DOCSLIB.ORG

Comanche Peak Units 3 and 4

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comanche Peak Units 3 and 4 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 & 4 COL Application Part 3 - Environmental Report CHAPTER 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF OPERATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF OPERATION ........................................................ 5.0-1 5.1 LAND-USE IMPACTS ................................................................................................. 5.1-1 5.1.1 THE SITE AND VICINITY ..................................................................................... 5.1-1 5.1.1.1 The Site........................................................................................................... 5.1-1 5.1.1.2 The Vicinity...................................................................................................... 5.1-2 5.1.2 TRANSMISSION CORRIDORS AND OFF-SITE AREAS..................................... 5.1-2 5.1.3 HISTORIC PROPERTIES..................................................................................... 5.1-3 5.1.3.1 Site and Vicinity............................................................................................... 5.1-3 5.1.3.1.1 Prehistoric Archaeological Sites...................................................................... 5.1-4 5.1.3.1.2 Historical Period Archaeological Sites............................................................. 5.1-4 5.1.3.1.3 Historic Sites ................................................................................................... 5.1-4 5.1.3.1.4 Historic Cemeteries......................................................................................... 5.1-5 5.1.3.1.5 Traditional Cultural Properties......................................................................... 5.1-5 5.1.3.2 Transmission Corridors and Off-Site Areas..................................................... 5.1-5 5.1.3.2.1 Water Pipeline Corridor ................................................................................... 5.1-6 5.1.4 REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 5.1-6 5.2 WATER-RELATED IMPACTS .................................................................................... 5.2-1 5.2.1 HYDROLOGIC ALTERATIONS AND PLANT WATER SUPPLY.......................... 5.2-1 5.2.1.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Water and Groundwater ......................... 5.2-2 5.2.1.2 Water Sources................................................................................................. 5.2-2 5.2.1.3 Plant Withdrawals and Returns ...................................................................... 5.2-3 5.2.1.4 Present and Future Surface Water Use .......................................................... 5.2-4 5.2.1.5 Hydrological Alterations Affecting Groundwater.............................................. 5.2-5 5.2.1.6 Operational Activities Causing Hydrologic Alterations .................................... 5.2-6 5.2.1.7 Surface Water and Groundwater Users Affected by Hydrologic Alterations ... 5.2-6 5.2.1.8 Legal Restrictions............................................................................................ 5.2-8 5.2.2 WATER-USE IMPACTS........................................................................................ 5.2-8 5.2.2.1 Plant Operational Activities Potentially Impacting Water Use ......................... 5.2-8 5.2.2.2 Surface Water - Makeup Water Withdrawal and Consumptive Use................ 5.2-9 5.2.2.3 Potential Impacts on Water Use ..................................................................... 5.2-9 5.2.2.3.1 Downstream Water Availability Impacts .......................................................... 5.2-9 5.2.3 WATER QUALITY IMPACTS.............................................................................. 5.2-12 5.2.3.1 Thermal Impacts............................................................................................ 5.2-12 5.2.3.2 Operational Limitations.................................................................................. 5.2-12 5.2.3.3 Discharge Design .......................................................................................... 5.2-13 5.2.3.4 Wastewater Discharge .................................................................................. 5.2-14 5-i Revision 1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 & 4 COL Application Part 3 - Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Title Page 5.2.3.5 Impacts to Groundwater ................................................................................ 5.2-16 5.2.3.6 Regulatory Compliance ................................................................................. 5.2-17 5.2.4 REFERENCES.................................................................................................... 5.2-17 5.3 COOLING SYSTEM IMPACTS................................................................................... 5.3-1 5.3.1 INTAKE SYSTEM ................................................................................................. 5.3-1 5.3.1.1 Hydrodynamic Description and Physical Impacts .......................................... 5.3-1 5.3.1.1.1 Intake-Hydrodynamic Description .................................................................. 5.3-1 5.3.1.1.2 Physical Impacts of Intake............................................................................... 