pre14a
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
SCHEDULE 14A
Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No. )
Filed by the Registrant þ
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant o
Check the appropriate box:
þ |
|
Preliminary Proxy Statement |
|
o |
|
Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) |
|
o |
|
Definitive Proxy Statement |
|
o |
|
Definitive Additional Materials |
|
o |
|
Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12 |
Fuel Tech, Inc.
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):
þ |
|
No fee required. |
|
o |
|
Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11. |
|
(1) |
|
Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction
computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the
amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how
it was determined): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Total fee paid: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
o |
|
Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. |
o |
|
Check box if any part of the fee is
offset as provided by Exchange Act
Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the
filing for which the offsetting fee
was paid previously. Identify the
previous filing by registration
statement number, or the Form or
Schedule and the date of its filing. |
|
(1) |
|
Amount Previously Paid: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Filing Party: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Date Filed: |
|
|
|
|
|
FUEL
TECH, INC.
27601 Bella Vista Parkway
Warrenville, Illinois 60555
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NOTICE OF
ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
To be Held May 19, 2011
To the Stockholders of Fuel Tech, Inc.:
The annual meeting of stockholders of Fuel Tech, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (Fuel Tech), will be held Thursday,
May 19, 2011, at 10:00 a.m. local time at the offices
of Fuel Tech, Inc., 27601 Bella Vista Parkway, Warrenville,
Illinois 60555 (Annual Meeting), to consider and vote on the
following items, each of which is explained in the attached
proxy statement (Proxy Statement). We have enclosed a proxy card
or a voting instruction form for your use in voting.
1. To elect seven directors;
2. To approve a program permitting the exchange of certain
options for restricted stock units;
3. To ratify the appointment of McGladrey &
Pullen, LLP as Fuel Techs independent registered public
accounting firm;
4. To conduct an advisory vote on executive compensation;
5. To conduct an advisory vote on the frequency of the
executive compensation advisory vote; and
6. To transact any other business that may properly come
before the meeting or at any adjournment thereof.
Only stockholders of record at the close of business on
March 23, 2011 are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting.
A list of stockholders entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting
will be available before the meeting for examination by any
stockholder, for any purpose relevant to the meeting, during
ordinary business hours at 27601 Bella Vista Parkway,
Warrenville, Illinois 60555. That list will also be available
for inspection at the Annual Meeting.
Fuel Techs Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010 is enclosed with this
Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement.
FUEL TECH, INC.
Secretary
[ ], 2011
IMPORTANT
Whether or not you expect to attend the Annual Meeting in
person, we urge you to vote your shares at your earliest
convenience. An addressed envelope for which no postage is
required if mailed in the United States is enclosed if you wish
to vote by mail. Submitting your proxy now will not prevent you
from voting your shares at the Annual Meeting if you desire to
do so, as your proxy is revocable at your option.
For Internet or telephone voting, please refer to the
instructions on the proxy card or voting instruction form.
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy
Materials for the Stockholder Annual Meeting to be Held on
May 19, 2011. Fuel Techs Proxy Statement and
Annual Report to Stockholders are available
at: http://bnymellon.mobular.net/bnymellon/ftek.
This Proxy Statement contains forward-looking
statements as defined in Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which are made
pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and reflect Fuel Techs
current expectations regarding future growth, results of
operations, cash flows, performance and business prospects, and
opportunities, as well as assumptions made by, and information
currently available to, our management. Fuel Tech has tried to
identify forward-looking statements by using words such as
anticipate, believe, plan,
expect, estimate, intend,
will, and similar expressions, but these words are
not the exclusive means of identifying forward-looking
statements. These statements are based on information currently
available to Fuel Tech and are subject to various risks,
uncertainties, and other factors, including, but not limited to,
those discussed in Fuel Techs Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Item 1A under the caption Risk Factors,
which could cause Fuel Techs actual growth, results of
operations, financial condition, cash flows, performance and
business prospects and opportunities to differ materially from
those expressed in, or implied by, these statements. Fuel Tech
undertakes no obligation to update such factors or to publicly
announce the results of any of the forward-looking statements
contained herein to reflect future events, developments, or
changed circumstances or for any other reason. Investors are
cautioned that all forward-looking statements involve risks and
uncertainties, including those detailed in Fuel Techs
filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
FUEL
TECH, INC.
Proxy
Statement
FUEL TECH
ANNUAL MEETING
The
Meeting
The Board of Directors of Fuel Tech, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (Fuel Tech), is soliciting your votes on the
enclosed form of proxy. The proxy is for use in voting your Fuel
Tech shares at the 2011 annual meeting of stockholders (Annual
Meeting). Any one of the persons you appoint on the form of
proxy will be your representative to vote your shares at the
Annual Meeting according to your instructions. The Annual
Meeting will be at the offices of Fuel Tech, 27601 Bella Vista
Parkway, Warrenville, Illinois 60555 on Thursday, May 19,
2011, at 10:00 a.m. local time. The proxy may also be used
at an adjournment of the Annual Meeting.
Shares Eligible
to Vote; Quorum
The record date for the Annual Meeting is March 23, 2011.
You may vote at the Annual Meeting in person or by a proxy, but
only if you were a stockholder of Fuel Tech common stock (Common
Stock) at the close of business on the record date. At the
record date, according to the records of BNY Mellon Shareowner
Services, LLC (BNY Mellon), Fuel Techs transfer agent,
Fuel Tech had [ ] shares of Common Stock
outstanding, which represents the total number of shares of
Common Stock that stockholders may vote at the Annual Meeting.
You may cast one vote for each share you hold. You may also vote
via telephone or the Internet according to the instructions on
the proxy card or the voting instruction form enclosed.
Stockholders who execute proxies retain the right to revoke them
at any time before the shares are voted by proxy at the Annual
Meeting. You may revoke a proxy by delivering a signed statement
to Fuel Techs Corporate Secretary at or prior to the
Annual Meeting or by timely executing and delivering, by mail,
Internet, telephone, or in person at the Annual Meeting, another
proxy dated as of a later date.
The quorum for the Annual Meeting, i.e., the number of
shares of Common Stock that must be present in order to have a
legally constituted meeting of stockholders, is one-third of the
number of shares of Common Stock entitled to vote, or
[ ] shares of Common Stock.
The Form
of Proxy; Revocability; Voting
You may appoint a proxy, or representative, at the Annual
Meeting other than the persons named in Fuel Techs
enclosed form of proxy. If you do wish to appoint some other
person, who need not be a stockholder, you may do so by
completing another form of proxy for use at the Annual Meeting.
Completed forms of proxy should be mailed promptly to BNY Mellon
in the enclosed return envelope.
You may revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted,
including at the Annual Meeting. If you sign and send a proxy to
BNY Mellon, or send a proxy by the Internet or telephonically,
and do not revoke it, the proxy holders will vote the shares of
Common Stock it represents at the Annual Meeting in accordance
with your instructions. Abstentions and broker non-votes are
counted as present in determining whether there is a quorum, but
are not counted in the calculation of the vote. If the proxy is
signed and returned without specifying choices, the shares of
Common Stock will be voted in favor of each item on the agenda
in accordance with the recommendations of the Board.
Proxy
Solicitation; Distribution
Directors and executive officers of Fuel Tech may solicit
stockholders proxies by mail, telephone or facsimile. Fuel
Tech will bear the cost of proxy solicitation, if any.
Fuel Tech first distributed this Proxy Statement and the
accompanying Annual Report to Stockholders on or about
[ ], 2011.
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 1 ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
The
Nominees
We are asking you to vote for the election of seven nominees as
directors of Fuel Tech. Two director seats are vacant. The
nominees were recommended by the Compensation and Nominating
Committee of the Board. The term of office of each director is
until the next annual meeting or until a successor is duly
elected or if before then a director resigns, retires or is
removed by the stockholders. The nominees are Douglas G. Bailey,
Miguel Espinosa, Charles W. Grinnell, Thomas L. Jones, John D.
Morrow, Thomas S. Shaw, Jr., and Delbert L. Williamson. The
Board of Directors, through its Compensation and Nominating
Committee, is engaged in a search to fill the two vacant
director seats.
In the opinion of the Board, Messrs. Espinosa, Jones,
Morrow, Shaw and Williamson satisfy the independence
requirements of NASD Rule 5605(a)(2). Detail concerning
directors compensation is set out below under the captions
Executive Compensation and Directors
Compensation. The following table sets forth certain
additional information with respect to the nominees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Director Since
|
|
Douglas G. Bailey
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
1998
|
|
Miguel Espinosa
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
Charles W. Grinnell
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
1989
|
|
Thomas L. Jones
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
John D. Morrow
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
Thomas S. Shaw, Jr.
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
2001
|
|
Delbert L. Williamson
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Each of the nominees identified above, all of whom are currently
serving on the Board, are the nominees of the full Board for
election as directors at the Annual Meeting, and were
recommended unanimously by the Compensation and Nominating
Committee. Biographical information, including qualifications,
regarding each of the nominees is set forth below.
Availability
The nominees have all consented to stand for election and to
serve, if elected. Should one or more of these nominees become
unavailable or decline to accept election, votes will be cast
for a substitute nominee, if any, designated by the Board on
recommendation of the Compensation and Nominating Committee. If
no substitute nominee is designated prior to the Annual Meeting,
the individuals named as proxies on the enclosed proxy card will
exercise their discretion in voting the shares of Common Stock
that they represent. That discretion may also include reducing
the size of the Board and not electing a substitute.
Plurality
Voting
A motion will be made at the Annual Meeting for the election as
directors of the seven nominees. Under Delaware law and Fuel
Techs By-Laws, a vote for a plurality of the shares of
Common Stock voting is required for the election of directors.
Under plurality voting, directors who receive the most
for votes are elected; there is no
against option, and votes that are
withheld or simply not cast are disregarded in the
count. If a nominee receives a plurality of votes but does not,
however, receive a majority of votes, that fact will be
considered by the Compensation and Nominating Committee in any
future decision on nominations.
The affirmative vote of a plurality of the votes cast is
required for the election of directors. The Board recommends a
vote FOR each of the nominees.
2
DIRECTORS
AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF FUEL TECH
Biographical information is presented below concerning Fuel
Techs directors and the Named Executive
Officers (or NEOs) as described below. Information as to
other executive officers of Fuel Tech is provided in
Item 10 of Fuel Techs
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.
Directors
Douglas G. Bailey has been President and Chief Executive
Officer of Fuel Tech since April, 2010, Chairman of the Board of
Fuel Tech since January, 2010, director of Fuel Tech since April
1998 and was Deputy Chairman from 2002 through December, 2009.
He also previously served as an employee of Fuel Tech from
January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2009.
Mr. Bailey, who is the son of Ralph E. Bailey, has been the
President of American Bailey Corporation (ABC), a closely held
private equity firm, since 1984 and its Chief Executive Officer
(CEO) since 1996.
Mr. D.G. Bailey, as President and Chief Executive Officer
of Fuel Tech, has management responsibility for the strategic,
operational and management performance of the Company. His
responsibility for running Fuel Tech, with both U.S. and
international operations, gives Mr. D.G. Bailey front-line
exposure to many of the issues facing U.S. public
companies, particularly on the strategic, operational,
financial, human resource, corporate governance, and compliance
fronts. Mr. D.G. Baileys ongoing experience informs
his judgment and participation as a member of Fuel Techs
Board. His early career began as an engineer with Foster-Miller,
Inc. and at Corning, Inc., in a variety of manufacturing and
marketing positions. During his subsequent business career,
following the founding of ABC, Mr. D.G. Bailey, in addition
to being ABCs CEO, served as the CEO of a number of its
affiliated companies, including Kokomo Spring Company, Inc.,
DieselCast France, SA, and Atlantis Components, Inc., bringing
to the Fuel Tech Board management ability at senior and
executive management levels in a variety of industrial markets.
Over the span of 30 years, Mr. D.G. Bailey has
provided board service to a number of other companies including,
since 2001, serving as a director and chairman of the
compensation committee for Endocyte, Inc., a public
biotechnology company, and previous service on the audit
committee and as chairman of the compensation committee for
Atlantis Components, Inc., which gives him a broad based
understanding of the role of a board of directors and its
committees, and positions him well to serve as Fuel Techs
Chairman of the Board.
Ralph E. Bailey has been a director and Chairman Emeritus
of the Fuel Tech Board since January 1, 2010 and was
Executive Chairman of Fuel Tech from June, 2006 through
December, 2009, and previously a director, Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer of Fuel Tech from April, 1998 through June,
2006. He has been a director and Chairman of ABC since 1984.
Mr. Bailey is the former Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Conoco Inc., an energy company, and a former Vice
Chairman of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., a chemical
company.
Mr. R.E. Bailey has extensive executive management
experience in running both private and public companies large
and small. Mr. R.E. Bailey has served Fuel Tech in both
executive management and Board positions since 1998. In addition
to the executive and board positions mentioned above, the
insights Mr. R.E. Bailey brings to the Fuel Tech Board in
its deliberations is further augmented by the range of knowledge
he acquired through his past experiences in both executive
management and board positions for other privately or publicly
owned companies during his business career including, as
director and Executive Vice President of Operations
Peabody Coal Co.; Chairman and CEO Consolidation
Coal Company (Consol Energy); and various terms as a director
for Abex Corporation, General Signal Corporation, I.C.
Industries, J.P. Morgan, the Rowan Companies, and the
Williams Company.
Miguel Espinosa has been a director of Fuel Tech since
2002, and has been President and Chief Executive Officer of The
Riverview Group, LLC, a financial consulting company, since
2001. He is a retired Treasurer of Conoco Inc. He has been a
member of the Board of Directors of the Electric Reliability
Council of Texas since 2003, serving as Vice Chair of the
Finance and Audit Committee and as a member of its Nominating
Committee.
Miguel Espinosa brings to the Board senior and executive
management finance operations experience acquired over a
35 year career with Conoco Inc., a Fortune 25 integrated
petroleum company with worldwide operations. His career there
covered a span of different assignments in Conocos
U.S. and international operations with ever increasing
responsibilities including as Treasurer for European Operations,
Assistant Treasurer, and, ultimately, as
3
Treasurer for that company. These senior and executive
management positions provided Mr. Espinosa experience in a
variety of U.S. and international business operation
contexts including dealing with accounting principles and
financial reporting rules and regulations, evaluating financial
results, and raising in excess of $10 billion in capital
while also maintaining operational responsibility for a large
number of financial professionals worldwide. The depth and
breadth of Mr. Espinosas experiential exposure to
complex financial and accounting matters makes him a skilled
advisor for Fuel Techs Board. In addition,
Mr. Espinosa brings corporate governance skills beyond the
finance area through his service for the Board of Directors of
the Electric Reliability Council of Texas as Vice Chair of its
Finance and Audit Committee and as a member of its Nominating
Committee.
Charles W. Grinnell has been a director of Fuel Tech
since September, 1989. Prior to his retirement on
January 31, 2009, Mr. Grinnell served as Vice
President, Legal Affairs of Fuel Tech from December, 2008, and
as Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of
Fuel Tech since 1986. Mr. Grinnell, who practices tax and
business law in Stamford, Connecticut, was also a director and
Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of Clean
Diesel Technologies, Inc., a specialty chemical and energy
technology company from 1994 until October, 2010.
Mr. Grinnell brings to the Board 44 years of corporate
experience for both private and public, and small to large
energy and energy technology companies in the tax and legal
aspects of finance, accounting rules and conventions, commercial
transactions, merger and acquisition activities, corporate
governance, executive compensation, human resource matters,
intellectual property licensing, environmental regulation, and
litigation, all of which experience informs his judgment and
participation as a Fuel Tech director. In addition,
Mr. Grinnell has been associated with Fuel Tech since 1986.
This association provides an institutional memory which is
advantageous to the directors as a group.
Thomas L. Jones has been a director of Fuel Tech since
2005, and has been a Managing Director of Alvarez &
Marsal Holdings LLC, a global performance improvement,
turnaround management and business consulting firm, since
October, 2008; previously he had been Managing Director of
Trinsum Group since September, 2006; a Senior Advisor at Credit
Suisse First Boston since 2003 and Managing Director in the
Telecommunications Group of that company since 2000. Prior to
those positions, Mr. Jones had been a Managing Director at
Salomon Smith Barney and J.P. Morgan & Co., Inc.
Mr. Jones brings to the Fuel Tech Board over 30 years
of experience in investment banking and mergers and
acquisitions. He began his career in 1977 in corporate finance
and throughout his career in his various positions and
assignments had responsibilities related to a variety of
industries including high tech, telecommunications, media and
aerospace defense. Mr. Jones positions have provided
him with knowledge in dealing with complex financial and
operational issues, accounting, financial reporting rules and
regulations, and evaluating financial results and
performance/risk business models pertaining to a number of
business firms both in the U.S. and abroad. This experience
makes Mr. Jones a valued advisor to Fuel Techs Board
as it considers various strategies and operational issues
related to growing the Company.
