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:

 

27175 ENERGY WAY
NOVI, MICHIGAN 48377

April 15, 2010

 

Dear Shareholder:

 

You are cordially invited to attend our Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which will be held on Wednesday, May 19, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. local time at our corporate headquarters located at 27175 Energy Way, Novi, Michigan. After the formal business session, there will be a report to the shareholders on the state of the Company and a question and answer session.

 

The attached notice and proxy statement describe the items of business to be transacted at the meeting. Your vote is important, regardless of the number of shares you own. I urge you to vote now, even if you plan to attend the Annual Meeting. You can vote your shares in person, or by phone, Internet or mail. Follow the instructions on the enclosed proxy card. If you receive more than one proxy card, please vote each card. Remember, you can always vote in person at the Annual Meeting even if you do so now, provided you are a shareholder of record or have a legal proxy from a shareholder of record.

 

Sincerely,

 

ITC HOLDINGS CORP.

 

Joseph L. Welch

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

 

Novi, Michigan

April 15, 2010

 

 

27175 ENERGY WAY
NOVI, MICHIGAN 48377
(248) 946-3000

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
TO BE HELD ON MAY 19, 2010

 

TO THE SHAREHOLDERS:

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Annual Meeting of Shareholders of ITC Holdings Corp. will be held at our corporate headquarters located at 27175 Energy Way, Novi, Michigan 48377, on May 19, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time, for the following purposes:

 

(1) To elect a Board of Directors to serve until the next annual meeting of shareholders;

 

(2) To ratify the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accountants for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010; and

 

(3) To transact such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

 

Only shareholders of record at the close of business on April 5, 2010 are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting.

 

YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT. PLEASE VOTE ON THE ENCLOSED PROXY CARD NOW EVEN IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING. YOU CAN VOTE BY SIGNING, DATING AND RETURNING YOUR PROXY CARD BY MAIL IN THE ENCLOSED RETURN ENVELOPE, WHICH REQUIRES NO ADDITIONAL POSTAGE IF MAILED IN THE UNITED STATES, OR BY TELEPHONE OR INTERNET BY FOLLOWING THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE PROXY CARD. IF YOU DO ATTEND THE ANNUAL MEETING, YOU MAY REVOKE YOUR PROXY AND VOTE IN PERSON IF YOU ARE A SHAREHOLDER OF RECORD OR HAVE A LEGAL PROXY FROM A SHAREHOLDER OF RECORD.

 

By Order of the Board of Directors,

 

Wendy A. McIntyre

Secretary

 

Novi, Michigan

April 15, 2010

 

ITC Holdings Corp.
27175 Energy Way
Novi, Michigan 48377
(248) 946-3000

April 15, 2010

 

PROXY STATEMENT

 

 

The Board of Directors is furnishing this proxy statement in connection with its solicitation of proxies for use at our 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, and at any and all adjournments and postponements thereof, for the purposes set forth in the accompanying notice. References in this proxy statement to the Company, we, our and us are to ITC Holdings Corp., a Michigan corporation. We intend to begin mailing this proxy statement, the attached Notice of Annual Meeting and the accompanying proxy card to shareholders on or about April 15, 2010. The following are questions and answers that convey important information regarding the Annual Meeting and how to vote your shares.

 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING AND VOTING

 

 

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE
SHAREHOLDER MEETING TO BE HELD ON MAY 19, 2010

 

The proxy statement and annual report to shareholders are available at the following website: http://itc.client.shareholder.com/annuals.cfm. The means to vote by Internet are available by accessing www.investorvote.com and following the instructions provided on the secure website using certain information provided on the front of the proxy card. Directions to attend the meeting in person may be obtained by contacting us at 248-946-3000.

 

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING DELIVERY OF
ANNUAL REPORT AND PROXY STATEMENT

 

To reduce the expenses of delivering duplicate materials to our shareholders, we are taking advantage of householding rules that permit us to deliver only one set of proxy solicitation materials and our Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 to shareholders who share the same address, unless otherwise requested. Each shareholder retains a separate right to vote on all matters presented at the meeting.

 

If you share an address with another shareholder and have received only one set of materials, you may write or call us to request a separate copy of these materials at no cost to you. For future annual meetings, you may request separate materials or request that we only send one set of materials to you if you are receiving multiple copies by writing to us at ITC Holdings Corp., Attn: Corporate Secretary, 27175 Energy Way, Novi, Michigan 48377, or calling us at (248) 946-3000.

 

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT AND MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS

 

The following table sets forth certain information regarding the ownership of our common stock as of March 1, 2010, except as otherwise indicated, by:

 

 

The number of shares beneficially owned is determined under rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and the information is not necessarily indicative of beneficial ownership for any other purpose. Under such rules, beneficial ownership includes any shares as to which the individual has sole or shared voting power or investment power and also any shares which the individual has the right to acquire on March 1, 2010 or within 60 days thereafter through the exercise of any stock option or other right.

 

Unless otherwise indicated, each holder has sole investment and voting power with respect to the shares set forth in the following table:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

 

Background

 

Our Bylaws provide for the election of directors at each annual meeting of shareholders. Each director serves until the next annual meeting and until his or her successor is elected and qualified, or until his or her resignation or removal. Directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast, so that only votes cast “for” directors are counted in determining which directors are elected. The size of our Board is currently set at seven directors and there are seven nominees for election. Therefore, the seven directors receiving the most votes “for” will be elected. Broker non-votes and withheld votes will be treated as shares present for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum but will have no effect on the vote for the election of directors. Information with respect to the seven nominees proposed for election is set forth below.

 

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR each of the director nominees. The persons named in the accompanying proxy card will vote for the election of the nominees named in this proxy statement unless shareholders specify otherwise in their proxies. If any nominee at the time of election is unable to serve, or otherwise is unavailable for election, and if other nominees are designated by the Board of Directors, the persons named as proxy holders on the accompanying proxy card intend to vote for such nominees. Management is not aware of the existence of any circumstance which would render the nominees named below unavailable for election. All of the nominees are currently directors of the Company.

 

Nominees For Directors

 

Set forth below are the names and ages of the nominees. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION OF EACH OF THE NOMINEES NAMED BELOW.

 

Edward G. Jepsen, 66.  Mr. Jepsen, an independent business consultant, became a Director of the Company in July 2005. Mr. Jepsen currently serves as a director, chair of the audit committee and member of the compensation committee of the board of directors of Amphenol Corporation and as a director, chair of the audit committee, and member of the compensation committee of the board of directors of Gerber Scientific, Inc. Mr. Jepsen served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Amphenol Corporation, a publicly traded manufacturer of electrical, electronic and fiber optic connectors, interconnect systems and cable, from 1989 to 2004. Prior to joining Amphenol Corporation, Mr. Jepsen worked at Price Waterhouse LLP from 1969 to 1988, ultimately attaining the position of partner. The Board selected Mr. Jepsen to serve as a director because of the expansive financial and accounting experience he obtained as a chief financial officer and Certified Public Accountant. Mr. Jepsen is an “audit committee financial expert” as defined in applicable SEC and NYSE rules.

 

Richard D. McLellan, 67.  Mr. McLellan became a Director of the Company in November 2007. Mr. McLellan retired in April 2007 after 25 years as the director of the government policy department for the law firm of Dykema Gossett PLLC. He continues to consult and provide limited legal services to select clients. Mr. McLellan is currently chairman of the Michigan Law Revision Commission, a position he has held since 1986, and Chairman of the Board for the Council for Africa Infrastructure Development. In June 2007, he was named Special Counsel to the Chairman of the Michigan House Appropriations Committee. Mr. McLellan previously served two terms as a member of the Board of Commissioners of the State Bar of Michigan and served on the Board of Trustees of the Michigan State University College of Law. He is a member of the Advisory Board for the Michigan State University James H. and Mary B. Quello Center for Telecommunications Management and Law and teaches as an adjunct professor at Michigan State University’s Department of Advertising, Public Relations and Retailing. The Board selected Mr. McLellan to serve as a director because of his extensive knowledge of public policy matters as well as his decades of experience in the practice of law.