5.3-4 5.3.1.2 Aquatic Ecosystems........................................................................................ 5.3-5 5.3.1.2.1 Fish Impingement and Entrainment ................................................................ 5.3-5 5.3.1.2.2 Important Species ........................................................................................... 5.3-5 5.3.2 DISCHARGE SYSTEM ......................................................................................... 5.3-7 5.3.2.1 Thermal Description and Physical Impacts .................................................... 5.3-7 5.3.2.2 Aquatic Ecosystems........................................................................................ 5.3-8 5.3.3 HEAT-DISCHARGE SYSTEM ............................................................................ 5.3-10 5.3.3.1 Heat Dissipation to the Atmosphere.............................................................. 5.3-10 5.3.3.1.1 Length and Frequency of Elevated Plumes ................................................. 5.3-11 5.3.3.1.2 Frequency and Extent of Ground Level Fogging and Icing in the Site Vicinity . 5.3- 11 5.3.3.1.3 Solids Deposition (i.e., Drift Deposition) in the Site Vicinity .......................... 5.3-11 5.3.3.1.4 Cloud Formation, Cloud Shadowing, and Additional Precipitation ................ 5.3-13 5.3.3.1.5 Vapor Plume Interactions With Existing Pollution Sources ........................... 5.3-13 5.3.3.1.6 Ground Level Humidity Increase in the Site Vicinity...................................... 5.3-13 5.3.3.2 Terrestrial Ecosystems.................................................................................. 5.3-13 5.3.3.2.1 Salt Drift......................................................................................................... 5.3-14 5.3.3.2.2 Increased Precipitation.................................................................................. 5.3-14 5.3.3.2.3 Fogging and Icing.......................................................................................... 5.3-14 5.3.3.2.4 Noise ............................................................................................................. 5.3-14 5.3.3.2.5 Bird collisions ................................................................................................ 5.3-14 5.3.4 IMPACTS TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC....................................................... 5.3-15 5.3.4.1 Thermophilic Microorganisms ....................................................................... 5.3-15 5.3.4.2 Noise ............................................................................................................. 5.3-16 5.3.5 REFERENCES.................................................................................................... 5.3-16 5.4 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF NORMAL OPERATIONS ........................................ 5.4-1 5.4.1 EXPOSURE PATHWAYS .................................................................................... 5.4-1 5.4.1.1 Liquid Pathways .............................................................................................. 5.4-1 5.4.1.2 Gaseous Pathways ........................................................................................ 5.4-6 5.4.1.3 Direct Radiation from Station Operation ......................................................... 5.4-7 5.4.2 RADIATION DOSES TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ....................................... 5.4-7 5.4.2.1 Liquid Pathways Doses .................................................................................. 5.4-7 5-ii Revision 1 Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 & 4 COL Application Part 3 - Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section Title Page 5.4.2.2 Gaseous Pathways Doses ............................................................................. 5.4-7 5.4.3 IMPACTS TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC......................................................... 5.4-8 5.4.3.1 Impacts from Liquid Pathways ........................................................................ 5.4-8 5.4.3.2 Impacts from Gaseous Pathways.................................................................... 5.4-8 5.4.3.3 Direct Radiation Doses ..................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SPECIAL PROJECTS the Brazos River
    SPECIAL PROJECTS The Brazos River Authority’s (BRA) public outreach activites include involving our stakeholders in planning water quality and watershed protection activities in the Brazos Basin as well as education and outreach programs. Brazos River Basin Clean Rivers Program Steering Committee The size and diversity of issues across the Brazos River Watershed presents a challenge for the large group of stakeholders in our basin. The Brazos River Clean Rivers Program (CRP) Steering Committee participants represent diverse interests that are represented by government agencies, municipalities, industry, agriculture, organized local stakeholder groups, individuals, and environmental groups. The BRA holds an annual meeting that provides the Steering Committee with an opportunity to hear results of water quality monitoring and CRP special studies and gives them a forum where they may voice opinions, make recommendations and interact with other stakeholder participants and BRA staff. Steering Committee members also participate by providing input into planning water quality monitoring activities, prioritizing problems within the basin for prospective CRP special studies, identifying problem areas and developing actions to address potential problem areas in the basin. How to get involved with the Brazos Basin CRP? BRA promotes communication and participation from the general public. If you are interested in serving on the Brazos River Basin CRP Steering Committee, send an email addressed to [email protected]. Please indicate what topics you are interested in and provide an email address so that you can receive electronic notices of meetings and reports. In addition, the information you provide will help us to develop more effective meetings and provide direction to the program.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Disaster Final Report
