DOCSLIB.ORG

Before the Public Service Commission of Maryland in the Matter of The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Before the Public Service Commission of Maryland in the Matter of The BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND IN THE MATTER OF THE MERGER ) OF EXELON CORPORATION AND ) CASE NO. 9361 PEPCO HOLDINGS, INC. ) SURREBUTAL TESTIMONY OF PAUL R. PETERSON ON BEHALF OF MARYLAND OFFICE OF PEOPLE’S COUNSEL January 21, 2015 Office of People’s Counsel Peterson Surrebuttal Page 2 of 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. I. STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS ............................................................ 3 II. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY OF SURREBUTTAL TESTIMONY ............... 3 III. SURREBUTAL TESTIMONY ............................................................................ 3 Office of People’s Counsel Peterson Surrebuttal Page 3 of 7 1 I. STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS 2 Q. Please state your name and business address. 3 A. My name is Paul R. Peterson. I am a Principal with Synapse Energy Economics, 4 Inc. a consulting Company with an address of 485 Massachusetts Avenue, 5 Cambridge, Massachusetts. 6 Q. Have you previously testified in this proceeding? 7 A. Yes, I submitted direct testimony on behalf of the Maryland Office of People’s 8 Counsel on December 8, 2015. Information on my educational background and 9 professional qualifications was included in that direct testimony. 10 II. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY OF SURREBUTTAL TESTIMONY 11 Q. What is the purpose of your surrebuttal testimony in this proceeding? 12 The purpose of my surrebuttal testimony is to respond to rebuttal testimony 13 submitted by Joint Applicants. Specifically, I respond to portions of the rebuttal 14 testimony of Joint Applicants witnesses Julie R. Solomon, Charles R. Dickerson, 15 and Susan F. Tierney. My surrebuttal testimony focuses on the reduced 16 competition that will result from this merger, the increase in concentration of 17 ownership of resources, and the potential for harm to Maryland customers that 18 arises from that reduced competition and concentration. 19 III. SURREBTUAL TESTIMONY 20 Q. What are your responses to Ms. Solomon’s rebuttal testimony? 21 A. Ms. Solomon attempts to dismiss my concerns about the merged company’s 22 increased quantities of demand resources; involvement in generation 23 interconnection studies; development of line ratings; and opportunity to abandon Office of People’s Counsel Peterson Surrebuttal Page 4 of 7 1 PJM as mere repetitions of concerns expressed by the IMM. Ms. Solomon does 2 not dispute that these concerns are factually true; instead she argues that there is 3 no evidence that Exelon has engaged in any improper behavior to date and no 4 certainty that Exelon will engage in improper behavior in the future. I hope she is 5 right, but I remain concerned that she is not.1 6 I reiterate my recommendation to establish oversight protections through the use 7 of third parties to review Exelon’s (1) submittal of offers of demands resources in 8 energy, capacity, and reserve markets; (2) interconnection studies for generation 9 and transmission competitors; and (3) line ratings for its transmission facilities. I 10 also reiterate my recommendation that Exelon agree to remain in PJM as a 11 condition of this merger. 12 Q. What is your response regarding competitive Standard Offer Service? 13 A. The most recent SOS auction had one bidder. Ms. Solomon does not claim that 14 the merger will increase competition in future SOS auctions.2 The merger will 15 make it less likely that a PHI affiliate competes against an Exelon affiliate in a 16 future SOS auction. 17 Q. What is your response to Mr. Dickerson? 18 A. In his Rebuttal testimony, Mr. Dickerson identifies all the procedures and 19 reporting mechanisms in place to ensure that reported line ratings are accurate.3 20 My concerns are not resolved by the existing reporting systems. My 1 Solomon Rebuttal at 21-22. 2 Solomon Rebuttal at 22-23. 3 Dickerson Rebuttal at 11-16. Office of People’s Counsel Peterson Surrebuttal Page 5 of 7 1 recommendation to have periodic, independent reviews of all Exelon reported line 2 ratings is to ensure that all judgment calls regarding line ratings or revisions to 3 line ratings in particular zones are not coincident with generation dispatches that 4 favor Exelon’s generating resources due to the line ratings. I believe this is the 5 crux of the IMM’s concern regarding line ratings, as well, and I have not seen 6 anything in the record in this docket from the Joint Applicants that addresses that 7 concern. 