UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON,Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant  x                             Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ¨

Check the appropriate box:

 

¨Preliminary Proxy Statement
¨Confidential, for useUse of the Commission onlyOnly (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
xDefinitive Proxy Statement
¨Definitive Additional Materials
¨Soliciting Material Pursuant to Section 240.14a-12
QUANTA SERVICES, INC.
(Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

xNo fee required.
¨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:

     

¨Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
¨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:

 

     

 

 

 


LOGO

LOGO

QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

2800 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 2600

Houston, TX 77056

(713) 629-7600

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD MAY 17, 201221, 2015

To our Stockholders:

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Quanta Services, Inc. (“Quanta”) will be held in the Williams Tower, 2nd Floor Conference Center, Auditorium No. 1, located at 2800 Post Oak Boulevard, Houston, Texas 77056, on May 17, 201221, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. local time. At the meeting, you will be asked to consider and act upon the following matters, which are more fully described in the accompanying Proxy Statement:

1. Election of eleven directors nominated by our Board of Directors;

1.

Election of ten directors nominated by our Board of Directors;

2. Ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2012;

2.

Ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2015;

3. Approving, by non-binding advisory vote, Quanta’s executive compensation; and

3.

Approving, by non-binding advisory vote, Quanta’s executive compensation; and

4.

4.

Acting upon any other matters that are properly brought before the meeting, or any adjournments or postponements of the meeting, by or at the direction of the Board of Directors.

Our stockholders of record at the close of business on March 19, 201223, 2015 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the annual meeting and any adjournments or postponements of the meeting.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

LOGO

Carolyn M. Campbell

Corporate Secretary

Houston, Texas

April 10, 20129, 2015

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR

THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS TO BE HELD ON MAY 17, 201221, 2015:

The Notice, Proxy Statement and 2011

2014 Annual Report to Stockholders

are available atwww.proxyvote.com.

YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

You are cordially invited to attend the annual meeting in person. To assure your representation at the meeting, please vote promptly whether or not you expect to be present at the meeting. You can vote your shares by signing and dating the enclosed proxy card and returning it in the accompanying envelope or you may vote via the Internet or telephone. You will find specific instructions for voting via the Internet or telephone on the proxy card if that option is available for your shares. If you attend the meeting, you may revoke your proxy and vote your shares in person. If you hold your shares through a broker, bank or nominee and wish to vote at the meeting, you will need to obtain a proxy from the institution that holds your shares. If you choose to attend the meeting, you will be asked to present valid picture identification, and if you hold your shares through a broker, bank or nominee, you will be asked to present a copy of your brokerage statement showing your stock ownership as of March 19, 2012.


TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

GENERAL INFORMATION – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MEETING

 1

What is the purpose of the meeting?

1

How does the Board recommend that stockholders vote?

1

Who is entitled to vote at the meeting?

1

What are the voting rights of the holders of Common Stock and Series F Preferred Stock?

2

Who can attend the meeting?

2

What constitutes a quorum?

2

What vote is required to approve each item to be voted on at the meeting?

2

How do I vote?

3

What is the difference between holding shares as a stockholder of record and in “street name”?

3

What are broker non-votes?

4

What routine matters will be voted on at the meeting?

4

What non-routine matters will be voted on at the meeting?

4

What is the effect of not casting a vote?

4

Can I change my vote?

4

What if I receive more than one proxy card?

5

Where can I find the voting results of the meeting?

5  

STOCKSECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

6

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

6

Security Ownership of Management

 7  

PROPOSAL NO. 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORSSecurity Ownership of Management

 8  

INFORMATION CONCERNING THE BOARDPROPOSAL NO. 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS AND COMMITTEES

 11

Director Meetings

11

Board Composition

11

Committees of the Board

1110  

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Board Leadership Structure

 13  

Board Independence

13

Board Leadership Structure

13

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

13

Audit Committee

 14  

Compensation CommitteeBoard Independence

14

Governance and Nominating Committee

14

Code of Ethics and Business Conduct

14

Executive Sessions of Non-Management Directors

 15  

Communications with the BoardExecutive Sessions of Non-Management Directors

 15  

Director QualificationsMeetings

 15  

Identifying and Evaluating Nominees for DirectorCommittees of the Board

15

Director Compensation

 16  

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

 17

Code of Ethics and Business Conduct

17

Communications with the Board

18

Identifying and Evaluating Nominees for Director

18

Director Qualifications

19

Director Compensation

19

2014 Director Compensation Table

22  

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

 1823  

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND OTHER MATTERSDISCUSSION & ANALYSIS

