DOCSLIB.ORG

Equistar Chemicals (Corpus Christi Complex)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Equistar Chemicals (Corpus Christi Complex) Biological Assessment Olefins Unit Expansion Project Nueces County, Texas Prepared for Equistar Chemicals, LP Prepared by Whitenton Group, Inc. October 2013 Revised February 2014 3413 Hunter Road • San Marcos, Texas 78666 • office 512-353-3344 • fax 512-392-3450 www.whitentongroup.com Biological Assessment Olefins Unit Expansion Project Nueces County, Texas Prepared for Equistar Chemicals, LP 1501 McKinzie Road P.O. Box 10940 Corpus Christi, Texas 78460 Prepared by Whitenton Group, Inc. 3413 Hunter Road San Marcos, Texas 78666 WGI Project No. 1279 October 2013 Revised February 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................ ii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................. iv 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 3.0 ACTION AREA .................................................................................................................................... 5 4.0 AGENCY REGULATIONS ................................................................................................................. 6 4.1 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ..................................................................................................... 6 4.2 CLEAN AIR ACT REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS .......................................................... 8 5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 9 5.1 PROJECT PURPOSE AND LOCATION ...................................................................................... 9 5.2 CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 10 5.2.1 CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................... 10 5.2.2 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND SCHEDULE .......................................................... 11 5.2.3 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT REQUIRED ................................................................... 12 5.2.4 STORM WATER ..................................................................................................................... 12 5.2.5 CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS ..................................................................................... 13 5.3 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE INFORMATION ........................................................ 13 5.3.1 OPERATION DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................... 13 5.3.2 WATER USE............................................................................................................................ 13 5.3.3 WASTEWATER AND STORM WATER ............................................................................. 14 5.3.4 OPERATION NOISE LEVELS .............................................................................................. 16 6.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION .................................................................................................. 17 6.1 GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION .................................................................. 17 6.1.1 GENERAL REGION INFORMATION ................................................................................ 17 6.1.2 LAND USE .............................................................................................................................. 17 6.1.3 CLIMATE ................................................................................................................................ 18 6.1.4 TOPOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................... 18 6.1.5 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................................... 18 6.1.6 SOILS ........................................................................................................................................ 19 6.1.7 WATER RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 19 6.1.8 VEGETATION ........................................................................................................................ 20 6.2 FEDERALLY-LISTED SPECIES ................................................................................................... 20 6.2.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST ..................................................... 20 6.2.2 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS ................................ 22 6.2.3 CANDIDATE SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS ........................................................................... 37 6.2.4 TEXAS NATURAL DIVERSITY DATABASE RESULTS .................................................. 39 7.0 LISTED SPECIES HABITAT EVALUATION................................................................................. 39 7.1 PLANT COMMUNITIES OBSERVED ........................................................................................ 40 7.2 LISTED SPECIES HABITAT ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 41 8.0 AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 42 Olefins Unit Expansion Project – Biological Assessment ii 8.1 AIR DISPERSION MODELING RESULTS ................................................................................ 42 8.1.1 CRITERIA POLLUTANT DISPERSION MODELING RESULTS AND EVALUATION ............................................................................................................................................................ 42 9.0 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ....................................................................................... 45 9.1 AIR EMISSIONS EFFECTS BACKGROUND RESEARCH ...................................................... 45 9.2 AIR QUALITY EFFECTS .............................................................................................................. 48 9.2.1 EMISSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 48 9.2.2 FUGITIVE DUST .................................................................................................................... 49 9.2.3 IMPACTS OF AIR POLLUTION SOURCES ON FLORA AND FAUNA ...................... 49 9.3 WATER QUALITY EFFECTS ....................................................................................................... 50 9.3.1 WASTEWATER ...................................................................................................................... 