8 Q. What is your response to Ms. Tierney? 9 A. In her Rebuttal testimony, Ms. Tierney contends that Exelon’s voting share is 10 small in the PJM stakeholder process that consists of over 500 voting members. 11 She also describes the sector-weighted voting that occurs at the PJM senior 12 committees.4 I continue to be concerned that the merged Exelon will eliminate the 13 independent perspective of Pepco in the PJM stakeholder process. 14 As an example, consider the three sector-weighted votes on Agenda Item 15 03 at the Members Committee on December 9, 2013.5 That agenda item involved 16 rule changes regarding the treatment of Demand Response as an Operational 17 Capacity Resource. Exelon voted as a member of the Transmission Owners 18 sector; Pepco voted as a member of the Electric Distributors sector. On the first 19 vote, Exelon voted in favor of the motion; Pepco voted opposed to the motion; 20 and the motion failed. On the second vote, on an amended motion, Exelon voted 4 Tierney Rebuttal at 39-42. 5 The votes of all Members Committee meetings are recorded in voting reports posted on the PJM web site at http://www.pjm.com/committees-and-groups/committees/mc.aspx with the materials for the meeting where the vote took place. The Draft Minutes for the December 9, 2013 Members Committee Meeting are attached as Attachment PRP –S1. Office of People’s Counsel Peterson Surrebuttal Page 6 of 7 1 in favor; Pepco voted in favor; and the motion failed. On the third vote, on an 2 amended motion, Exelon voted against; Pepco voted in favor; and the motion 3 passed. 4 As a second example, consider the three sector-weighted votes at the 5 Members Committee on November 21, 2013, on the Agenda Item 04 issue of how 6 Limited Demand Response resources would clear in RPM auctions.6 On the first 7 vote, Exelon voted against the motion; Pepco abstained; and the “ODEC package” 8 motion failed with 2.92. On the second vote, Exelon voted in favor; Pepco voted 9 against; and the “Package A” motion failed with 2.23. On the third vote, Exelon 10 voted against; Pepco abstained; and the “Package B” motion failed with 2.71. 11 PJM’s sector-weighted voting process requires a two-thirds vote to pass (3.33 or 12 better). On this agenda item, the only package Exelon supported was the only 13 package that Pepco opposed; it received the least support of the three packages. 14 The merger proposed by Joint Applicants will eliminate any role for Pepco 15 in the PJM voting process, including the role of presenting a different point of 16 view than Exelon’s point of view as demonstrated by the two examples, described 17 above, of agenda item votes at Members Committee meetings in 2013. If Pepco 18 retains an independent role in the PJM stakeholder process, Pepco may have an 19 impact beyond just its single vote; it may be able to influence the voting decisions 20 of other members in its sector. 21 Q. Does this complete your Surrebuttal testimony? 6 The Draft Minutes of the November 21, 2013 Members Committee Meeting are attached as Attachment PRP-S2. Office of People’s Counsel Peterson Surrebuttal Page 7 of 7 1 A. Yes. However, I reserve the right to supplement my testimony subject to further 2 updates to discovery and information provided in this proceeding. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Attchment PRP-S1 - (MC 12-9-2013) DRAFT Minutes PJM Interconnection Members Committee One Hundred-Thirty-seventh Meeting Teleconference/WebEx and The Conference and Training Center, Valley Forge, PA December 9, 2013 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon EPT Secretary/Chair: Horton Dana AEP Transmission Owner Fitch Neal NRG Power Marketing, LLC Generation Owner Voting Members Present: Last Name First Name Company Sector Barker Jason Exelon Business Services Company, LLC Transmission Owner Batta Michael Virginia Electric & Power Company Transmission Owner Borgatti Michael Rep.'g Covanta Energy Group, Inc. Generation Owner Borgatti Michael Rep.'g Jersey Green Energy LLC Other Supplier Borgatti Michael Rep.'g RC Cape May Holdings, LLC Generation Owner Borgatti Michael Rep.'g Richland-Stryker Generation LLC Generation Owner