Executive Summary

 2025  

Compensation DiscussionPhilosophy and AnalysisProcess

 2028  

2011 SummaryElements of Executive Compensation Table

 3832  

2011 All OtherChanges to Executive Compensation TableImplemented for 2014

 3933  

2011 Grants of Plan Based Awards TableExecutive Compensation Decisions for 2014

 4036  

Changes to 2015 Executive Compensation

47

Stock Ownership Guidelines

47

Pledging, Hedging and Other Transactions in Quanta Securities

48

Employment Agreements

48

Indemnification Agreements

48

Risk Considerations in our Compensation Program

49

Impact of Regulatory Requirements on our Executive Compensation Decisions

50

Conclusion

50

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

2014 Summary Compensation Table

51

2014 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table

54

Outstanding Equity Awards at 20112014 Fiscal Year EndYear-End

 5641

2014 Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table

57

2014 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table

58

Fees of the Compensation Committee Consultant

59

Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

60

Equity Compensation Plan Information

66

CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS

Related Party Transactions

67

Review of Related Party Transactions

69

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

69  


2011 Options Exercised and Stock Vested TableCOMMITTEE REPORTS

Compensation Committee Report

 4270  

Risk Considerations in Our Compensation ProgramAudit Committee Report

 42

Fees of the Compensation Committee Consultant

44

Equity Compensation Plan Information

45

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

4571  

CERTAIN TRANSACTIONSINDEPENDENT AUDITOR

Audit Fees

 52

Review of Related Party Transactions

5372  

SECTION 16(a) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE

53

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

54

REPORT FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

54

AUDIT FEES

55

PROPOSAL NO. 2: RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 5673  

PROPOSAL NO. 3: ADVISORY VOTE ONTO APPROVE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 5774  

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

59

Stockholder Proposals and Nominations of Directors for the 20132016 Annual Meeting

 5976  

Proxy Solicitation CostsOther Matters

 59

Other Matters

6076  


LOGOLOGO

QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

2800 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 2600

Houston, TX 77056

(713) 629-7600

 

 

PROXY STATEMENT

FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD MAY 17, 201221, 2015

 

 

We are distributing and making available this Proxy Statement, the form of proxy

or voting instructions and our 20112014 Annual Report

beginning on or about April 10, 2012.9, 2015.

We are furnishing this proxy statement in connection with the solicitation of proxies by our Board of Directors (“Board”) to be voted at the 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Quanta Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation, sometimes referred to as the Company, Quanta, us, we or like terms. The annual meeting will be held in Houston, Texas on Thursday, May 21, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. local time. The proxy materials, including this proxy statement, the form of proxy or voting instructions and our 2014 annual report, are being distributed and made available on or about April 9, 2015.

In accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we are providing our stockholders access to our proxy materials on the Internet. Accordingly, a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“Notice”) will be mailed to most of our stockholders on or about April 9, 2015. Stockholders will have the ability to access the proxy materials on a website referred to in the Notice or request a printed set of the proxy materials to be sent to them by following the instructions in the Notice.

The Notice also provides instructions on how to inform us to send future proxy materials to you electronically by e-mail or in printed form by mail. If you choose to receive future proxy materials by e-mail, you will receive an e-mail next year with instructions containing a link to those materials and a link to the proxy voting site. Your election to receive proxy materials by e-mail or printed form will remain in effect until you terminate it.

Choosing to receive future proxy materials by e-mail will allow us to provide you with the information you need in a timelier manner, save us the cost of printing and mailing documents to you, and conserve natural resources.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MEETING

What is the purpose of the meeting?

The meeting will be Quanta’s regular annual meeting of stockholders, and stockholders will be asked to vote on the following matters:

 

election of eleventen directors nominated by our Board of Directors (the “Board”);Board;

 

ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2012;2015; and

 

approval, by non-binding advisory vote, of Quanta’s executive compensation.

How does the Board recommend that stockholders vote?

The Board recommends that stockholders vote as follows:

 

FOR the election of all nominees as directors;

 

FOR ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal year 2012;2015; and

 

FOR the advisory resolution approving Quanta’s executive compensation.


General Information

When and where is the annual meeting?

