DOCSLIB.ORG

Duke Energy Corporation (“Duke Energy” Or the “Company”) Requests Confirmation That the Staff of the Division of Corporation Finance (The “Staff”) of the U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Duke Energy Corporation (“Duke Energy” Or the “Company”) Requests Confirmation That the Staff of the Division of Corporation Finance (The “Staff”) of the U.S ( ~ DUKE Nancy M. Wright ENERGY® Deputy General Counsel 550 S. Tryon Street Charlotte, NC 28202 Mailing Address: Mail Code DEC45A/ P.O. Box 1321 Charlotte, NC 28201 o: 704.382.9151 [email protected] December 30, 2020 Via email to [email protected] Office of Chief Counsel Division of Corporation Finance U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20549 Re: Omission of Shareholder Proposal Submitted by the National Center for Public Policy Research Dear Sir or Madam: Pursuant to Rule 14a-8(j)(1) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), Duke Energy Corporation (“Duke Energy” or the “Company”) requests confirmation that the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance (the “Staff”) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) will not recommend any enforcement action if the Company omits from its proxy solicitation materials (“Proxy Materials”) for its 2021 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “2021 Annual Meeting”) a proposal (the “Proposal”) submitted to the Company by the National Center for Public Policy Research (the “Proponent”). This letter provides an explanation of why the Company believes that it may exclude the Proposal and includes the attachments required by Rule 14a-8(j). In accordance with Staff Legal Bulletin No. 14D (Nov. 7, 2008), this letter and its exhibits are being delivered by e-mail to [email protected]. A copy of this letter and its attachments are also being sent on this date to the Proponent in accordance with Rule 14a-8(j), informing the Proponent of the Company’s intention to omit the Proposal from its Proxy Materials. We also wish to take this opportunity to inform the Proponent that if he submits additional correspondence to the Staff with respect to the Proposal, a copy of that correspondence should also be furnished to the Company, addressed to the undersigned, pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 14a-8(k). This letter is being submitted not less than 80 days before the filing of the Company’s definitive proxy statement, which the Company intends to file on or around March 23, 2021. #666434 THE PROPOSAL The Proposal requests that the Company’s Board “prepare a report based on a review of the BRT Statement of the Purpose of a Corporation, signed by our Chief Executive Officer, and provide the board’s perspective regarding whether our Company’s governance and management systems should be altered to fully implement the Statement of Purpose, or, in the alternative, what our Company should do if the Statement cannot be reconciled with current practices and commitments.” See Exhibit A for the complete Proposal submitted by the Proponent. BASIS FOR EXCLUSION OF PROPOSAL The Company believes that the Proposal may be properly excluded pursuant to Rule 14a-8(i)(10) because it has already been substantially implemented by the Company. BACKGROUND The Business Roundtable released its “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation” (the “Statement of Purpose”, attached hereto as Exhibit B) in 2019. The Statement of Purpose was signed by 181 CEO’s, including the Company’s Chair, President and CEO, Lynn Good, and stated that businesses play a vital role in the economy and that, while each individual company serves its own corporate purpose, the signatories shared a commitment to all of their stakeholders, including the following five key commitments: (1) delivering value to customers; (2) investing in employees; (3) dealing fairly and ethically with suppliers; (4) supporting communities in which the company works; and (5) generating long-term value for shareholders, including a commitment to transparency and engagement. As a regulated public utility, Duke Energy has long understood that its purpose as an essential provider of energy serves an important role to the vitality of the communities it serves and society as a whole. Ms. Good’s signature on the Statement of Purpose was consistent with the Company’s own statement of purpose and simply reiterated the commitment the Company had already made to its communities and stakeholders, as evidenced by its own practices, policies, procedures and disclosures. The Corporate Governance Committee (the “Corporate Governance Committee”) of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) first discussed the Statement of Purpose and its commitments in September 2019. After receipt of the Proposal, the Corporate Governance Committee further reviewed the Statement of Purpose and the Proposal and determined that the Statement of Purpose is consistent with the Company’s governance and practices and no alterations to the Company’s governance or management systems are necessary to fully implement the Statement of Purpose. DISCUSSION The Company may exclude the Proposal pursuant to Rule 14a-8(i)(l0) because the Proposal has already been substantially implemented by the Company. Rule 14a-8(i)(l0) provides that a shareholder proposal may be excluded from a company’s proxy materials when the proposal has already been substantially implemented by that company. A proposal need not be “fully effected” by a company to meet the substantially implemented 2 standard under Rule l4a-8 but rather, the Staff has concurred with the exclusion of proposals in situations where the essential objective of the proposal has been satisfied. See, e.g., Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (Feb. 