Borgatti Michael Rep.'g York County Solid Waste and Refuse Authority Generation Owner Brodbeck John Potomac Electric Power Company Electric Distributor Bruce Susan Rep.'g Air Liquide Industrial U.S., LP End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Gerdau Ameristeel Energy, Inc. Other Supplier Bruce Susan Rep.'g Industrial Energy Users-Ohio Other Supplier Bruce Susan Rep.'g Kimberly-Clark Corporation Generation Owner Bruce Susan Rep.'g Lehigh Portland Cement Company End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Letterkenny Industrial Development Authority Electric Distributor Bruce Susan Rep.'g Linde LLC End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g MeadWestvaco Corporation End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Occidental Power Services, Inc. Other Supplier Bruce Susan Rep.'g Praxair, Inc. End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Procter & Gamble Paper Products Company (The) End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Trustees of the U of PA, dba University of Pennsylvania End User Customer Bruce Susan Rep.'g Wellsboro Electric Company (pre-2008) Electric Distributor Campbell Bruce Rep.'g EnergyConnect, Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UNITED STATES SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 13F Form 13F COVER PAGE Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended: 30-September-09 Check here if Amendment [_]; Amendment Number: ------------------- This Amendment {Check only one.): [_]; is a restatement. [_]; adds new holdings entries. Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report: Name: Capital One Financial Corporation Address: 1680 Capital One Drive McLean, VA 22102 Form 13F File Number: 028-12320 The institutional investment manager filing this report and the person by whom it is signed hereby represent that the person signing the report is authorized to submit it, that all information contained herein is true, correct and complete, and that it is understood that all required items, statements, schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of this form. Person signing this report on behalf of Reporting Manager: Name: Matthew J. Murphy Title: Head of Brokerage, Trust, COAM Phone: 631-577-5801 Signature, Place, and Date of Signing: /s/ Matthew J. Murphy Melville, New York November 10, 2009 - -------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- (Signature) (City, State) (Date) Report Type (Check only one): [_] 13F HOLDINGS REPORT. (Check here if all holdings qf this reporting manager are reported in this report.) [_] 13F NOTICE. (Check here if no holdings reported are in this report, and all holdings are reported by other reporting manager (s).} [X] 13F COMBINATION REPORT. (Check here if a portion of the holdings
    [Show full text]
  • 84 Lumber Co-Manager Adelphoi Village, Inc. Jr. Accountant ALCOA Travel and Expense Processor Allegheny Energy Fuels Technician
    Employer Position 84 Lumber Co-Manager Adelphoi Village, Inc. Jr. Accountant ALCOA Travel and Expense Processor Allegheny Energy Fuels Technician Accounting Allegheny Ludlum Staff Accountant I Allegheny Valley Bank of Pittsburgh Staff Accountant Asset Genie, Inc. Accounting Department Bechtel Plant Machinery Inc. Procurement Specialist I BDO USA Tax Accountant, Auditor, Litigation Support Bononi and Bononi Accountant Boy Scouts-Westmoreland Fayette Council Accounting Specialist/Bookkeeper City of Greensburg Fiscal Assistant A/R Coca-Cola Budget Analyst DeLallo’s Italian Store Manager Department of Veteran Affairs-Dayton VA Accountant Trainee Medical Center Dept. of the Navy - Naval Audit Service Auditor Diamond Drugs, Inc. Staff Accountant Enterprise Rent A Car Accounting Coordinator FedEx Services Auditor First Commonwealth Financial Corporation Management Trainee - 16 month management development program Fox and James Inc. Controller (Office MGR, HR MGR, Accountant, Auditor) General American Corp. Accounts Payable Assistant Giant Eagle Staff Accountant Highmark Accountant One Inspector General's Office, Department of Junior Auditor Defense Irwin Bank and Trust Company Management Trainee James L. Wintergreen CPA Office Manager/Accountant - payroll, taxes John Wall, Inc Accountant Jordan Tax Service Accounting Clerk Kennametal Inc. Business Analyst Kennametal, Inc. Internal Auditor Limited Brands Internal Auditor Maher Duessel, CPAs Staff Accountant Malin, Bergquist & Company, LLP Staff Accountant Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC Audit Staff