 

William J. Museler, 69.  Mr. Museler is an independent energy consultant. He became a Director of the Company in November 2006. Previously, he served as president and CEO of the New York Independent System Operator from 1999 to 2005. Prior to his service at NYISO, Mr. Museler held senior positions at the Tennessee Valley Authority from 1991 to 1999, Long Island Lighting Company from 1973 to 1991 and Brookhaven National Laboratory from 1967 to 1973. He has served as a federal representative for the North American Electric Reliability Council and as chairman of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council. He was a member of the Secretary of

Energy’s Energy Advisory Board from 2001 to 2005 and is currently a director of the Independent Electric System Operator in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The Board selected Mr. Museler to serve as a director due to his lifelong career in the utility industry, as well as his invaluable experience with electric reliability matters.

 

Hazel R. O’Leary, 72.  Ms. O’Leary became a Director of the Company in July 2007. Since 2004, Ms. O’Leary has served as the President of Fisk University in Nashville, Tennessee and she currently serves on the boards of directors of the Nashville Alliance for Public Education, Nashville Business Community for the Arts, World Wildlife Fund and Arms Control Association. Ms. O’Leary served as an assistant attorney general and assistant prosecutor in the state of New Jersey and was appointed to the Federal Energy Administration under President Gerald Ford and to the Department of Energy under President Jimmy Carter. Ms. O’Leary worked in the private sector as a principal at the independent public accounting firm of Coopers and Lybrand from 1977 to 1979. In 1981 she was named vice president and general counsel of O’Leary and Associates, a company focused on international economics as related to energy issues. She served in that capacity until 1989 and then returned as president from 1997 to 2001. In 1989, she became executive vice president for environmental and public affairs for the Minnesota Northern States Power Company and in 1992 she was promoted to president of the holding company’s gas distribution subsidiary. Ms. O’Leary served as the Secretary of Energy from 1993 to 1997 and as president and chief operating officer for the investment banking firm Blaylock and Partners in New York from 2000 to 2002. Ms. O’Leary also served on the board of directors of UAL Corporation from 1999 to 2005. The Board selected Ms. O’Leary to serve as a director due to her unique combination of experience in government and in the utility industry.

 

Gordon Bennett Stewart, III, 57.  * Mr. Stewart became a Director of the Company in July 2006. In 1982, he co-founded Stern Stewart & Co., a global management consulting firm, where he served as Senior Partner until March 2006. Since then, Mr. Stewart has served as chief executive officer of EVA Dimensions, a firm he formed to acquire and manage the valuation modeling and investment research and funds management services of Stern Stewart & Co. He also currently serves as a member of the Alumni Advisory Council for Princeton University’s Department of Operations Research and Financial Engineering. Mr. Stewart has written and lectured widely in his 30 year professional career on topics such as accounting for value and management incentive plans. The Board selected Mr. Stewart to serve as a director because of his vast experience with executive compensation valuation and his unique insight into corporate governance matters.

 

Lee C. Stewart, 61.  *Mr. Stewart, an independent financial consultant, became a Director of the Company in August 2005. Mr. Stewart currently serves as a director, chair of the nominating/corporate governance committee and member of the compensation and finance committees of P.H. Glatfelter Company, as a director, chair of the human resources and compensation committee and member of the audit committee of Marsulex, Inc., and as a director, chair of the compensation committee and member of the audit committee of AEP Industries, Inc. Previously, Mr. Stewart was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Foamex International, Inc., a publicly traded manufacturer of flexible polyurethane and advanced polymer foam products, in 2001 and was Vice President responsible for all areas of Treasury at Union Carbide Corp., a chemicals and polymers company, from 1996 to 2001. Prior to that, Mr. Stewart was an investment banker for over 25 years. The Board selected Mr. Stewart to serve as a director due to his extensive knowledge of finance and capital raising through his experience as a treasury officer and an investment banker, which are critical elements in the execution of our business strategy. Mr. Stewart is also an “audit committee financial expert” as defined in applicable SEC and NYSE rules.

 

Joseph L. Welch, 61.  Mr. Welch has been a Director and the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since it began operations in 2003 and served as its Treasurer until April 2009. Mr. Welch has also served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company since May 2008. As the founder of ITCTransmission, Mr. Welch has had overall responsibility for the Company’s vision, foundation and transformation into the first independently owned and operated electricity transmission company in the United States. Mr. Welch worked for Detroit Edison Company, or Detroit Edison, and subsidiaries of DTE Energy Company, which we refer to collectively as DTE Energy, from 1971 to 2003. During that time, he held positions of increasing responsibility in the electricity transmission, distribution, rates, load research, marketing and pricing areas, as well as regulatory affairs that included the development and implementation of regulatory strategies. The Board selected Mr. Welch to serve as a director because he is the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer and he possesses unparalleled expertise in the electric transmission business.

 

* Gordon Bennett Stewart, III and Lee C. Stewart are not related.

 

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

 

Director Independence

 

Based on the absence of any material relationship between them and us, other than their capacities as directors and shareholders, the Board has determined that Mr. Jepsen, Mr. McLellan, Mr. Museler, Ms. O’Leary, Mr. Bennett Stewart and Mr. Lee Stewart are “independent” under applicable NYSE and SEC rules for board members. In addition, our Board has determined that, as the committees are currently constituted, all of the members of the Audit and Finance Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee are “independent” under applicable NYSE and SEC rules. None of the directors determined to be independent is or ever has been employed by us.

 

Mr. McLellan, who became a director of the Company in November 2007, was a member of the law firm Dykema Gossett PLLC until he retired in April 2007. Mr. McLellan acted as an independent consultant for the Dykema law firm through June 30, 2009, for which he was paid a nominal stipend. We made payments for legal services to the Dykema law firm amounting to less than 2% of its gross revenues during each of the last three calendar years. Mr. McLellan currently has no financial or other interest in such payments, and as a member of Dykema had no financial or other interest in such payments other than pro rata with the other members of the firm. Our Board considered this relationship when determining that Mr. McLellan is independent and determined that this relationship was not material and was unlikely to affect his ability to act as an independent board member.

 

Meetings and Committees of the Board of Directors

 

During 2009, our Board held 8 meetings. Each director attended 75% or more of the total number of meetings of the Board and committees of which he or she was a member in 2009. Mr. Lee Stewart was selected by our Board to chair its executive sessions. These sessions were held several times throughout the year.

 

Our policy is that all members of our Board are expected, absent a valid reason, to attend our annual shareholders’ meetings. All directors who were serving as such at the time of last year’s annual shareholders’ meeting attended the meeting.

 

Our Board has several standing committees, including but not limited to an Audit and Finance Committee, Compensation Committee, Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee and Security, Safety, Environmental, Health and Reliability Committee. The Board has adopted a written charter for each of these committees. The charters and our corporate governance principles are accessible on our website at www.itc-holdings.com through the “Corporate Governance” link on the “Investors” page.

 

Audit and Finance Committee

 

The Audit and Finance Committee met 6 times during 2009. The members of the Audit and Finance Committee are Messrs. Jepsen, Museler, Bennett Stewart and Lee Stewart, with Mr. Jepsen serving as Chair. The Board has determined that Mr. Jepsen is an “audit committee financial expert” as that term is defined under SEC rules and that all members of the Audit and Finance Committee satisfy all independence and other qualifications for Audit and Finance Committee members set forth in applicable NYSE and SEC rules. Our Audit and Finance Committee is responsible for, among other things, (1) selecting our independent public accountants, (2) approving the overall scope of the audit, (3) assisting our Board in monitoring the integrity of our financial statements, the independent public accountant’s qualifications and independence, the performance of the independent public accountants and our internal audit function and our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, (4) annually reviewing a report of our independent public accountants describing the firm’s internal quality-control procedures and any material issues raised by the most recent internal quality-control review, or peer review, of the firm, (5) discussing our annual audited and quarterly unaudited financial statements with management and our independent public accountants, (6) meeting separately and periodically with our management, internal auditors and independent public accountants, (7) reviewing with our independent public accountants any audit problems or difficulties and management’s response, (8) setting clear hiring policies for employees or former employees of our independent public accountants, and (9) handling such other matters that are specifically delegated to the Audit and Finance Committee by our Board from time to time, as well as other matters as set forth in the committee’s charter.