15, 2019); and Exelon Corp. (Feb. 26, 2010). According to the Staff, the determination as to whether a proposal has been substantially implemented depends on whether the company’s “particular policies, practices and procedures compare favorably with the guidelines of the proposal.” Texaco, Inc. (Mar. 6, 1991, recon. granted Mar. 28, 1991). See also, The Wendy’s Company (avail. Apr. 10, 2019) (concurring with exclusion of a proposal requesting that the board of directors prepare a report on the company’s process for identifying and analyzing human rights risks of operations and supply chain where the company already had a code of conduct for suppliers, a code of business conduct and ethics, and other policies and disclosures concerning its supply chain practices and human rights risks); McDonald’s Corporation (avail. Feb. 28, 2014) (concurring with the exclusion of a proposal requesting that the board of directors review and prepare a report to shareholders regarding the board’s duties with respect to ESG issues where the board’s sustainability and corporate responsibility committee charter as well as a report overseen by the committee described the Board’s ESG oversight); and The Dow Chemical Co. (avail. Mar. 5, 2008) (concurring with exclusion of a proposal requesting that the board of directors prepare a report discussing how the company’s efforts related to climate change have affected the global climate where the company had already included numerous corporate disclosures regarding its efforts related to climate change). The Company’s disclosures demonstrate that its governance, policies and procedures are aligned with the Statement of Purpose. As stated above, Duke Energy’s role as a regulated public utility has given it a unique perspective for years of a company’s importance within the various communities it serves. As an essential provider of energy, the Company serves an important role to power the vitality of the communities it serves and the individuals within those communities. The Company has discussed this purpose in numerous disclosures on its website, SEC filings and other disclosures. As Lynn Good stated in her “Message from the CEO” in the Company’s 2019 Sustainability Report (the “Sustainability Report”), “[h]aving a mission, vision and values keeps us grounded in an uncertain time. Our purpose at Duke Energy has never been more important. We provide an essential service. We power the daily lives of our employees, customers and communities, no matter the circumstances.” The Sustainability Report is attached hereto as Exhibit C. The Sustainability Report proceeds to detail the goals, governance, management actions, policies and procedures in the Company’s key focus areas: (1) improving the lives of our customers and vitality of our communities; (2) growing and adapting the business, and achieving our financial objectives; (3) exceling in safety, operational performance and environmental stewardship; and (4) developing and engaging employees, and strengthening leadership. These four focus areas are completely aligned with the Statement of Purpose, which also focuses on customers, communities, suppliers, shareholders, and employees. This alignment and the Company’s views on its commitment to all stakeholders is also evident in the Sustainability Report and numerous other disclosures, a small portion of which are detailed in the following chart. 3 Statement of Duke Energy Source Illustrative Disclosures of Duke Energy’s Existing Purpose Document Commitment Commitment Deliver value 2019 Sustainability Duke Energy’s Sustainability Report details its to customers Report, page 12, Our customer goals, including goals regarding providing Sustainability Plan affordable energy and energy efficiency measures for and Goals customers, and its progress toward those goals. 2019 Sustainability Duke Energy’s Sustainability Report included a Report, pages 15-23, section devoted to delivering value to customers, Customer section including how the Company is transforming the customer experience, connecting customers to smart energy technologies, customer assistance programs, customer rates and solutions the Company is
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Duke Energy Profile
    Duke Energy Duke Energy, based in North Carolina, is the largest electric utility in the United States and the company emits more carbon pollution than any other utility. Duke also ranks first in fossil fuel generation and second in coal-fired generation. The majority of Duke’s business is in regulated, monopoly utilities in six states: North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky. While Duke also owns a commercial arm that has invested in wind and solar power that it sells electricity to other utilities, Duke’s electricity customers in its regulated territory receive an electricity mix that contains next to zero renewable energy. The company has shown little appetite for change. In fact, regulatory documents show it intends to have only 4% renewable power in North Carolina by 2029. Duke’s fossil and nuclear-dominated strategy have led to a series of scandals in recent years both for its customers and the environment. Duke’s coal ash waste has become a systemic disaster in the Carolinas, culminating in the 2014 coal ash spill on the Dan River. Nuclear construction projects in the Carolinas and particularly Florida have been beset by problems, costing ratepayers billions of dollars. Duke has protected itself from stricter oversight in its regulated operations by contributing heavily to the state and federal politicians that control its destiny, pouring millions of dollars into campaign contributions and lobbying. Despite massive pressures facing the electric power sector to adapt to technological change that is ushering in a new wave of energy efficiency, rooftop solar power, and distributed energy storage, Duke has yet to show much of an appetite for change.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Sustainable Solutions