John D. Morrow has been a director of Fuel Tech since
June, 2004, and formerly a director of a predecessor Fuel Tech
entity that was merged into Fuel Tech in 2006, from 1985 to
1987. Mr. Morrow retired in 1983 as Chief Financial Officer
and a director of Conoco Inc.
During his 35 year tenure with Conoco, culminating in his
service there as Conocos Group Senior Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and as a member of its board of
directors, Mr. Morrow demonstrated leadership capability
and knowledge of complex financial and operational issues facing
a large organization and, as such, brings to Fuel Techs
Board an understanding of global business operations and
financial strategy for a large business concern in challenging
environments. In addition, his former service as a member of the
board of directors for other chemical or energy related
companies such as Vista Chemical Company, Union Texas Petroleum
and Eastern American Energy provides Mr. Morrow insight
pertaining to corporate governance matters.
Thomas S. Shaw, Jr. has been a director of Fuel Tech
since 2001. In September, 2010 Mr. Shaw was elected to
serve as Vice Chairman and as a member of the compensation
committee of the Board of Trustees of Wilmington University; in
addition to continuing as a Trustee, Treasurer and Chairman of
the Finance and Audit Committee of Wilmington University. In
June, 2010 he was appointed to the Delaware Board of Pension
Trustees for a term of four
4
years. Mr. Shaw retired in September, 2007 from his
position as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
of Pepco Holdings, Inc.
With 36 years of managerial experience in the utility
industry with Pepco Holdings, Inc. and two of its predecessor
companies Delmarva Power and Conectiv, Mr. Shaw
brings to the Fuel Tech Board demonstrated managerial experience
at senior and executive levels that includes over 30 years
of responsibility for the management, operation, maintenance,
engineering and construction of fossil fueled electricity
generating plants and their related equipment. He held a variety
of positions with the Pepco companies including Power Plant
Engineer, Plant Superintendent/Manager, General Manager of
Production, Vice President of Production, and President and
Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Shaws experiential base
provides Fuel Techs Board with a broad based viewpoint
from a utility customer perspective. In addition, during the
last 17 years of his career, Mr. Shaw was also
responsible for the management and oversight of numerous
unregulated, non-utility businesses, including serving as the
initial President of Conectiv Energy, the power generation and
trading subsidiary of Pepco Holdings, Inc. This business
experience has provided Mr. Shaw insights into the
operational requirements of a large company and more
specifically, a utility, in an array of areas including finance,
commercial transactions, corporate governance, executive
compensation, human resource matters, merger and acquisition
activities, and environmental regulations, all of which makes
him a skilled advisor to the Fuel Tech Board.
Delbert L. Williamson has been a director of Fuel Tech
since 2008. Mr. Williamson retired in 2004 as President,
Global Commercial Operations, GE Energy, Inc. (GE Energy). Prior
thereto he held a number of executive positions at General
Electric Company (GE), his employer for 45 years.
During his career with GE, Mr. Williamson held numerous
marketing, sales, strategy development and senior general
management and executive positions in that companys Energy
Infrastructure, Specialty Materials, and International
operations. As President, Commercial Operations of GE Energy,
Mr. Williamson was responsible for an organization of
1900 employees worldwide with an annual revenue budget of
$25 billion whose business focused on the construction and
services associated with power generation equipment projects
ranging from nuclear, fossil, solar to wind. As an officer of
GE, Mr. Williamson dealt directly with executives
throughout the global energy industry and the international
banking community, and the governments of many countries
including the U.S. government, Peoples Republic of
China, India, Russia and Saudi Arabia related to GE projects.
With his knowledge of complex business issues facing global
power generation companies and his understanding of what makes
energy-related businesses work effectively and efficiently in
domestic and international markets, Mr. Williamson provides
valuable judgment and participation to Fuel Techs Board.
Named
Executive Officers
Douglas G. Bailey See director entry above.
Stephen P. Brady, 54, has been Senior Vice President,
FUEL CHEM Sales since January, 2009; previously, he had been
Senior Vice President, Sales and Marketing since April 2006;
Senior Vice President, Fuel Chem since January 2002; and Vice
President, Fuel Chem since February 1998.
David S. Collins, 46, has been Senior Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Fuel Tech since
July 13, 2010. From 2006 to 2010 Mr. Collins was Audit
Partner with Grant Thornton LLP, and from 2005 to 2006 was Audit
Partner with Larson, Allen, Weishair & Co., LLP.
William E. Cummings, Jr., 54, has been Senior Vice
President, APC Sales since January, 2009; previously he had been
Vice President, Sales since April 2006; Vice President, Air
Pollution Control Sales since May 2000; Director, Utility Sales
since April 1998; and Director, Eastern Region since 1994.
John P. Graham, 45, prior to his resignation from Fuel
Tech effective March 5, 2010, was Senior Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Fuel Tech since June
2008 after joining Fuel Tech as Senior Vice President in April
2008; previously, he had been employed as Chief Financial
Officer of Hub International Limited, a North American insurance
brokerage, and as Senior Vice President of Finance, Treasurer
and Assistant Secretary of Career Education Corporation from
2002 through 2006.
5
John F. Norris Jr., 61, prior to his retirement from Fuel
Tech effective May 20, 2010, was an employee, serving as
Executive Advisor, and also a director of Fuel Tech from
April 1, 2010 through May 20, 2010, and, prior to his
resignation from such offices on April 1, 2010, was the
President and Chief Executive Officer of Fuel Tech since June,
2006. Previously, Mr. Norris had been President and Chief
Executive Officer of Fuel Tech, Inc., an operating subsidiary of
Fuel Tech, since February, 2006; a private consultant to clients
in energy related industries, including Fuel Tech, since 2003;
Senior Vice President, Operations and Technical Services of
American Electric Power from 1999 until 2003; President and
Chief Operating Officer of the American Bureau of Shipping Group
during 1999; and he was associated with Duke Energy Corporation
from 1982 until 1999 in positions from Assistant Engineer to
Senior Vice President, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
Duke Energy Global Asset Development.
Robert E. Puissant, 58, has been Executive Vice
President, Marketing and Sales since August, 2009; previously he
was President of We Enable LLC from July 2008; Executive Vice
President, Strategy & Business Development for School
Specialty Inc. since 2003 to 2008; and Senior Vice President,
Customer Analysis and Planning and Senior Vice President,
Marketing and Strategic Planning at Wisconsin Energy Corporation
since 1998.
Except as noted above, there are no family relationships between
any of the directors or executive officers.
PRINCIPAL
STOCKHOLDERS AND STOCK OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT
The following table sets forth information regarding the
beneficial ownership of Common Stock known to Fuel Tech as of
March 10, 2011 by (i) each person known to own
beneficially more than five percent of the outstanding Common
Stock; (ii) each director or nominee of Fuel Tech;
(iii) each of Fuel Techs Named Executive Officers;
and (iv) all directors and all officers as a group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name and Address(1)
|
|
No. of Shares
|
|
|
Percentage(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beneficial Owners
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Invesco Ltd. and related group(3)
|
|
|
1,324,624
|
|
|
|
5.47
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Directors and Named Executive Officers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bailey(4)(5)
|
|
|
1,467,434
|
|
|
|
6.03
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Ralph E. Bailey(4)(6)
|
|
|
4,632,925
|
|
|
|
19.04
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
David S. Collins
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen P. Brady(4)
|
|
|
157,480
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
William E. Cummings(4)
|
|
|
56,500
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miguel Espinosa(4)
|
|
|
97,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles W. Grinnell(4)
|
|
|
89,004
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas L. Jones(4)
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
John D. Morrow(4)
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert E. Puissant
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas S. Shaw, Jr.(4)
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delbert L. Williamson(4)
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Directors and Officers as a Group (24 persons)(4)
|
|
|
7,346,393
|
|
|
|
28.71
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than one percent (1.0%) |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The address of Invesco Ltd. and related group is 1555 Peachtree
Street NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30309; and of each of the above
directors and Named Executive Officers is
c/o Fuel
Tech, Inc., 27601 Bella Vista Parkway, Warrenville, Illinois
60555. |
|
(2) |
|
The percentages in each case are of the outstanding common at
March [ ], 2011 and all options exercisable
within 60 days thereafter. |
|
(3) |
|
According to Invesco Ltd.s Schedule 13G dated
February 10, 2011 (the Schedule 13G), the
members of the related group are Invesco Ltd. and four of its
subsidiaries that are investment advisers: Invesco Advisors,
Inc., |
6
|
|
|
|
|
Invesco PowerShares Capital Management, Invesco National
Trust Company and Stein Roe Investment Counsel, Inc.
According to the Schedule 13G, Invesco Advisors, Inc. has
sole voting power over 1,284,241 shares, and Invesco
PowerShares Capital Management has sole voting power over
31,183 shares. According to the Schedule 13G, sole
dispositive power is held as follows: Invesco Advisers, Inc.,
1,284,241 shares; Invesco Powershares Capital Management,
31,183 shares; Invesco National Trust Company,
8,200 shares; and Stein Roe Investment Counsel, Inc.
1,000 shares. |
|
(4) |
|
Includes shares subject to options exercisable presently and
within 60 days: for Mr. D. G. Bailey,
115,000 shares; Mr. R. E. Bailey, 120,000 shares;
Mr. Brady, 128,750 shares; Mr. Cummings,
52,500 shares; Mr. Espinosa, 90,000 shares;
Mr. Grinnell, 82,500 shares; Mr. Jones,
60,000 shares; Mr. Morrow, 70,000 shares;
Mr. Shaw, 100,000 shares; Mr. Williamson,
30,000 shares; and, for all directors and officers as a
group, 1,372,500 shares. Also, the amounts do not include
for Mr. R. E. Bailey 49,931 Units and for Mr. Jones
17,871 Units accrued at December 31, 2010 under the
Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors. |
|
(5) |
|
Includes 1,337,434 shares owned directly by Mr. D.G.
Bailey. |
|
(6) |
|
Includes 2,286,945 shares owned by a family limited
liability company of which Mr. R. E. Bailey and his spouse
are each managers and own 50% of the interests and over which
Mr. R. E. Bailey holds 100% investment control;
1,000,000 shares owned by a Grantor Retained Annuity Trust
in which Mr. R.E. Bailey retains a reversionary pecuniary
interest; 1,000,000 shares owned by a Grantor Retained
Annuity Trust in which his spouse retains a reversionary
pecuniary interest; 170,980 shares owned jointly by
Mr. R. E. Bailey and his spouse; and 55,000 shares
owned directly by his spouse. |
7
DIRECTOR
COMPENSATION
Fuel Tech uses a combination of cash and stock-based incentive
compensation to attract and retain qualified candidates to serve
on its Board. In setting director compensation, Fuel Tech
considers the role of the directors, the amount of time that
directors expend in fulfilling their duties as well as the
expertise required of Board members.
Cash
Compensation for Directors
Fuel Tech non-employee directors receive annual cash retainers
and meeting fees. The annual retainers, payable in arrears, in
2010 were $25,000 for Board service and $5,000 for service as a
committee chairman. Effective February 2011, an annual cash
retainer, payable in arrears, was established for service as a
Lead Director. Meeting fees are $1,200 for a Board meeting, a
committee meeting not connected with a Board meeting or
otherwise for a day of service as a director and requested by
the Chairman, and $600 for a committee meeting that occurs in
conjunction with a Board meeting. Under the Deferred
Compensation Plan for Directors, non-employee directors are
entitled to defer fees in either cash with interest or share
equivalent Units until fixed dates, including the
date of retirement from the Board, when the deferred amounts
will be distributed either in Fuel Tech stock or in cash in a
lump sum or over a period of five years, as the director elects.
Equity
Compensation for Directors
Under the Fuel Tech, Inc. Incentive Plan, each non-employee
director is awarded as of the first business day following the
annual meeting of stockholders, a non-qualified stock option for
10,000 shares of Fuel Tech common stock for a term of
10 years vesting immediately. As noted in the table below,
on May 21, 2010, 10,000 share options were awarded to
each non-employee director at the exercise price of $5.495 per
share, the fair market value of Fuel Tech common stock on that
date.
DIRECTOR
COMPENSATION IN FISCAL YEAR 2010
The following table shows for the Fuel Tech non-employee
directors all compensation paid in 2010 on account of fees and
stock option awards. Directors employed by Fuel Tech or its
subsidiaries receive no compensation for their service as
directors, and accordingly, during any time either of them was
employed by Fuel Tech, neither Mr. D.G. Bailey nor
Mr. Norris received any fees or stock options for their
participation on the Board. Disclosure regarding Mr. D.G.
Baileys and Mr. Norris compensation for fiscal
2010 is contained under the caption Summary Compensation
Table above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
(b)
|
|
(d)
|
|
(f)
|
|
(h)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Pension
|
|
|
|
|
Fees Earned
|
|
Option
|
|
Value and Nonqualified
|
|
|
|
|
or Paid in
|
|
Awards
|
|
Deferred Compensation
|
|
Total
|
Name
|
|
Cash ($)
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
Earnings(2)
|
|
($)
|
|
Ralph E. Bailey
|
|
|
33,400
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
85,175
|
|
|
|
151,287
|
|
Miguel Espinosa
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92,712
|
|
Charles W. Grinnell
|
|
|
37,000
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,712
|
|
Thomas L. Jones
|
|
|
61,600
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
36,381
|
|
|
|
130,693
|
|
John D. Morrow
|
|
|
51,400
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,112
|
|
Thomas S. Shaw, Jr.
|
|
|
73,800
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
106,512
|
|
Delbert L. Williamson
|
|
|
46,200
|
|
|
|
32,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78,912
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The amount of $3.271 is the fair value of these options on the
grant date calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic
No. 718. The amounts shown do not represent cash paid to
the directors. |
|
(2) |
|
These amounts reflect an increase/decrease in the value of
deferred units under the Deferred Compensation Plan for
Directors due to the increase/decrease in value of Fuel Tech
Common Stock during the year 2010. |
8
NON-EMPLOYEE
DIRECTORS OUTSTANDING STOCK OPTIONS AT 2010 FISCAL YEAR
END
The following table shows the outstanding stock options as of
December 31, 2010 for non-employee directors as of such
date, all of which are fully vested except as noted below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying Unexercised
|
|
|
Option Exercise
|
|
Name
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
Options # (Exercisable)
|
|
|
Price ($)
|
|
|
Ralph E. Bailey
|
|
|
06/13/2001
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
3.595
|
|
|
|
|
06/06/2002
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.265
|
|
|
|
|
05/29/2003
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.195
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2004
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.565
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2005
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.995
|
|
|
|
|
06/02/2006
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.950
|
|
|
|
|
05/24/2007
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
26.255
|
|
|
|
|
05/23/2008
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
$
|
22.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
Miguel Espinosa
|
|
|
06/06/2002
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.265
|
|
|
|
|
05/29/2003
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.195
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2004
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.565
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2005
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.995
|
|
|
|
|
06/02/2006
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.950
|
|
|
|
|
05/24/2007
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
26.255
|
|
|
|
|
05/23/2008
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
22.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
Charles W. Grinnell
|
|
|
02/02/2002
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.980
|
|
|
|
|
12/09/2003
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
$
|
3.800
|
|
|
|
|
12/07/2004
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.680
|
|
|
|
|
12/06/2005
|
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
$
|
8.460
|
|
|
|
|
12/07/2006
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
25.490
|
|
|
|
|
02/25/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
8.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
Thomas L. Jones
|
|
|
06/03/2005
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.995
|
|
|
|
|
06/02/2006
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.950
|
|
|
|
|
05/24/2007
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
26.255
|
|
|
|
|
05/23/2008
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
22.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
John D. Morrow
|
|
|
06/03/2004
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.565
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2005
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.995
|
|
|
|
|
06/02/2006
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.950
|
|
|
|
|
05/24/2007
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
26.255
|
|
|
|
|
05/23/2008
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
22.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
Thomas S. Shaw, Jr.
|
|
|
06/13/2001
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
3.595
|
|
|
|
|
06/06/2002
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
6.265
|
|
|
|
|
05/29/2003
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.195
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2004
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
4.565
|
|
|
|
|
06/03/2005
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.995
|
|
|
|
|
06/02/2006
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.950
|
|
|
|
|
05/24/2007
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
26.255
|
|
|
|
|
05/23/2008
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
22.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
Delbert L. Williamson
|
|
|
05/23/2008
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
22.920
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2009
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
9.965
|
|
|
|
|
05/21/2010
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
5.495
|
|
9
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Relationships and transactions in which Fuel Tech and its
directors and executive officers or their immediate family
members are participants or have other conflicts of interest are
reviewed and approved by the Audit Committee. Although our Audit
Committee has not adopted a written policy for the review and
approval of related party transactions, in determining whether
to approve or ratify any such transaction, the Audit Committee
considers, in addition to such other factors it may deem
appropriate in the circumstances, whether (i) the
transaction is fair and reasonable to the Company,
(ii) under all of the circumstances the transaction is in,
or not inconsistent with, the Companys best interests, and
(iii) the transaction will be on terms no less favorable to
the Company than could have been obtained in an arms
length transaction with an unrelated third party. The Audit
Committee, in its discretion, may request information from any
party to facilitate its consideration of a matter. However, the
Audit Committee does not allow a director to participate in any
review, approval or ratification of any transaction if he or
she, or his or her immediate family member, has a direct or
indirect material interest in the transaction.
