksonville Energy Authority (JEA) Florida Municipal Power Agency (FMPA) Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) Executive Staff Seminole Electric Cooperative (SEC) Nick Wiley Executive Director Lakeland Electric (LAK) Eric Sutton Tampa Electric Company (TECO) Assistant Executive Director Duke Energy Florida (DEF) Jennifer Fitzwater Chief of Staff We appreciate the opportunity to review the Ten-Year Site Plans, as provided by the PSC. If you need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Jane Chabre either by phone at (850) Office of the 410-5367 or by email at [email protected]. If you have Executive Director specific technical questions, please contact Jason Hight either by phone at (850) 413-6966 or by Nick Wiley email at [email protected]. Executive Director (850) 487-3796 Sincerely, (850) 921-5786 FAX Managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of people. Jennifer D. Goff Land Use Planning Program Administrator Office of Conservation Planning Services 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida jdg/jh 32399-1600 ENV 2-11-3 Voice: (850) 488-4676 2016 Ten-Year Site Plans_30912, 30917, 30910, 30916, 30921, 30925, 30911, 30914, 30923, 30924_062416 Hearing/speech-impaired: (800) 955-8771 (T) (800) 955-8770 (V) MyFWC.com 3 July 6, 2016 Moniaishi Mtenga Di vision of Engineering Florida Fish Public Service Commission and Wildlife 2540 Shumard Oak Boul evard Conservation Tallahassee, FL 32399-0850 Commission mm tenga@psc. state. fl. us Commissioners Brian Yablonski RE: GulfPower 2016 10-Year Site Plan, Multi-County Chairman Ta llahassee Aliese P. "Liesa" Priddy Vice Chairman Dear Mr. Mtenga: Immokalee Ronald M. Bergeron Fort Lauderdale Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) staffhas reviewed the Gulf Richard Hanas Power 2016 10-Year Site Plan and provides the following comments and Oviedo recommendations. Bo Rivard Panama City Charles W. Roberts Ill Tallahassee Project Description Robert A. Spottswood Key West Section 186.80 I, Florida Statutes, requires electric generating facilities to submit a ten­ year site plan to the Florida Public Service Commission. Gulf Power owns and operates Executive Staff five plants in Northwest Florida: Plant Crist (Escambia County); Plant Lansing Smith Nick Wiley (Bay County); Plant Scholz (Jackson County); Pea Ridge (Santa Rosa County); and Executive Director Perdido (Escambia County). Gulf Power has continued to evaluate the construction of Eric Sutton Assistant Executive Director generating facilities or the acquisition of equivalent capacity resources in coordination Jennifer Fitzwater with other Southern Electric System (SES) operating companies. Gulf Power indicates Chief of Staff that it has satisfied its need for firm capacity through the May 2023 time period. Any new facility construction is deferred during the 2016-2025 planning cycle. Gulf Power Office of the will consider future additional capacity at its existing sites at the Plant Crist, Plant Executive Director Lansing Smith, Plant Scholz, or on the identified Gulf Power sites at the Shoal River Nick Wiley Executive Director property in Walton County, Caryville property in Holmes and Washington counties, or the North Escambia County property. (850) 487-3796 (850) 921-5 786 FAX Managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term Potentially Affected Fish and Wildlife Resources well-being and the benefit of people. FWC staff previously provided comments to Gulf Power on the potentially affected resources at the proposed facility expansion sites during the 2010 and 2012 Plan 620 South Meridian Street Reviews, with the exception of the proposed North Escambia County Site (see Tallahassee. Florida enclosure). Since that time, the listing status of several species has changed which affects 32399-1600 Voice: (850) 488-4676 the discussion of unique or significant environmental features that are discussed under each site description in the Ten-Year Site Plan. We are providing the following Hearing/speech-impaired: (800) 955-8771 (T ) information as technical assistance at the request of Gulf Power staff so that they may (800) 955-8770 (V) update these descriptions. MyFWC.com 4 Moniaishi Mtenga Page 2 July6, 2016 Plant Crist (Escambia County) is located adj acent to the Escambia River. FWC GIS analysis found that this site is located near, within, or adjacent to: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat for the: o Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi, Federally Threatened (FT) • Potential habitat for the: o Harlequin darter (Etheostoma his trio, State Species of Special Concern [SSCJ) Plant Scholz (Jackson County) is located adjacent to the Apalachicola River. FWC GIS analysis found that this site is located near, within, or adjacent to: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat for the: o Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi, FT) o Purple bankclimber (Elliptoides sloatianus, FT) o