    DukeDuDu DuEnergykkeke eEnergy EnergyEnergy RDuenewablesDuke kR e RenewablesR enewablesEnergyenewables Energy Wind Renewables SustainableCommercial Regulated Third-PartyPower and U.S. Solar SolutionsSolar BatteryCustomer Portfolio Power Power Storage ProjectsProjects Projects Projects Including O&M sites Garden Michigan Fairbanks Pinnebog Echo McKinley Sigel Brookfield Pisgah Mountain Pine River Minden Isabella Gratiot Spruce Mountain Rosiere Wind Shirley Sterling Berkley EastFutureGen Campbell Hill Top of the World Ledyard Block Island Laurel HillBald Eagle Shoreham Bellefonte Silver Sage Happy Jack North Allegheny New Jersey Sunset Reservoir Sunset Reservoir San Jose Kit Carson Beckjord I San Carlos VictoryVictory Palmer PumpjackPumpjack North Carolina Taylorsville Dogwood Garysburg Murfreesboro Rio Bravo I & II Cimarron II North Carolina Halifax Long Farm Seaboard River Road Rio Bravo I & II Ironwood Taylorsville Dogwood Garysburg Murfreesboro Tarboro Gaston Woodland Winton Long Farm Seaboard Wildwood I & II Battleboro Halifax RiverSunbury Road Longboat Tarboro Gaston Woodland WintonShawboro Longboat Sunbury North Rosamond Frontier Battleboro Capital Partners Highlander Shawboro Highlander Bagdad Prescott Valley Martins Creek Hertford Frontier II Holiness Capital Partners Windsor Cooper Hill Bagdad MurphyMartins Farm Creek Hertford Seville I & II Black WingateHoliness WindsorCreswell Cooper Hill CA Hospitals Murphy Farm Everetts Wildcat Mountain Wingate Creswell EverettsWashington Wildcat White Post Shelby Washington Millfield Broad
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Renewables Blows Into Oklahoma with 200-Megawatt Wind Project
    Duke Energy Renewables blows into Oklahoma with 200-megawatt wind project - Company will sell power to City Utilities of Springfield - Project pushes Duke Energy Renewables past 2,000 megawatts of wind power in U.S. New Duke Energy logo CHARLOTTE, N.C., Dec. 3, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Duke Energy Renewables today announced it will build a large-scale wind power project in Oklahoma, the company's first renewables project in the state. When built, it will increase Duke Energy Renewables' U.S. wind capacity to more than 2,000 megawatts (MW). Duke Energy Renewables will build, own and operate the Frontier Windpower Project, sited in Kay County, east of Blackwell, Okla. The 200-MW wind farm will produce enough emissions-free electricity to power about 60,000 homes. "We're investing heavily in renewable energy and surpassing 2,000 megawatts of wind power is a significant accomplishment for our company," said Greg Wolf, president of Duke Energy's Commercial Portfolio. "We are excited to be working with the community and local landowners as we get our first project in this wind-rich state underway. The facility will help City Utilities meet its renewable energy goals while creating economic development opportunities for Kay County." The power will be sold to City Utilities of Springfield, Mo., under a 22-year agreement. "City Utilities is pleased to partner with Duke Energy on the Frontier Windpower Project," said Scott Miller, general manager, City Utilities of Springfield. "Providing a long-term renewable source of power generation in this changing market is critical to the future of utilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy 11.Qxd.Qxd
    1755 Massachusetts Ave., NW Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20036 – USA T: (+1-202) 332-9312 F: (+1-202) 265-9531 E: [email protected] www.aicgs.org 34 AICGS POLICY REPORT OVERCOMING THE LETHARGY: CLIMATE CHANGE, ENERGY SECURITY, AND THE CASE FOR A THIRD INDUSTRIAL Located in Washington, D.C., the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies is an independent, non-profit public policy organization that works REVOLUTION in Germany and the United States to address current and emerging policy challenges. Founded in 1983, the Institute is affiliated with The Johns Hopkins University. The Institute is governed by its own Board of Trustees, which includes prominent German and American leaders from the business, policy, and academic communities. Alexander Ochs Building Knowledge, Insights, and Networks for German-American Relations AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CONTEMPORARY GERMAN STUDIES THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword 3 About the Author 5 The American Institute for Contemporary German Studies strengthens the German-American relation - Chapter 1: Introduction 7 ship in an evolving Europe and changing world. The Institute produces objective and original analyses of Chapter 2: Climate Change and Energy Security: An Analysis of developments and trends in Germany, Europe, and the United States; creates new transatlantic the Challenge 9 networks; and facilitates dialogue among the busi - ness, political, and academic communities to manage Chapter 3: The Third Industrial Revolution: How It Might Look - differences and define and promote common inter - or Is It Already Happening? 17 ests. Chapter 4: Making the Economic Case for Climate Action 23 ©2008 by the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies Chapter 5: A New Era for Transatlantic Cooperation on Energy ISBN 1-933942-12-6 and Climate Change? 35 ADDITIONAL COPIES: Notes 47 Additional Copies of this Policy Report are available for $5.00 to cover postage and handling from the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036.