Relationships
with American Bailey Corporation
Douglas G. Bailey is President and Chief Executive Officer of
ABC; he is a director and stockholder of ABC. ABC is a
sub-lessee
under Fuel Techs November, 2009 lease of its Stamford,
Connecticut offices, and was previously the
sub-lessee
under Fuel Techs September, 2004 lease for a separate
office location. The current lease expires in 2020. In 2010,
2009 and 2008, American Bailey paid or reimbursed Fuel Tech
$52,000, $112,000 and $114,000 for rent and certain lease
related and administrative expenses.
Committees
of the Board
Audit
Committee
Until May 20, 2010 the Board had a five member Audit
Committee whose members were Messrs. Espinosa (Chairman),
Jones, Morrow, Shaw and Williamson. Each such director met the
criteria for independence set forth in NASD Rule 5605(a)(2)
and also
Rule 10A-3(b)(1)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Effective
May 20, 2010, the Board changed the Audit Committee to a
three member committee whose members are Messrs. Espinosa
(Chairman), Jones and Morrow, each of whom meet the criteria for
independence set forth in NASD Rule 5605(a)(2) and also
Rule 10A-3(b)(1)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Board has also
determined that Mr. Espinosa, in light of his significant
experience in positions requiring financial oversight
responsibility, is an audit committee member who possesses
financial sophistication as described in NASD
Rule 5605(c)(2)(A). The Board has determined that
Mr. Espinosa is an audit committee financial
expert as defined by Securities and Exchange Commission
rules.
The Audit Committee is responsible for review of audits,
financial reporting and compliance, and accounting and internal
controls policy. For audit services, the Audit Committee is
responsible for the engagement and compensation of independent
auditors, oversight of their activities and evaluation of their
independence. The Audit Committee has instituted procedures for
receiving reports of improper recordkeeping, accounting or
disclosure. The Board has also constituted the Audit Committee
as a Qualified Legal Compliance Committee in accordance with
Securities and Exchange Commission regulations. You may view the
Audit Committee Charter on the Fuel Tech web site at
www.ftek.com.
Compensation
and Nominating Committee
Until May 20, 2010, the Board had a five member
Compensation and Nominating Committee of which the members were
Messrs. Shaw (Chairman), Messrs. Espinosa,
Messrs. Jones, Messrs. Morrow and
Messrs. Williamson, each of whom were independent directors
of that committee as defined by NASD Rule 5605(a)(2).
Effective May 20, 2010, the Board changed the Compensation
and Nominating Committee to a three member committee whose
members are Messrs. Shaw (Chairman), Messrs. Jones and
Messrs. Williamson, each of whom are independent directors
of that committee as defined by NASD Rule 5605(a)(2).
The Compensation and Nominating Committee reviews and approves
executive compensation, stock options, restricted stock units
and similar awards, and adoption or revision of benefit, welfare
and executive compensation
10
plans and also determines the identity of director nominees for
election to fill a vacancy on the Board of Fuel Tech and
recommends the appointment of officers of Fuel Tech. Nominees
for election as directors are approved by the Board on
recommendation of the Committee. You may view the Compensation
and Nominating Committee Charter on the Fuel Tech web site at
www.ftek.com.
In evaluating nominees, the Committee particularly seeks
candidates of high ethical character with significant business
experience at the senior management or Board level who have the
time and energy to attend to Board responsibilities. The
Committee does not have a diversity policy. When evaluating
nominees, the Committee takes into account the extent to which a
candidates viewpoints, professional experience, education,
skill or other individual qualities or attributes could
contribute to Board heterogeneity in Board discussions and
decisions within the framework of what the Committee may
consider important to Fuel Techs business at the time.
Candidates should also satisfy such other particular
requirements that the Committee may consider important to Fuel
Techs business at the time. When a vacancy occurs on the
Board and the number of directors is not reduced to eliminate
the vacancy, the Committee, in consultation with the Chairman,
will consider nominees from all sources, including stockholders,
nominees recommended by other parties, and candidates known to
the directors or to Fuel Tech management. The Committee may, if
appropriate, make use of a search firm and pay a fee for
services in identifying candidates. The best candidate from all
evaluated, in the opinion of the Committee, will be recommended
to the Board to be considered for nomination. Currently, the
Board of Directors, through the Committee, is engaged in a
search to fill the Companys two vacant director seats.
Stockholders who wish to recommend candidates for consideration
as nominees should furnish in writing detailed biographical
information concerning the candidate to the Committee addressed
in care of the Corporate Secretary, Fuel Tech, Inc., before the
date and at the address set out below under the caption
Stockholder Proposals.
Corporate
Governance
Meetings
During 2010, there were six meetings of the Board of Fuel Tech,
ten meetings of the Audit Committee and twelve meetings of the
Compensation and Nominating Committee. Each director of Fuel
Tech attended at least 75% of Board and committee meetings of
which he was a member during the period of his directorship.
Each of the directors attended the annual meeting of
stockholders in 2010. Fuel Tech does not have a policy on
director attendance at stockholders meetings, but each of
the directors is expected to attend the 2011 Annual Meeting.
Executive
Sessions
In 2010 the independent Fuel Tech directors held two executive
sessions in connection with scheduled Board meetings. The
independent directors who make up the membership of the Audit
Committee and the Compensation and Nominating Committee held
four executive sessions in connection with Audit Committee
meetings, and nine executive sessions in connection with
Compensation and Nominating Committee meetings. The policy of
the Board on executive sessions is that the Board will hold not
less than two executive sessions of the independent directors
annually in connection with scheduled meetings. The committees
of the Board will hold executive sessions when appropriate.
Members of management and non-independent directors do not
attend executive sessions, except when invited to provide
information.
Code
of Business Ethics and Conduct
On the recommendation of the Audit Committee, the Board adopted
a Code of Business Ethics and Conduct that is available for
viewing on the Fuel Tech web site at www.ftek.com.
Changes to or waivers of the requirements of the Code will be
posted to the web site.
11
Board
Leadership Structure
The business judgments the Board makes regarding what leadership
structure it views to be appropriate for Fuel Tech are informed
by the facts and circumstances within which it makes those
decisions from time to time and, consequently, are subject to
change.
From April 1998 to June 2006, the positions of Chairman of the
Board (Chairman) and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a
predecessor Fuel Tech entity that was merged into Fuel Tech in
2006 were held by the same person, Ralph E. Bailey. In 2006, the
Board, in light of its continuing oversight responsibilities and
relative unfamiliarity with the then newly hired CEO, John F.
Norris Jr., concluded that it was appropriate to have a separate
person serve as the leader of the corporate body in charge of
overseeing the CEOs management of the Company. From June
2006 through March 2010, the positions of Chairman and CEO were
held by separate people. In April 2010, the Board concluded
that, given the Companys circumstance at that time, and,
in light of Mr. D.G. Baileys over twelve years of
experience with Fuel Tech as a director and employee and the
enhanced efficiencies that could be achievable by the Company by
a single person filling both roles, it was appropriate to have
Mr. D.G. Bailey serve as both Chairman of the Board, and,
on an interim basis, as President and CEO. In December 2010,
after completing a lengthy CEO executive search wherein the
Compensation and Nominating Committee and the Board had
considered both internal and external candidates, that committee
recommended to the Board and the Board then determined that it
was in the Companys interest to have Mr. D.G. Bailey
serve as both Chairman of the Board and as President and CEO on
a continuing basis.
Given the Boards December 2010 decision to have one
person, Mr. Douglas G. Bailey, serve as both Chairman of
the Board and as President and CEO on a continuing basis, in
February 2011, the Board determined it useful and appropriate to
appoint Thomas J. Shaw, Jr. to be Lead Director.
Mr. Shaw is an incumbent non-employee Director (who also
meets the legal requirements of being an independent director
under applicable securities laws, rules or guidelines and
applicable stock exchange requirements) and he is also the
current Chairman of the Compensation and Nominating Committee of
the Board. The Board also approved a charter for the Lead
Director role. Among other things, that charter provides that as
the Lead Director, Mr. Shaw shall: facilitate the
activities of the other non-employee/independent directors;
advise the Chairman of the Board as to an appropriate schedule
of Board meetings seeking to ensure that the
non-employee/independent directors can perform their duties
responsibly while not interfering with the flow of Company
operations; advise the Chairman of the Board and the Corporate
Secretary with input as to the preparation of the agendas for
Board and Board committee meetings, the information sent to the
Board pertaining to those meetings and approval of Board meeting
agendas; make recommendations to the Chairman of the Board
regarding the retention of consultants who report directly to
the Board; interview and make recommendations to the
Compensation and Nominating Committee and the Board regarding
Board director candidates; co-ordinate, develop the agenda for,
and moderate executive sessions of the Boards independent
directors, as well as plenary sessions of the Board where the
Chairman of the Board is not present; act as principal liaison
between the independent directors and the Chairman of the Board;
and coordinate any performance evaluation of the Chairman of the
Board deemed appropriate by the Board. The charter also provides
that each year, no later than the day following the annual
stockholder meeting, the Board will review the Lead Director
charter for recommended changes and the propriety of continuing
the Lead Director role.
Risk
Oversight
The Boards risk oversight approach is intended to support
managements achievement of organizational objectives,
including strategic objectives, to improve long-term
organizational performance and enhance stockholder value. A
fundamental part of risk oversight is not only understanding the
risks a company faces and what steps management is taking to
manage those risks, but also understanding what level of risk is
appropriate for the Company. The involvement of all directors in
setting the Companys business strategy is a key part of
its assessment of managements approach to risk taking to
achieve its organizational objectives, and also a determination
of what makes up an appropriate level of risk for the Company.
The Board regularly reviews information regarding the
Companys credit, liquidity, operations, and strategic
initiatives as well as the risks associated with each.
While the Board has the ultimate risk oversight responsibility,
various committees of the Board also have responsibility for
risk oversight. The Audit Committee oversees financial risk (see
Report of Audit Committee
12
below.) The Audit Committee also reviews and approves all
related party transactions and reviews potential conflict of
interest matters. In addition, the Audit Committee acts as the
Companys Qualified Legal Compliance Committee to receive
reports of material violations of the securities laws, breaches
of fiduciary duty or similar material violations from legal
counsel representing the Company and practicing before the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Companys
Compensation and Nominating Committee is responsible for
overseeing the management of risks relating to the
Companys compensation plans and arrangements. It strives
to consider and approve compensation programs that encourage a
level of risk-taking behavior under those programs that are
consistent with the Companys business strategy. While each
committee is responsible for evaluating certain risks and
overseeing the management of such risks, the entire Board of
Directors is regularly informed through committee reports about
such risks.
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
Report of
Compensation and Nominating Committee
The Compensation and Nominating Committee (the
Committee) has reviewed and discussed with
management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis appearing
immediately below in this Proxy Statement. Based on this review
and discussion, the Committee has recommended to the Board that
the Compensation Discussion and Analysis set forth below be
included in this Proxy Statement. The Committee also reviewed
its Charter and determined that no changes are required to the
Charter.
By the Compensation and Nominating Committee
T.S. Shaw, Chairman
T.L. Jones and D.L.
Williamson
Compensation
and Nominating Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation
During 2010, all members of the Compensation and Nominating
Committee were independent directors, and no member was an
employee or former employee of Fuel Tech. During 2010, none of
Fuel Techs executive officers served on the compensation
committee (or its equivalent) or board of directors of another
entity whose executive officer served on the Committee.
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
The Compensation and Nominating Committee (the
Committee) is responsible for approving in advance
of implementation all incentive plans, sales commission plans
and salary actions and bonuses for Vice President level and
above officers of Fuel Tech or new or incumbent employees that
have base salaries in excess of $175,000 per year including the
Named Executive Officers (NEOs) listed in the Summary
Compensation Table below. The Committee periodically reviews
Fuel Tech compensation practices, including the methodologies
for setting total compensation for those employees, including
NEOs. As discussed below, from time to time the Committee may
also supplement its exercise of business judgment in
compensation matters with market information pertaining to Fuel
Techs compensation levels against comparable companies in
its industry and across multiple industries including the use of
peer group data (Also see Use of Peer Group section
below). However, the Committee exercises its independent
judgment when making decisions on compensation matters,
including when rewarding individual performance. The
responsibilities of the Committee are described more fully in
its Charter at www.ftek.com.
Compensation
Philosophy and Objectives
Fuel Techs compensation philosophy is to promote
long-term, sustainable stockholder value by incentivizing
individual performance, as well as promoting overall financial
performance on an annual and long-term basis.
13
With that compensation philosophy in mind, Fuel Techs
compensation programs are designed to achieve the following
objectives:
|
|
|
|
|
to ensure Fuel Tech remains a market leader in the development
of innovative solutions:
|
|
|
|
to provide stockholders with a superior rate of return;
|
|
|
|
to attract, motivate, and retain top talent to advance the
achievement of business goals, strategies and
objectives; and
|
|
|
|
to support an integrated team-oriented philosophy.
|
Compensation
Elements
Fuel Techs executive compensation program has as a primary
purpose to attract, retain and motivate the highly talented
individuals whose enterprise will enable Fuel Tech to succeed.
The key components of that program include three elements: base
salary, short-term incentives and long-term incentives, as more
fully described below.
Base
Salary
Base salaries are approved by the Compensation and Nominating
Committee on recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer,
except that the base salary of the Chief Executive Officer is
fixed by the Committee itself. In approving or fixing base
salaries, the Committee acts in its business judgment on what it
understands to be fair, reasonable and equitable compensation in
view of Fuel Techs requirements for recruiting and
retention in a highly competitive market. To assist in that
determination, the Committee may refer to compensation
consultant reports as to general market information and also:
|
|
|
|
|
the executives compensation relative to other officers;
|
|
|
|
recent and expected performance of the executive;
|
|
|
|
Fuel Techs recent and expected overall
performance; and
|
|
|
|
Fuel Techs overall budget for base salary increases.
|
Short
Term Incentives
Executive
Officer Incentive Plan
In 2010, the NEOs who served as Fuel Techs President and
Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer,
and Executive Vice President of Marketing and Sales had the
opportunity to earn an annual cash bonus based upon Fuel
Techs achievement of predetermined performance thresholds
under the 2010 Executive Officer Incentive Plan (2010 EOIP). The
2010 EOIP was adopted by the Compensation and Nominating
Committee in December of 2009. Participation in the 2010 EOIP
was limited to Fuel Techs President and Chief Executive
Officer, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, and Executive
Vice President of Marketing and Sales. The 2010 EOIP was the
only 2010 annual cash incentive plan for participating officers.
The 2010 EOIP was intended to focus the efforts of the
participating officers on the overall financial performance of
Fuel Tech across all business lines, and thus, align the
interests of the participating officers with the overall
financial performance of Fuel Tech. Fuel Techs President
and Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer and Chief Financial
Officer joined Fuel Tech in their respective positions during
2010. As such, each of their participation in the 2010 EOIP was
prorated from their respective date of employment through the
end of 2010.
In 2010, the EOIP was structured and payouts were made as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
2010 EOIP payouts were based on Fuel Techs performance for
three critical financial metrics modified EBIT
(EBIT), Revenues and APC Backlog, as those terms are described
below. An Incentive Pool was funded based upon Fuel
Techs financial performance pertaining to those metrics
during the fiscal year. In March 2011, each participating
officer was awarded his designated portion of the Incentive
Pool. The respective payout percentages for participants were
established by the Committee considering the same compensation
factors set forth above that the Committee used when evaluating
base salary levels.