Fat three-ridge (Amblema neislerii, Federally Endangered [FE]) • Potential habitat for the: o Barbour's map turtle (Graptemys barbouri, SSC) The undeveloped Shoal River Site (Walton County) is located on the Shoal River approximately 3 miles northwest of Mossy Head, Florida. The property is predominantly in pine plantation. FWC GIS analysis found that this site is located near, within, or adjacent to: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation Area for the: o Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis, FE) • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat for the: o Southern sandshell mussel (Hamiota australis, FT) o Choctaw bean (Villosa choctawensis, FE) o Narrow pigtoe (Fusconaia escambia, FT) o Fuzzy pigtoe (Pleurobema strodeanum, FT) • Potential habitat for the: o Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus, State Threatened [ST]) o Bl ackmouth shiner (Notropis melanostomus, ST) o Bluenose shiner (Pteronotropis welaka, SSC) o Alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii, SSC) o Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi, FT) o Pine barrens treefrog (Hyla andersonii, SSC) o Florida black bear ( Ursus americanus jloridanus) The undeveloped Caryville Site (Holmes and Washington counties) is approximately 1.5 miles northeast of Caryville, Florida, and adjacent to the Choctawhatchee River. The property is predominantly in agriculture and pine plantation. FWC staff conducted a GIS analysis and found that this site is located near, within, or adjacent to: • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat for the: o Gulf sturgeon (A cipenser oxyrinchus desotoi, FT) o Southern sandshell mussel (Hamiota australis, FT) o Choctaw bean (Villosa choctawensis, FE) 5 Moniaishi Mtenga Page 3 July 6, 2016 o Southern kidneyshell (Ptychobranchus jonesi, FE) o Tapered pigtoe (Fusconaia burld, FT) o Fuzzy pigtoe (Pleurobema strodeanum, FT) • Potential habitat for the: o Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus, ST) o Barbour's map turtle ( Graptemys barbouri, SSC) o Bluenose shiner (Pteronotropis welaka, SSC) o Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi, FT) o Pine barrens treefrog (Hy la andersonii, SSC) o Alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii, SSC) o Florida black bear (Ursus americanus jloridanus) The undeveloped North Escambia Property Site (Escambia County) is approximately 5 miles southwest of Century, Florida near County Road 4 and U.S. Highway 29. The site contains part of the Mitchell Creek drainage basin. FWC GIS analysis found that this site is located near, within, or adjacent to: • Potential habitat for the: o Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus, State Threatened [ST]) o Harlequin darter (Etheostoma histrio, SSC) o Sherman' s fox squirrel (Sciurus niger shermani, SSC) With the addition ofthe information provided above, FWC finds that GulfPower's 2016 10-year Site Plan 2016-2025 document is suitable for planning purposes and the plan proposes no significant impacts to fish and wildlife resources as written. If you need further assistance, please
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP., Aka TXU Corp.; Aka TXU Corp; Aka Texas Utilities, Et Al., Debtors
    PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT __________ No. 19-3492 __________ IN RE: ENERGY FUTURE HOLDINGS CORP., aka TXU Corp.; aka TXU Corp; aka Texas Utilities, et al., Debtors NextEra Energy, Inc., Appellant __________ On Appeal from the District Court for the District of Delaware (D.C. No. 1-18-cv-01253) District Judge: Hon. Richard G. Andrews __________ Argued July 2, 2020 Before: KRAUSE, PHIPPS, Circuit Judges, and BEETLESTONE,* District Judge. (Filed: March 15, 2021) * Honorable Wendy Beetlestone, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. __________ OPINION __________ James P. Bonner [ARGUED] Joshua D. Glatter Fleischman Bonner & Rocco 447 Springfield Avenue 2nd Floor Summit, NJ 07901 Keith M. Fleischman Fleischman Bonner & Rocco 81 Main Street Suite 515 White Plains, NY 10601 Matthew B. McGuire Landis Rath & Cobb 919 Market Street Suite 1800, P.O. Box 2087 Wilmington, DE 19801 Counsel for Appellant NextEra Energy Inc. Daniel G. Egan Gregg M. Galardi [ARGUED] Ropes & Gray 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Jonathan R. Ference-Burke Douglas H. Hallward-Driemeier 2 Ropes & Gray 2009 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20006 Counsel for Appellees Elliott Associates LP, Elliott International LP, Liverpool Limited Partnership, UMB Bank NA Daniel J. DeFranceschi Jason M. Madron Richards Layton & Finger 920 North King Street One Rodney Square Wilmington, DE 19801 Mark E. McKane [ARGUED] Kirkland & Ellis 555 California Street Suite 2700 San Francisco, CA 94104 Counsel for Appellee EFH Plan Administrator Board BEETLESTONE, District Judge. This case arises from the bankruptcy of Energy Future Holdings and its affiliates (“EFH” or “Debtors”).