The annual meeting will be held in the Williams Tower, 2nd Floor Conference Center, Auditorium No. 1, located at 2800 Post Oak Boulevard, Houston, Texas 77056, on May 21, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. local time.

Who can attend the meeting?

All stockholders of record as of March 23, 2015, or their duly appointed proxies, may attend the meeting, and each may be accompanied by one guest. Seating, however, is limited. Admission to the meeting will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Registration and seating will begin at 8:30 a.m. on May 21, 2015. Each stockholder will be asked to present valid picture identification, such as a driver’s license or passport. Cameras, recording devices and other electronic devices will not be permitted at the meeting. To obtain directions to the meeting, please contact our Corporate Secretary at 713-629-7600.

If you hold your shares in “street name” (that is, through a broker, bank or other nominee), you will need to bring a copy of a brokerage statement reflecting your stock ownership as of the record date and check in at the registration desk at the meeting.

Who is entitled to vote at the meeting?

Only holdersHolders of record of (A)(i) our Common Stock, par value $0.00001 per share, and (B)(ii) our Series F Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share, and (iii) our Series G Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share, respectively, at the close of business on March 19, 2012,23, 2015, the record date for the meeting, are entitled to notice of and to vote at the annual meeting. If you were a stockholder of record on that date, you will be entitled to vote all of the shares that you held on that date at the meeting, or at any adjournments or postponements of the meeting, unless a new record date is then set.

As of March 19, 2012, 207,255,98323, 2015, there were 204,430,017 shares of our Common Stock, and one share of our Series F Preferred Stock, and one share of our Series G Preferred Stock, respectively, were outstanding and entitled to vote.

What are the voting rights of the holders of Common Stock, and Series F Preferred Stock and Series G Preferred Stock?

Each share of Common Stock is entitled to one vote on each matter on which it may vote. The share of Series F Preferred Stock is entitled to a number of votes equal to the number of outstanding Class A non-voting exchangeable common shares of our wholly-owned subsidiary, Valard Construction Ltd., a British Columbia company and successor to Quanta Services EC Canada Ltd.,corporation, on each matter on which it may vote. Valard Construction Ltd. had 3,909,1103,500,000 Class A non-voting exchangeable common shares outstanding on March 19, 2012.23, 2015. The share of Series G Preferred Stock is entitled to a number of votes equal to the number of outstanding Class A non-voting exchangeable common shares of our wholly-owned subsidiary, Northstar Energy Services Inc., an Alberta corporation, on each matter on which it may vote. Northstar Energy Services Inc. had 899,858 Class A non-voting exchangeable common shares outstanding on March 23, 2015.

Holders of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series FG Preferred Stock vote together as a single class on all matters. The required vote to approve each item to be voted on at the meeting is described below.

Who can attend the meeting?

All stockholders of record as of March 19, 2012, or their duly appointed proxies, may attend the meeting, and each may be accompanied by one guest. Seating, however, is limited. Admission to the meeting will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Registration will begin at 8:00 a.m. and seating will begin at 8:30 a.m. Each stockholder will be asked to present valid picture identification, such as a driver’s license or passport. Cameras, recording devices and other electronic devices will not be permitted at the meeting. To obtain directions to the meeting, please contact our Corporate Secretary at 713-629-7600.

Please note that if you hold your shares in “street name” (that is, through a broker, bank or other nominee), you will need to bring a copy of a brokerage statement reflecting your stock ownership as of the record date and check in at the registration desk at the meeting.

What constitutes a quorum?

The holders of shares representing both (i) a majority of the aggregate outstanding shares and (ii) a majority of the aggregate voting power of Common Stock and Series F Preferred Stock entitled to vote must be present, in person or by proxy, to constitute a quorum to transact business at the annual meeting.

As of March 19, 2012, 207,255,983 shares of our Common Stock with aggregate voting power of 207,255,983 votes, and one share of our Series F Preferred Stock with aggregate voting power of 3,909,110 votes, respectively, were outstanding and entitled to vote. Properly executed proxies received but marked as abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted as present for purposes of establishing a quorum at the meeting.

What vote is required to approve each item to be voted on at the meeting?