    [Show full text]
  • Docket # 2018-318-E - Page 11 of 97
    EXHIBIT DJW - 5.0 ELECTRONICALLY Page 1 of 18 Date: May 14, 2015 Document: EXHIBIT 2 – AMENDED STIPULATIONS – PLEA AGREEMENT Cases: US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION NUMBERS 5:15-CR-67-H-2 AND 5:15-CR-68- H-2 FILED Findings: - 2019 1. Dan River Steam Station (pages 43 - 48) – The Court found Defendants guilty and Defendants plead guilty to four counts (sets of violations) at Dan River. March a. Count One is that the company violated the Clean Water Act for the unpermitted discharge through the 48-inch stormwater so and the Defendant aided and abetted another 4 in doing so. Furthermore, the Court found that the Defendant acted negligently in doing 4:55 so. b. Count Two is that Defendant violated the CWA by not maintaining the 48-inch storm PM water pipe which constituted a violation of its NPDES permit which requires that the - permittee to properly maintain its equipment. Furthermore, the Court found that the SCPSC Defendant acted negligently in doing so and that the Defendant aided and abetted another in doing so. c. Count Three is that Defendant violated the CWA for the unpermitted discharge through - the 36-inch stormwater pipe at Dan River of coal ash and coal ash wastewater from a Docket point source into a water of the US. Furthermore, the Court found that the Defendant acted negligently in doing so and that the Defendant aided and abetted another in doing # so. 2018-318-E d. Count Four is that Defendant violated the CWA by not maintaining the 36-inch storm water pipe which constituted a violation of its NPDES permit which requires that the permittee to properly maintain its equipment.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy at a Glance
    Duke Energy At A Glance Regulated Utilities Commercial Portfolio Generation Diversity (percent owned capacity)1 Generation Diversity (percent owned capacity)1 38% Natural Gas/Fuel Oil 37% Coal 100% Renewable 18% Nuclear 7% Hydro and Solar Commercial Portfolio primarily builds, develops, and operates Generated (net output gigawatt-hours (GWh))2 wind and solar renewable generation and energy transmission 36% Coal projects throughout the continental U.S. The portfolio includes nonregulated renewable energy, electric transmission, natural 34% Nuclear gas infrastructure and energy storage businesses. 29% Natural Gas/Fuel Oil Commercial Portfolio’s renewable energy includes utility-scale 1% Hydro and Solar wind and solar generation assets which total more than 2,500 MW across 12 states from more than 22 wind farms and 38 2 Customer Diversity (in billed GWh sales) commercial solar farms. Revenues are primarily generated by selling the power through long-term contracts to utilities, electric 33% Residential cooperatives, municipalities, and other customers. 31% General Services Duke Energy currently has about 1,950 MW of wind and solar 21% Industrial energy in operation (pie chart excludes 538 MW, which are 15% Wholesale/Other from equity investments) Regulated Utilities consists of Duke Energy’s regulated generation, electric and natural gas transmission and distribution systems. Regulated Utilities generation portfolio is International Energy a balanced mix of energy resources having different operating Generation Diversity (percent owned capacity)1 characteristics and fuel sources designed to provide energy at the lowest possible cost. 70% Hydro Electric Operations 22% Fuel Oil Owns approximately 50,200 megawatts (MW) of 6% Natural Gas generating capacity 2% Coal Service area covers about 95,000 square miles with International Energy principally operates and manages power an estimated population of 24 million generation facilities and engages in sales and marketing of electric power, natural gas, and natural gas liquids outside the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Application for FDF Variance