Audit and Finance Committee Report

 

In accordance with its written charter, the Audit and Finance Committee provides assistance to our Board in fulfilling the Board’s responsibility to our shareholders, potential shareholders and investment community relating to independent registered public accounting firm oversight, corporate accounting, reporting practices and the quality and integrity of the financial reports, including our internal controls over financial reporting.

 

The Audit and Finance Committee received and reviewed a formal written statement from Deloitte & Touche LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, describing all relationships between Deloitte & Touche LLP, the member firms of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, and their respective affiliates, whom we refer to collectively as Deloitte, and us that might bear on Deloitte’s independence consistent with applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant’s communications with the audit committee concerning independence, discussed with Deloitte any relationships that may impact their objectivity and independence, and satisfied itself as to Deloitte’s independence.

 

The Audit and Finance Committee discussed with Deloitte the matters required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, as amended, “Communication with Audit Committees” (AICPA, Professional Standards, Vol. 1. AU section 380), as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3200T, and, with and without management present, discussed and reviewed the results of Deloitte’s examination of the consolidated financial statements.

 

The Audit and Finance Committee reviewed and discussed with management and Deloitte our consolidated audited financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

Based on the above-mentioned reviews and discussions with management and Deloitte, the Audit and Finance Committee approved the inclusion of our audited consolidated financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 for filing with the SEC.

 

 

Compensation Committee

 

The Compensation Committee met 7 times during 2009. The members of the Compensation Committee are Messrs. Jepsen, McLellan and Bennett Stewart and Lee Stewart, with Mr. Lee Stewart serving as Chair. The Compensation Committee is responsible for (1) reviewing employee compensation policies, plans and programs, (2) reviewing and approving the compensation of our executive officers, (3) reviewing and approving employment contracts and other similar arrangements between us and our executive officers, (4) reviewing and consulting with the chief executive officer on the selection of officers and evaluation of executive performance and other related matters, (5) administration of stock plans and other incentive compensation plans and (6) such other matters that are specifically delegated to the Compensation Committee by our Board from time to time.

 

Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee

 

The Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee met 3 times during 2009. The members of the Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee are Ms. O’Leary, and Messrs. McLellan and Bennett Stewart, with Ms. O’Leary serving as Chair. The Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for (1) developing and recommending criteria for selecting new directors, (2) screening and recommending to our Board individuals qualified to become directors, (3) overseeing evaluations of our Board, its members and its committees and (4) handling such other matters that are specifically delegated to it by our Board from time to time. In identifying candidates for director, the Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee considers suggestions from incumbent directors, management or others, including shareholders. The committee also may retain the services of a consultant from time to time to identify qualified candidates for director. The committee reviews all candidates in the same manner without regard to who suggested the candidate. The committee selects candidates to meet with management and conduct an initial interview with the committee. Candidates whom the committee believes would be a valuable addition to the Board are recommended to the full Board for election. Individuals recommended by shareholders for nomination as a director should be submitted to our Corporate Secretary and, if submitted in accordance with the

procedures set forth in our annual proxy statement, will be forwarded to the Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee for consideration.

 

As stated in the committee’s charter, in selecting candidates, the committee will consider all factors it considers appropriate, which may include (1) ensuring that the Board of Directors, as a whole, is diverse and consists of individuals with various and relevant career experience, technical skill, industry knowledge and experience, financial expertise, local or community ties, and (2) minimum individual qualifications, including strength of character, mature judgment, familiarity with our business and industry, independence of thought and an ability to work collegially. Although it has no formal policy with regard to diversity, the Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee believes that the Board will function best when its members possess a broad range of backgrounds and expertise so that the Board as a whole reflects diverse but complementary skills and viewpoints.

 

Security, Safety, Environmental, Health and Reliability Committee

 

The Security, Safety, Environmental, Health and Reliability Committee met 2 times during 2009. The members of the Security, Safety, Environmental, Health and Reliability Committee are Ms. O’Leary and Messrs. Jepsen, Museler and Welch, with Mr. Museler serving as Chair. The Security, Safety, Environmental, Health and Reliability Committee is responsible for (1) determining whether the Company has appropriate policies and management systems in place with respect to security, safety, environmental, health and reliability matters, (2) ensuring that the policies and their implementation support the Company’s overall business objectives and meet the Company’s obligations to its shareholders , employees and regulators, (3) monitoring and reviewing compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations and industry standards, and management’s criteria for determining compliance of Company’s security, safety, environmental, health and reliability policies and procedures, and reviewing performance against these criteria annually, (4) investigating any matter of interest or concern that the Committee deems appropriate while having sole authority to retain and terminate advisors, outside counsel or other experts for this purpose, (5) overseeing and reviewing issues and concerns which affect or could affect the Company’s security, safety, environmental, health and reliability practices, (6) reviewing the scope, effectiveness, cost, objectivity and independence of security, safety, environmental, health and reliability related audits, reviewing any significant findings of internal and external audits and investigations and making recommendations to the Board of Directors as the Committee deems appropriate, (7) monitoring the adequacy of the Company’s operational risk management process and reviewing the operational contingency planning process within the Company to ensure all security, safety, environmental, health and reliability risks are identified and that appropriate risk management processes are in place, (8) reviewing actions taken by the Company’s management with respect to any security, safety, environmental, health and reliability deficiencies identified or improvements recommended, (9) reviewing periodically reports from the Company’s management regarding (i) the Company’s performance with respect to security, safety, environmental, health and reliability maters and compliance with applicable laws, (ii) significant risks to, and the physical and cyber security of, the Company’s facilities and IT systems, (iii) significant security, safety, environmental, health and reliability related litigation and regulatory proceedings in which the Company is or may become involved and (iv) significant legislation or regulations, judicial decisions or other agreements, public policies or other developments involving security, safety, environmental, health and reliability matters in the electricity transmission sector that will or may have a material effect on the Company’s business, (10) reporting regularly to the Board of Directors and (11) carrying out any other responsibilities and duties delegated to it by the Board of Directors from time to time related to the purposes of the Committee.

 

Board Leadership Structure/Role in Risk Oversight and Management

 

The Board believes that Mr. Welch, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, is best situated to serve as Chairman of the Board because he is ultimately responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operation of the Company, identifying Company priorities and opportunities, and executing the Company’s strategic plan. The Board also believes having Mr. Welch as Chairman better promotes the flow of information between management and the Board than would a chairman who was an outside director. The Board further believes that independent oversight of management is an important component of an effective board of directors and is essential to effective governance and has therefore appointed Mr. Lee Stewart as Lead Director of the Board. The Lead Director has the

responsibility of presiding over all executive sessions of the Board and acting as a liaison between the independent directors and Mr. Welch, including facilitating organization and communication among the directors.

 

The Board and its Committees play an active role in overseeing management of the Company’s risks. The Audit and Finance Committee reviews financial risks including those related to internal controls and the annual financial audit, financial reporting, credit and liquidity. The Compensation Committee oversees the management of risks associated with the Company’s executive compensation plans and arrangements. The Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee reviews and manages risks related to director independence and corporate governance. The Security, Safety, Environmental, Health and Reliability Committee oversees the risks associated with reliability compliance obligations, Company security plans, safety programs and environmental regulations. The full Board is regularly informed of and consulted about such risks through quarterly Committee reports as well as quarterly reports provided by members of the Company’s senior management team.

 

The Board believes the combined role of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, together with an independent Lead Director, is appropriate and in the best interest of shareholders because it provides the appropriate balance between company-specific expertise and independent management and risk oversight.