Directors are elected by a majority of the votes cast with respect to such director in uncontested elections, such that a nominee for director will be elected to the Board if the votes cast FOR the nominee’s election exceed the votes cast AGAINST such nominee’s election. Abstentions and broker non-votes are not counted as votes

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

2


General Information

cast for purposes of the election of directors and, therefore, will have no effect on the outcome of such election. Even if a nominee is not re-elected, he or she will remain in office as a director until his or her earlier resignation or removal. Each of the current director nominees has signed a letter of resignation that will be effective if the nominee is not re-elected at the meeting and the Board accepts his or resignation following the meeting. If a nominee is not re-elected, the Board will decide whether to accept the director’s resignation in accordance with the procedures listed in Quanta’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, which are available on our website atwww.quantaservices.com.www.quantaservices.com.

Ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series FG Preferred Stock, considered together as a single class, present at the meeting in person or by proxy and entitled to vote on that proposal. Abstentions will have the same effect as a vote against the proposal. Broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the vote on such proposal.

Advisory approval of the resolution on Quanta’s executive compensation requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series FG Preferred Stock, considered together as a single class, present at the meeting in person or by proxy and entitled to vote on that proposal. Abstentions will have the same effect as a vote against the resolution. Broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the advisory vote. The results of this vote are not binding on the Board, whether or not the proposal is adopted by the aforementioned voting standard. In evaluating the vote on this resolution, the Board intends to consider the voting results in their entirety.

Any other matter properly brought before the meeting will be decided by the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series FG Preferred Stock, considered together as a single class, present at the meeting in person or by proxy and entitled to vote on the matter.

Why did I receive a Notice in the mail regarding the Internet availability of proxy materials this year instead of a full set of proxy materials?

In accordance with SEC rules, we are providing access to our proxy materials over the Internet. As a result, we have sent to most of our stockholders a Notice instead of a paper copy of the proxy materials. The Notice contains instructions on how to access the proxy materials over the Internet and how to request a paper copy. In addition, stockholders may request to receive future proxy materials in printed form by mail or electronically by e-mail. A stockholder’s election to receive proxy materials by mail or e-mail will remain in effect until the stockholder terminates it.

Why didn’t I receive a Notice in the mail regarding the Internet availability of proxy materials?

We are providing certain stockholders, including those who have previously requested to receive paper copies of the proxy materials, with paper copies of the proxy materials instead of a Notice. If you would like to reduce the costs incurred by Quanta in mailing proxy materials, you can consent to receive all future proxy statements, proxy cards and annual reports electronically via e-mail or the Internet. To sign up for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions provided with your proxy materials and on your proxy card or voting instruction card to vote using the Internet. When prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access stockholder communications electronically in the future.

Can I vote my stock by completing and returning the Notice?

No. The Notice will, however, provide instructions on how to vote by Internet, by telephone, by requesting and returning a paper proxy card, or by submitting a ballot in person at the annual meeting.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

3


General Information

How can I access the proxy materials over the Internet?

Your Notice or proxy card will contain instructions on how to view our proxy materials for the annual meeting on the Internet. Our proxy materials are available atwww.proxyvote.com.

How do I vote?

You may vote your shares inby any of the following manners:methods:

(i) Internet. Vote on the Internet atwww.proxyvote.com. This website also allows electronic proxy voting using smartphones, tablets and other web-connected mobile devices (additional charges may apply pursuant to your service provider plan). Simply follow the instructions on the Notice, or if you received a proxy card by signing and datingmail, follow the enclosedinstructions on the proxy card and you can confirm that your vote has been properly recorded. If you vote on the Internet, you can request electronic delivery of future proxy materials. Internet voting facilities for stockholders of record will be available 24 hours a day and will close at 11:59 p.m. (Eastern Time) on May 20, 2015.

(ii) Telephone. Vote by telephone by following the instructions on the Notice or, if you received a proxy card, by following the instructions on the proxy card. Easy-to-follow voice prompts allow you to vote your stock and confirm that your vote has been properly recorded. Telephone voting facilities for stockholders of record will be available 24 hours a day and will close at 11:59 p.m. (Eastern Time) on May 20, 2015.

(iii) Mail. If you received a proxy card by mail, vote by mail by completing, signing, dating and returning ityour proxy card in the accompanying envelope;pre-addressed, postage-paid envelope provided. If you vote by mail and your proxy card is returned unsigned, then your vote cannot be counted. If you vote by mail and the returned proxy card is signed without indicating how you want to vote, then your proxy will be voted as recommended by the Board. If mailed, your completed and signed proxy card must be received by May 20, 2015.

