DOCSLIB.ORG

Valero Crude by Rail Project Public Comments Received April 4 -5, 2016 Commenter Date Received

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Valero Crude by Rail Project Public Comments Received April 4 -5, 2016 Commenter Date Received Valero Crude by Rail Project Public Comments received April 4 -5, 2016 Commenter Date Received Association of Irritated Residents vs. Kern County Board of Supervisors ruling 4-Apr-16 Organizations League of Conservation Voters of the East Bay 4-Apr-16 Benicia Chamber of Commerce 4-Apr-16 Safe Fuel and Energy Resources California 4-Apr-16 Safe Fuel and Energy Resources California 5-Apr-16 Applicant Chris Howe 4-Apr-16 Individual Comments Russell Hands 4-Apr-16 Larnie Fox 4-Apr-16 Margaret Ericson 4-Apr-16 Jean Jackman 4-Apr-16 Charles Davidson 4-Apr-16 Michael D'Adamo 4-Apr-16 Madeline Koster 4-Apr-16 Greg Yuhas 4-Apr-16 California Senator Lois Wolk, Third Senate District 4-Apr-16 Frances Burke 4-Apr-16 Simone Cardona 4-Apr-16 Lynne Nittler 5-Apr-16 Identical Comments "Public Comment re Valero Crude by Rail Project - Appeal Application No. 16PLN-00009" 10 Commenters (List and Sample Attached) 4/4-4/5/16 Identical Comments - With Modifications "Public Comment re Valero Crude by Rail Project - Appeal Application No. 16PLN-00009" Cate Leger 4-Apr-16 Identical Comments "I support the Valero Crude by Rail project" 27 Commenters (List and Sample Attached) 4-Apr-16 Superior Court of California County of Kern Bakersfield Traffic Courtroom 2 Hearing Date: April 01, 2016 Time: 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS VS KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS S1500CV283166 Honorable: J. Eric Bradshaw Clerk: Patrick Ogilvie Court Reporter: N/A Bailiff: N/A Interpreter: N/A Language Of: N/A PARTIES: ACE ATTORNEY SERVICE, Non-Party, not present ALON USA ENERGY, INC., Real Party Interest, not JOCELYN THOMPSON, Attorney, not present present ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS, ANGELA MESZAROS, Attorney, not present Petitioner, not present CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, Petitioner, ANGELA MESZAROS, Attorney, not present not present KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CHARLES COLLINS, Attorney, not present Respondent, not present KERN COUNTY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY CHARLES COLLINS, Attorney, not present DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, Respondent, not present PARAMOUNT PETROLEUM CORPORATION, Real JOCELYN THOMPSON, Attorney, not present Party Interest, not present SIERRA CLUB, Petitioner, not present ANGELA MESZAROS, Attorney, not present NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: RULING ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE, HERETOFORE SUBMITTED Hearing Start Time: 2:15 PM * * * * * DISPOSITION The petition is DENIED. Respondents shall prepare a proposed judgment consistent with this ruling. Costs may be claimed in accordance with applicable statutes and rules of court. MINUTE ORDER Page 1 of 6 ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS VS KERN COUNTY BOARD OF S1500CV283166 SUPERVISORS BACKGROUND This action arises from respondent Kern County Board of Supervisors’ (“County’s”) approval of the Alon Bakersfield Refinery Crude Flexibility Project (“Project”) in September 2014. The refinery on the Project site was initially constructed in the early 1930’s, and has expanded over the years. Historically, the refinery has processed primarily “heavy” crude oil produced in the San Joaquin Valley. The refinery’s current crude processing capacity is 70,000 barrels per day. The purpose of the Project is to enhance the existing refinery’s flexibility to receive and process a variety of crude oils, including “light sweet” crude oils produced in distant locations such as North Dakota, Colorado and Utah, while maintaining its ability to refine local heavy crude oil. To accomplish this, the Project would expand or modify on-site rail, transfer and storage facilities, including construction of a rail loop connected to the existing railway, and would add, modify, upgrade or repurpose various other refinery facilities. The rail terminal capacity would increase. The permitted crude processing capacity would not change. Petitioners challenge the sufficiency of the EIR and County’s findings under CEQA. Petitioners seek a “writ of mandate or peremptory writ,” injunctive relief and declaratory relief to void the EIR and overturn County’s approval of the Project. STANDARD OF REVIEW The parties do not agree on the appropriate standard of review. The standard of review in CEQA cases is governed generally by Public Resources Code §§ 21168 and 21168.5, and depends on the relief sought. Section 21168 applies in cases seeking administrative mandamus, where a public agency’s “determination, finding, or