    The Senate Interim Committee on Natural Resources Interim Report to the 78th Legislature Natural Disasters August 2002 Senate Interim Committee on Natural Resources Report to the 78th Legislature Analysis of State Natural Disaster Efforts TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS............................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 4 INTERIM CHARGE.................................................................................................................. 5 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................ 6 STATE’S ABILITY TO RESPOND TO NATURAL DISASTERS......................................... 9 DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.................................................................... 9 HURRICANES.......................................................................................................................... 11 TROPICAL STORMS............................................................................................................... 17 COASTAL FLOODING............................................................................................................ 20 RIVER BASIN FLOODING..................................................................................................... 21 FLOOD LIABILITY.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Page 1 Chapter 292 - Special Requirements for Certain Districts and Authorities
    Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Page 1 Chapter 292 - Special Requirements for Certain Districts and Authorities SUBCHAPTER A: GENERAL PROVISIONS §292.1, §292.2 Effective November 28, 2002 §292.1. Objective and Scope of Rules. (a) The commission has the continuing right of supervision of districts and authorities created under Article III, §52 and Article XVI, §59 of the Texas Constitution. The authorities identified in Texas Water Code (TWC), §9.010, shall report to the Texas Water Advisory Council as specified in TWC, §9.011. This chapter shall govern the administrative policies of the following districts: (1) Angelina and Neches River Authority; (2) Bexar-Medina-Atascosa Counties Water Control and Improvement District Number 1; (3) Brazos River Authority; (4) Canadian River Municipal Water Authority; (5) Central Colorado River Authority; (6) Colorado River Municipal Water District; (7) Dallas County Utility and Reclamation District; (8) Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority; (9) Gulf Coast Water Authority; (10) Lavaca-Navidad River Authority; (11) Lower Colorado River Authority; (12) Lower Neches Valley Authority; (13) Mackenzie Municipal Water Authority; (14) North Central Texas Municipal Water Authority; (15) North Harris County Regional Water Authority; (16) North Texas Municipal Water District; Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Page 2 Chapter 292 - Special Requirements for Certain Districts and Authorities (17) Northeast Texas Municipal Water District; (18) Nueces River Authority; (19) Red River Authority of Texas; (20) Sabine River Authority; (21) San Antonio River Authority; (22) San Jacinto River Authority; (23) Sulphur River Basin Authority; (24) Sulphur River Municipal Water District; (25) Tarrant Regional Water District, a Water Control and Improvement District; (26) Titus County Fresh Water Supply District Number 1; (27) Trinity River Authority of Texas; (28) Upper Colorado River Authority; (29) Upper Guadalupe River Authority; (30) Upper Neches River Municipal Water Authority; and (31) West Central Texas Municipal Water District.
    [Show full text]
  • List of State Agencies and Higher Education Institutions
    List of State Agencies and Institutions of Higher Education (List may not be all inclusive) Abilene State Supported Living Center Civil Commitment Office, Texas Fire Protection, Commission on Accountancy, Board of Public Clarendon College Forest Service, Texas Administrative Hearings, Office of Coastal Bend College Frank Phillips College Affordable Housing Corporation College of the Mainland Funeral Service Commission Aging and Disability Services, Dept. of Collin County Community College Galveston College Agriculture, Department of Competitive Government, Council on Geoscientists, Board of Professional AgriLife Extension Service, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Governor, Office of the AgriLife Research, Texas Consumer Credit Commissioner, Office of Grayson County College Alamo Community College District Corpus Christi State Supported Groundwater Protection Committee Alcoholic Beverage Commission County and District Retirement System Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority Alvin Community College Court Administration, Office of Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority Amarillo College Credit Union Department Headwaters Groundwater Conservation Anatomical Board Criminal Appeals, Court of Health and Human Services Commission Angelina and Neches River Authority Criminal Justice, Department of Health Professions Council Angelina College Dallas County Community College Health Services, Department of State Angelo State University Deaf, School for the High Plains Underground Water Conserv. Animal Health Commission Del Mar College Higher Education Coordinating