50 9.3.2 STORM WATER ..................................................................................................................... 51 9.4 NOISE EFFECTS ............................................................................................................................ 51 9.5 INFRASTRUCTURE-RELATED EFFECTS ................................................................................ 51 9.6 HUMAN ACTIVITY EFFECTS .................................................................................................... 52 9.7 FEDERALLY-LISTED SPECIES EFFECTS ................................................................................. 52 9.7.1 THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES .................................................................. 52 9.7.2 CANDIDATE SPECIES ......................................................................................................... 75 10.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 78 10.1 DETERMINATION OF EFFECT ............................................................................................... 78 10.2 INTERDEPENDENT AND INTERRELATED ACTIONS ..................................................... 79 10.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ........................................................................................................... 79 10.4 CONSERVATION MEASURES ................................................................................................. 80 11.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 81 12.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ...................................................................................................................... 85 APPENDIX A FIGURES APPENDIX B FIGURE 1-6 (RPS) APPENDIX C FLOW DIAGRAMS APPENDIX D SOILS TABLE APPENDIX E PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG APPENDIX F FIELD SURVEY DATA SUMMARY APPENDIX G EMISSIONS TABLES Olefins Unit Expansion Project – Biological Assessment iii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS °F Degree Fahrenheit AOI Area of Impact BA Biological Assessment BACT Best Available Control Technology BD Butadiene CO Carbon Monoxide CWS Contaminated Water Sewer EA Extended Aeration EPA Environmental Protection Agency Equistar Equistar Chemicals, LP ESA Endangered Species Act ESL Effects Screening Levels GHG Greenhouse Gas GLC Ground Level Concentration GLCmax Maximum Ground
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Research Paper a Review of Goji Berry (Lycium Barbarum) in Traditional Chinese Medicine As a Promising Organic Superfood And
    Academia Journal of Medicinal Plants 6(12): 437-445, December 2018 DOI: 10.15413/ajmp.2018.0186 ISSN: 2315-7720 ©2018 Academia Publishing Research Paper A review of Goji berry (Lycium barbarum) in Traditional Chinese medicine as a promising organic superfood and superfruit in modern industry Accepted 3rd December, 2018 ABSTRACT Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has been used for thousands of years by different generations in China and other Asian countries as foods to promote good health and as drugs to treat disease. Goji berry (Lycium barbarum), as a Chinese traditional herb and food supplement, contains many nutrients and phytochemicals, such as polysaccharides, scopoletin, the glucosylated precursor, amino acids, flaconoids, carotenoids, vitamins and minerals. It has positive effects on anitcancer, antioxidant activities, retinal function preservation, anti-diabetes, immune function and anti-fatigue. Widely used in traditional Chinese medicine, Goji berries can be sold as a dietary supplement or classified as nutraceutical food due to their long and safe traditional use. Modern Goji pharmacological actions improve function and enhance the body ,s ability to adapt to a variety of noxious stimuli; it significantly inhibits the generation and spread of cancer cells and can improve eyesight and increase reserves of muscle and liver glycogens which may increase human energy and has anti-fatigue effect. Goji berries may improve brain function and enhance learning and memory. It may boost the body ,s adaptive defences, and significantly reduce the levels of serum cholesterol and triglyceride, it may help weight loss and obesity and treats chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis. At Mohamad Hesam Shahrajabian1,2, Wenli present, they are considered functional food with many beneficial effects, which is Sun1,2 and Qi Cheng1,2* why they have become more popular recently, especially in Europe, North America and Australia, as they are considered as superfood with highly nutritive and 1 Biotechnology Research Institute, antioxidant properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Surveys of Saguaro National Park Protected Natural Areas
    Floristic Surveys of Saguaro National Park Protected Natural Areas William L. Halvorson and Brooke S. Gebow, editors Technical Report No. 68 United States Geological Survey Sonoran Desert Field Station The University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona USGS Sonoran Desert Field Station The University of Arizona, Tucson The Sonoran Desert Field Station (SDFS) at The University of Arizona is a unit of the USGS Western Ecological Research Center (WERC). It was originally established as a National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit (CPSU) in 1973 with a research staff and ties to The University of Arizona. Transferred to the USGS Biological Resources Division in 1996, the SDFS continues the CPSU mission of providing scientific data (1) to assist U.S. Department of Interior land management agencies within Arizona and (2) to foster cooperation among all parties overseeing sensitive natural and cultural resources in the region. It also is charged with making its data resources and researchers available to the interested public. Seventeen such field stations in California, Arizona, and Nevada carry out WERC’s work. The SDFS provides a multi-disciplinary approach to studies in natural and cultural sciences. Principal cooperators include the School of Renewable Natural Resources and the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at The University of Arizona. Unit scientists also hold faculty or research associate appointments at the university. The Technical Report series distributes information relevant to high priority regional resource management needs. The series presents detailed accounts of study design, methods, results, and applications possibly not accommodated in the formal scientific literature. Technical Reports follow SDFS guidelines and are subject to peer review and editing.