decision” is made as a result of a “proceeding in which by law a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken and discretion in the determination of facts is vested in a public agency,” i.e., an “adjudicative” or “quasi-judicial” determination. Pub. Res. Code § 21168 ; Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (“Laurel Heights”) (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, fn. 5; Vineyard Area Citizens v. City of Rancho Cordova (“Vineyard”) (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, fn. 4. The court reviews an agency’s determinations under Section 21168 to see if they are supported by substantial evidence in the light of the whole record. Pub. Res. Code § 21168 . Section 21168.5 applies in cases seeking traditional mandamus and cases other than those to which Section 21168 applies, such as cases where an agency has made a “legislative,” “nonjudicial” or “nonadjudicative” determination or decision. Pub. Res. Code § 21168.5 ; Laurel Heights, supra, 47 Cal.3d 376, fn. 5; Vineyard, supra, 40 Cal.4th 412, fn. 4; Center for Biological Diversity v. California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (“Center”) (2015) 62 Cal.4 th 204, 214-215 . The court reviews an agency’s determination or decision under Section 21168.5 to see if the agency committed a “prejudicial abuse of discretion.” Pub. Res. Code § 21168.5 . An “abuse of discretion” occurs under Section 21168.5 if: (1) “the agency has not proceeded in a manner required by law,” or (2) “the [agency’s] determination or decision is not supported by substantial evidence.” Pub. Res. Code § 21168.5 ; Vineyard, supra, at p. 435. Judicial review of these two types of error differs significantly: the court determines de novo whether the agency has employed the correct procedures, “scrupulously enforc[ing] all legislatively mandated CEQA requirements,” Vineyard, supra, at p. 435 [quoting Citizens Golleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564] ; the court accords greater deference to the agency’s substantive factual conclusions, and reviews them for substantial evidence. Laurel Heights, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 393; Vineyard, supra, at p. 435. Thus, in evaluating MINUTE ORDER Page 2 of 6 ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS VS KERN COUNTY BOARD OF S1500CV283166 SUPERVISORS an EIR for CEQA compliance under Section 21168.5, the court must adjust its scrutiny to the nature of the alleged defect, depending on whether the claim is predominantly one of improper procedure or a dispute over the facts. Vineyard, supra, at p. 435; Center, supra, 62 Cal.4th 204, 214-215. In applying the “substantial evidence” standard to an agency’s factual determinations under both Section 21168 and Section 21168.5, the court must resolve reasonable doubts in favor of the administrative finding and decision. Topanga Association for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506, 514; Laurel Heights, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 393. A court may not set aside an agency’s approval of an EIR on the ground that an opposite conclusion would have been equally or more reasonable. Greenbaum v. City of Los Angeles (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 401-402; Laurel Heights, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 393. The court does not pass upon the correctness of the EIR’s environmental conclusions, but only upon its sufficiency as an informative document. Laurel Heights, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 392. The court must resolve reasonable doubts in favor of the administrative finding and decision. Id. at p. 393. DISCUSSION 1. Description of Project and Baseline The EIR describes baseline using environmental conditions as of the date the Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) was published in 2013, adjusted to include the refinery’s production in 2007. The former owner’s 2008 bankruptcy resulted in a suspension of refinery operations. Some of those operations were restarted when real parties in interest purchased the refinery, but there was no crude oil processing in 2013. Petitioners argue that the EIR does not describe the true nature of the Project because it does not treat “restarting” the refinery as part of the Project, and baseline conditions should have been “zero crude processing,” the refinery’s production on the date the NOP was published. CEQA Guideline 15125(a) states, in relevant part: An EIR must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published,…This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant. 14 CCR § 15125(a). (Emphasis added.) Neither CEQA nor the CEQA Guidelines mandates a uniform, inflexible rule for determination of the existing conditions baseline; rather, an agency enjoys the discretion to decide, in the first instance, exactly how the existing physical conditions without the project can most realistically be measured, subject to review, as with all CEQA factual determinations, for support by substantial evidence. Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 310, 328 . The date for establishing a baseline cannot be a rigid one; environmental conditions may vary from year to year and in some cases it is necessary to consider conditions over a range of time periods. Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4 th 99, 125 . In the present case, County did not abuse its discretion in describing the Project or baseline conditions in a manner that recognized the refinery’s 80-plus year production history.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Midnight Train to Georgemas Report Final 08-12-2017
    Midnight Train to Georgemas 08/12/2017 Reference number 105983 MIDNIGHT TRAIN TO GEORGEMAS MIDNIGHT TRAIN TO GEORGEMAS MIDNIGHT TRAIN TO GEORGEMAS IDENTIFICATION TABLE Client/Project owner HITRANS Project Midnight Train to Georgemas Study Midnight Train to Georgemas Type of document Report Date 08/12/2017 File name Midnight Train to Georgemas Report v5 Reference number 105983 Number of pages 57 APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications Claire Mackay Principal Author 03/07/2017 James Consultant Jackson David Project 1 Connolly, Checked Director 24/07/2017 by Alan Director Beswick Approved David Project 24/07/2017 by Connolly Director James Principal Author 21/11/2017 Jackson Consultant Alan Modifications Director Beswick to service Checked 2 21/11/2017 costs and by Project David demand Director Connolly forecasts Approved David Project 21/11/2017 by Connolly Director James Principal Author 08/12/2017 Jackson Consultant Alan Director Beswick Checked Final client 3 08/12/2017 by Project comments David Director Connolly Approved David Project 08/12/2017 by Connolly Director TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 6 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 6 2.1 EXISTING COACH AND RAIL SERVICES 6 2.2 CALEDONIAN SLEEPER 7 2.3 CAR -BASED TRAVEL TO /FROM THE CAITHNESS /O RKNEY AREA 8 2.4 EXISTING FERRY SERVICES AND POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THESE 9 2.5 AIR SERVICES TO ORKNEY AND WICK 10 2.6 MOBILE PHONE -BASED ESTIMATES OF CURRENT TRAVEL PATTERNS 11 3. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 14 4. PROBLEMS/ISSUES 14 4.2 CONSTRAINTS 16 4.3 RISKS : 16 5. OPPORTUNITIES 17 6. SLEEPER OPERATIONS 19 6.1 INTRODUCTION 19 6.2 SERVICE DESCRIPTION & ROUTING OPTIONS 19 6.3 MIXED TRAIN OPERATION 22 6.4 TRACTION & ROLLING STOCK OPTIONS 25 6.5 TIMETABLE PLANNING 32 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Refugio Oil Spill Response & Recovery
    Refugio Oil Spill Response & Recovery Incident Summary • On 19 May 2015 at 1243, report to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services • The report indicated a pipeline rupture had occurred near Refugio State Beach in Santa Barbara County, CA • The responsible party (Plains All American Pipeline) estimated the total release at 500 barrels (21,000 gallons) of crude oil on the shoreside of Hwy 101 which then flowed into the Pacific Ocean • 23x7 mile (138 square mile) fishery closure Incident Summary (con’t) • Initial reports estimated a sheen to be 3.5 NM along the beach and 50-100 yards into the water • Revised worst-case release: 101,000 gal (2,400 bbl) • On May 19, Governor Brown declared a State of Emergency for Santa Barbara County • On June 5, Governor Brown issued a subsequent Executive Order to Further Expedite Oil Spill Recovery Efforts in Santa Barbara County Location of Incident (Approximately 25 miles west of Santa Barbara) Incident Command Post Shoreline below the cliff Photo Courtesy of CDFW‐OSPR Refugio State Beach Photo Courtesy of NOAA Significant Environmental, Cultural, Historical & Social Concerns • 2 Marine Protected Areas (Kashtayit & Naples) • 23‐mile by 7‐mile mile fishery closure • Wildlife impacts – birds, mammals, Grunion Spawning • Chumash Indian Tribe – 2,000 ‐ 5,000 members coastal members – Inhabitants of SB Coast for over 13,000 years • Varied Beach composition & environments: – Cobble, Rock, Sand, Cliffs, Kelp, Marinas, Parks Areas of Special Interest/Concerns Volunteers Extensive Fisheries Closure Zone Cultural and Tribal Integration Wildlife Operation - marine mammals NGO and community involvement At Maximum Effort • Personnel – 1287 in field – 129 in ICP • Vessels on water – 21 skimmers – 2 support barges • 6,000 ft boom deployed • 5 SCAT teams deployed • 23 x 7 mile fishery closure • 1000‐ft temporary flight restriction within a 5‐mile radius of Refugio Beach – Daily responder overflights Unified Command Established USCG Sector LA‐LB Sector Commander, EPA Region 9, CA DFW, Santa Barbara Co OEM, Plains All American.