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
Under the 2010 EOIP, a percentage of EBIT was set aside in the
Incentive Pool to provide for bonus payments based on
performance in the following three categories: (i) modified
EBIT, (ii) Revenue and (iii) APC Backlog. Under the
2010 EOIP, EBIT referred to earnings before interest
expense, taxes, profit sharing contributions, sales commissions
and incentive pay, Revenue referred to net sales,
and APC Backlog referred to customer orders for air
pollution control equipment construction projects that had not
been recognized under the percentage of completion method of
accounting for revenue recognition in Fuel Techs
consolidated statement of income.
|
|
|
|
A condition precedent to any payment under the 2010 EOIP was
Fuel Techs achievement of the established minimum
threshold of EBIT for 2010. Accordingly, if Fuel Techs
financial performance for 2010 had fallen below the established
minimum threshold of EBIT, there would have been no payout under
the 2010 EOIP of any kind, regardless of the annual Revenue or
year-end APC Backlog amounts achieved. Under the 2010 EOIP, Fuel
Techs minimum threshold of EBIT was met. Thus, a
percentage of EBIT was set aside in the Incentive Pool. That
percentage rose incrementally based on actual Company
performance for EBIT, Revenues, and Backlog.
|
|
|
|
For 2010, the minimum performance thresholds for EBIT, Revenue
and APC Backlog were set at $2 million, $75 million
and $30 million, respectively. As the 2010 EOIP was
structured, upon achievement of the EBIT performance threshold,
an amount equal to 1% of EBIT would be funded into the Incentive
Pool; assuming Fuel Tech achieved two of the three performance
thresholds, 1.5% of EBIT would be funded into the Incentive
Pool; and, assuming Fuel Tech had achieved all three performance
thresholds, 2% of EBIT would have been funded into the Incentive
Pool. As discussed below, in 2010 Fuel Tech met the EBIT and
Revenue minimum performance thresholds.
|
|
|
|
Upon achievement of the minimum thresholds described above, the
2010 EOIP provided that the percentage of EBIT funded into the
Incentive Pool for EBIT would rise incrementally at a rate equal
to 0.188% of EBIT for each additional $500,000 in EBIT, subject
to an overall cap of 3.25%; the percentage of EBIT funded into
the Incentive Pool for Revenue would rise incrementally at a
rate equal to 0.125% for each additional $2.5 million in
revenues, subject to an overall cap of 1.5%; and the percentage
of EBIT funded into the Incentive Pool for APC Backlog would
rise incrementally at a rate equal to 0.125% for each additional
$2.5 million in APC Backlog, subject to an overall cap of
1.5%. Accordingly, the highest possible funding percentage that
was possible for the Incentive Pool under the 2010 EOIP was
6.25%.
|
|
|
|
On February 15, 2011, the Committee determined that Fuel
Tech had achieved EBIT of $7,130,000 and Revenue of $81,795,000,
and therefore, had met the EBIT and Revenues minimum performance
thresholds under the 2010 EOIP. An amount equal to 3.63% of
EBIT, or $259,000, was accordingly funded into the Incentive
Pool.
|
|
|
|
The Incentive Pool for the 2010 EOIP was divided in accordance
with the following participation percentages: 37.5% ($73,000) of
the Incentive Pool being awarded to the President and Chief
Executive Officer, prorated to such officers commencement
of employment; 25% ($27,000) to the Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer, prorated to such officers commencement
of employment and 25% ($65,000) to the Executive Vice President
of Marketing and Sales. 12.5% of the Incentive Pool was
unallocated and not paid out.
|
|
|
|
The size of the Incentive Pool, the allocation percentages and
the payouts for participating executives under the 2010 EOIP
were applied according to the formulas in the EOIP and did not
involve any adjustments based on the exercise of discretion by
the Committee.
|
For 2011, the EOIP has been modified as set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
2011 EOIP payouts are based on Fuel Techs performance for
three critical financial metrics adjusted EBITDA,
Revenues and bookings for sales in Fuel Techs APC line of
business, as those terms are described below. As with the 2010
EOIP, an Incentive Pool may be created dependent on
Fuel Techs financial performance pertaining to all or some
of those metrics during the fiscal year. If the Incentive Pool
is created, each participating officer will be awarded his
designated portion of the Incentive Pool on or about
March 15, 2012. The respective payout percentages for
participants were established by the Committee considering the
same compensation factors set forth above that the Committee
used when evaluating base salary levels.
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
Under the 2011 EOIP, a percentage of EBIT may be set aside in
the Incentive Pool to provide for bonus payments based on
performance in the following three categories: (i) Adjusted
EBITDA, (ii) Revenue and (iii) Bookings.
Adjusted EBITDA refers to earnings before interest
expense, taxes, depreciation and amortization, profit sharing
contributions, legal expenses out of the ordinary course of Fuel
Techs business and incentive pay (excluding sales
commissions), Revenue refers to net sales, and
Bookings refers to revenue from the sale of
equipment or services in Fuel Techs APC line of business
to which Fuel Tech has a contractual right pursuant to a
purchase agreement executed during 2011.
|
|
|
|
No amounts will be payable under the 2011 EOIP unless Fuel Tech
achieves the established minimum threshold of Adjusted EBITDA
for 2011. Accordingly, if Fuel Techs financial performance
for 2011 falls below the established minimum threshold of
Adjusted EBITDA, there will be no payout under the 2011 EOIP of
any kind, regardless of the annual Revenue or Bookings achieved.
If Fuel Techs minimum threshold of Adjusted EBITDA is met,
however, the percentage of Adjusted EBITDA set aside in the
Incentive Pool rises incrementally based on actual combined
performance for the Adjusted EBITDA, Revenues, and Bookings
financial metrics up to an upper limit cap.
|
|
|
|
For 2011, the minimum performance thresholds for Adjusted
EBITDA, Revenue and Bookings were set at $10.5 million,
$85 million and $50 million, respectively. If the
Adjusted EBITDA performance threshold is met, 0.75% of Adjusted
EBITDA will be funded into the Incentive Pool; assuming Fuel
Tech achieved two of the three performance thresholds, 1.25% of
Adjusted EBITDA will be funded into the Incentive Pool; and,
assuming Fuel Tech achieves all three performance thresholds,
1.75% of Adjusted EBITDA will be funded into the Incentive Pool.
|
|
|
|
If the minimum thresholds above are met, the percentage of
Adjusted EBITDA funded into the Incentive Pool for the Adjusted
EBITDA metric will rise incrementally at a rate equal to 0.125%
for each additional $500,000 in Adjusted EBITDA, subject to an
overall cap of 2.25%; the percentage of Adjusted EBITDA funded
into the Incentive Pool for Revenue will rise incrementally at a
rate equal to 0.0625% for each additional $2.5 million in
revenues, subject to an overall cap of 1.0%; and the percentage
of Adjusted EBITDA funded into the Incentive Pool for Bookings
will rise incrementally at a rate equal to 0.0625% for each
additional $2.5 million in Bookings, subject to an overall
cap of 1.0%. Accordingly, the highest possible funding
percentage for the Incentive Pool under the 2011 EOIP is 4.25%.
|
|
|
|
If the performance thresholds under the 2011 EOIP are met, the
Incentive Pool will be divided in accordance with the following
participation percentages: 40% of the Incentive Pool being
awarded to the President and Chief Executive Officer; 20% to the
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer; 20% to the Executive Vice
President, Marketing and Sales and 20% to the Executive Vice
President, Worldwide Operations.
|
|
|
|
The size of the Incentive Pool, the allocation percentages and
the payouts for participating executives under the 2011 EOIP are
intended to be applied according to the formulas in the EOIP and
not involve any adjustments based on the exercise of discretion
by the Committee.
|
FUEL
CHEM®
Officer Sales Commission Plan
The FUEL CHEM Officer Sales Commission Plan (FUEL CHEM Plan)
provides for sales commission payments to be made to Fuel
Techs Senior Vice President, Fuel Chem Sales. Under the
FUEL CHEM Plan, Fuel Tech will pay to such officer a commission
equal to a specified percentage of all commission payments made
by Fuel Tech under the employee sales commission plan relating
to its FUEL CHEM line of business. The officer participating in
the FUEL CHEM Plan is not eligible to participate in any other
cash incentive plan. Mr. Brady is the Companys Senior
Vice President, Fuel Chem Sales.
For 2009 and 2010, an amount equal to one-third of all
commissions otherwise payable to the officer under the FUEL CHEM
Plan is withheld and only paid if predetermined performance
targets are met. The predetermined performance target is based
upon revenues recognized in the applicable fiscal year from FUEL
CHEM sales in the United States, Puerto Rico, Jamaica and
Canada. Notwithstanding the foregoing, all or a portion of such
contingent commission may be paid if approved in writing at the
sole discretion of Fuel Techs Chief Executive Officer, and
the annual FUEL CHEM revenue performance target has been
substantially, but not fully, achieved. The contingent
16
commission is payable on or before March 31 of the year
following the year in which it is earned. For 2011, the
contingent commission component of the FUEL CHEM Plan has been
removed, and thus, no withholding of any commission payments
will take place.
For 2009 and 2010, Mr. Brady earned $212,520 and $270,475
in sales commission under the FUEL CHEM Plan. Included in those
amounts were $63,047 and $90,158, respectively, representing the
contingent commission withheld for Mr. Brady for such
period. In 2010, Mr. Bradys contingent commission was
paid in full. In 2009, 89% of the contingent commission was paid
to Mr. Brady because, in the judgment of Fuel Techs
Chief Executive Officer, the FUEL CHEM revenue budget had been
substantially, but not fully, achieved in such year.
APC
Officer Sales Commission Plan
The APC Officer Sales Commission Plan (APC Plan) provides for
sales commission payments to be made to Fuel Techs Senior
Vice President, APC Sales. Under the APC Plan, Fuel Tech will
pay to such officer a commission equal to a specified percentage
of all commission payments made by Fuel Tech under the employee
sales commission plan relating to its APC line of business. The
officer participating in the APC Plan is not eligible to
participate in any other cash incentive plan. Mr. Cummings
is the Companys Senior Vice President, APC Sales.
For 2009 and 2010, an amount equal to one-third of all
commissions otherwise payable to the officer under the APC Plan
is withheld and only paid if predetermined performance targets
are met. The predetermined performance target is based upon new
APC sales bookings in the United States and Canada.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, all or a portion of such
contingent commission may be paid if approved in writing at the
sole discretion of Fuel Techs Chief Executive Officer, and
the annual APC sales bookings performance target has been
substantially, but not fully, achieved. The contingent
commission is payable on or before March 31 of the following
year in which it is earned. For 2011, the contingent commission
component of the APC Plan has been removed, and thus, no
commission payments will be withheld.
For 2009 and 2010, Mr. Cummings earned $45,657 and $134,824
in sales commission under the APC Plan. Included in the
commission payments for 2010 was $43,142 representing the
contingent commission withheld for Mr. Cummings for such
period. In 2010, Mr. Cummingss contingent commission
was paid in full. Because new APC sales bookings in the United
States and Canada failed to meet the predetermined performance
target under the APC Plan in 2009, Mr. Cummings did not
receive any payment of contingent commission for that year.
Long-Term
Incentives
Fuel Tech has one equity-based employee compensation plan,
formally titled the Fuel Tech, Inc. Incentive Plan (FTIP). The
FTIP allows for a variety of types of awards that may be granted
to participants in the form of non-qualified stock options,
incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted
stock, restricted stock units (as that term is defined below),
performance awards, bonuses or other forms of share-based or
non-share-based awards or combinations thereof. Participants in
the FTIP may be Fuel Techs directors, officers, employees,
consultants or advisors (except consultants or advisors in
capital-raising transactions) as the directors determine are key
to the success of Fuel Techs business. A restricted
stock unit or RSU means a notional account
established pursuant to an award granted to a participant under
the FTIP which is (i) valued solely by reference to Shares,
(ii) subject to restrictions and other terms and conditions
specified in the grant agreement and the FTIP, and
(iii) payable only in a share of the Companys common
stock.
Historically, Fuel Techs overall long-term equity
incentives approach has been to use the FTIP to award stock
options, principally non-qualified options, which are designed
to focus management on Fuel Techs long-term success as
evidenced by appreciation of Fuel Techs stock price over
several years, by growth in its earnings per share and other
elements. Following an analysis undertaken by the Committee as
to the features of a variety of equity award vehicles (which
analysis included input from the Committees compensation
consultant), and given the general trend towards use of RSUs as
a long-term incentive equity award vehicle and in consideration
of the limitation of shares available for equity award grants in
the FTIP, in 2010 the Company started to use predominantly RSUs
under the FTIP for equity based long-term incentive awards (all
such stock option awards and restricted stock unit awards are
collectively referred to as Equity Awards).
17
Both RSUs and stock options have ownership motivational
attributes for the participants. Further, Fuel Techs RSU
grants and stock option grants, by design, have featured
graduated vesting over a multiple year period which can
facilitate employee retention and also incents performance by
employee that is focused on creating long-term value and growth
for the Company. As such, we believe that each type of equity
award can have a place in the Companys long-term incentive
compensation programs. However, there are three potential
advantages to granting RSU awards over options: 1) RSUs are
less depletive on the remaining available FTIP shares because
they carry a higher valuation than stock options on the date of
grant, thus, less FTIP shares are required for each RSU award
than would be required for an equivalent stock option award to
achieve the Companys desired equity award value for the
participant; 2) the prospect of an RSU award retaining the
Companys intended motivational attributes for the
participant over time can be greater than a stock option award
because an RSU award does not carry a strike price
that must be exceeded for the RSU award to continue to be of
value to the participant; and 3) because the motivational
aspects of an RSU over a stock option can be greater as
described above, that prospect can result in enhanced value to
the Company for the compensation charges that will be recognized
by the Company to grant an RSU award versus a stock option award.
Historically, except for Equity Awards granted to the CEO,
Equity Awards have been determined by the Committee based upon
recommendations from Fuel Techs CEO. Equity Awards for the
CEO have been determined by the Committee with no participation
of the CEO. The determination and approval of proposed Equity
Awards are based on a variety of factors that may include:
|
|
|
|
|
historical Equity Awards, by employee, by year;
|
|
|
|
intrinsic values for each Equity Award, or, when applicable, the
fair value of each Equity Award using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model;
|
|
|
|
the number of Equity Award units available for issuance under
the FTIP;
|
|
|
|
supervisor recommendations for employee Equity Awards;
|
|
|
|
the estimate of expected intrinsic value (e.g., Equity Award
compensation expense) of the aggregate Equity Award;
|
|
|
|
Fuel Techs financial performance in light of market
conditions and operational considerations, which may be
quantitative, qualitative or both;
|
|
|
|
achievement of individual or company operational objectives;
|
|
|
|
exceptional and innovative individual performance;
|
|
|
|
individual contribution to a strategic goal;
|
|
|
|
teamwork;
|
|
|
|
leadership accomplishments; and
|
|
|
|
employee job level
|
In 2010, Equity Awards granted to any of the NEOs were not tied
to the NEO performing a specific individual goal or meeting a
specific company operational objective in some formulaic
fashion. Rather, it involved the exercise of business judgment
by the Committee, the criticality of the NEOs position
relative to the Companys long-term success, and a
qualitative assessment by the Committee regarding the NEOs
overall role in contributing to that long-term success
including, contributions in the NEOs field of operations,
and the NEOs leadership contributions to the Company. Also
see Summary of NEO Compensation below.
The Company is in the process of evaluating its equity based
long-term incentives for 2011.
Material
Compensation Actions
On April 1, 2010 in connection with the Companys
hiring and the Board electing Mr. D.G. Bailey as Fuel
Techs President and Chief Executive Officer, on an interim
basis, the Committee approved that: (i) commencing on
April 1, 2010, Mr. D.G. Bailey would receive a monthly
salary of $32,500; a Participation Percentage of 37.5% in Fuel
Techs Executive Officer Incentive Plan; and to the extent
provided for in such programs, would be eligible to
18
participate in the benefit and welfare programs offered by Fuel
Tech to its employees from time to time; and (ii) during
the time Mr. D.G. Bailey serves as President and Chief
Executive Officer and also as Chairman of the Board for the
Company, he would receive no compensation for his duties as
Chairman of the Board of the Company.
On August 4, 2010, in connection with the Companys
hiring and the Board electing Mr. D.S. Collins as Fuel
Techs Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, the Committee
ratified: an annual base salary of $280,000; a one-time sign on
bonus of $17,500; an initial Incentive Pool Participation
Percentage of 25% (prorated from commencement of employment) of
the Incentive Pool in Fuel Techs Executive Officer
Incentive Plan; subject to the Company completing its design of
and the Committee approving a Restricted Stock Unit award
program under the FTIP, Mr. Collins would receive a grant
of up to 20,000 RSUs under that program; and to the extent
provided for in such programs, would be eligible to participate
in the benefit and welfare programs offered by Fuel Tech to its
employees from time to time.
On December 9, 2010, in connection with the Board approving
that effective January 1, 2011 Mr. Douglas G. Bailey
would serve full-time as the Companys President/Chief
Executive Officer on a continuing basis, the Committee approved
that effective January 1, 2011 Mr. Bailey would
receive an annual salary of $450,000 and, contingent on the
Committees review and approval of the 2011 EOIP, the
Committee approved a target participation percentage for
Mr. Bailey in that plan equal to 60% of his 2011 annual
base salary.
On December 21, 2010, the Committee approved the 2011 form
of FUEL CHEM Plan and APC Plan applicable to Messrs. Brady
and Cummings, respectively. The Committee also approved an RSU
grant of 25,000 RSUs and 10,000 RSUs to Mr. D.G. Bailey and
Mr. Puissant, respectively.