    [Show full text]
  • Ajo Peak to Tinajas Altas: a Flora of Southwestern Arizona. Part 20
    Felger, R.S. and S. Rutman. 2016. Ajo Peak to Tinajas Altas: A Flora of Southwestern Arizona. Part 20. Eudicots: Solanaceae to Zygophyllaceae. Phytoneuron 2016-52: 1–66. Published 4 August 2016. ISSN 2153 733X AJO PEAK TO TINAJAS ALTAS: A FLORA OF SOUTHWESTERN ARIZONA PART 20. EUDICOTS: SOLANACEAE TO ZYGOPHYLLACEAE RICHARD STEPHEN FELGER Herbarium, University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 & International Sonoran Desert Alliance PO Box 687 Ajo, Arizona 85321 *Author for correspondence: [email protected] SUSAN RUTMAN 90 West 10th Street Ajo, Arizona 85321 [email protected] ABSTRACT A floristic account is provided for Solanaceae, Talinaceae, Tamaricaceae, Urticaceae, Verbenaceae, and Zygophyllaceae as part of the vascular plant flora of the contiguous protected areas of Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, and the Tinajas Altas Region in southwestern Arizona—the heart of the Sonoran Desert. This account includes 40 taxa, of which about 10 taxa are represented by fossil specimens from packrat middens. This is the twentieth contribution for this flora, published in Phytoneuron and also posted open access on the website of the University of Arizona Herbarium: <http//cals.arizona.edu/herbarium/content/flora-sw-arizona>. Six eudicot families are included in this contribution (Table 1): Solanaceae (9 genera, 21 species), Talinaceae (1 species), Tamaricaceae (1 genus, 2 species), Urticaceae (2 genera, 2 species), Verbenaceae (4 genera, 7 species), and Zygophyllaceae (4 genera, 7 species). The flora area covers 5141 km 2 (1985 mi 2) of contiguous protected areas in the heart of the Sonoran Desert (Figure 1). The first article in this series includes maps and brief descriptions of the physical, biological, ecological, floristic, and deep history of the flora area (Felger et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Site R038XA114AZ Schist Hills 12-16" P.Z
    Natural Resources Conservation Service Ecological site R038XA114AZ Schist Hills 12-16" p.z. Accessed: 09/27/2021 General information Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site. Figure 1. Mapped extent Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated. MLRA notes Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 038X–Mogollon Transition AZ 38.1 – Lower Mogollon Transition Elevations range from 3000 to 4500 feet and precipitation averages 12 to 16 inches per year. Vegetation includes canotia, one-seed juniper, mesquite, catclaw acacia, jojoba, turbinella oak, ratany, shrubby buckwheat, algerita, skunkbush, tobosa, vine mesquite, bottlebrush squirreltail, grama species, curly mesquite, desert needlegrass and New Mexico feathergrass. The soil temperature regime is thermic and the soil moisture regime is ustic aridic. This unit occurs within the Transition Zone Physiographic Province and is characterized by canyons and structural troughs or valleys. Igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock classes occur on rough mountainous terrain in association with less extensive sediment filled valleys exhibiting little integrated drainage. Classification relationships This site is similar to TE Sites #250 and #275 found on the Prescott National Forest. Associated sites R038XA104AZ Granitic Hills 12-16" p.z. R038XA105AZ Limestone Hills 12-16" p.z. R038XA133AZ Volcanic/Metamorphic Hills 12-16" p.z.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Assessment for the Rio Grande City Station Road
    DRAFT FINDING OF NO SIGNIFIGANT IMPACT (FONSI) RIO GRANDE CITY STATION ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, RIO GRANDE CITY, TEXAS, RIO GRANDE VALLEY SECTOR, U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. BORDER PATROL, RIO GRANDE VALLEY SECTOR, TEXAS U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON, D.C. INTRODUCTION: United States (U.S.) Customs and Border Protection (CBP) plans to upgrade and lengthen four existing roads in the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) Rio Grande City (RGC) Station’s Area of Responsibility (AOR). The Border Patrol Air and Marine Program Management Office (BPAM-PMO) within CBP has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA). This EA addresses the proposed upgrade and construction of the four aforementioned roads and the BPAM-PMO is preparing this EA on behalf of the USBP Headquarters. CBP is the law enforcement component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that is responsible for securing the border and facilitating lawful international trade and travel. USBP is the uniformed law enforcement subcomponent of CBP responsible for patrolling and securing the border between the land ports of entry. PROJECT LOCATION: The roads are located within the RGC Station’s AOR, Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector, in Starr County, Texas. The RGC Station’s AOR encompasses approximately 1,228 square miles, including approximately 68 miles along the U.S.