    [Show full text]
  • Brazos River Authority Offices
    BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For The Fiscal Year Ended August 31, 2009 Waco, Texas The Brazos River Authority DALLAM SHERMANHANSFORD LIPSCOMB OCHILTREE HUTCHINSON HARTLEY MOORE ROBERTS HEMPHILL OLDHAM POTTER CARSON GRAY WHEELER DEAF SMITH RANDALL DONLEYCOLLINGSWORTH ARMSTRONG PARMER CASTRO SWISHER BRISCOE HALL CHILDRESS HARDEMAN BAILEY LAMB HALE FLOYD MOTLEY COTTLE WILBARGER FOARD WICHITA CLAY LAMAR MONTAGUE COOKE GRAYSON RED RIVER COCHRANHOCKLEY LUBBOCK CROSBY DICKENS KING KNOX BAYLOR ARCHER FANNIN BOWIE DELTA THROCKMORTON FRANKLINTITUS JACK WISE DENTON COLLIN YOAKUM TERRY LYNN GARZA KENT STONEWALLHASKELL YOUNG HUNT HOPKINS MORRIS CASS CAMP ROCKWALL RAINS MARION WOOD PARKER TARRANT DALLAS UPSHUR GAINES DAWSON BORDEN SCURRY FISHER JONES STEPHENS PALO PINTO KAUFMAN HARRISON SHACKELFORD VAN ZANDT GREGG SMITH HOOD JOHNSON ANDREWS ELLIS MARTIN HOWARD MITCHELL NOLAN TAYLOR CALLAHAN EASTLAND HENDERSON PANOLA ERATHSOMERVELL RUSK NAVARRO HILL EL PASO GLASSCOCK COMANCHE LOVING WINKLER ECTOR MIDLAND COKE BOSQUE ANDERSONCHEROKEE SHELBY STERLING RUNNELS COLEMAN BROWN HAMILTON FREESTONE NACOGDOCHES HUDSPETH TOM GREEN MCLENNAN LIMESTONE CULBERSON WARD MILLS SAN AUGUSTINE CRANE SABINE UPTON REAGAN CORYELL LEON HOUSTON ANGELINA REEVES IRION CONCHO FALLS MCCULLOCHSAN SABA LAMPASAS TRINITY BELL ROBERTSON MADISON SCHLEICHER MENARD POLK TYLER NEWTON BURNET JASPER JEFF DAVIS PECOS MILAM WALKER CROCKETT MASON BRAZOS LLANO WILLIAMSON SAN JACINTO GRIMES BURLESON SUTTON KIMBLE HARDIN BLANCO MONTGOMERY GILLESPIE TRAVIS LEE TERRELL
    [Show full text]
  • Quality Assurance Project Plan Brazos River Authority
    Quality Assurance Project Plan Brazos River Authority 4600 Cobbs Dr. Waco, TX 76710 Clean Rivers Program Water Quality Planning Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087, MC 234 Austin, Texas 78711-3087 Effective Period: FY 2018 to FY 2019 Questions concerning this QAPP should be directed to: Kay Barnes Quality Assurance Officer 4600 Cobbs Dr. Waco, Texas 76710 (254) 761-3131 [email protected] Page 1 of 78 Brazos River Authority FY1819 Clean Rivers Program QAPP A2 Table of Contents A1 Approval Page ................................................................................................................................................... 2 A2 Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................................. 4 List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................. 5 A3 Distribution List ............................................................................................................................................... 6 A4 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION ................................................................................................................ 7 Figure A4.1. Organization Chart - Lines of Communication ........................................................................ 10 A5 Problem Definition/Background ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Texas River Authorities
    The Senate Committee on Natural Resources Interim Report to the 81st Legislature Texas River Authorities March 2009 INTERIM CHARGE Review all state-created river authorities, including the powers exercised by each authority and the advisability of subjecting these authorities to legislative review. Consider options for ensuring adequate protection of public assets, improving transparency of operations, enhancing appropriate access to financial and management records, and authorizing audits by the State Auditor's Office. BACKGROUND The following background on past attempts to subject river authorities to legislative review was provided during testimony at the April 8, 2008, hearing of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources (Committee) by Dean Robbins of the Texas Water Conservation Association: In 1985, the Legislature added 19 of the State's river authorities to the list of agencies subject to review under the Sunset Act. Those entities were scheduled for review in 1991. That law provided that unless the board of directors of the river authorities were continued in office, their membership would expire and the Governor would appoint a new board. Another bill was passed in 1985 requiring the State Auditor to conduct an annual audit of 23 specifically named districts and authorities. That bill also created a Water Districts and River Authority Study Committee to consider the appropriate role and level of accountability of these entities. In December 1986, the Water Districts and River Authority Study Committee issued its report. That report recommended that the state audit and sunset requirements passed in 1985 be repealed. That report also addressed many other issues still being debated today such as water conservation, water planning, and groundwater management.