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Power in Florida
    Solar Power in Florida September 20, 2016 Shelly Whitworth Renewable Program Manager Tampa Electric Company Background: Florida’s Regulatory Environment • Scope of comprehensive regulation of investor-owned electric utilities by the Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) – Rates – Reliability – Territorial boundaries – Quality of service – Conservation/DSM – Safety • PW Ventures Decision (1988) – Florida Supreme Court clarified that only electric utilities are allowed to sell electricity at retail – The sale of electricity to a single retail customer makes the provider a public utility subject to FPSC regulation – Court ruled that sales of electricity outside the FPSC’s jurisdiction would lead to uneconomic duplication of facilities • Duke Energy Decision (2000) – Florida Supreme Court rules that non-utility entities could not access the State of Florida’s power plant siting process – The court clarified that the Power Plant Siting Act and the Florida Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act were not intended to authorize the determination of need for a power plant with output that is not fully committed to serving retail load • Relevance to solar: 3rd party sales of power at retail are prohibited in Florida Solar Potential Florida is called the “Sunshine State” • Solar Energy Industries Association ranks Florida 3rd for rooftop solar potential • NREL ranks Florida 8th for rooftop solar potential and 9th for overall solar energy potential • Florida has lots of sunshine, but lots of clouds, too, unlike southwestern states Policies Favoring
    [Show full text]
  • Download 2015 Annual Report
    A Decade of Providing Excellence in Health Care for the Communities We Serve. In this report, which spans a decade from 2006 through 2015, you will learn of ways United Regional has elevated the quality of health care for the communities we serve. Our programs and services have been awarded nationally-recognized certifications for meeting or exceeding the most stringent quality standards. Our safety and quality initiatives have resulted in achieving the highest benchmarking levels. Our highly skilled physicians and staff have the expertise to treat complex medical conditions and perform the latest surgical procedures. Our financial strength has allowed us to reinvest in the most advanced technologies to benefit patient outcomes, build modern and more accessible facilities, bring needed primary care and specialty physicians to the area, and fulfill our strong commitment to provide care for the under and uninsured. Although our accomplishments have been significant, we will never be satisfied with the status quo. United Regional will continue to bring new and better ways to deliver compassionate, quality care for our patients today and well into the future. our passion To provide excellence in health care for the communities we serve. our purpose To make a positive difference in the lives of others. PEOPLE PEOPLE During the past decade, United Regional has developed a culture that embraces our passion of providing excellence in health care for the communities we We are all serve – care that is both high quality and compassionate. It starts with recruiting patients skilled staff and physicians and attracting dedicated volunteers. Then we dedicate resources to help ensure that our people stay committed, engaged, passionate, highly capable and healthy.
    [Show full text]
  • Court Confirms Energy Future Holdings'ʹ Plan of Reorganization
    Court Confirms Energy Future Holdings' Plan of Reorganization Upon Regulatory Approvals and Emergence, EFH to Benefit from Strengthened Balance Sheet and Strong Position in Texas' Competitive Energy Market DALLAS, Dec. 3, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Energy Future Holdings today announced that the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware has confirmed the company's plan of reorganization. The plan contemplates a tax-free spin of the company's competitive businesses, including Luminant and TXU Energy, and the sale of its holdings in Oncor to a consortium of investors. "We are pleased to have reached this critical milestone on the road to emergence," said John Young, chief executive officer of EFH. "We can now begin, in earnest, to build for the future, with a strong capital structure, excellent assets and a singular commitment to delivering for our customers, employees and business partners in Texas' growing, competitive market. Our financial restructuring has been among the most complex in history, and it is a credit to our entire team and our outside advisors that the company has reached this point while maintaining stellar customer service and operational excellence." Following the court's confirmation, the company must also receive regulatory approvals and satisfy various other closing conditions in order to emerge from chapter 11. The regulatory process is expected to extend into the spring of 2016, though final timing is subject to modification. About Energy Future Holdings EFH is a Dallas-based holding company engaged in competitive and regulated energy market activities in Texas. Its portfolio of competitive businesses consists primarily of Luminant, which is engaged largely in power generation and related mining activities, wholesale power marketing and energy trading, and TXU Energy, a retail electricity provider with 1.7 million residential and business customers in Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Is Most Impacted by the New Lease Accounting Standards?