-Mexico border and the Rio Grande from the Starr/Zapata County line to the Starr/Hidalgo County line. From north to south, the four road segments are named Mouth of River to Chapeno Hard Top, Chapeno USIBWC Gate to Salineno, Salineno to Enron, and 19-20 Area to Fronton Fishing, and all of these segments are located south of Falcon International Reservoir (Falcon Lake), generally parallel to the Rio Grande.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 14. Wildlife and Forest Communities 341
    chapteR 14. Wildlife and Forest Communities 341 Chapter 14. Wildlife and Forest communities Margaret Trani Griep and Beverly Collins1 key FindingS • Hotspot areas for plants of concern are Big Bend National Park; the Apalachicola area of the Southern Gulf Coast; • The South has 1,076 native terrestrial vertebrates: 179 Lake Wales Ridge and the area south of Lake Okeechobee amphibians, 525 birds, 176 mammals, and 196 reptiles. in Peninsular Florida; and coastal counties of North Species richness is highest in the Mid-South (856) and Carolina in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The Appalachian- Coastal Plain (733), reflecting both the large area of these Cumberland highlands also contain plants identified by subregions and the diversity of habitats within them. States as species of concern. • The geography of species richness varies by taxa. • Species, including those of conservation concern, are Amphibians flourish in portions of the Piedmont and imperiled by habitat alteration, isolation, introduction of Appalachian-Cumberland highlands and across the Coastal invasive species, environmental pollutants, commercial Plain. Bird richness is highest along the coastal wetlands of development, human disturbance, and exploitation. the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, mammal richness Conditions predicted by the forecasts will magnify these is highest in the Mid-South and Appalachian-Cumberland stressors. Each species varies in its vulnerability to highlands, and reptile richness is highest across the forecasted threats, and these threats vary by subregion. Key southern portion of the region. areas of concern arise where hotspots of vulnerable species • The South has 142 terrestrial vertebrate species coincide with forecasted stressors. considered to be of conservation concern (e.g., global • There are 614 species that are presumed extirpated from conservation status rank of critically imperiled, imperiled, selected States in the South; 64 are terrestrial vertebrates or vulnerable), 77 of which are listed as threatened or and 550 are vascular plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plants for Habitat at Home
    Native Plants for Habitat at Home You can make a difference! Native plants provide the resources and habitat structure birds are looking for. They provide food, shelter and nesting opportunities. Thorny Desert Trees Whitethorn acacia, Acacia constricta Shrubby tree generally 10’–15’ tall; found between 1500’-5000’ elevation. Deciduous; Bloom May– Aug/Sept. Very cold hardy, tough when established, can handle full sun and poor soils. Harbors insects and produces seeds that draw verdins, doves, sparrows, finches, pyrrhuloxias and other birds. Verdins may nest in them. Hosts desert mistletoe, so can be important to phainopeplas. Larval plant for some butterflies. Good shelter for birds. Catclaw acacia, Acacia greggii Shrubby tree rarely to 20’ tall on floodplains. Likes sun, can be lanky in mesquite forests. Locally native in Tucson and Green Valley areas; found up to 5000’ elevation. Long-lived; semi-deciduous in winter and extreme drought. Catchy catclaw thorns—good for out-of-the-way places. Blooms Apr–Oct.with many small flowers clustered on catkins. Seeds attract doves, verdins, sparrows, pyrrhuloxias, quail. Blooms Figure 1: Catclaw acacia attract butterflies and other beneficial insects. Ironwood, Olneya tesota Tree to 26’-30' found below 2500’ in upland areas. Long lived; Bloom May–June; Seed June-July; Avoid in low-lying areas where cold air settles, but seems to do well in most Tucson neighborhoods; Seeds eaten raw, parched, steamed, ground; wood used for tools, tool handles; Seeds: mammals, game birds; Nesting: cactus wren. Flowers: hummingbirds, bumble bees, carpenter bees, honeybees. Host for desert mistletoe. Browse for bighorn sheep, mule deer; Figure 2: Ironwood Insects on plant eaten by birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Risk Assessment