    [Show full text]
  • Firstenergy's History of Bad Business Decisions
    FirstEnergy’s history of bad business decisions Risky beginning In 1997, Ohio Edison changed its name to FirstEnergy when it acquired Centerior Energy, becoming the 11th largest electric utility in the country, serving 2.2 million customers in northern Ohio and western Pennsylvania. Centerior had invested in three expensive nuclear power plants, just about the time that the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 drove up the cost for these plants. Centerior cancelled one of the nuclear plants in 1994, slashed its dividend, and took a $1 billion write-off. Despite such troubles, and the threat of additional problems at reactors, Ohio Edison bailed out Centerior with the 1997 merger. With this risky investment, FirstEnergy was born. Safety violations FirstEnergy has made repeated mistakes with its poor safety record, as evidenced by its frequent citations from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for safety violations. In 2002, FirstEnergy narrowly averted disaster at the Davis-Besse reactor. The NRC had set a 2001 deadline for a crucial safety inspection, but FirstEnergy pushed it back to 2002, when the plant was scheduled to close for refueling. The NRC found a coolant leak from the reactor core had caused a gaping hole in the reactor cover, eating away six inches of the 6½-inch thick steel plate. The NRC also found a host of defective welds. FirstEnergy had to shut the plant down for two years for repairs. Poor oversight High costs for nuclear maintenance and safety led FirstEnergy to cut costs in other areas, like its tree trimming budget. In 2003, FirstEnergy inadvertently turned out the lights on the eastern U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • You Can Double Your Gift to Extra Mile Education Foundation. Many Companies Will Match Their Employee's Contribution. Below I
    You can double your gift to Extra Mile Education Foundation. Many companies will match their employee’s contribution. Below is a partial list of corporations and business who provide matching gifts. Please contact your Human Resource representative to help support children and their families seeking a values-based quality education. CBS GE Fund 3M CIGNA Foundation Gannett CNA Insurance Company Gap Foundation ADC Telecommunications, Inc. CNG General Electric AES Beaver Valley CR Bard General Mills AK Steel Corporation Cadence General Motors AMD Matching Gifts Program Design Systems, Inc. Gillette Company AMGEN Foundation (The) Capital Group Companies Charitable GlaxoSmithKline Foundation AT&T Casey Matching Gift Program Goldman, Sachs & Company Alcatel-Lucent Certain Teed Goodrich Corporation Alcoa Channel Craft Google Allegheny Energy Co., Inc. Chevron Texaco Corporation Allegheny Power Chicago Title & Trust Company H.J. Heinz Company Allegheny Technologies, Inc. Chubb & Son, Inc. Hamilton Sundstrand Alliant Techsystems Citigroup Harcourt, Inc. Altria Group, Inc. Citizens Bank Harsco Corporation Altria Program Cleveland H. Dodge Foundation, Inc. Hartford Steam Boiler Computer Associates International, Inc. American Express Financial Advisors Hewlett Packard Company Corning Incorporated American International Group Highmark Cyprus Amax Ameritech Hillman Company (The) Ameriprise Financial Home Depot, Inc. Del Monte Foods Company Aramark Honeywell Houghton Mifflin Deluxe Corporation Arco Chemical Company Dictaphone Corporation ARCO IBM Corporation Dominion Foundation Armco, Inc. International Minerals & Chemical Co. Astorino EQT Corporation Automatic Data Processing J.P. Morgan Chase ERICSSON AXA Financial/Equitable John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance. Co. East Suburban Medical Supply Johnson & Johnson Eaton Corporation B.F. Goodrich Johnson Controls Eli Lilly Company BNY Mellon Juniper Networks (The) Emerson Electric BP America Erie Insurance Group Baxter Allegiance Kaplan, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Allegheny Energy Retirement Plan 02808066.DO