    139 E. Fourth Street, EM740 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 April 27, 2016 VIA OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Mr. Robert Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator Region 5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 77 W. Jackson Blvd. Chicago, IL 60604 Ms. Carol S. Comer, Commissioner Indiana Department of Environmental Management Indiana Government Center North, 13th Floor 100 N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204 RE: Fundamentalty Different Factors Variance Application for Duke Energy Indiana, LLC - EdWardsport IGCC Station (NPDES Permit IN0002780) Dear Mr. Kaplan and Ms. Comer. Enclosed, please find an application by Duke Energy Indiana, LLC for a fundamentally different factors variance from recently adopted revisions to the Steam Electric EHluenl Limitation Guidelines that are applicable to gasification wastewater generated at the Edwardsport IGCC Station. This Application is being submitted pursuant to the authority granted by Section 301 (n) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1311 {n). Please contact me (513-287-2268 or [email protected]) if you have any questions about the enclosed materials. Sincerely, p~~t~ Duke Energy - Environmental Services Enclosure (:li,ek 011t: Apc!26'",,0I~ •...,.,.,....,,bm 0000- HHl*l o , I\lt. Ut INDIAl'IA Cftrck~•m~n •=UICA1l l•~lc:• N• Mrr lnvel« O.reo Vo~•rfD c,1uA•o11n1 DbcCMtnlS T•l:c tt Latt0.11tt PalcJAnH1uu M?-2011 A~r1Wl016 101!6677 lllOO 000 0.00 50.00 fEl:fOR f,O~ VARIAN('£AP1'llC'IITl0H ©@fP'W 'tool TeuJ Ttttl Toto! Clittk N•<ttblN 0•1< Crf.lnAIMWftf 0tft&41•U L.ate- Chara.n P1WAmo•ot IIIOOl~IOC'I o\p,-12&2016 $30.00 so-oo $0.00 s,P.oo ~~DUKE ~ -ENERGY.
    [Show full text]
  • Sep. 01, 2015 Duke Energy Renewables Acquires Half Interest
    Duke Energy media contact: Tammie McGee 980.373.8812 | 800.559.3853 Sumitomo Corporation of Americas media contact: Jewelle Yamada 212-207-0574 Sept. 1, 2015 Life just got a little sweeter for Duke Energy Renewables . Duke Energy Renewables acquires half interest in Sumitomo’s Mesquite Creek Wind Project serving Mars Inc. Duke Energy Renewables now owns more than 1.2 gigawatts of wind capacity in Texas CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Duke Energy Renewables has acquired a 50-percent stake in Mesquite Creek Wind, a 211-megawatt (MW) wind power project near Lamesa, Texas, through its joint venture partnership with Sumitomo Corp. of Americas. The acquisition increases Duke Energy Renewables’ Texas wind capacity to more than 1,200 MW. Global food manufacturer Mars Inc., best known for its candy products, is purchasing the power and associated renewable energy credits from the wind farm for a 20-year period. The facility began operations in April of this year. “Mars is an industry leader in using sustainable business practices to meet its customers’ needs,” said Greg Wolf, president of Duke Energy’s Commercial Portfolio. “We’re proud to partner with Sumitomo to provide emissions-free wind energy to Mars and help them achieve their goal of carbon neutral operations by 2040.” Mesquite Creek Wind consists of 118 1.7 MW GE wind turbines, enough to provide electricity for Mars’ entire U.S. operations comprised of 70 sites, including 37 factories. The energy produced is enough to make 13 billion SNICKERS® bars or 188 billion sticks of ORBIT® gum. “Mesquite Creek Wind has been a landmark project for our company as the sixth renewable energy investment in the U.S.,” said Teruyuki Miyazaki, SVP and GM of Environment and Infrastructure Group, Sumitomo Corporation of Americas.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Policy and Economics
    Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Policy and Economics A Report Prepared for the Kansas Energy Council Trisha Shrum, KEC Research Fellow August 3, 2007 1 Acknowledgments This review benefited from the indispensable advice and assistance of many individuals. Dr. John Cita, Chief of Economic Policy of the Kansas Corporation Commission, provided comments, edited, and contributed to multiple drafts, in addition to his generous contribution of time spent advising on various economic issues. Dr. Robert Glass, Managing Research Economist of the KCC, also provided valuable comments and advice. Jim Sanderson, Senior Research Economist of the KCC, contributed data and assistance. Carlos Centeno and Kerem Sengun both put forth extremely helpful comments in the editing process. Charles Komanoff also contributed provided valuable feedback. Throughout the entire development of this review, Liz Brosius, Director of the KEC, was a constant guide and highly effective editor. I truly appreciate the valuable contributions of each of these individuals. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary. .4 Introduction. 8 Scientific Conclusions on Climate Change. 8 Summary of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. .9 Economics and Greenhouse Gas Policy. .9 Economic Principles Relevant to the Discussion. .10 Climate Change Economics . 12 Estimating the Benefit of Reducing Greenhouse Gases . 12 Estimating the Cost of Reducing Greenhouse Gases. .12 Dealing with Uncertainty. .13 Mitigating Climate Change: Atmospheric GHG Stabilization Goals. .14 Overview of Control Methodologies: Market vs. Non-Market Approaches . 17 Controlling the Quantity of GHG Emissions: The Greenhouse Gas Tax. 18 The Economics of the Greenhouse Gas Tax. 18 Administration of a Greenhouse Gas Tax. 20 Political Considerations of a Greenhouse Gas Tax.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Energy Notrees Wind Storage Demonstration Project