    Ecological Sustainability Analysis of the Kaibab National Forest: Species Diversity Report Ver. 1.2 Prepared by: Mikele Painter and Valerie Stein Foster Kaibab National Forest For: Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision Analysis 22 December 2008 SpeciesDiversity-Report-ver-1.2.doc 22 December 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 PART I: Species Diversity.............................................................................................................. 1 Species List ................................................................................................................................. 1 Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 2 Assessment Sources................................................................................................................ 3 Screening Results.................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat Associations and Initial Species Groups........................................................................ 8 Species associated with ecosystem diversity characteristics of terrestrial vegetation or aquatic systems ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Christina Mild's Sustainable Landscaping with LRGV Native
    Garden of Eatin’ 4/14/07 planted at Harlingen’s Ramsey Park by RGV chapter TX Master Naturalists Author: Christina Mild [www.riodeltawild.com] A demonstration garden of locally-native plants which produce edible fruit, seed or blooms. Separated by thornless or thorny habit. These are appropriate choices for sustainable private & public landscaping for humans and wildlife. Clearing & site preparation by Dick Roesler & Frank Wiseman. Mulch & plant funding provided by Hgn. Parks Dept. Plants from Heep’s Nursery, Harlingen (457-6834) [www.heepsnursery.com]. CWCMA-NC participating. Notes of caution: It is important to consume small quantities of unfamiliar fruits to avoid stomach upset. Please note that several poisonous fruits (black, red, orange) are also native to the LRGV. Thornless Growing notes: Fruiting attributes: Anacua, Sugarberry Long-lived, large tree provides dense Fruit is sweet when orange, but becomes Ehretia anacua shade. Initially is slow growing. Dark soapy tasting when over-ripe. Produces ¼” green foliage. Medium water fruit after rain. Aromatic bloom clusters. requirements. Chapote, TX Persimmon Small evergreen tree with beautifully 1’ fruit. Ripe when almost black. Very tasty. Diospyros texana smooth, peeling bark. Requires good Females bear fruit once per year. Good for drainage. jam. Fiddlewood, Negrito Evergreen. Fast-growing and adaptable. Some plants non-fruiting. Water for frequent Citharexylum berlandieri Tall shrub or tree. Foliage develops fruiting. Attractive clusters of ¼” orange fruits attractive orange coloration during ripen to black. Date-like flavor. stress. Stinky Passionflower Groundcover or climbing vine prefers Delicately beautiful flowers followed by 1” Vine full sun. Devoured by Gulf Fritillary yellowish fruits. Many seeds; flesh is juicy, Passiflora foetida caterpillars.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Classification List Update for Big Bend National Park and Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Vegetation Classification List Update for Big Bend National Park and Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River Natural Resource Report NPS/CHDN/NRR—2011/299 ON THE COVER Chisos Basin, as viewed from Casa Grande Peak. Image provided by NPS Vegetation Classification List Update for Big Bend National Park and Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River Natural Resource Report NPS/CHDN/NRR—2011/299 James Von Loh Cogan Technology, Inc. 8140 East Lightening View Drive Parker, Colorado 80134 Dan Cogan Cogan Technology, Inc. 21 Valley Road Galena, Illinois 61036 February 2011 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.