    Allegheny Energy Retirement Plan 02808066.DO Summary Plan Description CX;1 /font=8 January 2018 Allegheny Energy Retirement Plan This Summary Plan Description (SPD) is created for eligible participants in the Allegheny Energy Retirement Plan (also known as “FirstEnergy Corp. Master Pension Plan - Parts A and Part K”). For purposes of this SPD, the term “Plan” means the Allegheny Energy Retirement Plan and “Company” means FirstEnergy Corp. ”Company” includes any of FirstEnergy Corp.’s affiliates or operating companies that have employees represented by UWUA Local 102 and the provisions of the Plan apply to them (see the section entitled “Participating Employers and Identification Numbers”). This SPD explains how your Plan currently works, when you qualify for benefits, and other information contained in the Plan document. The Plan document is written in much more technical and precise language and is designed to comply with applicable legal requirements. If the non-technical language in this SPD and the technical, legal language of the Plan document conflict, the Plan document always governs. If you wish to receive a copy of the Plan document, please contact the Plan Administrator, or go to https://firstenergycorp.sharepoint.com/sites/compben/Retirement%20Programs/Cash%20Bala nce%20Plan.pdf. Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 Definitions ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 IMRF Addendum to the 2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial
    Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund Addendum to the 2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the year ending December 31, 2010 Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund Investment Portfolio as of December 31, 2010 Interest Asset Description Rate Maturity Date Par Value Cost Value Market Value FIXED INCOME U.S. Securities Corporate Bonds 1st Horizon Natl 5.38% 12/15/2015 $ 500,000 $ 498,345 $ 504,710 Abbott Labs 5.13% 4/1/2019 2,830,000 2,817,746 3,116,011 Acco Brands Corp 10.63% 3/15/2015 90,000 88,652 101,250 Ace Cash Express 10.25% 10/1/2014 330,000 330,000 290,400 Actuant Corp 6.88% 6/15/2017 990,000 991,138 1,012,275 Adobe Sys Inc 4.75% 2/1/2020 2,365,000 2,319,805 2,419,182 AEP Inds Inc Sr Nt 7.88% 3/15/2013 180,000 180,000 179,325 AES Corp 7.75% 3/1/2014 350,000 373,988 373,625 AES Corp 7.75% 10/15/2015 580,000 580,000 619,150 AES Corp 8.00% 10/15/2017 140,000 141,075 148,050 Affiliated 5.20% 6/1/2015 650,000 675,340 689,794 Affinia Group Inc 9.00% 11/30/2014 720,000 668,494 739,800 AFLAC Inc 8.50% 5/15/2019 2,745,000 3,255,410 3,394,173 AFLAC Inc 6.45% 8/15/2040 3,000,000 2,984,970 3,072,534 Air Med Group 9.25% 11/1/2018 980,000 980,000 1,029,000 Ak Stl Corp Sr Nt 7.63% 5/15/2020 100,000 99,000 100,250 Albertsons Inc 7.50% 2/15/2011 1,500,000 1,523,385 1,501,875 Alcoa Inc 6.15% 8/15/2020 3,000,000 2,996,130 3,080,703 Alere Inc 8.63% 10/1/2018 1,045,000 1,046,575 1,060,675 Aleris International Inc Dip 10.46% 12/19/2013 139,837 61,794 143,858 Aleris Intl Inc B-1 Ru 4.25% 12/19/2013 325,784 286,376 146,603 Aleris Intl Inc Sr 9.00% 12/15/2014
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Power Outlook for Pennsylvania 2018-2023 I Ii Electric Power Outlook for Pennsylvania 2017-2022
    ELECTRIC POWER OUTLOOK FOR PENNSYLVANIA 2018–2023 August 2019 Published by: Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission 400 North Street Harrisburg, PA 17105-3265 www.puc.pa.gov Technical Utility Services Paul T. Diskin, Director Prepared by: David M. Washko - Reliability Engineer Electric Power Outlook for Pennsylvania 2018-2023 i ii Electric Power Outlook for Pennsylvania 2017-2022 Executive Summary Introduction Section 524(a) of the Public Utility Code (Code) requires jurisdictional electric distribution companies (EDCs) to submit to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC or Commission) information concerning plans and projections for meeting future customer demand.1 The PUC’s regulations set forth the form and content of such information, which is to be filed on or before May 1 of each year.2 Section 524(b) of the Code requires the Commission to prepare an annual report summarizing and discussing the data provided, on or before Sept. 1. This report is to be submitted to the General Assembly, the Governor, the Office of Consumer Advocate and each affected public utility.3 Since the enactment of the Electricity Generation Customer Choice and Competition Act,4 the Commission’s regulations have been modified to reflect the competitive market. Thus, projections of generating capability and overall system reliability have been obtained from regional assessments. Any comments or conclusions contained in this report do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Commission or individual Commissioners. Although issued by the Commission, this report is not to be considered or construed as approval or acceptance by the Commission of any of the plans, assumptions, or calculations made by the EDCs or regional reliability entities and reflected in the information submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Recipients