On February 15, 2011 the Committee approved a payout under
the 2010 EOIP as described above. Further, the Committee
approved the 2011 EOIP also as described above.
Benchmarking,
Consultants and the Use of Peer Groups
Fuel Tech has from time to time made use of Frederick W.
Cook & Co., Inc. (Cook), a compensation
consultant, to address matters of compensation and benefits, and
to identify peer group companies based on industry, markets and
size. Fuel Tech recognizes that compensation practices must be
competitive in the marketplace and marketplace information is
one of the many factors that are considered in assessing the
reasonableness of compensation programs. The Compensation and
Nominating Committee retains the discretion to make all final
decisions relative to matters of compensation and benefits.
In 2010, the Committee engaged in benchmarking for its NEOs
based on the use of its then existing peer group data.
At the time of their selection in February, 2010, the companies
listed below were chosen as peer group companies due to their
inclusion in the evolving clean technology or alternative energy
industries segment and, for some, common listing in certain
third-party clean technology indices that also include Fuel
Tech, which indices consider market capitalization, revenues and
company size as factors.
|
|
|
A123 Systems
|
|
FuelCell Energy
|
Active Power
|
|
Met-Pro
|
American Superconductor
|
|
Peerless Manufacturing
|
Amerigon
|
|
Plug Power
|
Ballard Power Systems
|
|
Power Integrations
|
Capstone Turbine
|
|
Quantum Fuel Systems
|
Clean Energy Fuels
|
|
RenTech
|
Energy Conversion Devices
|
|
Syntroleum
|
Evergreen Solar
|
|
Fuel Systems Solutions
|
From time to time, the Committee may supplement its business
judgment pertaining to its consideration of Fuel Tech
compensation matters with a variety of market information
obtained from a number of different sources including, among
other things, the Committees general knowledge regarding
compensation matters, information
19
from one or more independent compensation consultants, peer
company data, benchmarking related to that data, information
obtained from independent search firms, and historical and
current Fuel Tech compensation data.
Ownership
Guidelines
Fuel Tech does not have a stock ownership policy for its
executive officers.
Hedging
and Insider Trading Policies
Fuel Tech does not have a formal policy on hedging. Fuel Tech
does prohibit all employees from speculating in Fuel Tech
securities, which includes, but is not limited to: short
selling; and the purchase and sale or sale and purchase, in
non-exempt transactions, of Common Stock within periods of less
than six months. Fuel Tech prohibits trading in Common Stock
during closed periods from the end of a quarterly period until
the third day following the announcement of earnings for that
quarterly period.
Equity
Grant Practices
As discussed in the Long-Term Incentives portion of the
Compensation Elements section above, long-term incentives
in the form of stock options or RSUs have been issued by Fuel
Tech under the FTIP in accordance with compensation policy as
determined by the Committee from time to time.
Under current policy, based on the level of the employee
position, new employee stock options or RSUs or some combination
thereof may be granted at the first Committee meeting following
employment. However, from time to time, an option or RSU or
equity-based performance award may be authorized by the
Committee to be granted and effective on a specified date or
event, such as on the first date of employment. The price of all
options granted is the mean of the high and low stock prices
reported on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. for the effective date
of grant. Also, under the current policies of the Committee: all
employees options have a term of ten years and are subject
to a four-year vesting schedule as follows: 50% of the options
vest two years from the grant date and 25% vest on each
subsequent year on that date. Each of the RSU awards granted by
the Company in 2010 were subject to a four-year vesting schedule
as follows: 50% of the RSU grant vests two years from the grant
date and 25% vests on each subsequent year on that date.
The Committee may grant options or RSUs to existing
employees on a periodic basis based on the level of the employee
position and as well as certain of the factors enumerated in the
Long-Term Incentives portion of the Compensation Elements
section above. While there are no mandatory levels
established for the quantity of options or RSUs to be granted,
Fuel Tech has used historical practice and employee job level as
two of the factors it considers.
Retirement
Benefits
Fuel Tech has no defined benefit pension plan. Fuel Tech has a
401(k) Plan covering substantially all employees. The 401(k)
Plan is an important factor in attracting and retaining
employees as it provides an opportunity to accumulate retirement
funds. Fuel Techs 401(k) Plan provides for annual deferral
of up to $16,500 for individuals until age 50, $22,000 for
individuals 50 and older, or as allowed by the Internal Revenue
Code.
Fuel Tech annually matches 50% of employee contributions up to
6% of the employees salary, or a maximum annual match of
$7,350. Fuel Tech may also make discretionary profit sharing
contributions to the 401(k) Plan on an annual basis. Matching
and profit sharing contributions vest over a three-year period.
Based on the Companys 2010 financial performance, on
February 15, 2011 the Committee approved a $164,049 profit
sharing contribution by the Company to Fuel Techs 401(k)
Plan.
Welfare
Benefits
In order to attract and retain employees, Fuel Tech provides
certain welfare benefit plans to its employees, which include
medical and dental insurance benefits, group term life
insurance, voluntary life and accidental death and dismemberment
insurance and personal accident insurance. These benefits are
not provided to non-employee directors.
20
Employment
Agreements; and Change in Control Severance
Arrangement
Messrs. D.G. Bailey, Brady, Collins, Cummings, Graham,
Norris and Puissant are each party to an employment agreement
with Fuel Tech effective as follows: April 1, 2010 for
Mr. D.G. Bailey; February 1, 1998 for Mr. Brady;
August 2, 2010 for Mr. Collins; October 31, 1998
for Mr. Cummings; April 30, 2008 for Mr. Graham;
February 28, 2006 for Mr. Norris; and August 31,
2009, for Mr. Puissant. These agreements are for indefinite
terms, provide for disclosure and assignment of inventions to
Fuel Tech, protection of Fuel Tech proprietary data, covenants
against certain competition and arbitration of disputes. These
employment agreements are for terms of employment at
will and do not provide for severance payments. Under the
agreements for Messrs. D.G. Bailey, Collins, Graham, Norris
and Puissant however, each executive is entitled to continuation
of base salary and benefits, and incentive bonus amounts earned
under the plan for the year of termination, for up to one year
or sooner on finding comparable employment, after involuntary
termination not for cause within one year of a Change in
Control as described below under the caption Options
Vesting on Change in Control. Mr. Grahams
employment with Fuel Tech ended upon his resignation on
March 5, 2010.
Mr. Norris employment ended upon his retirement from
Fuel Tech on May 20, 2010. Effective that same date,
Mr. Norris and Fuel Tech to entered into a Separation
Agreement. Under the Separation Agreement, Mr. Norris will
receive a severance payment of $500,000, payable over a period
of twelve months, and reimbursement for out of pocket COBRA
insurance premium costs actually paid by Mr. Norris should
he choose to continue his medical, dental or vision healthcare
coverages through COBRA for a period of eighteen months. In
addition, the Separation Agreement also contains a
non-competition and non-solicitation covenant, prohibiting
Mr. Norris from competing with the business of Fuel Tech
for a period of twelve months following the end of his
employment, as well as other customary provisions.
Options
or RSUs Vesting on Change in Control
Under the FTIP, all outstanding options and RSUs shown in the
table below Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal
Year-End for the NEOs that are not vested will become
immediately vested in the event that there is with respect to
Fuel Tech, a Change in Control. A Change in Control
takes place if (a) any person or affiliated group becomes
the beneficial owner of 51% or more of Fuel Techs
outstanding securities, (b) in any two-year period, persons
in the majority of the board of directors cease being so unless
the nomination of the new directors was approved by a majority
of the directors then still in office who were directors at the
beginning of such period, (c) a business combination takes
place where the shares of Fuel Tech are converted to cash,
securities or other property, but not in a transaction in which
the stockholders of Fuel Tech have proportionately the same
share ownership before and after the transaction, or
(d) the stockholders of Fuel Tech approve of a plan of
liquidation or dissolution of Fuel Tech.
Indemnification
and Insurance
Under the Fuel Tech Certificate of Incorporation and the terms
of individual indemnity agreements with the directors and
executive officers, indemnification is afforded Fuel Techs
directors and executive officers to the fullest extent permitted
by Delaware law. Such indemnification also includes payment of
any costs that an indemnitee incurs because of claims against
the indemnitee and provides for advancement to the indemnitee of
those costs, including legal fees. Fuel Tech is not, however,
obligated to provide indemnity and costs where it is adjudicated
that the indemnitee did not act in good faith in the reasonable
belief that the indemnitees actions were in the best
interests of Fuel Tech, or, in the case of a settlement of a
claim, such determination is made by the Board.
Fuel Tech carries insurance providing indemnification, under
certain circumstances, to all of its directors and officers for
claims against them by reason of, among other things, any act or
failure to act in their capacities as directors or officers. The
current annual premium for this policy is $246,589.
No payments have been made for such indemnification to any past
or present director or officer by Fuel Tech or under any
insurance policy.
21
Compensation
Recovery Policies
Fuel Techs Board maintains a policy that it will evaluate
in appropriate circumstances whether to seek the reimbursement
of certain compensation awards paid to an executive officer, if
such executive engages in misconduct that caused or partially
caused a restatement of financial results, in accordance with
Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. If the Board
determines that circumstances warrant, Fuel Tech will seek to
recover appropriate portions of the executive officers
compensation for the relevant period, as provided by law.
Tax
Deductibility of Executive Compensation
Fuel Tech reviews and considers the deductibility of executive
compensation under the requirements of Internal Revenue Code
Section 162(m), which provides that the Company may not
deduct compensation of more than $1,000,000 that is paid to
certain individuals. The Company believes that compensation paid
under the Companys incentive plans is generally fully
deductible for federal income tax purposes.
Accounting
for Equity-Based Compensation
On January 1, 2006, Fuel Tech began accounting for the
equity-based compensation issued under the FTIP in accordance
with the requirements of with FASB ASC Topic No. 718.
22
Summary
of NEO Compensation
It has been Fuel Techs practice that overall NEO
compensation consists of three primary elements: base salary,
short-term incentive compensation based on financial
performance, whether under the CIP in 2009, the EOIP in 2010, or
a sales commission plan, and long-term incentives. The elements
of overall compensation paid by Fuel Tech to its NEOs are
reflected in the following chart.
The Committee determined the amounts to be paid to each NEO for
fiscal 2010 as follows:
Douglas G. Bailey, President and Chief Executive Officer
(from April 1, 2010): Mr. Baileys
compensation for 2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Mr. Baileys monthly base salary for 2010
was $32,500. Effective January 1, 2011,
Mr. Baileys annualized base salary was increased from
$390,000 to $450,000 per year.
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: Mr. Bailey earned a prorated bonus
payout of $73,000 under the 2010 EOIP as further described in
the Executive Officer Incentive Plan portion of the
Compensation Elements section above.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: On December 21, 2010, Mr. Bailey
was granted 25,000 RSUs under the FTIP. The Committee determined
to award Mr. Bailey such RSUs in light of his leadership
and completion of a variety of corporate initiatives from
April 1, 2010 when he was elected as the Companys
President and Chief Executive Office on an interim basis, the
Companys overall operational and financial performance
during 2010, as well as certain of the Equity Award factors
enumerated in the Long-Term Incentives portion of the
Compensation Elements section above.
|
Stephen P. Brady, Senior Vice President-Fuel Chem
Sales: Mr. Bradys compensation for
2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Mr. Bradys base salary for 2010 was
$228,000. No increase was made to Mr. Bradys base
salary from 2009.
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: For 2010, Mr. Brady earned $270,475
in sales commission under the FUEL CHEM Plan discussed under the
Compensation Elements section above.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: On December 21, 2010, Mr. Brady
was granted 4,000 RSUs under the FTIP. The Committee determined
to award Mr. Brady such RSUs on the President/CEOs
recommendation in light of the overall operational and financial
performance of the of the FUEL CHEM sales organization business
in the United States market in 2010, as well as certain of the
Equity Award factors enumerated in the Long-Term Incentives
portion of the Compensation Elements section above.
|
David S. Collins, Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer (from August 2,
2010): Mr. Collins compensation for
2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Mr. Collins joined the Company on
August 2, 2010 with an annualized base salary of $280,000.
Given his August 2, 2010 hire date, for 2010 the actual
base salary Mr. Collins earned was $116,668.
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: Mr. Collins earned a prorated bonus
payout of $27,000 under the 2010 EOIP as further described in
the Executive Officer Incentive Plan portion of the
Compensation Elements section above.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: On December 21, 2010,
Mr. Collins was granted 20,000 RSUs under the FTIP. The
Committee determined to award Mr. Collins such RSUs as part
of Mr. Collins new hire compensation package.
|
William E. Cummings, Senior Vice President, APC
Sales: Mr. Cummings compensation for
2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Effective March 1, 2010,
Mr. Cummings annualized base salary for 2010 was
increased from $190,000 to $205,000. The actual base salary
Mr. Cummings earned in 2010 was $202,500.
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: For 2010, Mr. Cummings earned
$134,824 in sales commission under the APC Plan discussed the
under the Compensation Elements section above.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: On December 21, 2010,
Mr. Cummings was granted 4,000 RSUs under the FTIP. The
Committee determined to award Mr. Cummings such RSUs on the
President/CEOs recommendation in light of the overall
operational and financial performance of the of the APC sales
organization in the United States market in 2010, as well as
certain of the Equity Award factors enumerated in the Long-Term
Incentives portion of the Compensation Elements section
above.
|
John P. Graham, Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer (through March 5,
2010): Mr. Grahams compensation for
2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Mr. Grahams base salary for 2010 was
$300,000, of which he was paid $78,846 through March 5,
2010. No increase was made to Mr. Grahams base salary
from 2009.
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: Mr. Graham resigned from Fuel Tech
effective March 5, 2010, and consequently, did not receive
any bonus payout under the 2010 EOIP.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: Mr. Graham resigned from Fuel Tech
effective March 5, 2010, and consequently, did not receive
any long term incentive awards in 2010.
|
John F. Norris Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer
(through March 31,
2010): Mr. Norris compensation for
2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Mr. Norris base salary for 2010 was
$500,000, of which he was paid $252,883 through May 20,
2010, the date Mr. Norris retired from the Company. No
increase was made to Mr. Norris base salary from
2009. Under a separation agreement between Mr. Norris and
the Company, in 2010 Mr. Norris was paid $291,667 in
severance payments.
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: Mr. Norris retired from Fuel Tech
effective May 20, 2010, and consequently, did not receive
any bonus payout under the 2010 EOIP.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: Mr. Norris retired from Fuel Tech
effective May 20, 2010, and consequently, did not receive
any long term incentive awards in 2010.
|
Robert E. Puissant, Executive Vice President, Marketing and
Sales: Mr. Puissants compensation for
2010 consisted primarily of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Base Salary: Mr. Puissants base salary for 2010 was
$300,000. No increase was made to Mr. Puissants base
salary from 2009.
|
|
|
|
Short Term Incentives: Mr. Puissant earned a bonus payout
of $65,000 under the 2010 EOIP as further described in the
Executive Officer Incentive Plan portion of the Compensation
Elements section above.
|
|
|
|
Long Term Incentives: On December 21, 2010,
Mr. Puissant was granted 10,000 RSUs under the FTIP. The
Committee determined to award Mr. Puissant such RSUs on the
President/CEOs recommendation in light of the overall
operational and financial performance of both of the
Companys business segments in the
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
domestic U.S. and Canada marketing and sales operation , as
well as certain of the Equity Award factors enumerated in the
Long-Term Incentives portion of the Compensation Elements
section above.
|
SUMMARY
COMPENSATION TABLE
The table below sets forth information concerning fiscal years
2010, 2009 and 2008 compensation awarded to, earned by or paid
in all capacities to the Named Executive Officers,
who are the President and Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer, and each of the three most highly
compensated executive officers other than the President and
Chief Executive Officer or the Treasurer and Chief Financial
Officer, whose total compensation exceeded $100,000.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
(e)
|
|
|
(f)
|
|
|
(g)
|
|
|
(i)
|
|
|
(j)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Non-Equity Incentive
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
|
Awards(4)
|
|
|
Awards(5)
|
|
|
Plan Compensation(6)
|
|
|
Compensation(7)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Name & Principal Position
|
|
Year
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bailey(1)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
292,500
|
|
|
|
215,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,000
|
|
|
|
3,837
|
|
|
|
585,087
|
|
President and Chief
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,778
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,350
|
|
|
|
106,128
|
|
Executive Officer
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
285,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94,530
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,393
|
|
|
|
380,923
|
|
John F. Norris Jr.(2)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
252,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,566
|
|
|
|
279,449
|
|
Former President and
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
298,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,762
|
|
|
|
826,652
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
475,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
661,710
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,530
|
|
|
|
1,184,157
|
|
David C. Collins
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
116,668
|
|
|
|
172,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
|
6,012
|
|
|
|
372,280
|
|
Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasurer and
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John P. Graham(3)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
78,846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,024
|
|
|
|
88,870
|
|
Former Senior Vice
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
239,112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,897
|
|
|
|
564,009
|
|
President, Treasurer and
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
201,153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
605,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,098
|
|
|
|
824,801
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen P. Brady
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
228,000
|
|
|
|
34,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
270, 475
|
|
|
|
26,538
|
|
|
|
559,533
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
228,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,778
|
|
|
|
212,520
|
|
|
|
24,839
|
|
|
|
525,137
|
|
Fuel Chem Sales
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
225,833
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
283,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,920
|
|
|
|
543,343
|
|
William E. Cummings
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
202,500
|
|
|
|
34,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134,284
|
|
|
|
22,176
|
|
|
|
393,480
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,778
|
|
|
|
59,778
|
|
|
|
19,668
|
|
|
|
315,103
|
|
APC Sales
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
183,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
189,060
|
|
|
|
189,060
|
|
|
|
20,266
|
|
|
|
393,096
|
|
Robert E. Puissant
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
86,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,000
|
|
|
|
45,451
|
|
|
|
496,751
|
|
Executive Vice President,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
101,154
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
236,966
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,655
|
|
|
|
355,775
|
|
Marketing & Sales
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts shown prior to 2010 reflect the salary Mr. D.G.