 

Shareholder Communications

 

Shareholder Proposals.  Any proposal by a shareholder of the Company to be considered for inclusion in the proxy statement for the 2011 annual meeting must be received by Wendy McIntyre, our Corporate Secretary, by the close of business on December 16, 2010. Such proposals should be addressed to her at our principal executive offices and should satisfy the informational requirements applicable to shareholder proposals contained in the relevant SEC rules. If the date for the 2011 Annual Meeting is significantly different than the first anniversary of the 2010 Annual Meeting, Rule 14a-8 of the SEC provides for an adjustment to the notice period described above.

 

For shareholder proposals not sought to be included in our proxy statement, Section 4.11 of our Bylaws provides that, in order to be properly brought before the 2011 Annual Meeting, written notice of such proposal, along with the information required by Section 4.11, must be received by our Corporate Secretary at our principal executive offices no earlier than the close of business on January 19, 2011 and no later than February 18, 2011. If the 2011 annual meeting date has been significantly advanced or delayed from the first anniversary of the date of the 2010 annual meeting, then notice of such proposal must be given not earlier than the close of business on the 120th day before the meeting and not later than the 90th day before the meeting or, if later, the 10th day after the first public disclosure of the date of the annual meeting. A proponent must also update the information provided in or with the notice at the times specified in our Bylaws.

 

Only persons who are shareholders both as of the giving of notice and the date of the shareholder meeting and who are eligible to vote at the shareholder meeting are eligible to propose business to be brought before a shareholder meeting. The proposing shareholder (or his qualified representative) must attend the shareholder meeting in person and present the proposed business in order for the proposed business to be considered.

 

Nominees.  Shareholders proposing director nominees at the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders must provide written notice of such intention, along with the other information required by Section 4.11 of our Bylaws, to our Corporate Secretary at our principal executive offices no earlier than the close of business on January 19, 2011 and no later than the close of business on February 18, 2011. If the 2011 annual meeting date has been significantly advanced or delayed from the first anniversary of the date of the 2010 annual meeting, then the notice and information must be given not earlier than the close of business on the 120th day before the meeting and not later than the 90th day before the meeting or, if later, the 10th day after the first public disclosure of the date of the annual meeting. With respect to an election to be held at a special meeting of shareholders, such notice must be given in accordance with the procedures set forth in our Bylaws no earlier than the close of business on the 120th day before and not later than the close of business on the 90th day before the date of such special meeting or, if later, the 10th day after the first public disclosure of the date of such special meeting. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the number of directors to be elected is increased and there is no public disclosure regarding such increase or naming all of the nominees for director at least 100 days prior to the first anniversary of the prior year’s annual meeting, then shareholder notice with regard to nomination of directors shall be considered timely if received by our Corporate Secretary no later than the tenth day following public disclosure of the increase in the number of directors to be

elected. A proponent must also update the information provided in or with the notice at the times specified by our Bylaws. Nominees for director which do not contain the information required by our Bylaws or which are not delivered in compliance with the procedure set forth in our Bylaws will not be considered at the shareholder meeting.

 

Only persons who are shareholders both as of the giving of notice and the date of the shareholder meeting and who are eligible to vote at the shareholder meeting are eligible to nominate directors. The nominating shareholder (or his qualified representative) must attend the shareholder meeting in person and present the proposed nominee in order for the proposed nominee to be considered.

 

The Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee’s policy is to review the qualifications of candidates submitted for nomination by shareholders and evaluate them using the same criteria used to evaluate candidates submitted by the Board for nomination.

 

Communications with the Board

 

A person who wishes to communicate directly with our Board or with an individual director should send the communication, addressed to the Board or the individual director, to our executive offices at the address shown on the first page of this proxy statement and the communication will be forwarded to the director or directors to whom it is addressed.

 

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

 

We have adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to all of our employees, executive officers and directors, including our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and principal accounting officer. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, as currently in effect (together with any amendments that may be adopted from time to time), is available on our website at www.itc-holdings.com through the “Corporate Governance” link on the “Investors” page. In the future, to the extent any waiver is granted or amendment is made with respect to the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that requires disclosure under applicable SEC rules, we intend to post information regarding such waiver or amendment on the “Corporate Governance” page of our website.

 

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

 

Set forth below are the names, ages and titles of our executive officers.

 

 

Our executive officers serve as executive officers at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. Our current executive officers are described below.

 

Joseph L. Welch.  Mr. Welch’s background is described above under “Election of Directors — Nominees for Directors.”

 

Cameron M. Bready.  Mr. Bready has served as Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer since April 2009. Mr. Bready is responsible for the Company’s accounting, finance, treasury, and other related financial functions. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Bready served for one and a half years as vice president of finance at Northeast Utilities in Hartford, Connecticut, where he was responsible for the financial assessment and structuring of the company’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, regulated transmission and state regulated distribution infrastructure investments in the Northeast. He also oversaw financial policy matters, including cost of capital and capital structure requirements and dividend policy, as well as all corporate financial planning and analysis functions. Prior to this post, Mr. Bready served for seven and a half years in various senior management positions at Mirant Corporation, a publicly traded wholesale electricity generator based in Atlanta, Georgia, and prior to Mirant, he worked for six years as a senior manager in the Transaction Advisory practice at Ernst & Young and as an audit manager for Arthur Andersen.

 

Edward M. Rahill.  Mr. Rahill has served as a Senior Vice President of the Company and President of the Company’s ITC Grid Development, LLC subsidiary since April 2009. In this position, Mr. Rahill is responsible for identifying, developing and implementing new business opportunities including new projects, partnerships and acquisition opportunities. From February 2006 until April 2009, Mr. Rahill served as the Company’s Senior Vice President — Finance and Chief Financial Officer, while simultaneously managing the business activities of ITC Grid Development, LLC and its subsidiaries. He was Vice President — Finance and Chief Financial Officer from 2003 until being named Senior Vice President in February 2006. Prior to his employment with the Company, Mr. Rahill headed the Planning and Corporate Development functions for DTE Energy and its subsidiaries, led the corporate development function for Equitable Resources and held various finance and accounting positions with Bell & Howell, Atlantic Richfield and Carborundum Corporation.

 

Linda H. Blair.  Ms. Blair has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer of the Company since June 2007. Ms. Blair is responsible for managing each of our regulated operating companies and the necessary business support functions, including regulatory strategy, federal and state legislative affairs, community government affairs, human resources, marketing and communications and information technology and facilities. Prior to this appointment, Ms. Blair served as our Senior Vice President — Business Strategy and was responsible for managing regulatory affairs, policy development, internal and external communications, community affairs and human resource functions. Ms. Blair was Vice President — Business Strategy from March 2003 until she was named Senior Vice President in February 2006. Prior to joining the Company, Ms. Blair was the Manager of

Transmission Policy and Business Planning at ITCTransmission when it was a subsidiary of DTE Energy and supervised Detroit Edison’s regulatory affairs department.

 

Jon E. Jipping.  Jon E. Jipping has served as our Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer since June 2007. In this position, Mr. Jipping is responsible for transmission system planning, system operations, engineering, supply chain, and field construction and maintenance. Prior to this appointment, Mr. Jipping served as our Senior Vice President — Engineering and was responsible for transmission system design, project engineering and asset management. Mr. Jipping joined us as Director of Engineering in March 2003, was appointed Vice President — Engineering in 2005 and was named Senior Vice President in February 2006. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Jipping was Manager of Business Systems & Applications in DTE Energy’s Service Center Organization, responsible for implementation and management of business applications across the distribution business unit, and held various other positions in DTE Energy’s Transmission Operations and Transmission Planning department.

 

Daniel J. Oginsky.  Mr. Oginsky has served as our Vice President and General Counsel since November 2004 and was named Senior Vice President and General Counsel in May 2009. In this position, Mr. Oginsky is responsible for our legal affairs and managing the legal department. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Oginsky was an attorney in private practice for five years with various firms, where his practice focused primarily on representing ITCTransmission and other energy clients on regulatory, administrative litigation, transactional, property tax and legislative matters.