    Who is Most Impacted by the New Lease Accounting Standards? An Analysis of the Fortune 500’s Leasing Obligations What Do Corporations Lease? Many companies lease (rather than buy) much of the equipment and real estate they use to run their business. Many of the office buildings, warehouses, retail stores or manufacturing plants companies run their operations from are leased. Many of the forklifts, trucks, computers and data center equipment companies use to run their business is leased. Leasing has many benefits. Cash flow is one. Instead of outlaying $300,000 to buy five trucks today you can make a series of payments over the next four years to lease them. You can then deploy the cash you saved towards other investments that appreciate in value. Also, regular replacement of older technology with the latest and greatest technology increases productivity and profitability. Instead of buying a server to use in your data center for five years, you can lease the machines and get a new replacement every three years. If you can return the equipment on time, you are effectively outsourcing the monetization of the residual value in the equipment to an expert third-party, the leasing company. Another benefit of leasing is the accounting, specifically the way the leases are reported on financial statements such as annual reports (10-Ks). Today, under the current ASC 840 standard, leases are classified as capital leases or operating leases. Capital leases are reported on the balance sheet. Operating leases are disclosed in the footnotes of your financial statements as “off balance sheet” operating expenses and excluded from important financial ratios such as Return on Assets that investors use to judge a company’s performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop Transcript
    1 1 BEFORE THE FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 2 DOCKET NO. UNDOCKETED 3 In the Matter of 4 RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD (RPS). 5 ___________________________________/ 6 7 ELECTRONIC VERSIONS OF THIS TRANSCRIPT ARE 8 A CONVENIENCE COPY ONLY AND ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING. 9 THE .PDF VERSION INCLUDES PREFILED TESTIMONY. 10 11 12 PROCEEDINGS: WORKSHOP 13 14 BEFORE: CHAIRMAN MATTHEW M. CARTER, II COMMISSIONER LISA POLAK EDGAR 15 COMMISSIONER KATRINA J. McMURRIAN COMMISSIONER NANCY ARGENZIANO 16 COMMISSIONER NATHAN A. SKOP 17 DATE: Friday, July 11, 2008 18 19 TIME: Commenced at 9:30 a.m. Concluded at 3:17 p.m. 20 21 PLACE: Betty Easley Conference Center Joseph P. Cresse Hearing Room 148 22 4075 Esplanade Way Tallahassee, Florida 23 24 REPORTED BY: MARY ALLEN NEEL, RPR, FPR 25 2 1 I N D E X 2 PAGE 3 OPENING REMARKS BY CHAIRMAN CARTER 3 4 DISCUSSION OF 2008 AMENDMENTS TO 366.92, F.S. 7 5 PRESENTATIONS BY INTERESTED PARTIES: 6 STEVE ADAMS, Florida Energy and Climate Commission 12 CHRISTY HERIG, Solar Electric Power Association 14 7 CHRISTOPHER MAINGOT, Solar Coalition 30 MICHAEL DOBSON, FREPA 35 8 MARK SINCLAIR, Clean Energy Group 45 GUS CEPERO, Florida Crystals 60 9 CLAY BETHEA, Buckeye Florida 71 MICHELLE CURTIS, Buckeye Florida 76 10 JOHN WILSON, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy 92 ERIC DRAPER, Audobon of Florida 103 11 MIKE BRANCH, Smurfit-Stone Forest Resources 116 VICKI GORDON KAUFMAN, for Wheelabrator 120 12 RENE SILVA, Florida Power & Light 128 BILL ASHBURN, Tampa Electric Company 131 13 BOB McGEE, Gulf Power Company 134 BOB NIEKUM, Progress Energy Florida 143 14 DISCUSSION OF DRAFT DATA REQUEST 148 15 PUBLIC COMMENT: 16 MIKE TWOMEY, for AARP 152 17 ROY RATNER, Atlas Solar Innovations 158 JOE TRESHLER, Covanta Energy 164 18 DISCUSSION OF SCHEDULING, POST-WORKSHOP 167 19 COMMENTS, AND PROCEDURAL MATTERS 20 CLOSING REMARKS BY THE COMMISSIONERS 171 21 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER 181 22 23 24 25 3 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 CHAIRMAN CARTER: Good morning to everyone.