    UTILITY_NAME UTILITY_CITY UTILITY_STATE Alabama Electric Coop, Inc Leroy AL Alabama Power Company Birmingham AL Alcoa Power Generating, Inc Newburgh IN Allegheny Energy Supply Co, LLC Greensburg PA Allete, Inc Duluth MN Ameren Energy Generating Company St Louis MO Ameren UE St Louis MO American Electric Power Columbus OH Arizona Electric Power Coop, Inc Cochise AZ Arizona Public Service Company Phoenix AZ Associated Electric Coop, Inc Springfield MO Basin Electric Power Coop Bismarck ND Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company Cincinnati OH Cleco Power, LLC Pineville LA Consumers Energy Company Jackson MI Dayton Power & Light Company Dayton OH Detroit Edison Company Detroit MI Duke Energy Corp. Charlotte NC Dynegy Midwest Generation, Inc Decatur IL East Kentucky Power Coop, Inc Winchester KY Empire District Electric Company Joplin MO Georgia Power Company Atlanta GA Gulf Power Company Pensacola FL Hoosier Energy R E C, Inc Bloomington IN Indianapolis Power & Light Company Indianapolis IN Kansas City Power & Light Company Kansas City MO Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation Bingham Canyon UT Kentucky Utilities Company Lexington KY Louisiana Generating, LLC New Roads LA Louisville Gas & Electric Company Louisville KY Lower Colorado River Authority Austin TX MidAmerican Energy Company Des Moines IA Minnkota Power Coop, Inc Grand Forks ND Mirant Mid-Atlantic, LLC Upper Malboro MD Mississippi Power Company Gulfport MS Northern Indiana Public Service Company Merrillville IN Northern States Power Company Minneapolis MN Ohio Valley Electric Corp. Piketon
    [Show full text]
  • Monongahela Power Company and the Potomac Edison Company Both D/B/A Allegheny Power Company Case No. OS-1511-E-GI Consumer Advoc
    P3 Monongahela Power Company and The Potomac Edison Company both d/b/a Allegheny Power Company Case No. OS-1511-E-GI Consumer Advocate Division’s First Request for Information The following response to No. A-3 of the First Request for Information of the Consumer Advocate Division received on August 29,2008 has been prepared under the supervision of the person identified below. Name: Patricia A. Koos Title: Assistant Controller Company: Allegheny Energy Service Corporation Date: September 12,2008 Please provide answers for Monongahela Power Company (MP), The Potomac Edison Company (PE) (sometimes referred to together as “the Company”) and Allegheny Energy (“AE” or “Allegheny”) as appropriate. “Review period” means May 23, 2007, through June 30, 2008, and “Forecast period” means January 1, 2009, through December 3 1, 2009. A. GENERAL A-3 Please provide copies of the annual report to shareholders for 2007 for MP, PE and AE. Response: No Allegheny Energy, Inc. affiliate, including Monongahela Power Company and The Potomac Edison Company, prepares a separate annual report to shareholders. The 2007 Allegheny Energy, Inc. annual report to shareholders is being supplied in response to this question. See Attachment. Allegheny Energy FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (millions, except per share amounts) Percent For years ended December 31, 2007 2006 Increase Operatingrevenues ................................................... $ 3,307 $3,121 6% Net income: GAAPbasis ..................................................... 412 319 29% As adjusted1 ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Week of 8/5/19 Public Notices from the Pennsylvania Bulletin