    [Show full text]
  • Scotrail Franchise – Franchise Agreement
    ScotRail Franchise – Franchise Agreement THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS and ABELLIO SCOTRAIL LIMITED SCOTRAIL FRANCHISE AGREEMENT 6453447-13 ScotRail Franchise – Franchise Agreement TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Interpretation and Definitions .................................................................................... 1 2. Commencement .......................................................................................................... 2 3. Term ............................................................................................................ 3 4 Franchisee’s Obligations ........................................................................................... 3 5 Unjustified Enrichment ............................................................................................... 4 6 Arm's Length Dealings ............................................................................................... 4 7 Compliance with Laws................................................................................................ 4 8 Entire Agreement ........................................................................................................ 4 9 Governing Law ............................................................................................................ 5 SCHEDULE 1 ............................................................................................................ 7 PASSENGER SERVICE OBLIGATIONS ............................................................................................. 7 SCHEDULE 1.1 ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT of TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ) in Re: ) Chapter 11 ) WHITING PETROLEUM CORPORATION, ) Case No
    Case 20-32021 Document 362 Filed in TXSB on 05/21/20 Page 1 of 147 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) WHITING PETROLEUM CORPORATION, ) Case No. 20-32021 (DRJ) et al.,1 ) ) Debtors. ) (Jointly Administered) ) GLOBAL NOTES AND STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS, METHODOLOGIES, AND DISCLAIMERS REGARDING THE DEBTORS’ SCHEDULES OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES AND STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL AFFAIRS The Schedules of Assets and Liabilities (collectively with attachments, the “Schedules”) and the Statements of Financial Affairs (collectively with attachments, the “Statements,” and together with the Schedules, the “Schedules and Statements”), filed by the above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the “Debtors”), were prepared pursuant to section 521 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) and rule 1007 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”) by the Debtors’ management, with the assistance of the Debtors’ advisors, and are unaudited. These Global Notes and Statement of Limitations, Methodologies, and Disclaimers Regarding the Debtors’ Schedules of Assets and Liabilities and Statements of Financial Affairs (the “Global Notes”) are incorporated by reference in, and comprise an integral part of, each Debtor’s respective Schedules and Statements, and should be referred to and considered in connection with any review of the Schedules and Statements. While the Debtors’ management has made reasonable efforts to ensure that the Schedules and Statements are as accurate and complete as possible under the circumstances, based on information that was available at the time of preparation, inadvertent errors, inaccuracies, or omissions may have occurred or the Debtors may discover subsequent information that requires material changes to the Schedules and Statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Check out This Factsheet on the Project
    The GETFACTS ABOUT PLAINSPIPELINE’S NEW THREAT TO COASTAL CALIFORNIA Plains All American Pipeline caused California’s worst coastal oil spill in 25 years – the Refugio Oil Spill of 2015 – and now it wants a second chance to spill again. anta Barbara County is processing Plains’ application to build another coastal oil pipeline that would restart Sdrilling from six decrepit offshore oil platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel. Houston-based Plains was criminally negligent in allowing its previous coastal oil pipeline to become corroded and fail, coating Santa Barbara area beaches in crude and killing hundreds of birds and marine mammals. It doesn’t deserve another opportunity to kill threatened wildlife, poison our communities and wreck the climate. THE PROJECT • Plains All American Pipeline is proposing to build more than 123 miles of new oil pipeline through