 

COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS

 

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

 

The following Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes the elements of compensation for our chief executive officer, our chief financial officer and his immediate predecessor, and each of the three other most highly compensated executive officers who were serving as such at December 31, 2009. We refer to these individuals collectively as the NEOs. The Compensation Committee of our Board establishes and reviews the compensation for the NEOs, while implementation and day-to-day administration of our compensation programs is performed by our employees.

 

Objectives of Compensation Program

 

The objective of our compensation program is to attract, retain, and motivate exceptional managers and employees, and to maintain the focus of those managers and employees on providing value to customers and shareholders by:

 

 

Our compensation program is designed to motivate and reward individual and corporate performance. Our compensation philosophy is to:

 

 

When reviewing the compensation program, the Compensation Committee considers the impact of the program on the Company’s risk profile. The Compensation Committee believes that the executive compensation program has been structured with the appropriate mix and design of elements to provide strong incentives for executives to balance risk and reward, without incentivizing excessive risk taking. The Compensation Committee believes that risks arising from the compensation program are not likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Exclusion of Pre-IPO Related Amounts from Normal Compensation Amounts

 

On July 26, 2005, we became a public company following our initial public offering, or IPO. Certain dollar amounts, referred to as “Pre-IPO Related Amounts,” are included in the Summary Compensation Table in this proxy statement. However, those amounts are legacy issues, which are tied to and result from certain NEOs’ personal investments and assumed risks, and other arrangements, made while we were privately held. Accordingly, the Compensation Committee believes those legacy amounts should not be viewed as part of the NEOs’ normal compensation for purposes of measuring against the objectives of our compensation program or for comparisons to public company executive compensation. The Compensation Committee believes that NEO compensation, excluding the Pre-IPO Related Amounts, is fair and reasonable as compared to peer company compensation and meets the objectives of our compensation program outlined above. Amounts that are Pre-IPO Related Amounts, and the compensation of the NEOs after exclusion of the Pre-IPO Related Amounts, are identified in footnote 1 to the Summary Compensation Table.

 

We began operations on February 28, 2003, following the acquisition of our first operating utility subsidiary, ITCTransmission, from DTE Energy. To motivate management to meet challenges and cause us to grow, we, at the direction of our controlling shareholder at the time, International Transmission Holdings Limited Partnership, or ITHLP, established an equity participation program under which each executive officer at the time made personal equity investments in our common stock. Based on the number of shares purchased, we also made a grant of options to the executive. Certain executives, including certain NEOs, also received grants of restricted stock. All of these purchases and grants were subject to five-year vesting and transfer restrictions.

 

In connection with the IPO in 2005, each executive also waived contractual rights to sell stock in the IPO. In exchange, the executives were granted options based on the number of shares each executive could have sold, but chose not to sell, in the IPO. Because these equity grants are tied to NEOs’ personal investments and risks faced prior to the IPO, option awards made before July 26, 2005, which are included in the Outstanding Equity Awards At Fiscal Year End Table to the extent not previously exercised, are not considered by the Compensation Committee to be part of normal NEO compensation.

 

Under the ITC Holdings Corp. Executive Group Special Bonus Plan, or the Special Bonus Plan, the Compensation Committee is authorized to approve the crediting of special bonus amounts to plan participants and generally gives consideration to dividends paid, or expected to be paid, on our common stock. We adopted the Special Bonus Plan in June 2005 as a vehicle that could be used to compensate plan participants for the lost value of equity investments and grants that occurred prior to the IPO. Since inception, bonuses under the Special Bonus Plan have been credited to NEOs once each quarter. The amounts of the awards were equal to the approved per share quarterly dividend amount, multiplied by the number of our common shares underlying the options held by the NEO granted prior to the IPO and are immediately vested and paid. The amounts paid under the Special Bonus Plan in 2009 are set forth in footnote 2 to the Summary Compensation Table. The only participants in this plan are executives who were granted options during the pre-IPO period and special bonus amounts have been paid only with respect to options granted before the IPO. The Compensation Committee also considers these amounts to be tied to the investments made and risks faced by our executive officers prior to the IPO. Accordingly, the Compensation Committee does not consider amounts awarded under the Special Bonus Plan to be part of normal NEO compensation. The Special Bonus Plan awards that the Compensation Committee considers to be Pre-IPO Related Amounts are identified in footnote 1 to the Summary Compensation Table.

 

Finally, for Mr. Welch, the Change in Pension Value & Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Earnings column of the Summary Compensation Table includes amounts associated with the Management Supplemental Benefit Plan, or MSBP. Mr. Welch retired under DTE Energy’s Management Supplemental Benefit Plan, though with lower benefits than he would have earned with additional service. In order to compensate Mr. Welch for the value of benefits he would have received had he remained with DTE Energy, the Company agreed to establish the MSBP such that his retirement benefits would be calculated to include service with DTE Energy, with the resulting amount offset by the benefits he is receiving from DTE Energy. The MSBP is described in detail in the Pension Benefits — Management Supplemental Benefit Plan section of this proxy statement following the Pension Benefits Table. The calculation of Mr. Welch’s benefit under the MSBP is affected by including awards to him under the

Special Bonus Plan prior to May 17, 2006, which are considered Pre-IPO Related Amounts as discussed above. The calculation also is affected by including awards to Mr. Welch under our former Dividend Equivalents Rights Plan, or DERP. The DERP was established in 2003 to preserve the value of options that previously were granted to executives and key employees upon a return of capital to shareholders that we issued that year. Under the DERP, upon affecting a return of capital to shareholders, a cash amount (equal to the per share return of capital multiplied by the number of options held by each executive and key employee) was credited to a bookkeeping account maintained for each DERP participant. Those amounts previously held in bookkeeping accounts under the DERP were paid out to each DERP participant in 2005 upon the plan’s termination. Similarly, because awards under the DERP are particularly tied to investments made and risks faced by our executive officers prior to the IPO, such awards also are considered to be Pre-IPO Related Amounts. Because awards under the Special Bonus Plan and DERP are Pre-IPO Related Amounts, the Compensation Committee does not include those amounts in the calculation of Mr. Welch’s benefit under the MSBP for purposes of reviewing his normal compensation. The component of the Change in Pension Value & Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Earnings for Mr. Welch, which the Compensation Committee considers Pre-IPO Related Amounts due to the exclusion of Special Bonus Plan and DERP awards from Mr. Welch’s MSBP benefit calculation, is identified in footnote 1 to the Summary Compensation Table.

 

Review of Compensation Benchmarks and Relationship of Compensation Elements

 

The Compensation Committee has engaged in benchmarking total compensation paid to our executive officers. The benchmarking analysis compared the compensation of our executive officers, including the NEOs, to compensation paid to executives by two groups of peer companies.

 

At the beginning of 2009, the Compensation Committee engaged Hewitt Associates, or Hewitt, as its advisor on executive compensation issues, to provide market data on all of the components of compensation, including salary, bonus, long-term incentives and total compensation, for select executive officers, including the NEOs. The Compensation Committee also engages Hewitt to provide market data and comments about the design of our executive compensation programs with respect to both market practice and the unique strategic goals of our business model. Hewitt is engaged by and reports to the Compensation Committee and, at the Compensation Committee’s discretion, participates in its meetings and executive sessions. Executive compensation consulting is the only work that Hewitt performs for us. In January 2010, Hewitt spun off a portion of its executive compensation practice into a separate, entirely independent entity named Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC, or Meridian. Due to the importance of independence for board advisors on executive compensation, while maintaining consistent process, continuity of service and representation, the Compensation Committee may retain Meridian going forward as its independent executive compensation consultant.

 

During 2009, the Compensation Committee, through Hewitt, updated its 2008 benchmarking study that compared total compensation, including base salary, annual incentives and long term incentives paid to our executive officers, including the NEOs, to the 50th percentile of market compensation among the peer companies listed below. The benchmarking study determined that total compensation paid to our NEOs (excluding the Pre-IPO Related Amounts) continued to trail the market median as well as the Compensation Committee’s goal of targeting the 50th percentile for NEO compensation.