    [Show full text]
  • Amendment #1 Update to the Brazos River Authority Clean Rivers Program FY 2020/2021 QAPP
    Amendment #1 Update to the Brazos River Authority Clean Rivers Program FY 2020/2021 QAPP Prepared by the Brazos River Authority in Cooperation with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Effective: Immediately upon approval by all parties Questions concerning this QAPP should be directed to: Kay Barnes Quality Assurance Officer 4600 Cobbs Dr. Waco, TX 76710 (2540 761-3131 [email protected] Brazos River Authority Amendment #1 Page 1 Last revised on September 10, 2020 BRACRPQAPPFY2020-2021MonitoringUpdate[379]BRAEdits Justification This document details the changes made to the basin-wide Quality Assurance Project Plan to update Appendix B for fiscal year 2021. This document also updates personnel changes, updates versions of referenced documentation, adds clarifying language about frequency of blank collection, and addresses any other changes made to the quality program since the last amendment. Summary of Changes Section/Figure/Table Page Change Justification Section A4 6 Replaced Sarah Eagle with Personnel changes at TCEQ Kyle Girten as acting CRP Work Leader Replaced Peter Bohls with Sarah Kirkland as CRP Data Manager, DM&A Team Replaced Howard Barrons with Chase Carpenter as CRP Project Manager. Replaced Sharon Coleman with Dana Squires as CRP Lead Quality Assurance Specialist Section A4 6 Replaced Jack Davis with Personnel changes at BRA Jeremey Nickolai as BRA Field Operations Manager Figure A4.1 8 Replaced Sarah Eagle with Personnel changes at TCEQ Kyle Girten as acting CRP Work Leader Replaced Peter Bohls with Sarah Kirkland as CRP Data Manager, DM&A Team Replaced Howard Barrons with Chase Carpenter as CRP Project Manager. Replaced Sharon Coleman with Dana Squires as CRP Lead Quality Assurance Specialist Figure A4.1 8 Replaced Jack Davis with Personnel changes at BRA Jeremey Nickolai as BRA Field Operations Manager Section A8 9 Change date of TNI Standard The 2016 TNI ELS Standard was from 2009 to 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Advertise in the Classfieds Today! Call 254.883.2554
    Page 9 Wednesday, December 2, 2020 T:3.45” Notice of Public Meeting LEGAL NOTICE: ROSEBUD-LOTT INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT This Texas Lottery Commission scratch ticket game will NOTICE OF LAND OFFERED FOR SALE to Discuss Marlin ISD’s State close on December 19, 2020. You have until June 17, 2021, Financial Accountability to redeem any tickets for this game: #2218 Super 7s ($10) Rosebud-Lott Independent School District is interested in selling the land de- overall odds are 1 in 3.45. This Texas Lottery Commission scribed below: Rating scratch ticket game will close on December 20, 2020. You have until June 18, 2021, to redeem any tickets for this The Former PEP Center, generally located at HWY 77 and County Rd. 3007, game: #2056 $200 Million Cash Explosion® ($10) overall Travis, TX, more particularly described as: Marlin ISD will hold a public odds are 1 in 3.91. This Texas Lottery Commission scratch meeting ticket game will close on December 24, 2020. You have All of Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 2, Town of Travis, Falls County, Texas. Monday, December 7, 2020 until June 22, 2021, to redeem any tickets for this game: #2230 Find the 9s ($2) overall odds are 1 in 4.64. These Bid packets with more information may be obtained by contacting the following: in the Marlin Middle School Texas Lottery Commission scratch ticket games will close Rosebud-Lott ISD Library on January 20, 2020. You have until July 19, 2021, to redeem T:4” any tickets for these games: #2228 Prize Piggy ($1) overall 6XSHULQWHQGHQW·V2IÀFH 678 Success Lane Marlin, odds are 1 in 4.87, #2161 Bingo Extra ($2) overall odds are PO Box 638 Texas 76661 1 in 4.37, #2162 Break The Bank ($2) overall odds are 1 in Rosebud, TX 76570 ® 4.80, #2223 Break The Bank Super Ticket ($10) overall [email protected] odds are 1 in 3.80, #2197 Monopoly™ 200X ($20) overall The purpose of this meeting is odds are 1 in 3.45.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazos River Authority Management and Performance Review