Santa Barbara (73 miles), San Luis Obispo (37 miles) and Kern counties (14 miles), transporting heavy crude pumped from offshore drilling platforms to onshore processing facilities. Plains also proposes to abandon in place about 123 miles of its old failed oil pipelines. • The new pipeline will mostly follow the same route as the old broken pipeline – which was built based on environmental studies done in the late ‘80s – in a rapidly changing coastal zone that is now being affected by coastal erosion, sea level rise and other impacts from climate change. HISTORY OF VIOLATIONS • Investigators responding to a massive coastal oil spill near Refugio State Beach in 2015 found the source, Plains’ Pipeline 901, to be severely corroded and poorly maintained. In September 2018, a Santa Barbara jury found Plains guilty of a felony for failing to properly maintain its pipeline and eight misdemeanor charges for a delay in reporting the spill and for its deadly impact on protected wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History Database
    Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History database Abdala, C. S., A. S. Quinteros, and R. E. Espinoza. 2008. Two new species of Liolaemus (Iguania: Liolaemidae) from the puna of northwestern Argentina. Herpetologica 64:458-471. Abdala, C. S., D. Baldo, R. A. Juárez, and R. E. Espinoza. 2016. The first parthenogenetic pleurodont Iguanian: a new all-female Liolaemus (Squamata: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. Copeia 104:487-497. Abdala, C. S., J. C. Acosta, M. R. Cabrera, H. J. Villaviciencio, and J. Marinero. 2009. A new Andean Liolaemus of the L. montanus series (Squamata: Iguania: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. South American Journal of Herpetology 4:91-102. Abdala, C. S., J. L. Acosta, J. C. Acosta, B. B. Alvarez, F. Arias, L. J. Avila, . S. M. Zalba. 2012. Categorización del estado de conservación de las lagartijas y anfisbenas de la República Argentina. Cuadernos de Herpetologia 26 (Suppl. 1):215-248. Abell, A. J. 1999. Male-female spacing patterns in the lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Amphibia-Reptilia 20:185-194. Abts, M. L. 1987. Environment and variation in life history traits of the Chuckwalla, Sauromalus obesus. Ecological Monographs 57:215-232. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2003. Anfibios y reptiles del Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay: Facultad de Ciencias. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2007. Anfibio y reptiles del Uruguay, 3rd edn. Montevideo, Uruguay: Serie Fauna 1. Ackermann, T. 2006. Schreibers Glatkopfleguan Leiocephalus schreibersii. Munich, Germany: Natur und Tier. Ackley, J. W., P. J. Muelleman, R. E. Carter, R. W. Henderson, and R. Powell. 2009. A rapid assessment of herpetofaunal diversity in variously altered habitats on Dominica.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-2024 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program
    NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL August 17, 2017 Ms. Kelly Hammerle National Program Manager Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 45600 Woodland Road Sterling, VA 20166 Submitted online at http:www.regulations.gov Re: NRDC Comments on the Request for Information and Comments on the Preparation of the 2019-2024 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program. Dear Ms. Hammerle: On behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council (“NRDC”) and its more than 2.5 million members and online activists, we submit this letter to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement (“BOEM”) regarding the Request for Information for the Preparation of the 2019-2024 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program (“Program”). For more than three decades, NRDC has monitored and engaged in policy processes related to leasing, exploring and producing oil and gas from our nation’s oceans. We object to the Administration’s initiation of a whole new process to develop a Five-Year Program so soon after the current Outer Continental Shelf Offshore Oil and Gas Leasing Program (2017-2022) was put in place (January 2017). An extensive, multi-year public process preceded the adoption of the current program, during which over 1.4 million comments were submitted opposing new drilling. The program finalized at the end of this lengthy public process contains no lease sales in the following areas: the Atlantic, Pacific, Arctic, Bristol Bay or Eastern Gulf. New offshore drilling and leasing threatens billion dollar coastal economies, would open fragile and priceless coastal ecosystems to damage from pollution and spills, and would accelerate global climate disruption.