Bailey received for his role as Deputy Chairman, including a
payment of $240,000 in employee compensation made in December
2008 for services rendered in connection with Fuel Techs
merger and acquisition activities in fiscal 2007 and 2008. |
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Norris resigned as President and Chief Executive
Officer of Fuel Tech on April 1, 2010 and retired from Fuel
Tech on May 20, 2010. Amounts shown do not reflect $291,667
in severance payments made to Mr. Norris in 2010. All
unvested options granted to Mr. Norris were forfeited on
the retirement date. All vested options as of May 20,
2010 may be exercised until the fifth anniversary of the
retirement date. |
|
(3) |
|
Mr. Graham resigned from Fuel Tech effective March 5,
2010. All options granted to Mr. Graham in 2009 expired
unvested as of such date. |
|
(4) |
|
Amounts shown for stock awards represent the grant date fair
value for restricted stock units granted during the applicable
year calculated in accordance with Accounting Standards
Codification (ASC) Topic No. 718, Compensation
Stock Compensation . The assumptions made for this
calculation are set out in Note 6 to Fuel Techs
Consolidated Financial Statements for 2010 which are included in
Fuel Techs Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 9, 2011.
The amounts shown do not represent cash paid to the Named
Executive Officers. |
25
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Amounts shown for option awards represent the grant date fair
value of amounts granted during the applicable year calculated
in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic
No. 718, Compensation Stock Compensation
. The assumptions made for this calculation are set out in
Note 6 to Fuel Techs Consolidated Financial
Statements for 2010 which are included in Fuel Techs
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 9, 2011.
The amounts shown do not represent cash paid to the Named
Executive Officers. |
|
(6) |
|
The amounts of sales commission paid to Messrs. Brady and
Cummings for commission earned in 2009 and 2010 was based on the
criteria described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis
section above for the FUEL CHEM Officer Sales Commission Plan
and APC Officer Sales Commission Plan. |
|
(7) |
|
All Other Compensation includes for each of the
Named Executive Officers, matching contributions and profit
sharing allocations to the Fuel Tech 401(k) Plan; expense for
life, accidental death and dismemberment and long-term
disability insurance; and, for Mr. Norris, it also includes
reimbursement for commuting and housing expenses of $9,150
through April 30, 2008, and for Mr. Puissant it also
includes reimbursement for temporary housing expenses of $18,000
and $6,000 in 2010 and 2009 respectively. |
GRANTS OF
PLAN-BASED AWARDS IN FISCAL YEAR 2010
TO NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Future Payouts
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
Under Non-Equity Incentive
|
|
Shares,
|
|
Closing Price
|
|
of Stock
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Awards(1)
|
|
Stocks or
|
|
per Share
|
|
Option and
|
Name
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
Threshold
|
|
Target
|
|
Maximum
|
|
Units
|
|
($/Sh) on
|
|
Other
|
(a)
|
|
(b)
|
|
(c)
|
|
(d)
|
|
(e)
|
|
(#)(2)
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
Awards(3)
|
|
Douglas G. Bailey
|
|
|
12.21.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
8.72
|
|
|
|
215,750
|
|
John F. Norris Jr.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David S. Collins
|
|
|
12.21.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
8.72
|
|
|
|
172,600
|
|
John P. Graham
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen P. Brady
|
|
|
12.21.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
8.72
|
|
|
|
34,520
|
|
William C. Cummings
|
|
|
12.21.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
8.72
|
|
|
|
34,520
|
|
Robert E. Puissant
|
|
|
12.21.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
8.72
|
|
|
|
86,300
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Registrants 2010 EOIP was adopted on December 10,
2009 by the Compensation and Nominating Committee, and
accordingly, no plan based awards were made in 2010 for the 2010
EOIP. The terms of the 2010 EOIP and other information regarding
the officer allocation percentages and payouts under the 2010
EOIP are set forth in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis
section above for the Executive Officer Incentive Plan. Actual
payouts under the 2010 EOIP are set forth in the Summary
Compensation Table above. |
|
(2) |
|
Amounts shown reflect the grant of RSUs on December 21,
2010. 50% of the RSUs vest on the second anniversary of grant,
and 25% of such RSUs vest on each of the third and fourth
anniversaries of grant. |
|
(3) |
|
The fair value shown for these RSU awards is calculated in
accordance with FASB ASC Topic No. 718 based on the grant
date fair value. The assumptions made for this calculation are
set out in Note 6 to Fuel Techs Consolidated
Financial Statements for 2010 which are included in Fuel
Techs Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 9, 2011.
The amounts shown do not represent cash paid to the Named
Executive Officers. |
OPTION
EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED IN FISCAL YEAR 2010
FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
There were no exercises of options by, or stock vested for, any
Named Executive Officer in fiscal year 2010.
26
OUTSTANDING
EQUITY AWARDS AT 2010 FISCAL YEAR-END
FOR NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
For each of the options described below, the option expiration
date is the 10th anniversary of the grant date; each of
these options vests 50% on the second anniversary of the grant
date and 25% on each of the third and fourth anniversaries of
the grant date. See the text under the caption Equity
Grant Practices in the Compensation Discussion and
Analysis above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
(a)
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
(e)
|
|
|
(f)
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
Options (#)
|
|
|
Options (#)
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
Price ($)
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bailey
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.60
|
|
|
|
06/13/2011
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.27
|
|
|
|
06/06/2012
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.20
|
|
|
|
05/29/2013
|
|
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.80
|
|
|
|
12/09/2013
|
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.68
|
|
|
|
12/07/2014
|
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.46
|
|
|
|
12/06/2015
|
|
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
$
|
25.49
|
|
|
|
12/07/2016
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
17.82
|
|
|
|
03/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
10.20
|
|
|
|
05/20/2019
|
|
John F. Norris Jr.,
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
11.40
|
|
|
|
05/20/2015
|
|
Former President and
|
|
|
56,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25.49
|
|
|
|
05/20/2015
|
|
Chief Executive Officer(1)
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
10.20
|
|
|
|
05/20/2015
|
|
David S. Collins
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John P. Graham(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Former Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen P. Brady
|
|
|
6,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.80
|
|
|
|
12/09/2013
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.68
|
|
|
|
12/07/2014
|
|
Fuel Chem Sales
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.46
|
|
|
|
12/06/2015
|
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
25.49
|
|
|
|
12/07/2016
|
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
$
|
17.82
|
|
|
|
03/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
10.20
|
|
|
|
05/20/2019
|
|
William E. Cummings
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.80
|
|
|
|
12/09/2013
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.68
|
|
|
|
12/07/2014
|
|
APC Sales
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.46
|
|
|
|
12/06/2015
|
|
|
|
|
11,250
|
|
|
|
3,750
|
|
|
$
|
25.49
|
|
|
|
12/07/2016
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
17.82
|
|
|
|
03/07/2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
10.20
|
|
|
|
05/20/2019
|
|
Robert E. Puissant
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
10.15
|
|
|
|
08/30/2019
|
|
Executive Vice President, Marketing and Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mr. Norris resigned as President and Chief Executive
Officer of Fuel Tech effective April 1, 2010. He retired
from Fuel Tech effective May 20, 2010, at which time, his
vested options under each of his stock option agreements with
the Company, as of May 20, 2010, have a five year exercise
period, while all unvested options as of that date were
forfeited. |
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Graham resigned from Fuel Tech effective March 5,
2010, at which time all unvested stock options were forfeited |
27
For each of the RSUs described below, the RSUs vest 50% on the
second anniversary of the grant date and 25% on each of the
third and fourth anniversaries of the grant date. See the text
under the caption Equity Grant Practices in the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
(g)
|
|
|
(h)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market Value
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
of Shares or
|
|
|
|
Shares or
|
|
|
Units of
|
|
|
|
Units of
|
|
|
Stock That
|
|
|
|
Stock That
|
|
|
Have Not
|
|
|
|
Have Not
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
Name
|
|
Vested (#)
|
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bailey
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
242,750
|
|
President and Chief Executive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John F. Norris Jr.,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Former President and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David S. Collins
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
194,200
|
|
Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John P. Graham
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Former Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen P. Brady
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
38,840
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel Chem Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William E. Cummings
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
38,840
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APC Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert E. Puissant
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
97,100
|
|
Executive Vice President, Marketing and Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Market value reflects a per RSU value of $9.71, the closing
price of Fuel Techs Common Stock on December 31, 2010. |
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 2 APPROVAL OF A PROGRAM PERMITTING THE
EXCHANGE OF CERTAIN STOCK OPTIONS FOR RESTRICTED STOCK
UNITS
On February 24, 2011, our Board of Directors resolved to
seek, subject to stockholder approval for a program (the
Exchange Program) that will permit our eligible
employees to exchange outstanding options with an exercise price
that is greater than the highest closing price of our common
stock during the 52-week period prior to the date on which the
Exchange Program commences and that were granted more than two
years before the date the Exchange Program commences (the
Eligible Options) for a lesser number of restricted
stock units (the RSUs) to be granted under the Fuel
Tech, Inc. Incentive Plan (the FTIP). Options that
have a remaining term of less than two years when the Exchange
Program commences will also not be Eligible Options. In
determining the exchange ratios and other information presented
in this proposal, we have used $11.20, which was the highest
stock price during the 52-week period ending March 10,
2011, as the minimum exercise price for Eligible Options. As
noted below, the Compensation and Nominating Committee of the
Board of Directors (the Committee) will finalize the
minimum exercise price for the Eligible Options, the exchange
ratios and the other terms and conditions of the Exchange
Program prior to the commencement of the offer.
The Exchange Program will be open to all of our eligible
employees and eligible employees of any of our subsidiaries
designated for participation by the Committee. However, members
of the Board of Directors, and our senior executive management
team, namely, our President/Chief Executive Officer,
Treasurer/Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President,
Marketing and Sales, and our Executive Vice President, Worldwide
Operations
28
will not be eligible to participate in the Exchange Program.
Other officers of the Company who are identified in the
Companys 2010
Form 10-K
may be entitled to participate in the Exchange Program.
Each RSU granted in the Exchange Program will represent a
contingent right to receive one share of our common stock on a
specified future date when the RSU vests, subject to the
participants continued employment through the vesting
date. The number of RSUs to be granted for an Eligible Option
tendered for exchange will depend on the exchange
ratio for the Eligible Option as described below under
Exchange Ratios. These exchange ratios are intended
to result in the grant of RSUs that have a grant-date value no
greater than the value as of the date of the Exchange Program of
the cancelled options they replace, with the value of the
options determined using a Black-Scholes option valuation model
as described below and the grant-date value of the RSUs to be
established by the Committee. The RSUs will be subject to a
vesting schedule pursuant to which 100% of the RSUs will vest on
the second anniversary of the end of the Exchange Program.
We are required under the FTIP to obtain stockholder approval of
the Exchange Program. If stockholders do not approve this
Exchange Program proposal, we will not offer the Exchange
Program, and the Eligible Options will continue in accordance
with their terms.
Reasons
for the Exchange Program
We have granted stock options periodically to a substantial
number of our employees and employees of our subsidiaries. When
the Committee approves the grant of a stock option, it
establishes the exercise price that the employee must pay to
purchase shares of common stock when the option is exercised.
The exercise price per share is set at the market price of a
share of our common stock on the effective date of the option
grant. Thus, an employee receives value only if he or she
exercises the option and sells the purchased shares at a price
that exceeds the options exercise price.
Our stock price has experienced a significant decline driven
primarily by external factors. As reported in certain of our
prior public filings, our business has been adversely affected
by the economic downturn which began in 2008, and despite modest
recovery, continues to impact our business today. Reduced
electricity demand across all of our geographic sales regions
has led to electricity production declines and declines in
pricing for key sources of alternative fuel such as natural gas.
Although net generation of electric power in 2010 has returned
to 2008 levels, coal-fired electricity generation has declined
and remains suppressed from 2007 levels. Contributing to this
decline in coal-fired generations were 1) lower natural gas
prices which allowed utility operators to increase the amount of
power generated from natural gas plants, 2) increased cost
of environmental compliance with current environmental
regulations, 3) constrained funding for capital projects in
a financial climate wherein the capital funds necessary for the
capital projects necessary to achieve that compliance became
more limited, 4) a drop in industrial electricity demand,
and 5) a sustained, general decline in overall economic
activity. Further, the uncertainty of regulation resulted in
electricity generating unit operators delaying investment in NOx
emission remediation plans until such time as the United States
Environmental Protection Agency further clarifies the
regulations. Amidst these difficult conditions, the Company has
worked to control costs, has made selective reductions in work
force, invested in expanding its product lines through two
acquisitions and has maintained a strong balance sheet. Despite
those efforts, the external factors described above resulted in
reduced product demand in both of our business segments,
contributing to a decline in revenue and operating income during
the affected years, and a resulting decrease in our stock price.
As a result of our stock price resetting itself at a lower level
due to the macro-economic factors described above, many of our
employees hold options with exercise prices significantly higher
than the current market price of our common stock. As of
March 10, 2011, employees held Eligible Options covering
approximately 927,000 shares with exercise prices ranging
from $11.22 per share to $27.57 per share, while the closing
price of our common stock on the Nasdaq exchange on that date
was $8.15. These
out-of-the-money
options are no longer effective as performance and retention
incentives.
We believe that to enhance long-term stockholder value and
maintain our competitive positions we need to maintain
competitive employee compensation, incentive and retention
programs. An equity stake in the long-term success of the
Company is a critical component of these programs.
29
Historically, the Company has used stock option awards as its
long-term incentive equity award of choice. However, our pool of
available shares to grant stock option awards has been depleted
due to the currently existing number of out of the
money options being held by employees. Following an
analysis undertaken by the Committee pertaining to the features
of a variety of equity award vehicles that included input in
that regard from the Committees compensation consultant,
and given the general trend towards use of RSUs as a long-term
incentive equity award vehicle, and in light of the limitation
of shares available for equity award grants, in 2010 the Company
started to use RSUs under the FTIP for long-term incentive
equity awards. We believe that the opportunity to own part of
the Company by participating employees is a powerful
motivational tool. It incentivizes them to enhance long-term
stockholder value because their own equity ownership potential
aligns their interests in that regard with other stockholders.
We believe that the prospect of an ownership stake in the
Company motivates participating employees to accomplish the
Companys objectives and goals that are aimed at achieving
long-term future growth.
Both RSUs and stock options share the same ownership
motivational attributes just described. As such, we believe that
each type of equity award can have a place in the Companys
long-term incentive compensation programs. However, there are
three potential advantages to granting RSU awards over options:
1) RSUs are less depletive on the limited remaining
available FTIP shares because they carry a higher valuation than
stock options on the date of grant, thus, less FTIP shares are
required for each RSU award than would be required for an
equivalent stock option award to achieve the Companys
desired equity award value for the participant; 2) the
prospect of an RSU award retaining the Companys intended
motivational attributes for the participant over time can be
greater than a stock option award because an RSU award does not
carry a strike price that must be exceeded for the
RSU award to continue to be of value to the participant; and
3) because the motivational aspects of an RSU over a stock
option can be greater as described above, that prospect can
result in enhanced value to the Company for the compensation
charges that will be recognized by the Company to grant an RSU
award versus a stock option award. These distinctions were a
consideration for us in structuring the Exchange Program as the
stock for RSU exchange that is described in this proposal.