    Week of 8/5/19 You can search this document for notices pertaining to your township by typing “CTRL F” or “command F” and typing the name of your township in the search bar. Notices from the Pennsylvania Bulletin precede those from the Observer-Reporter. Public Notices from the Pennsylvania Bulletin Washington County Notices EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL The following Erosion and Sediment Control permits have been issued. Persons aggrieved by an action may appeal that action to the Environmental Hearing Board (Board) under section 4 of the Environmental Hearing Board Act and 2 Pa.C.S. §§ 501—508 and 701—704. The appeal should be sent to the Environmental Hearing Board, Second Floor, Rachel Carson State Office Building, 400 Market Street, P.O. Box 8457, Harrisburg, PA 17105-8457, (717) 787-3483. TDD users may contact the Board through the Pennsylvania AT&T Relay Service, (800) 654-5984. Appeals must be filed with the Board within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin unless the appropriate statute provides a different time period. Copies of the appeal form and the Board's rules of practice and procedure may be obtained from the Board. The appeal form and the Board's rules of practice and procedure are also available in Braille or on audiotape from the Secretary to the Board at (717) 787-3483. This paragraph does not, in and of itself, create a right of appeal beyond that permitted by applicable statutes and decisional law. For individuals who wish to challenge an action, the appeal must reach the Board within 30 days.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 146/Friday, July 28
    46450 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 146 / Friday, July 28, 2000 / Notices Comment date: August 8, 2000, in 20. Gregory Power Partners, L.P. amounts, including interest, collected in accordance with Standard Paragraph E [Docket No. QF99±32±002] excess of the settled Energy Imbalance at the end of this notice. Schedule amounts in the above- Take notice that on July 12, 2000 and referenced dockets. 17. California Power Exchange July 19, 2000, Gregory Power Partners, A copy of the filing was served upon Corporation L.P. filed supplements to its May 16, the state commissions within whose 2000 Application for Commission [Docket No. ER00±3213±000] jurisdiction the wholesale customers Recertification as a Qualifying distribute and sell electric energy at Take notice that on July 18, 2000, the Cogeneration Facility. The supplements California Power Exchange Corporation provide additional information retail. (CalPX), on behalf of its CalPX Trading regarding the cogeneration facility and Comment date: August 9, 2000, in Services Division (CTS), tendered for the proposed change in ownership of accordance with Standard Paragraph E filing revised tariff sheets in compliance the facility. at the end of this notice. with the Commission's June 23, 2000 Comment date: August 9, 2000, in 2. Boston Edison Company order in this proceeding accepting accordance with Standard Paragraph E [Docket No. ER00±2067±002] Amendment No. 3. CTS has adapted at the end of this notice. Take notice that on July 19, 2000, Amendment No. 3 to the format and Standard Paragraphs pagination of its Second Revised Rate Boston Edison Company (BECo), Schedule FERC No.
    [Show full text]
  • The Most Compensation
    Thanks to new Securities and Exchange Commission regulations, most companies were required to provide previously undisclosed information on executive pay. The additional information gives a more accurate picture of overall compensation, but makes comparisons with prior year’s pay impossible. So information on whether an executive’s pay increased or decreased from the previous year is not included. Total return on stocka The Post-Gazette’s 2009 survey of top executive compensation at regional companies The most What the highest-ranking executives at 49 public companies in the region received in pay during their company’s most recent fiscal year: Change in pension Change in pension Grants of value/Deferred compensation value/deferred stock and Non-stock compensation Total Stocks and Non-equity compensation Other 2009 Percent Executive, company, title Salary Bonus option incentives earnings Other compensation Xxxxxx Executive, company, Title Salary Bonus options incentives earnings Summary total change Paul J. Evanson, Allegheny Energy, chm. pres., CEO $1,121,343 $0 $8,444,786 $1,230,000 $817,184 $360,510 $11,973,823 140.3% Paul J. Evanson, Allegheny Energy, chm., pres., CEO $1,200,000 $0 $8,331,755 $1,918,500 $834,131 $305,345 $12,589,731 8.9 L. Patrick Hassey, Allegheny Technologies, chm., pres. CEO $907,917 $0 $4,377,531 $5,514,208 $367,554 $722,645 $11,889,855 -54.0% L. Patrick Hassey, Allegheny Technologies, chm., pres., CEO $910,000 $0 $5,205,291 $3,481,000 $352,744 $493,070 $10,442,105 -12.4 James V. O'Donnell, American Eagle Outfitters, principal executive officer $1,475,000 $0 $10,228,161 -$299,624 $0 $39,520 $11,443,057 -20.5% James V.
    [Show full text]