    Technology Performance Report: Duke Energy Notrees Wind Storage Demonstration Project 2013 Interim Report Contract ID: DE-OE0000195 Project Type: Regional Demonstration Revision: Final Submittal Company Name: Duke Energy November 2013 This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-OE0000195. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of its employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes a legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. CONTENTS 1 OVERVIEW OF THE ENERGY STORAGE PROJECT ....................................................... 1-1 1.1 Phases and Tasks ........................................................................................................ 1-2 Phase 1: Project Definition, NEPA Compliance and Economic Analysis ........................ 1-2 Phase 2: Project
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Sustainability Report
    2020 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT ENERGY FOR A BETTER TOMORROW 2020 | 2021 Recognitions Table of Contents ■ For the 15th consecutive year, Duke Energy was named to the 2020 | 2021 Recognitions . 2 Dow Jones Sustainability Index for A Message From Our CEO . 3 North America. Duke Energy is A Message From Our CSO . 5 one of only seven companies in our Duke Energy At A Glance . 7 sector to make the index. Conducting Business in the Era ■ Duke Energy was named to Fortune magazine’s “World’s Most Admired of COVID-19 . 10 Companies” list in 2021 for the fourth consecutive year. This year the Our Strategy: company ranked 7th among gas and electric utilities. Clean Energy Transformation . 12 ■ Forbes magazine included Duke Energy in its America’s Best Employers Our Value Creation Model . 13 for Women list for 2020 and its Best Employers for Diversity list Our Stakeholders and for 2020. What Matters Most . 15 ■ Forbes magazine included Duke Energy in its 2020 list for Best-In-State Our Sustainability Plan and Goals . 17 Employers in North Carolina, ranking the company 12th out of 100 Management Approach employers on the list. to Sustainability . 20 ■ Duke Energy received a perfect score for the fourth year in a row on the Environmental . 21 Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s 2021 Corporate Equality Index, Social . 40 earning inclusion on the organization’s list of Best Places to Work for LGBTQ Equality. Governance . 53 ■ Duke Energy received the 2020 AMVETS Veteran Friendly Employer of the Year Award for North Carolina, for companies with more than 1,000 employees.
    [Show full text]
  • Point Source 2007 SEMAP Emissions Inventory
    Development of the Point Source Emission Inventory for 2007 in the SESARM Region (Version 1.10a) Prepared for: John Hornback Executive Director, Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. 526 Forest Parkway, Suite F Forest Park, GA 30297-6140. (404) 361-4000, FAX (404) 361-2411 [email protected] Prepared by: AMEC E&I, Inc. 404 SW 140th Terrace Newberry, FL 32669 (352) 333-6617, FAX (352) 333-6622 wrbarnard@ AMEC.com Mark Diblin William R. Barnard Senior Principal Senior Principal AMEC Project No.: 6066-09-0326.02 Contract No.: S-2009-06-02 March 27, 2012 Development of Point Source Emission Inventory for 2007 Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. AMEC Project No.: 6066-09-0326.02 January 18, 2012 Table of Contents 1.0 ANNUAL 2007 INVENTORY FOR POINT SOURCES .......................................................... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 INITIAL DATA SOURCES AND QA REVIEW .................................................................... 2 1.2.1 State Submittals and Conversion into a NIF Database ............................................. 2 1.2.1.1 Alabama ................................................................................................................ 5 1.2.1.2 Alabama – Jefferson County ................................................................................. 5 1.2.1.3 Florida ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]