    LEGISLATIVELEGISLATIVE BBUDGETUDGET BBOARDOARD Brazos River Authority Management and Performance Review LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF FEBRUARY 2015 Brazos River Authority Management and Performance Review LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF FEBRUARY 2015 CONTENTS Management Review of the Brazos River Authority ................................................................. 1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 1 Accomplishments ................................................................................................................... 1 Findings and Recommendations ............................................................................................ 1 Chapter 1: Governance and Planning ....................................................................................... 3 Accomplishments ................................................................................................................... 4 Findings .................................................................................................................................. 5 Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 5 Detailed Accomplishments ..................................................................................................... 5 Detailed Findings ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Brazos River Authority Customer Water Use And
    BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY CUSTOMER WATER USE AND RESERVOIR ACCOUNTING SUMMARY What is an acre-foot? An acre-foot is the volume of water required to cover one acre of land one foot deep with water. One acre-foot = 325,851 gallons. What is the difference between firm, interruptible, lakeside local and Colorado basin water customers? Firm water customers have contracts that are issued for terms longer than five years. These contracts supply municipalities, water supply districts, industries, agricultural producers and mining operations with a reliable long-term water source. All contracts contain a maximum annual use limit. Interruptible water customers have contracts that are issued for a term of one year. These contracts primarily provide water for non-municipal purposes and are subject to being cutoff during droughts. The amount of interruptible water that is made available for sale is determined annually by the BRA Board of Directors. Lakeside local customers are BRA customers with property adjacent to a reservoir. These customers have a permit with the BRA to use water from the reservoir for lawn watering and domestic uses. Colorado basin customers are BRA firm water customers in Williamson County that receive some of their water supply from the Colorado basin. The BRA contracts with the Lower Colorado River Authority for up to 25,000 acre-feet of water annually. This water is transferred from the Colorado River basin into the Brazos River basin for use in Williamson County. What is System Operation Permit water use? This is water used under permit 5851 (System Operation Permit) by BRA firm or interruptible customers.
    [Show full text]
  • Rick's Revolvers
    Rick’s Revolvers: The Governor’s Office Runs a Farm Team for Lobbyists State Library & Archives Commission Then-Rep. Rick Perry huddles in the House with future lobbyists Cliff Johnson & Gib Lewis. Contents Perry’s Revolver Lobbyists 2 Perry-Revolver Clients 6 Notes 11 Texans for Public Justice—January 2012—www.tpj.org Rick’s Revolvers: The Governor’s Office Runs a Farm Team for Lobbyists Rick Perry’s gubernatorial office hired or retained 850 people from December 2000 through August 2011.1 Excluding employees who worked brief stints during the Bush-Perry transition, 43 Perry employees (5 percent) also registered to lobby in Austin during Perry’s gubernatorial reign (another one lobbied without registering). Perry’s 43 gubernatorial revolvers reported 1,605 annual lobby contracts with 552 different clients. These clients paid Perry’s revolvers between $53 million and $100 million since 2001 (Texas lobbyists report their incomes in ranges). The average Perry revolver reported a lobby income ranging from $1.2 million to $2.3 million. Perry’s former roommate and ex-chief of staff Mike Toomey led the pack. He reported 280 annual contracts worth from $9 million to $17 million (Toomey is the subject of a separate TPJ report: “Perry’s Roomie Mike Toomey Mobilizes the Corporate Lobby to ‘Make Us Great Again’”). At the other end of the spectrum, ex-gubernatorial aide Marcy Foster reported that she received no income lobbying for Cantey Hanger and Newby Davis (firms affiliated with former Perry General Counsel Brian Newby). Most Perry revolvers worked in the Governor’s Office before hitting the lobby.
    [Show full text]