    [Show full text]
  • Inline Inspection / Integrity Management
    e Journal 1 / 2019 Issue Issue Pipeline Technology Journal INLINE INSPECTION / INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT www.pipeline-journal.net ISSN 2196-4300 Advanced in Sealing. DENSOLEN ® DENSOMAT ® Tapes and Systems Wrapping Devices ■ Reliable corrosion prevention and strong ■ For fast and secure application mechanical resistance ■ High flexibility for all diameters ■ For extreme temperatures: -50 °C to +100 °C (-58 °F to +212 °F) www.denso.de PIPELINE TECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 3 EDITORIAL We face many challenges – together we must find solutions Oil and gas pipelines around the world are facing a number of challenges that will shape our industry in a severe way and require us to work even more closely to- gether than ever before in order to develop innovative solutions to these challenges. At the annual Pipeline Technology Conference (ptc) in Berlin and in the Pipeline Technology Journal (prj), we regularly cover topics, lead them into international discussion and thus support pipeline developers and operators around the Admir Celovic world to make their pipelines safer, more reliable and more economical. Director Publications In addition to some 80 presentations on the further development of material, technology, construction and operation of pipelines, the 14th ptc will also include the two new side conferences Public Perception / Qualification & Recruitment, as well as panel discussions and plenary sessions about a number of current pipeline topics: Illegal Tapping Just a short while ago, a devastating pipeline explosion killed about 100 people in Mexico. The explosion was caused by illegal tapping of a fuel pipeline. This problem may be extreme in Mexico, but it certainly is not limited to this county.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinross Gold Corporation 2010 Annual Report
    TRANSFORMING OUR FUTURE KINROSS GOLD CORPORATION 2010 ANNUAL REPORT In 2010, Kinross established itself as the new growth leader among senior 2010 HIGHLIGHTS gold producers while delivering record operational and fi nancial results. We signifi cantly upgraded our portfolio by acquiring strategic assets in high- Acquired Red Back Mining The transformational combination with Red Back expanded our global portfolio, including potential gold regions — including Tasiast in Mauritania, one of the world’s the addition of the spectacular Tasiast project, giving Kinross the best growth profi le among fastest-growing gold resources. At the same time, we continued to build our senior gold producers. capacity to deliver on our ambitious growth plans by adding new strength to Increased Revenue, Cash Flow and Earnings For the fi rst time, annual revenue exceeded $3 billion, an increase of 25% over 2009, while our global organization. adjusted operating cash fl ow exceeded $1 billion. Adjusted net earnings increased by 57% and adjusted net earnings per share increased by 32%. With a balanced global portfolio of ten operating mines and four high-quality Advanced Growth Projects growth projects, Kinross expects to double its share of world gold production With new studies completed at Tasiast, Fruta del Norte, Lobo-Marte and Dvoinoye, we are in the next fi ve years. making signifi cant and steady progress advancing the projects that will fuel our next round of growth. By 2015 we expect production to grow to 4.5 — 4.9 million ounces, double our 2010 production. Expanded Gold Reserves and Resources In 2010, Kinross increased total proven and probable gold reserves by 23% to 62.4 million gold ounces.