    [Show full text]
  • GRI STANDARDS REPORT 2021 GRI Report
    AEP’S 2021 GRI STANDARDS REPORT 2021 GRI Report AEP’s 2021 Corporate Accountability Report has been prepared in accordance with the GRI Standards Core Option and reflects data for the 2020 performance year. All Standards below are based on the most recent set of GRI Standards published. AEP discloses additional information through the GRI Electric Utility Sector Supplement, providing industry-specific information. The GRI Standards are a voluntary reporting framework used by organizations around the world as a basis for sustainability reporting. AEP uses the GRI Framework as a supplement to our Corporate Accountability Report (CAR), providing additional detail on data and programs that are relevant to stakeholders but not necessarily covered in the CAR. For this reason, many of the GRI Standard are linked to sections of the CAR as a response along with other annual financial company-wide disclosure documents. Links to other AEP websites and company documents are also used to support our responses. For those Standards not supported by the CAR or other company websites and document, the detail is contained within the appendix section of this report. For more information contact: Sandy Nessing Managing Director, Corporate Sustainability American Electric Power [email protected] Melissa Tominack Manager, Corporate Sustainability American Electric Power [email protected] Madeline Moses Corporate Sustainability Coordinator Associate American Electric Power [email protected] 2 GRI Indicator GRI Data Requests AEP Response Organization overview
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the United States National Museum
    ; 1885.] PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 149 Tol. VIII, ]¥o. 39. TFashing^ton, D. C. IScpt. 33, 1885. REPORT ON THE FLORA OP "WESTERN AND SOUTHERN TEXAS. By Dr. V. HATAKD, U. 8. A. The observatioDS and collections on which the following report is based were made at the several posts where I have been stationed since August, 1880, also, and chiefly, while on duty with the expeditions for the exploration of Western Texas, under the command of Maj. William K. Livermore, chief engineer officer, Department of Texas, in the sum- mer and fall of 1881 and 1883. The specimens themselves will be pre- sented to the National Museum. The first part describes in a general way the vegetation of Western and Southern Texas. The various topographical features of the land are considered separately and their botanical physiognomy sketched as accurately as possible. It includes such meteorological notes as were deemed useful for the better understanding of the subject. The seconfi part is made up of economic notes on the plants known to have useful or baneful i^roperties or to be of value to agriculture or in- dustry. My grateful acknowledgments are particularly due to Mr. Sereno Watson, of Cambridge, and Dr. George Vasey, of the Department of Agriculture, for their valuable assistance in the determination of spe- cies. PAKT I. GENEEAL VIEW. Austin, the capital of Texas, lies within the timbered agricultural section of the State. South and west of it, the mean annual temperature increases while the rainfall decreases so that a change of vegetation soon becomes perceptible.
    [Show full text]