 

Because we are the only publicly traded company that exclusively owns stand-alone electricity transmission companies, the Compensation Committee for benchmarking purposes selected two different peer groups, which were used for previous studies. The first group, referred to as the Size and Industry Peer Group, consists of electric, gas and water utility companies, as well as some companies from other industries, that are comparable to our current size and projected future size as measured by market capitalization. The second group, referred to as the High Performance Peer Group, was based on non-financial companies in the Hewitt database with revenue below $4 billion that were in the 60th or higher percentile in both 5-year return on equity and 5-year compound annual growth in revenue for 2006. There are no utilities in the second group; rather the group was chosen to reflect our high growth and return profile. Periodically the composition of the peer groups will be reviewed and updated for

consistency with the growth and performance profile of the Company. These two peer groups consist of the following entities:

 

 

In addition to the Compensation Committee’s benchmarking analysis, our chief executive officer reviews and examines market benchmark compensation, as well as individual responsibilities and performance, our compensation philosophy and other related information to determine the appropriate level of compensation for each of our NEOs. Mr. Welch evaluates the performance of the NEOs, other than himself, and makes recommendations on their salaries, bonus targets and long-term incentive awards. The Compensation Committee considers these recommendations in its decision making and confers with its compensation consultant to understand the impact and result of any such recommendations.

 

The Compensation Committee reviews and considers each element of compensation and all elements of compensation together in measuring total compensation packages as part of its benchmarking analyses and in measuring compensation packages against the objectives of our compensation program. In making compensation determinations, the Compensation Committee has not determined that compensation elements are to be set according to a pre-set or formulaic mix. The Compensation Committee retains full discretion to consider or disregard data collected through benchmarking or peer group studies in the course of setting executive compensation levels.

 

Cash Components of Compensation

 

The Compensation Committee does not have a pre-established mix of cash and non-cash compensation that it targets. Instead, it considers the value of each component of compensation as well as the value of total compensation

as compared to market values. Compensation decisions are also considered in the context of individual and Company performance, retention concerns, the importance of the position and internal equity.

 

Base Salary.  The base salary component of each NEO’s annual cash compensation is based on the job responsibilities and individual contribution of each NEO and with reference to base salary levels of executives at peer companies.

 

While the Company’s NEOs generally trail the 50th percentile salary levels of both peer groups, due to economic conditions nationally and locally, the Compensation Committee did not make any changes to the salaries of the NEOs whose positions and roles within the Company did not change from the previous year. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Compensation Committee made two salary adjustments in 2009 for NEOs whose positions changed during the year as well as establishing the compensation package for Mr. Bready.

 

In March 2009, the Compensation Committee approved an increase to Mr. Rahill’s base salary from $280,000 to $300,000, effective April 6, 2009, in connection with his promotion to president of ITC Grid Development, LLC, the Company’s subsidiary focused on development activities. Mr. Rahill had served as the Company’s chief financial officer since its inception and played a key role in two successful acquisitions. With this promotion, Mr. Rahill is expected to increase shareholder value by devoting his full-time attention to the profitable expansion of the Company into new geographic areas. The Compensation Committee considered Mr. Rahill’s past achievements and the expected benefits to the Company and shareholders when increasing his salary upon this promotion.

 

Also in March 2009, the Compensation Committee approved a compensation package for Mr. Bready. In establishing Mr. Bready’s cash compensation, the Compensation Committee considered both the benchmarking data it had obtained for 2009 and the importance of his position relative to other NEOs, as well as the compensation package he had in his previous position. In reviewing all of these factors, the Compensation Committee determined that a base salary of $300,000 and a target bonus of 100% were the appropriate amounts. The total cash compensation was determined in the context that NEOs would receive 2009 equity grants with a target grant date fair value of 150% of base salary.

 

In May 2009, the Compensation Committee approved an immediate increase to Mr. Oginsky’s base salary from $228,000 to $270,000 in connection with his promotion from Vice President to Senior Vice President of the Company. As Vice President and General Counsel, Mr. Oginsky had served as a key member of the management team, and previous benchmarking analyses showed his salary to be below the market 50th percentile. The Compensation Committee considered the market comparison, as well as Mr. Oginsky’s contributions to the Company’s success and his pay in comparison to that of the other senior executives in granting him an 18% salary increase in connection with his promotion to Senior Vice President.

 

Accordingly, base salaries of our NEOs are as follows:

 

 

Mr. Welch’s base salary approximates the 50th percentile of the peer groups, while the other NEOs’ base salaries remain considerably below the peer group medians.

 

Bonus Compensation.  Annual bonus awards based on corporate performance goals, as well as occasional cash bonuses made on a discretionary basis upon completion of significant projects or milestones, are used to provide incentives for and reward contributions to our growth and success. Annual corporate performance bonuses awarded to NEOs for 2009 are listed in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary

Compensation Table in this proxy statement, NEOs’ discretionary bonuses for 2009 are listed in the Bonus column of the Summary Compensation Table, and each are described below.

 

Early each year, the Compensation Committee approves our annual corporate performance bonus plan goals and targets, which are based on key Company objectives: operational excellence and superior financial performance. The same corporate performance goals and targets generally are used in determining annual bonus compensation for all of our employees. The corporate performance goals and targets, accordingly, are designed to align the interests of customers, shareholders, management and all employees, and encourage teamwork and coordination among all of our executives and employees with a common focus on the growth and success of the Company. Target amounts for the corporate performance goals are determined based on long-term strategic plans, historical performance, expectations for future growth and desired improvement over time. Weights are assigned to each goal based on areas of focus during the year and difficulty in achieving target performance. Weights are also assigned so that there is a balance between operational and financial goals.

 

The annual bonus plan performance goals are individually weighted. Each goal operates independently, and, for most goals, there is not a range of acceptable performance; if a goal is not achieved, there is no payout for that goal. We do not pay for achieving below-target performance on any goal, but we will pay for achievement of target performance on those goals that are achieved even though other goals may not be achieved. The bonus goal targets are established to motivate employees towards operational excellence and superior financial performance and are designed to be challenging to meet, while remaining achievable. Corporate performance goal criteria approved by the Compensation Committee for 2009, and actual bonus results, were:

 

 

 

 

Additionally, to further motivate management to provide value to shareholders, we include a performance factor for our executives, including the NEOs, under which their annual bonus awards may be increased by as much as 100 percent based on our relative total return to shareholders compared to the Dow Jones Utility Average Index companies. The factor can be applied only if our total return to shareholders is positive for the year. Moreover, the factor has the effect of increasing the earned bonus award only when relative return to shareholders exceeds the 50th percentile of the group and is determined as follows:

 

ITC’s Total Return to Shareholders relative to each of
the Dow Jones Utility Average Companies		Performance Factor
1st to 50th percentile			1.0
51st to 60th percentile			1.2
61st to 70th percentile			1.4
71st to 80th percentile			1.6
81st to 90th percentile			1.8
91st to 100th percentile			2.0

 

We computed 2009 total return to shareholders as follows:

 

A: Calculated the average of the closing prices from December 17, 2008 to January 15, 2009

 

B: Calculated the average of the closing prices from December 17, 2009 to January 15, 2010

 

C: Calculated total dividends paid per share in 2009

 

Total Return to Shareholders:(B − A + C)/A

 

Our 2009 total return to shareholders was 27.8%, which ranked as the fourth highest and the 81st percentile compared to the Dow Jones Utility Average Index companies. This ranking equated to a performance factor of 1.8.

Bonuses are based on target bonus amounts, which for each employee is a percentage of his or her base salary. The Compensation Committee considers each individual’s job responsibilities and the results of its benchmarking analysis when determining target bonus levels. For 2009, target bonus levels were 125% of base salary for Mr. Welch and 100% of base salary for Ms. Blair and Messrs. Bready, Jipping, Oginsky and Rahill. The benchmarking study showed that Mr. Welch’s target bonus opportunity is above the 50th percentile compared to CEOs in our peer groups. In establishing the target at 125%, the Compensation Committee considered this information along with Mr. Welch’s leading role in the industry and his pivotal role in the growth of the Company. The target bonus percentages for the other NEOs are also above the 50th percentile of the market; however, when these percentages are applied to their base salaries, which are below the 50th percentile, they produce total cash compensation values that are generally consistent with market practice.