Many of the Eligible Options have been out of the money for an
extended period of time and, therefore, have not been exercised
by our employees. Coupled with periodic grants of options to new
and continuing employees, the number of shares subject to
outstanding options has steadily increased as a percentage of
our total shares of common stock outstanding. As a result, an
increasing number of the overall share awards available under
the FTIP have come to be absorbed by grants that are not
effectively providing the incentives we originally intended them
to provide. In addition, since these options are not being
exercised and returned to the FTIP for future use, the number of
share awards available under the FTIP for grant in the future
has steadily diminished. We believe the perception of our
employees that equity incentives will continue to be provided in
the future has an important effect on our ability to retain our
employees, and a perception that the FTIP would in the near
future no longer have awards available for grant would undermine
the Companys intended employee retention value for the
long-term incentive component of the Companys compensation
programs. Under the proposed Exchange Program, participating
employees will receive significantly fewer RSUs than the number
of shares subject to options surrendered. Shares subject to
Eligible Options that were granted under the FTIP and are
surrendered in the Exchange Program will be available for future
awards under the FTIP. As a result of both these effects, the
FTIP will have more share awards available for continuing grants
in line with our overall compensation philosophy.
Based on the number of Eligible Options outstanding on
March 10, 2011 and assuming 100% participation by eligible
employees, a minimum exercise price for Eligible Options of
$11.20 per share and the application of the illustrative
exchange ratios described in the table set forth under
Exchange Ratios below, Eligible Options for
approximately 927,000 shares would be surrendered and
cancelled, while approximately 325,335 RSUs would be issued.
Both the Committee and the Companys Board of Directors
believe that the Exchange Program is favorable to the interests
of our stockholders and, at the same time, will restore
long-term incentives for employees currently holding underwater
stock options to remain with us and to contribute to the
long-term growth and success of our business. Therefore, the
Board urges you to vote to approve the Exchange Program.
30
Alternatives
Considered
When considering how best to continue to provide incentives to
and reward our employees who hold options that are significantly
underwater, we considered the following alternatives:
|
|
|
|
|
Increase cash compensation. To replace equity incentives, we
considered whether we could substantially increase base salary
and short-term incentive bonus cash compensation. However,
significant increases in cash compensation would reduce our cash
flow from operations, which could adversely affect our business
and operating results. In addition, these increases would not
reduce the number of share awards outstanding under the FTIP
that were ineffective incentives or increase the number of
potential share awards that could be effectively utilized, and
would not necessarily best align the interests of our employees
with those of our stockholders.
|
|
|
|
Grant additional equity awards. We also considered special
grants of additional stock options at current market prices or
RSUs. However, these additional grants would not reduce the
number of share awards outstanding under the FTIP that were
ineffective incentives and would further diminish the number of
potential share awards that could be effectively used. We
considered addressing this by seeking stockholder approval for
an increase in the number of awards available under the FTIP,
but we believe that although such an effort is appropriate
absent other alternatives, the increased potential dilution to
our stockholders with that approach would not be in their best
interests while a less dilutive alternative, such as the
proposed Exchange Program, is available. In addition, the
currently ineffective options will over time diminish through
expiration (whether at the end of the term or by departure of
employees), and an increase in the number of awards available
would lead to more awards being available than originally
intended. The Exchange Program would address the short term
problem of ineffective grants without leading to this longer
term unintended consequence.
|
|
|
|
Exchange options for cash. We also considered implementing a
program to exchange significantly underwater options for cash
payments. However, an exchange program where options are
generally exchanged for cash would substantially increase our
compensation expenses and reduce our cash flow from operations,
which could adversely affect our business and operating results.
In addition, we do not believe that such a program would have
significant long-term retention value or provide continuing
incentives that align the interests of our employees with those
of our stockholders.
|
|
|
|
Exchange options for options with lower exercise prices. We also
considered implementing a program to exchange significantly
underwater options for options having an exercise price equal to
the market price of our common stock on the date of the
exchange. However, as described above, we believe that
implementing an
option-for-RSU
exchange program would have three relative advantages versus an
option-for-option
exchange program with an equivalent accounting impact. First, an
option-for-RSU
exchange program would require the grant of substantially fewer
RSUs than options in an
option-for-option
exchange program (i.e., fewer shares will be subject to the
replacement RSU awards granted than replacement option awards),
and thus preserve more of the share awards available under the
FTIP for future grants. Second, granting RSUs is consistent with
our current grant practices and provides value to our employees
even if current economic conditions continue and our stock price
fails to increase further. Third, because the motivational
aspects of an RSU over a stock option can be greater depending
on the circumstances, that prospect can result in enhanced value
to the Company for the compensation charges that will be
recognized by the Company to grant an RSU award versus a stock
option award.
|
Implementing
the Exchange Program
We have not commenced the Exchange Program and will not do so
unless our stockholders approve this proposal. Provided such
approval is received, the Exchange Program will commence at a
time determined by the Committee. However, even if the Exchange
Program is approved by our stockholders, the Committee will
retain the authority, in its discretion, to terminate or
postpone the Exchange Program at any time prior to expiration of
the election period under the Exchange Program. Upon the
commencement of the Exchange Program, eligible employees holding
Eligible Options will receive written materials explaining the
precise terms and timing of the Exchange Program (an Offer
to Exchange). Employees will be given at least 20 business
days to elect to
31
surrender their Eligible Options in exchange for RSUs. At or
before commencement of the Exchange Program, we will file the
Offer to Exchange with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (the SEC) as part of a tender offer
statement on Schedule TO. Eligible employees, as well as
stockholders and members of the public, will be able to obtain
the Offer to Exchange and other documents filed by us with the
SEC free of charge from the SECs website at www.sec.gov.
If stockholders approve this Exchange Program proposal, we would
anticipate commencing the Exchange Program no later than
December 31, 2011. For purposes of the examples in this
proposal, we have assumed a commencement date of June 1,
2011.
Description
of the Exchange Program
Eligible Options. As noted above, the
Eligible Options as of the date the Exchange Program
commences that may be exchanged are options (1) with an
exercise price that is higher than the highest closing price of
our common stock during the 52-week period prior to that date,
(2) were granted more than two years prior to that date and
(3) will have a remaining term of life of more than two
years as of that date. As of March 10, 2011, options for
approximately 2,812,625 shares of our common stock were
outstanding under all of our equity compensation plans. Of these
outstanding options, the number of options held by eligible
employees with exercise prices above $11.20 (the highest closing
price of our common stock during the 52-week period ending
March 10, 2011) that were granted more than two years
ago and have at least a two year or longer remaining life is
approximately 927,000. In all cases, options that have exercise
prices less than the highest closing price of our common stock
as reported on the Nasdaq exchange during the 52-week period
prior to the commencement of the Exchange Program and options
granted either less than two years before the commencement of
the Exchange Program or having less than a two year remaining
life will not be Eligible Options. The Committee will finalize
the minimum exercise price of the Eligible Options prior to the
commencement of the Exchange Program and may increase (but not
decrease) the minimum exercise price for Eligible Options above
the 52-week high for our stock price if it deems appropriate in
light of our stock price at the time the Exchange Program
commences.
Eligible Employees. The Exchange Program will be
open to all of our employees and employees of any of our
subsidiaries designated for participation by the Committee who
hold Eligible Options. However, members of our Board of
Directors and our senior executive management team, namely, our
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice
President, Marketing and Sales, and our Executive Vice
President, Worldwide Operations will not be able to participate.
We may exclude employees in certain
non-U.S. jurisdictions
from the Exchange Program if local law would make their
participation infeasible or impractical. To be eligible, an
employee must be employed by us or one of our participating
subsidiaries both at the time the Offer to Exchange commences
and on the date the surrendered options are cancelled and RSUs
are granted to replace them. Any employee holding Eligible
Options who elects to participate but whose employment
terminates for any reason prior to the grant of the RSUs,
including voluntary resignation, retirement, involuntary
termination, layoff, death or disability, will not be eligible
to participate in the Exchange Program and will instead retain
his or her Eligible Options subject to their existing terms. As
of March 10, 2011, approximately 927,000, Eligible Options
were held by approximately 96 eligible employees (based on a
minimum exercise price for Eligible Options of $11.20 per share).
Exchange Ratios. Our objective is to establish
exchange ratios that will result in the grant of RSUs in the
Exchange Program that, in the aggregate, will have a value no
greater than the value of the Eligible Options surrendered. The
exchange ratios will be finalized by the Committee prior to the
commencement of the Exchange Program and will be based on the
exercise price and remaining term of each of the Eligible
Options. We have estimated the fair value of the Eligible
Options using a Black-Scholes option valuation model. The
Black-Scholes model is a common method used for estimating the
fair value of a stock option, and we have been using this model
for required footnote disclosures in our financial statements.
We then calculated the illustrative exchange ratios listed in
the table below for the Eligible Options based on these
Black-Scholes valuations and an assumed fair market value for
one share of our common stock underlying an RSU to be issued in
the Exchange Program. For this purpose, we assumed a fair market
value per share equal to $8.15 which was the closing price per
share of our common stock on the Nasdaq exchange on
March 10, 2011.
32
TABLE OF
EXCHANGE RATIOS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs to be
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted (Assumes
|
|
|
|
Remaining Term
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Exchange
|
|
|
100%
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
(in years)
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Participation)
|
|
|
27.57
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
6,211
|
|
25.73
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
29,500
|
|
|
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
9,263
|
|
25.52
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
0.30
|
|
|
|
2,120
|
|
25.49
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
|
421,500
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
122,217
|
|
23.77
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
0.37
|
|
|
|
18,516
|
|
23.66
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
32,500
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
12,220
|
|
22.63
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
|
|
22,000
|
|
|
|
0.36
|
|
|
|
8,006
|
|
17.82
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
296,000
|
|
|
|
0.42
|
|
|
|
123,489
|
|
17.49
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
0.33
|
|
|
|
825
|
|
15.42
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
43,500
|
|
|
|
0.46
|
|
|
|
19,930
|
|
15.03
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
9,500
|
|
11.40
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
0.41
|
|
|
|
8,270
|
|
11.22
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
|
3,284
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
927,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325,335
|
|
The total number of RSUs a participating employee will receive
with respect to a surrendered Eligible Option will be determined
by multiplying the number of shares subject to the surrendered
option by the applicable exchange ratio and rounding down to the
nearest whole share.
As described above, the illustrative valuation of the Eligible
Options and the RSUs that may be granted under the Exchange
Program was made and the exchange ratios were calculated on the
basis of our closing stock price on March 10, 2011. The
Committee will finalize the minimum exercise price for Eligible
Options, the exchange ratios and the other terms of the Exchange
Program using the approach outlined in this proposal prior to
the commencement of the Exchange Program.
Election to Participate. Participation in the
Exchange Program will be voluntary. Eligible employees will have
an election period of at least 20 business days from the
commencement of the Exchange Program in which to determine
whether they wish to participate. Eligible employees holding
more than one Eligible Option may elect to tender any or all of
their Eligible Options in the Exchange Program.
Vesting of RSUs. RSUs issued in the Exchange
Program will be completely unvested at the time they are granted
and will become vested on the basis of the participants
continued employment with us or any of our subsidiaries. The
RSUs will vest over two years measured from the date of grant,
regardless of the extent to which the corresponding Eligible
Options were vested upon surrender, with 100% of the RSUs
vesting on the second anniversary of the date of grant. A
participant in the Exchange Program will forfeit any RSUs
received that remain unvested at the time his or her employment
with us terminates for any reason. In addition, vested RSU
forfeiture will occur if prior to settlement, the employee is
terminated for cause or if after employment termination the
participant violates a one year covenant not to compete. The
Committee may provide for the acceleration of vesting of RSUs in
connection with a change in control.
Other Terms and Conditions of RSUs. RSUs issued in
the Exchange Program will be granted pursuant to the FTIP. Each
RSU represents a contingent right to receive one share of our
common stock on a fixed settlement date, which is the date on
which the RSU vests subject to the ability to defer settlement.
The holder is not required to pay any monetary consideration to
receive shares of our common stock upon settlement of his or her
RSUs. The holder does not have any voting rights, dividend
rights or other rights as a stockholder with respect to the RSUs
prior to the time the units vest and shares of our common stock
related to the vested RSUs have been distributed to the
holder.
33
Terms and Conditions of the FTIP. The FTIP is
administered by the Committee. The Committee has authority to
interpret the plan provisions and make all required
determinations under the plan. Awards may be granted under the
FTIP only to directors, officers, employees, consultants or
agents of us or any of our subsidiary corporations or other
affiliated entities. The types of awards that may be granted
under the FTIP include stock options, stock appreciation rights,
restricted stock, RSUs, performance shares, performance units,
deferred compensation awards, and other stock-based and
cash-based awards.
Awards granted under the FTIP are generally only transferable to
a beneficiary of a participant upon his death. Under the terms
of the FTIP, if we undergo a change in control, outstanding
awards granted under the plan will generally be assumed or
otherwise continued by the successor entity. The Compensation
Committee has discretion to provide for the vesting of
outstanding awards to accelerate in connection with a change in
control.
Potential Modification to Exchange Program Terms to Comply
with Governmental Requirements. The terms of the
Exchange Program will be described in an Offer to Exchange that
will be filed with the SEC. Although we do not anticipate that
the SEC would require us to modify the terms materially, it is
possible that in addition to other potential modifications the
Exchange Program already mentioned that we will need to alter
the terms of the Exchange Program to comply with comments from
the SEC. Further, we intend to make the Exchange Program
available to some of our employees who are located outside of
the United States, where permitted by local law and where we
determine it is feasible or practical to do so. It is possible
that we may need to make modifications to the terms offered to
employees in countries outside the U.S. to comply with
local requirements, or for tax or accounting reasons.
Summary
of U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences
The U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Exchange
Program under current federal law, which is subject to change,
are summarized below. This summary is not intended to be
exhaustive and, among other considerations, does not describe
state, local or international tax consequences.
The exchange of Eligible Options for RSUs pursuant to the
Exchange Program should be treated as a non-taxable exchange.
Eligible employees should recognize no income for
U.S. federal income tax purposes upon the surrender of
Eligible Options and the grant of RSUs. However, employees
generally will recognize taxable income upon settlement of the
RSUs that is subject to income and employment tax withholding.
We may elect to satisfy our tax withholding obligations by
deducting from the shares of common stock that would otherwise
be issued in settlement of RSUs a number of whole shares having
a fair market value that, at a minimum, meets the Companys
applicable minimum federal statutory and any other legally
mandated withholding requirements for the Company.
Accounting
Treatment
Under Financial Accounting Standards Board Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised), the fair
value of each award of RSUs granted to employees in exchange for
surrendered stock options (determined as of the date the RSUs
are granted) over the fair value of the original award
immediately before its terms are modified, plus any unrecognized
expense for the stock options surrendered in exchange for the
RSUs, will be recognized by us as an expense for compensation.
This expense will be recognized ratably over the vesting period
of the RSUs. In the event that any of the RSUs are forfeited
prior to their vesting due to termination of employment, any
previously recognized expense for the forfeited RSUs will be
reversed so that ultimately no expense for those RSUs will have
been recognized.
New Plan
Benefits
Because the decision whether to participate in the Exchange
Program is completely voluntary, we are not able to predict how
many or which employees will elect to participate, how many
options will be surrendered for exchange or the number of RSUs
that may be granted under the program. As noted above, members
of our Board of Directors and certain of our executive officers
are not eligible to participate in the Exchange Program.
34
Effect on
Stockholders
We described in the Reasons for the Exchange
Program section above the potential benefits to
stockholders associated with the Exchange Program. However, we
are not able to predict the precise beneficial impact the
Exchange Program will have on our stockholders because we are
unable to predict how many or which employees will exchange
their Eligible Options. As noted above, the Exchange Program was
designed to be no less than value neutral to our stockholders.
Also, as noted above, of the Eligible Options held by employees
as of March 10, 2011, the maximum number of shares of
common stock underlying Eligible Options (assuming a minimum
exercise price for Eligible Options of $11.20 per share) which
could be exchanged is approximately 927,000, and the maximum
number of shares of common stock underlying the RSUs which could
be granted based on the exchange ratios described above is
approximately 325,335.
The following table presents, for purposes of example only,
information regarding the potential effects of the Exchange
Program on our outstanding stock awards. For purposes of this
table, we have assumed that the minimum exercise price of the
Eligible Options will be $11.20 per share, that all of the
Eligible Options as of March 10, 2011 will be tendered in
the Exchange Program, and that the number of RSUs to be granted
in exchange for each Eligible Option will be determined based on
the exchange ratios presented in the table above. We have also
assumed a fair market value per share equal to $8.15 which was
the closing price of our common stock on the Nasdaq exchange on
March 10, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals After
|
|
|
Totals Before Giving
|
|
Giving Effect
|
|
|
Effect to Exchange Program
|
|
to Exchange
|
|
|
(as of March 10, 2011)
|
|
Program
|
|
Shares Available for Grant Under Equity Plans
|
|
|
3,396,887
|
|
|
|
3,321,678
|
|
Shares Subject to Outstanding Options
|
|
|
2,812,625
|
|
|
|
1,885,625
|
|
Weighted Average Exercise Price
|
|
$
|
14.50
|
|
|
$
|
8.02
|
|
Weighted Average Remaining Term
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
Shares Subject to Outstanding Full-Value Awards
|
|
|
149,000
|
|
|
|
474,335
|
|
Total Number of Shares Subject to Outstanding Awards
|
|
|
2,961,625
|
|
|
|
2,359,960
|
|
Shares Available for Future Grant
|
|
|
435,262
|
|
|
|
961,718
|
|
Required
Vote and Board of Directors Recommendation
The Board of Directors believes that the approval of the
Exchange Program is in our interests and the interests of our
stockholders for the reasons stated above.