    [Show full text]
  • R-09-DMA-0066-12-18.Pdf
    Estudio de Riesgo Ambiental Área Contractual 3, Cuenca Salina, Golfo de México Estudio de Riesgo Ambiental Evaluación de los Riesgos Ambientales Relacionados con la Perforación Exploratoria, Área Contractual 3 del Contrato CNH-R01-L04-A3.CS/2016, Cuenca Salina, Golfo de México Fecha: 30 de noviembre del 2018 Nombre y firma de persona física. Información protegida bajo los artículos 113 fracción I de la LFTAIP y 116 primer párrafo de la LGTAIP. Líder de Offshore Oil and Gas México Nombre y firma de persona física. Información protegida bajo los artículos 113 fracción I de la LFTAIP y 116 primer párrafo de la LGTAIP. Líder de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental Estudio de Riesgo Ambiental Área Contractual 3, Cuenca Salina, Golfo de México Tabla de Contenidos 1.0 Escenarios de los Riesgos Ambientales Relacionados con el Proyecto ........................................ 1-1 1.1 Bases de Diseño .......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Información General del Proyecto .................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1.1 Descripción del Proyecto ................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1.2 Alcance del ERA................................................................................................ 1-3 1.1.2 Características del Sitio y Susceptibilidad a Fenómenos Naturales y Efectos Meteorológicos Adversos................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • KWP Titelblaetter
    Equal Split in the Informal Market for Group Train Travel by Israel Waichman, Artem Korzhenevych, Till Requate No. 1638 | July 2010 Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Düsternbrooker Weg 120, 24105 Kiel, Germany Kiel Working Paper No.1638 | July 2010 Equal Split in the Informal Market for Group Train Travel Israel Waichman, Artem Korzhenevych, and Till Requate Abstract: In this paper we make use of a unique dataset collected in the central train station of Kiel, Germany. A group ticket is used by individual proposers who search for co-travelers to share the ride with shortly before the train departure. The bargaining behavior resembles the Ultimatum game to the extent that proposers request a fixed price for a shared ride and potential co-travelers usually accept or reject the deal. We observe that the prevailing price corresponds to the equal split of the ticket cost between the maximum possible number of co-travelers. This result is remarkable because the positions of the bargaining parties are hardly symmetric and the formation of the full group is not guaranteed. Using a simple agent-based model we are able to identify some sufficient conditions leading to the observed distribution of prices. Finally, we observed that the probability to accept an unusually high offer is decreasing with the price and increasing when the offer is made right before the train departure. Keywords: natural field experiment; bargaining; focal point; equal split; agent-based model JEL classification: C78; C93; D74; D83 Israel Waichman Artem Korzhenevych Department of Economics, University of Kiel Kiel Institute for the World Economy Olshausenstrasse 40 Hindenburgufer 66 24098 Kiel, Germany 24105 Kiel, Germany E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Till Requate Department of Economics, University of Kiel Olshausenstrasse 40 24098 Kiel, Germany E-mail: [email protected] ____________________________________ The responsibility for the contents of the working papers rests with the author, not the Institute.
    [Show full text]
  • What Explains the Diversity of Sexually Selected Traits?
    Biol. Rev. (2020), 95, pp. 847–864. 847 doi: 10.1111/brv.12593 Songs versus colours versus horns: what explains the diversity of sexually selected traits? John J. Wiens* and E. Tuschhoff Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 85721-0088, U.S.A. ABSTRACT Papers on sexual selection often highlight the incredible diversity of sexually selected traits across animals. Yet, few studies have tried to explain why this diversity evolved. Animals use many different types of traits to attract mates and outcom- pete rivals, including colours, songs, and horns, but it remains unclear why, for example, some taxa have songs, others have colours, and others horns. Here, we first conduct a systematic survey of the basic diversity and distribution of dif- ferent types of sexually selected signals and weapons across the animal Tree of Life. Based on this survey, we describe seven major patterns in trait diversity and distributions. We then discuss 10 unanswered questions raised by these pat- terns, and how they might be addressed. One major pattern is that most types of sexually selected signals and weapons are apparently absent from most animal phyla (88%), in contrast to the conventional wisdom that a diversity of sexually selected traits is present across animals. Furthermore, most trait diversity is clustered in Arthropoda and Chordata, but only within certain clades. Within these clades, many different types of traits have evolved, and many types appear to have evolved repeatedly. By contrast, other major arthropod and chordate clades appear to lack all or most trait types, and similar patterns are repeated at smaller phylogenetic scales (e.g.
    [Show full text]