 

Company performance on the incentive plan goals, including the performance factor based on total return to shareholders that is applicable only to executives, resulted in a bonus calculation for 2009 for executives, including NEOs, according to the following formula:

 

Base Salary x Target Bonus (% of base salary) x Achievement of Corporate Goals (90%) x Performance Factor (1.8)

= Annual Bonus Amount

 

For fiscal year 2010, the Compensation Committee approved corporate performance goals for the annual bonus award similar to the 2009 criteria, including the performance factor for NEOs and other executives.

 

In February 2006, the Compensation Committee approved the Executive Cash Bonus Agreement between the Company and Mr. Oginsky to offer him additional financial incentive to provide continuing services to the Company in lieu of the equity-based compensation previously received by other executive officers. The agreement provided that Mr. Oginsky would receive a cash bonus in the amount of $120,000 on August 1 of each of the years 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009. The bonus for any year would not have been payable if Mr. Oginsky’s employment had been terminated by him without “good reason” or by the Company for “cause” (each as defined in the Executive Cash Bonus Agreement) prior to August 1 of such year. If Mr. Oginsky’s employment was otherwise terminated, he was entitled to receive all unpaid bonus payments in a lump sum within 15 days after termination. The final installment under this agreement was paid in 2009.

 

In May 2009, the Compensation Committee approved additional cash bonuses for substantially all employees in conjunction with the successful completion of certain significant regulatory milestones relating to the Hugo to Valliant transmission line project. The total bonus award amount to be paid to employees was recommended by management to the Compensation Committee and generally was divided among employees on a pro rata basis equal to the percentage of the total annual incentive award payout received by each employee, with certain employees, including Messrs. Oginsky and Rahill, receiving additional amounts in recognition of significant contributions to the project. The bonus was paid in August 2009.

 

Similarly, in January 2010, the Compensation Committee approved discretionary cash bonuses for substantially all employees in conjunction with the successful completion of certain significant regulatory milestones relating to the KETA Phase I transmission project. The bonus award amount was recommended by management to the Compensation Committee and was paid on a pro rata basis equal to the percentage of the total annual incentive award payout received by each employee. The bonus was paid in January 2010.

 

Equity-Based Grants

 

In March 2009, as part of Mr. Bready’s overall compensation package the Compensation Committee approved a grant of restricted stock with a grant date fair value of $500,000 to be made in conjunction with his employment with Company. Consistent with all grants to new hires at the Company, this restricted stock award has a five year cliff vesting provision. While not intended to bring him to the level of ownership of the longer-service NEOs, the grant was made with the goal of accelerating his compliance with the Company’s executive stock ownership guidelines and in consideration of building alignment between Mr. Bready and the other NEOs.

In May 2009, the Compensation Committee approved grants of restricted stock and stock options to employees, including the NEOs, under the Amended and Restated ITC Holdings Corp. 2006 Long Term Incentive Plan, or LTIP. The primary purpose of the LTIP is to encourage equity ownership among our employees, non-employee directors and consultants in order to align their interests with those of shareholders. The LTIP is designed to enhance our ability to attract, motivate and retain qualified managers and employees, and encourage strong performance. It also is designed to motivate future growth through individual performance and, in turn, strong Company performance. The amounts and terms of grants made under the LTIP are described in the narrative following the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table in this proxy statement.

 

The Compensation Committee approved awards under the LTIP based on our CEO’s recommendation derived from market data of our peer groups. The award grants are meant to reward, motivate and incent performance, as well as act as a retention mechanism. A total value for the award for each grantee, except Mr. Welch, was determined based on a percentage of salary. For the NEOs except Mr. Welch, the awards were targeted to be 150% of base salary. For Mr. Welch, the total value for the award was based on a target value of $1,100,000, which was then weighted between grants of restricted stock and options at 50% each. The mix for other NEOs was generally weighted toward options, with the awards being granted 30% in restricted stock and 70% in options. Hewitt provided the Compensation Committee with valuations of the options and restricted stock according to its modified Black-Scholes model, which was also applied to the equity awards of the peer group companies. In determining the size of grants under the LTIP and the split between options and restricted stock, the Compensation Committee considered the recommendation of the CEO in light of comparisons to peer company long-term incentive plan grants, expense to the Company and dilution of shareholder value, as well as amounts that it believes will motivate performance to achieve continued growth in shareholder value. The grants made to Ms. Blair and Messrs. Welch and Jipping were somewhat below the 50th percentile of the market values at that time, while Messrs. Rahill, Bready and Oginsky received grants that somewhat exceeded the 50th percentile. In light of the volatile nature of long-term incentives in the wake of significant stock market fluctuations and broader economic turmoil, the Committee continues to monitor and balance competitive practice, alignment with shareholders’ interests and cost considerations.

 

Pension Benefits

 

As is common in our industry and as established pursuant to our initial formation requirements pursuant to the acquisition agreement with DTE Energy for ITCTransmission, we maintain a tax-qualified defined benefit retirement plan for eligible employees, comprised of a traditional pension component and a cash balance component. All employees, including the NEOs, participate in either the traditional component or the cash balance component. We have also established two supplemental nonqualified, noncontributory retirement benefit plans for selected management employees: the MSBP, in which only Mr. Welch participates and the Executive Supplemental Retirement Plan, or ESRP, in which all other NEOs participate. These plans provide for benefits that supplement those provided by our qualified defined benefit retirement plan. Benefits payable to the NEOs pursuant to the retirement plans are set by the terms of that plan. The Compensation Committee exercises no regular discretionary authority in the determination of benefits. The retirement plans may be modified, amended or terminated at any time, although no such action may reduce a NEO’s earned benefits and, with regard to the MSBP, changes must generally be agreed to by Mr. Welch. See Pension Benefits in this proxy statement for information regarding participation by the NEOs in our retirement plans as well as a description of the terms of the plans.

 

Benefits and Perquisites

 

The NEOs participate in a variety of benefit programs, which are designed to enable us to attract and retain our workforce in a competitive marketplace. These programs include our Savings and Investment Plan, which consists of a 401(k) component, a matching contribution component and a component that provides additional benefits for certain executives (“executive defined contribution plan”).

Our NEOs are provided a limited number of perquisites in addition to benefits provided to our other employees. The purpose of these perquisites is to minimize distractions from the NEOs’ attention to important Company initiatives, to facilitate their access to work functions and personnel, and to encourage interactions among NEOs and others within professional, business and local communities. NEOs are provided perquisites such as auto allowance, financial, estate and legal planning, income tax return preparation, annual physical, club memberships, personal liability insurance, and relocation assistance, as well as reimbursements for income taxes related to the inclusion of the value of the payment by the Company of these perquisites. Additionally, we own aircraft to facilitate the business travel schedules of our executives and other employees, particularly to locations that do not provide efficient commercial flight schedules. Mr. Welch and guests traveling with him are permitted to travel for personal business on our aircraft, with an annual limit on total incremental expense to the Company of $125,000 for such personal travel. In 2007, the Compensation Committee reviewed market data showing the prevalence of various perquisites in American industry. These perquisites are further discussed in footnote 6 to the Summary Compensation Table in this proxy statement.

 

Potential Severance Compensation

 

Pursuant to employment agreements, each NEO is entitled to certain benefits and payments upon a termination of his or her employment. Our new chief financial officer, Mr. Bready, became a party to our standard employment agreement for senior executive officers of the Company upon his hiring in April 2009 and Mr. Oginsky became a party to such agreement upon his promotion in May 2009. Benefits and payments to be provided vary based on the circumstances of the termination. The Compensation Committee believes it is important to provide this protection in order to ensure our NEOs will remain engaged and committed to us during an acquisition of the Company or other transition in management. See Employment Agreements and Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control in this proxy statement for further detail on these employment agreements, including a discussion of the compensation to be provided upon termination or a change in control.