The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares voting is
required for the approval of this proposal. The Board recommends
a vote FOR this proposal.
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 3 APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
On July 12, 2010, the Registrants then current
independent registered public accounting firm, Grant Thornton
LLP (Grant Thornton) resigned. The Audit Committee approved the
resignation of Grant Thornton. With respect to Grant Thornton
and its service as the Registrants independent registered
public accounting firm:
(i) Grant Thorntons report on the Registrants
consolidated financial statements for the past two years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008 did not contain an adverse
opinion or a disclaimer of opinion, and was not qualified or
modified as to uncertainty, audit scope, or accounting
principles.
(ii) During the Registrants two most recent fiscal
years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 and the subsequent
period through July 12, 2010, the Registrant did not have
any disagreements (as defined in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) of
Regulation S-K
and the related instructions to Item 304 of
Regulation S-K)
with Grant Thornton on any matter of accounting principles or
practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or
procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the
satisfaction of Grant Thornton, would have caused it
35
to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in
connection with its report. Also during that period, there had
been no reportable events as that term is described in
Item 304(a)(1)(v) of
Regulation S-K.
On July 28, 2010, the Audit Committee approved the
appointment of McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
(McGladrey & Pullen) as the Registrants
independent registered accounting firm for the year ending
December 31, 2010. We are asking you to ratify that
appointment. McGladrey & Pullen has served in this
capacity since its July 2010 appointment and has become
knowledgeable about Fuel Techs operations and accounting
practices and is well qualified to act in the capacity of
independent registered accountants. In making the appointment,
the Audit Committee reviewed McGladrey & Pullens
performance along with its reputation for integrity, overall
competence in accounting and auditing and independence.
Representatives of McGladrey & Pullen will be present
at the Annual Meeting and will have the opportunity to make a
statement, if they wish to do so, and be available to respond to
questions.
Audit
Fees
Fees for professional services provided by McGladrey &
Pullen and Grant Thornton, as applicable, in each of the last
two fiscal years by category were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Audit Fees
|
|
$
|
265,629
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
327,301
|
(2)
|
Audit-Related Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
265,629
|
|
|
$
|
362,301
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Audit fees paid to McGladrey & Pullen. |
|
(2) |
|
Audit fees paid to Grant Thornton. |
|
(3) |
|
Expenses shown relate to audit fees paid to Grant Thornton in
preparing the audited financial statements of Advanced
Combustion Technology, Inc. Fuel Tech acquired substantially all
of the assets of Advanced Combustion Technology, Inc. in
January, 2009. |
Pre-Approval
Policies and Procedures
Fuel Techs policy and procedure is that each engagement
for an audit or non-audit service is approved in advance by the
Audit Committee.
The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares voting is
required for the approval of this proposal. The Board recommends
a vote FOR this proposal.
Report of
the Audit Committee
Management is primarily responsible for Fuel Techs
internal controls and financial reporting. McGladrey &
Pullen, the independent auditors, are responsible for performing
independent audits of Fuel Techs consolidated financial
statements and its internal control over financial reporting in
accordance with the auditing standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board. These audits serve as the basis for
McGladrey & Pullens opinions included in annual
reports to stockholders as to whether the financial statements
fairly present, in all material respects, Fuel Techs
financial position, results of operations, and cash flows in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles, whether managements assessment of the
effectiveness of Fuel Techs internal control over
financial reporting is fairly stated in all material respects,
and whether Fuel Techs internal control over financial
reporting was effective. The Committee is responsible for the
review and oversight of these processes.
Management has represented that Fuel Techs 2010 financial
statements were prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. The
Committee has reviewed and discussed with both management and
McGladrey & Pullen the 2010 financial statements,
managements report on internal control over financial
reporting and McGladrey & Pullens report on
internal control over financial reporting. The Committee
36
has also discussed with McGladrey & Pullen the matters
required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards
No. 61, as amended (AICPA, Professional Standards, Vol. 1
AU section 380), as adopted by the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board.
The Committee has received the written disclosures and the
letter from McGladrey & Pullen required by the
applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board regarding the independent accountants
communications with the Committee concerning independence, and
has represented that McGladrey & Pullen is independent
from Fuel Tech. The Committee has discussed with
McGladrey & Pullen their independence and concluded
that the provision of the services described above under the
caption Audit Fees is compatible with maintaining
their independence.
The Committee also reviewed its Charter and determined that no
changes are required to the Charter.
Based on the representations, reviews and discussions referred
to above, the Committee recommended to the Board that Fuel
Techs audited consolidated financial statements be
included in its Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010 and filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
By the Audit Committee:
M. Espinosa, Chairman
T. L.
Jones and J. D. Morrow
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 4 ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
In accordance with the recently enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the Dodd-Frank
Act), we are offering our stockholders the opportunity to
cast an advisory vote (commonly referred to as the say on
pay vote) on the Companys executive compensation
program for our NEOs. Although this advisory vote is nonbinding,
the Board of Directors and the Compensation and Nominating
Committee will take into account the outcome of the vote when
considering future compensation decisions for our NEOs.
As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section
of this proxy statement, we believe our compensation program is
based on a
pay-for-performance
structure, is well-aligned with the long-term interests of our
stockholders, and is designed to attract, motivate, and retain
NEOs who are critical to our success. Some of the features of
our compensation program that illustrate our philosophy are:
|
|
|
|
|
By design, two of the three components of each NEOs
overall compensation package are at-risk and are subject to the
Companys performance. As explained in detail in the
Summary of NEO Compensation portion of the Compensation
Discussion and Analysis, in fiscal 2010, NEO incentive
compensation, whether short-term or long-term, was determined
based on the Companys financial, operational or sales
performance, or a combination of those factors.
|
|
|
|
Base salary and base salary increases for Fuel Techs NEOs
are typically in keeping with market pay data for comparable
executive positions in companies from Fuel Techs
established peer group (Also see
Use of Peer Group above).
Exceptional increases are limited to promotions or situations
where the executives job performance is strong and
his/her base
salary is significantly under the market median.
|
|
|
|
Both in design and application, the applicable cash-based
short-term incentive program for each of our NEOs is a
pay-for-performance
program.
|
|
|
|
Our stock option awards and RSU grant awards feature graduated
vesting over a multiple year period. For an RSU grant award, the
number of years in the vesting period can vary. In 2010, all RSU
grants awarded had a graduated four year vesting period.
|
Stockholders are encouraged to read the full details of our
executive compensation program as described in the Compensation
Discussion and Analysis, the accompanying compensation tables
and related narrative disclosure to properly evaluate our
approach to compensating our executives.
37
For the reasons provided above, we recommend that the
stockholders vote in favor of the following resolution:
RESOLVED, that the stockholders approve, on an advisory
non-binding basis, the compensation of the Companys named
executive officers, as disclosed in the Compensation Discussion
and Analysis and the accompanying compensation tables and
related narrative disclosure in this proxy statement.
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR this
proposal to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of
the Companys named executive officers.
AGENDA
ITEM NO. 5 ADVISORY VOTE ON THE FREQUENCY
OF THE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION ADVISORY VOTE
In addition to providing an advisory vote on our compensation
program for our named executive officers, we are requesting
stockholders to indicate their preference for the frequency with
which these advisory votes should take place every
one, two or three years. This vote is mandated by
Section 951 of the Dodd-Frank Act and SEC regulations.
Stockholders may indicate their preference on this advisory vote
by choosing an annual, biennial or triennial vote frequency, or
abstaining on this vote when stockholders vote in response to
the resolution set forth below. We will ask stockholders not
less than every six years whether they desire a different vote
frequency on the advisory vote on our compensation program for
our named executive officers.
Resolved, that a non-binding advisory vote of the
Companys stockholders to approve, on an advisory basis,
the compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed
pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC be held
at an Annual Meeting of Stockholders, beginning with the 2011
Annual Meeting of the Stockholders, every one year, two years or
three years.
The Board of Directors has recommended that the stockholders
approve that the Company provide for our stockholders a
non-binding advisory vote on our named executive officer
compensation program annually. We believe that an annual
advisory vote on our compensation program for our named
executive officers can create a greater opportunity for us to
obtain information on stockholders views of the
compensation program of our named executive officers including
the Companys compensation philosophy, policies and
implementation approach. Thus, we believe that stockholders
should support an annual advisory vote on executive compensation.
The option of one year, two years or three years that receives
the highest number of votes cast by the stockholders will be the
frequency for the advisory vote on named executive officer
compensation that has been selected by stockholders. However,
because this is an advisory vote, this proposal is not binding
upon the Company in any way and the Companys Board of
Directors may decide that it is in the best interests of
stockholders and the Company to hold an advisory vote on
executive compensation more or less frequently than the option
approved by the stockholders. The Boards Compensation and
Nominating Committee, which is responsible for approving our
executive compensation program, and the Board of Directors value
the opinions expressed by stockholders in their vote on this
proposal, and will consider the outcome of the vote when making
a decision about the frequency of future advisory votes on
executive compensation.
The Board of Directors recommends that you select ONE YEAR
as your preference for the frequency with which our stockholders
would have the opportunity to provide an advisory vote on the
Companys named executive officer compensation.
GENERAL
Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Fuel Tech believes that all reports required to be filed under
Section 16(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
for the year 2010 were timely filed except for the following
instances: that Form 4 filings for Mr. R.E. Bailey due
on March 25, April 2, July 5 and October 4 were filed
on April 5, May 20, July 28 and October 6,
respectively; due for Mr. Jones on April 2,
July 5, October 4 and May 24 were filed on May 20,
July 29, October 7 and May 25, respectively; due for
Mr. Espinosa on May 24 was filed on May 25; and a
Form 3 filing due for Mr. Collins on July 23 was filed
on July 27.
38
Other
Business
Management knows of no other matters that may properly be, or
are likely to be, brought before the Annual Meeting other than
those described in this Proxy Statement.
Stockholder
Proposals
Stockholder proposals intended for inclusion in the proxy
statement and proxy to be mailed to all stockholders entitled to
vote at the annual meeting of stockholders to be held in the
year 2011 must be received in writing addressed to the Board of
Directors or the Secretary of Fuel Tech at 27601 Bella Vista
Parkway, Warrenville, IL 60555 on or before
December 17, 2011, and, if not received by such date, may
be excluded from the proxy materials.
Communicating
With the Board of Directors
Any stockholder desiring to send a communication to the Board of
Directors, or any individual director, may forward such
communication to the Secretary to the address provided above for
stockholder proposals. Under procedures fixed from time to time
by the independent directors, the Secretary will collect and
organize all such communications and forward them to the Board
or individual director. Fuel Tech generally will not forward to
the directors a communication that is primarily commercial in
nature, relates to an improper or irrelevant topic, or requests
general information regarding Fuel Tech.
FUEL TECH, INC.
Albert G. Grigonis
Secretary
April [ ], 2011
39
YOUR
VOTE IS IMPORTANT. PLEASE VOTE TODAY.
We encourage you to take advantage of Internet or telephone voting.
Both are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Internet and telephone voting is available through 11:59 PM Eastern Time
the day prior to annual meeting day.
INTERNET
http://www.proxyvoting.com/ftek
Use the Internet to vote your proxy.
Have your proxy card in hand when you
access the web site.
OR
TELEPHONE
1-866-540-5760
Use any touch-tone telephone to vote your proxy. Have your proxy card in hand when you call.
If you vote your proxy by Internet or by telephone, you do NOT need to mail back your proxy card.
To vote by mail, mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.
Your Internet or telephone vote authorizes the named proxies to vote your shares in the same manner as if you marked, signed and returned your proxy card.
WO#
95365
6 FOLD AND DETACH HERE 6
|
|
|
|
|
THIS PROXY WILL BE VOTED AS DIRECTED, OR IF NO DIRECTION IS INDICATED, WILL BE VOTED FOR
THE ELECTION OF DIRECTORS, FOR ITEMS 2 THROUGH 4 AND FOR EVERY 1 YEAR ON ITEM 5.
|
|
Please mark your votes as
indicated in this example
|
|
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOR ALL
|
WITHHOLD FOR ALL
|
|
*EXCEPTIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FOR
|
AGAINST
|
|
ABSTAIN |
|
1. |
ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
Nominees: |
o
|
o
|
|
o
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
Proposal to approve a stock option for restricted stock unit exchange program. |
|
|
o
|
o
|
|
o |
|
01 Douglas G. Bailey 02 Miguel Espinosa 03 Charles W. Grinnell
|
04 Thomas L. Jones 05 John D. Morrow 06 Thomas S. Shaw, Jr.; and 07 Delbert L. Williamson |
|
|
|
|
3. |
|
Ratification of the appointment of McGladry & Pullen, LLP as Fuel Techs independent registered public accounting firm for the year 2011.
|
|
|
o
|
o
|
|
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
|
Proposal to approve the advisory (non-binding) resolution relating to executive compensation.
|
|
|
o
|
o
|
|
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(INSTRUCTIONS: To withhold
authority to vote for any individual nominee, mark the Exceptions box above and write that nominees name in the space provided below.) |
|
|
|
The Board of Directors recommends a vote for Shareholder approval every 1 year. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 year |
|
2 years |
3 years |
Abstain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Executive compensation frequency shareholder vote
|
o
|
|
o
|
o |
o |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*Exceptions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Here for Address Change or Comments
SEE REVERSE
|
|
o |
Please sign exactly as name appears. If acting as attorney, executor, trustee or in other representative capacity, insert name and title.
You can now access your Fuel Tech, Inc. account online.
Access
your Fuel Tech, Inc. account online via Investor ServiceDirect® (ISD).
BNY
Mellon Shareowner Services, the transfer agent for Fuel Tech, Inc., now makes it easy and convenient to get current
information on your shareholder account.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
View account status
|
|
View payment history for dividends |
|
|
View certificate history
|
|
Make address changes |
|
|
View book-entry information
|
|
Obtain a duplicate 1099 tax form |
Visit us on the web at www.bnymellon.com/shareowner/equityaccess
For Technical
Assistance Call 1-877-978-7778 between 9am-7pm
Monday-Friday Eastern Time
Investor ServiceDirect®
Available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week
TOLL FREE NUMBER: 1-800-370-1163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Choose MLinkSM
for fast, easy and secure 24/7 online access
to your future proxy materials, investment plan statements, tax documents
and more. Simply log on to Investor ServiceDirect® at
www.bnymellon.com/shareowner/equityaccess where step-by-step instructions will prompt
you through enrollment.
|
|
|
Important
notice regarding the Internet availability of proxy materials for the
Annual Meeting of shareholders. The Proxy Statement and the 2010
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010
are available at:
http://bnymellon.mobular.net/bnymellon/ftek
6 FOLD AND DETACH HERE 6
Solicited by the Board of Directors
Fuel Tech, Inc.
Annual Meeting of Stockholders - May 19, 2011
The undersigned hereby appoints Douglas G. Bailey, or Albert G. Grigonis, each acting singly, with full power of substitution, proxies for
the undersigned and authorizes them to represent and vote, as designated on the reverse side, all of the shares of Common Stock of Fuel Tech, Inc.
(Fuel Tech) which the undersigned may be entitled to vote at the annual meeting of stockholders of Fuel Tech to be held at 10:00 a.m., local time,
at the offices of Fuel Tech at 27601 Bella Vista Parkway, Warnenville, Illinois 60521 on Thursday, May 19, 2011, and at any adjournments or postponements
of the meeting, as provided on the reverse side, and with discretionary authority as to any other matters that may properly come before the meeting, all in accordance
with and as described in the notice of meeting and accompanying proxy statement. The Board of Directors recommends a vote for election as director of each of the
nominees and for approval of each other agenda item, and, if no direction is given, this proxy will be voted for all nominees and for such other items.
IMPORTANT - TO BE SIGNED AND DATED ON THE REVERSE SIDE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BNY MELLON SHAREOWNER SERVICES |
|
|
|
Address Change/Comments
|
|
|
P.O. BOX 3550 |
|
|
|
(Mark the corresponding box on the reverse side)
|
|
|
SOUTH HACKENSACK, NJ 07606-9250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WO#
95365