    [Show full text]
  • Hb 2417, Hd2 Neil Abercrombie Governor Department of Business, Richard C
    HB 2417, HD2 NEIL ABERCROMBIE GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS, RICHARD C. LIM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TOURISM DIRECTOR MARY ALICE EVANS DEPUTY DIRECTOR No.1 Capitol District Building, 250 South Hotel Street, 5th Floor, Honolulu, Hawail96813 Telephone: (808) 586-2355 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, Hawaii 96804 Fax: (808) 586-2377 Web site: www.hawaii.gov/dbedt Statement of REVISED 3/20/12 RICHARD C. LIM Director Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism before the SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Tuesday, March 20, 2012 2:50PM State Capitol, Senate Conference Room 225 in consideration of HB2417 HD 2 Proposed SDI RELATING TO RENEWABLE ENERGY. Chair Gabbard, Vice English, and Members of the Committee. The Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT) opposes HB2417 Proposed SD 1, which removes the Renewable Energy Technology System Tax Credit cap and changes the incentive structure for utility scale systems to a ten year production credit. DBEDT supports the HD2 version of this measure and requests that version be passed instead. The proposed SD 1 is likely to increase costs to the State and create conditions for a spike in short-term growth that may not be in the best long-term interests of the State. Assuming that solar capacity follows recent trends and doubles to 70 MW in 2012 for non-utility scale projects, and that an additional 67 MW of utility scale projects are completed within the next several years, the proposed SDI would cost the State roughly $597 million. This scenario
    [Show full text]
  • Winners and Losers: Fallout from KKR’S Race for Profit Contents
    Winners and Losers: Fallout from KKR’s Race for Profit Contents Introduction ......................................................................................5 The U.S. Economy .............................................................................9 The KKR Workforce ........................................................................13 Consumers .....................................................................................17 Environment ...................................................................................23 Conclusion .....................................................................................27 Appendices ....................................................................................28 Endnotes ........................................................................................32 Introduction KKR’s Race for Profit 5 Winners and Losers: Fallout from KKR’s Race for Profit The buyout industry and its harmful practices are receiving greater scrutiny as Americans struggle with a growing sense of anxiety over the state of the economy and the expanding income gap between the richest 10th of Americans and those in the middle class. How does the buyout industry’s “see no evil, accept no responsibility” approach to business really impact Main Street America? With hundreds of thousands of employees, KKR portfolio companies together employ one of the largest private workforces of any U.S.-based firm. While recent reports have focused on the net job loss resulting from leveraged buyouts, there
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Ethics Commission 2012 List of Registered Lobbyists with Employers/Clients (Emp/C) Sorted by Lobbyist Name
    TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION 2012 LIST OF REGISTERED LOBBYISTS WITH EMPLOYERS/CLIENTS (EMP/C) SORTED BY LOBBYIST NAME Lobbyist Lobbyist Mailing Address Telephone # Reporting Type Termination Date EMP/C EMP/C Address Comp. Type Comp. Level EMP/C Term. Date Aanstoos, Alice L. 6500 West Loop South # 5100 Bellaire, TX (713)567-7718 Monthly 12/31/2012 77401-3520 AT&T 208 S. Akard St. Dallas, TX 75202 Prospective $50,000 - $99,999.99 12/31/2012 Abel, Douglas Deane 1515 Hermann Dr. Houston, TX 77004-7126 (713)524-4267 Annual 12/31/2012 Harris County Medical Society 1515 Hermann Dr. Houston, TX 77004 Prospective Less Than $10,000.00 12/31/2012 Acevedo, Adrian G. 1001 Congress Avenue, Suite 400 Austin, TX (512)499-8085 Annual 12/31/2012 78701 Anadarko Petroleum Corporation 1201 Lake Robbins Drive The Woodlands, TX Prospective $50,000 - $99,999.99 12/31/2012 77380 Adair, Bobby Glenn 600 N. Dairy Ashford - 2WL 8024F Houston, (832)486-3395 Annual 12/31/2012 TX 77079 ConocoPhillips 600 N. Dairy Ashford Houston, TX 77079 Prospective $ 0.00 12/31/2012 Adams, Cynthia S. 2100 S IH 35 Suite 202 Austin, TX 78704 (512)692-1465 Annual 12/31/2012 Superior HeatlhPlan 2100 S IH 35 Suite 202 Austin, TX 78704 Prospective $10,000 - $24,999.99 12/31/2012 Page: 1 Texas Ethics Commission * (512) 463-5800 * www.ethics.state.tx.us Date Printed: 02/13/2013 Lobbyist Lobbyist Mailing Address Telephone # Reporting Type Termination Date EMP/C EMP/C Address Comp. Type Comp. Level EMP/C Term.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Contract Detention