 

In addition to severance benefits identified in their employment agreements, NEOs are eligible to receive certain payments or benefits due to a termination of employment or change in control of the Company, which would be related to grants made under the 2003 Plan, the LTIP, or our benefits plans. The NEOs’ eligibility for such payments or benefits is identified in the descriptions of those plans in this proxy statement. Because these agreements are provided to satisfy different objectives than our regular compensation program, and because they are by definition contingent in nature, decisions made regarding these programs do not affect our regular compensation program.

 

Deductibility of Executive Compensation

 

Section 162(m) of the Code restricts the deductibility of executive compensation paid to a company’s chief executive officer and any of the four other most highly compensated executive officers at the end of any fiscal year to not more than $1,000,000 in annual compensation (including the value of restricted stock and deferred stock units as they vest and the gain from the exercise of certain stock option grants). Certain performance-based compensation is exempt from this limitation if it complies with the various conditions described in Section 162(m). In general, our stock options and cash incentive compensation arrangements are designed to cause compensation realized in connection with the plans to comply with these conditions and be exempt from the Section 162(m) restriction on deductibility, to the extent permissible.

 

Other components of our compensation program may result in payments from time to time that would be subject to the restriction on deductibility, but we do not believe the effect of the restriction on us is currently material or that further action to qualify compensation for deductibility is necessary at this time. It may be appropriate to exceed the limitations on deductibility under Section 162(m) to ensure that executive officers are compensated in a manner that is consistent with the best interests of us and our shareholders, and we reserve the authority to approve non-deductible compensation in appropriate circumstances. We continue to evaluate from time to time the

advisability of qualifying future executive compensation programs for exemption from the Section 162(m) restriction on deductibility.

 

Stock Ownership Guidelines

 

In furtherance of our objective to align the interests of management with shareholders, effective August 16, 2006, the Compensation Committee adopted stock ownership guidelines applicable to executive officers. Under these guidelines, executive officers, including NEOs, must meet the applicable stock ownership guideline by the later of August 16, 2011 or the fifth anniversary of when the guidelines first become applicable to the individual. The guidelines require ownership of shares of our common stock valued at five times annual salary in the case of the chief executive officer, three times annual salary in the case of executive and senior vice presidents and two times annual salary in the case of other executive officers. The Compensation Committee determined the ownership levels in reliance on comparisons to peer company stock ownership guideline policies. Shares issuable upon exercise of vested in-the-money stock options, shares (including shares of restricted stock) owned directly, shares owned through various employee benefit plans and shares previously owned by executives but placed in trust for family members count towards the ownership threshold. Stock ownership positions could be considered as a factor in promotion or succession decisions and failure to maintain the applicable minimum ownership threshold may result in payment of only a portion of annual incentives in our common stock or other action by the Compensation Committee. Restricted stock awards may not be sold after vesting unless the individual is in compliance with the applicable ownership guideline, subject to hardship exceptions approved by the chief executive officer (or by the Compensation Committee, in the case of an exception to be approved on behalf of the chief executive officer). The Compensation Committee may modify, amend, waive, suspend or rescind any aspect of the guidelines at any time. Each of the NEOs is in compliance at this time with the stock ownership guidelines.

 

Compensation Committee Report

 

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed this Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management and, based on the review and discussions with management, has recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement.

 

 

Summary Compensation

 

The following table provides a summary of compensation paid or accrued by the Company and its subsidiaries to or on behalf of the NEOs for services rendered by them during each of the last three calendar years, as required by SEC rules and regulations. As stated in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this proxy statement, the NEOs received certain amounts disclosed as compensation below but which are tied to and result from personal investments and assumed risks, and other arrangements, made while the Company was privately held (referred to throughout this proxy statement as Pre-IPO Related Amounts). Footnote 1 to this Summary Compensation Table identifies amounts considered by the Compensation Committee to be Pre-IPO Related Amounts, which the Compensation Committee does not consider part of NEOs’ normal compensation. Footnote 1 also shows compensation paid to the NEOs in each of the last three calendar years, excluding Pre-IPO Related Amounts, which the Compensation Committee considers NEOs’ normal compensation.

 

Summary Compensation Table (1)

 

 

 

Pre-IPO Related Amounts

 

 

Compensation After Excluding Pre-IPO Related Amounts

 

 

 

 

 

 

2008 Base Salary x Target Bonus (100% of base salary) x

Achievement of Corporate Goals (85% for 2007) ¸ 2

= Bonus Amount

 

 

 

 

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

 

The following table sets forth information concerning each grant of an award made to a NEO during 2009.

 

Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table

 

 

 

 

The Compensation Committee has established bonus targets as a percentage of the base salary for each NEO in consideration of benchmarking data on total cash compensation, the importance of the NEO’s position to the success of the Company, our need to create meaningful incentives to enhance performance and the culture of teamwork that makes our company successful. The Compensation Committee does not have a pre-established targeted allocation of cash compensation into its component elements of base salary and bonus.

 

The Compensation Committee may grant stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units and performance based awards in the form of equity or cash under the LTIP with the terms of each award set forth in a written agreement with the recipient. Equity-based grants made in 2009 to the NEOs under the LTIP were made pursuant to terms stated in a restricted stock award agreement and an option agreement.

 

The restricted stock award agreements provide that, so long as the grantee remains employed by us, the restricted stock fully vests upon the earlier of (i) the third anniversary of the grant date (or, for Mr. Bready’s April 6, 2009 grant, the fifth anniversary of the grant date), (ii) the grantee’s death or permanent disability, or (iii) a “change in control” (as defined in the LTIP). If the grantee’s employment is terminated for any reason other than retirement at or after age 65, death or disability prior to the restricted stock becoming fully vested, the grantee forfeits the restricted stock, unless otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee. If the grantee’s employment is terminated due to retirement, the stock will vest pro rata based on service time since the grant date and the remaining unvested shares will be canceled. The restricted stock award agreements also provide that restricted stock issued to the grantee may not be transferred by the grantee in any manner prior to vesting. Grantees otherwise have all rights of holders of our common stock, including voting rights and the right to receive dividends.

 

The option agreements provide that the options become exercisable in three equal annual installments beginning on the one year anniversary of the grant date so long as the grantee remains employed by us. The options become fully exercisable immediately upon (i) the grantee’s death or permanent disability or (ii) upon a “change in control” (as defined in the LTIP). The Compensation Committee has the right to accelerate vesting or extend the time for exercise. The exercise price of the options is the fair market value per share of our common stock on the grant date. The grantee may pay the exercise price in cash, with previously acquired shares that have been held at least six months or pursuant to a broker-assisted cashless exercise method. The stock options will expire 10 years after the grant date and will immediately terminate to the extent not yet exercisable if the grantee’s employment with us is terminated for any reason other than retirement at or after age 65, death or disability. If the grantee’s employment is terminated other than due to retirement at or after age 65, death or disability on or after the date the options first become exercisable, then the grantee has the right to exercise the option for three months after termination of employment to the extent exercisable on the date of termination. If the grantee retires from the Company at or after age 65, the options will continue to vest on the normal schedule and the grantee has the right to exercise the option at any time during the remaining term to the extent it was not previously exercised. If the grantee’s employment terminates due to death or disability, the grantee or the grantee’s estate has the right to exercise the option at any time during the remaining term to the extent it was not previously exercised. The option agreements also provide that options issued to the grantee may not be transferred by the grantee except pursuant to a will or the applicable laws of descent and distribution or transfers to which the Compensation Committee has given prior written consent. Until the issuance of shares of stock pursuant to the exercise of stock options, holders of stock options granted under the option agreements have no rights of holders of our common stock.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

 

The following table provides information with respect to unexercised options and shares of stock that have not vested as of the end of 2009 held by the NEOs.

 

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Table