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED CONTRACT DETENTION FACILITY IN THE HOUSTON, TEXAS AREA OF OPERATIONS 29 December 2016 Lead Agency: Department of Homeland Security U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 500 12th Street Southwest Washington, DC 20536 Points of Contact: Trina Fisher Contracting Officer, Detention Compliance and Removals Division DHS ICE Office of Acquisition Management 801 I Street NW, Room 9143 Washington, DC 20536-5750 Elizabeth Kennett Energy, Environmental, and Sustainability Program Manager DHS ICE Office of Asset and Facilities Management 500 12th Street SW, Mail Stop 5703 Washington, DC 20536 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 8 PROJECT BACKGROUND 11 1.1 Introduction 11 1.2 Purpose and Need 11 1.3 Scope and Content of the Analysis 12 1.4 Interagency Coordination, Consultation and Public Involvement 12 1.5 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives 13 1.5.1 Proposed Action 13 1.5.2 No Action Alternative 13 1.5.3 Proposed Action Alternative 1 – Renovations to HPC 14 1.5.4 Proposed Action Alternative 2 – New Facility in Montgomery County 15 1.5.5 Summary of Alternatives Considered but Eliminated 15 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 17 2.1 Geology, Soils, Topography and Seismicity 21 2.1.1 Affected Environment 21 2.1.2 Environmental Consequences 24 2.1.3 Mitigation and BMPs 25 2.2 Hydrology and Water Resources 25 2.2.1 Affected Environment 25 2.2.2 Environmental Consequences 28 2.2.3 Mitigation
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Directors' Pay up from Last Year
    Published By 200 Business Park Drive Armonk, NY 10504 Phone: 914.730.7300 Fax: 914.730.7303 www.total-comp.com 2017 / 2018 BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMPENSATION REPORT January 2018 All rights reserved. © 2018 Total Compensation Solutions, LLC. Printed in the United States of America. This publication of the 2017/2018 Board of Directors Compensation Report may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in whole or in part, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of Total Compensation Solutions, LLC. 200 Business Park Drive, Armonk, NY 10504. The information provided in this report is confidential and for the use of the subscribing organization only. By accepting this material, you agree that it will not be reproduced, copied, transmitted or disclosed to organizations or persons outside of your organization. Table of Contents Section Page I. Executive Summary Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Company Demographics -------------------------------------------------- 5 Findings and Observations ----------------------------------------------- 8 II. Data Analysis Board Structure -------------------------------------------------------------- 13 Committee Structure ------------------------------------------------------- 16 Board Compensation ------------------------------------------------------ 19 III. Board Compensation All Companies --------------------------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Local Permitting on the Cost of Solar Power
    The Impact of Local Permitting on the Cost of Solar Power How a federal effort to simplify processes can make solar affordable for 50% of American homes January 2011 Endorsed by: Alteris Renewables Namaste Solar Sullivan Solar Power American Solar Electric PetersenDean Sun Chariot Solar Acro Energy Real Goods Solar Sunetric Corbin Solar REC Solar Sunlight Solar Energy Greenspring Energy RevoluSun SunTrek Solar groSolar Sierra Club Trinity Solar HelioPower SolarTech Verengo Solar Plus Mainstream Energy SolSource The Vote Solar Initiative Mercury Solar Systems The full report is available as a free download at www.sunrunhome.com/permitting. Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................ 1 Note from SunRun ......................................................................................... 2 The impact of local permitting on the cost of solar power ............................. 3 Local permitting costs $2,516 per installation ............................................ 6 Streamlined permitting will benefit jurisdictions ......................................... 7 Launching the Residential Solar Permitting Initiative ................................... 9 The prize: grid parity for more than half of American homes .................... 11 Appendix ..................................................................................................... 12 Appendix A: Methodology ......................................................................... 13 Appendix B: Data .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]