(iv) Meeting. You may attend and vote at the annual meeting. The Board recommends that you vote using one of the first three methods discussed above, as it is not practical for most stockholders to attend and vote at the annual meeting. Using one of the first three methods discussed above to vote will not limit your right to vote at the annual meeting if you later decide to attend in person. If your stock is held in street name (for example, held in the name of a bank, broker, or other nominee), you must obtain a proxy executed in your favor from your bank, broker or other holder of record to be able to vote in person at the annual meeting.

If I vote by telephone or Internet and received a proxy card in the mail, do I need to return my proxy card?

No, you do not need to return your proxy card if you vote by telephone or Internet.

If I vote by mail, telephone or Internet, may I still attend the annual meeting?

Yes, you may attend the annual meeting even if you have voted by mail, telephone or Internet.

Can I change my vote?

Yes. You may revoke your proxy before the voting polls are closed at the annual meeting, by the following methods:

 

  

on thevoting at a later time by Internet aton the websitewww.proxyvote.com, by following the instructions included with your proxy card until 11:59 p.m. (Eastern Time) on May 20, 2015 (not available to the holderholders of Series F Preferred Stock or Series G Preferred Stock);

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

4


General Information

 

voting at a later time by telephone, following the instructions included with your Notice or proxy card, until 11:59 p.m. (Eastern Time) on May 20, 2015 (not available to the holderholders of Series F Preferred Stock or Series G Preferred Stock);

voting in person, or giving notice to the inspector of elections, at the annual meeting; or

 

signing, dating and delivering to Quanta’s Corporate Secretary a proxy with a later date or a written revocation of your most recent proxy.

The powers of the proxy holders will be revoked with respect to your shares if you attend the meeting in person and vote your shares in person by completing a written ballotballot. Attendance at the meeting.

meeting will not by itself revoke a previously granted proxy. If you are a street name stockholder of record and you attend the meeting, you may deliver your completed proxy card in person. If you hold your shares in “street name” and you wish to vote at the meeting, you will need to obtain a proxy from the broker or nominee that holds your shares.

Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, we encourage you to vote by proxy, as soon as possible.you may later revoke your proxy by informing the holder of record in accordance with that entity’s procedures.

What is the difference between holdingeffect of an advisory vote?

Because your vote with respect to approval of our named executive officer compensation is advisory, it will not be binding upon the Board. However, our Compensation Committee and the Board will take the outcome of the vote into account when considering future compensation arrangements for our executive officers.

What constitutes a quorum?

The holders of shares asrepresenting both (i) a stockholdermajority of record and in “street name”?

Many stockholders hold theirthe aggregate outstanding shares through a stockbroker, bank or other nominee rather than directly in their own name. This is often called holding shares in “street name.” As summarized below, there are some distinctions between record stockholders and “street name” holders.

If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, you are considered the stockholder of record for those shares, and these proxy materials are being sent directly to you.

If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account or by a bank or other nominee, you are considered the beneficial owner of those shares, and you hold your shares in “street name.” In this case, proxy materials are being forwarded to you by or on behalf of your broker, bank or nominee. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or nominee howentitled to vote, and are also invited(ii) a majority of the aggregate voting power of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series G Preferred Stock entitled to attendvote must be present, in person or by proxy, to constitute a quorum to transact business at the annual meeting. However, because you are not a stockholder

As of record, you may not vote theseMarch 23, 2015, there were 204,430,017 shares in personof our Common Stock with aggregate voting power of 204,430,017 votes, one share of our Series F Preferred Stock with aggregate voting power of 3,500,000 votes, and one share of our Series G Preferred Stock with aggregate voting power of 899,858 votes, respectively, outstanding and entitled to vote.

Your stock is counted as present at the annual meeting unlessif you bring withattend the annual meeting and vote in person or if you properly return a proxy from yourby Internet, telephone or mail. Abstentions and broker bank or nominee. Your broker, bank or nominee has enclosednon-votes will be counted as present for purposes of establishing a voting instruction card for you to use in directingquorum at the vote of your shares.

meeting.

What are broker non-votes?

The New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) permits brokers to vote their customers’ stock held in street name on routine matters, such as the ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm, when the brokers have not received voting instructions from their customers. However, the NYSE does not allow brokers to vote their customers’ shares held in street name on non-routine matters unless they have received voting instructions from their customers. In such cases, the uninstructed shares for which the broker is unable to vote are called broker non-votes.

What routine matters will be voted on at the annual meeting?

Ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm is the only matter to be voted on at the meeting on which brokers may vote in their discretion on behalf of customers who have not provided voting instructions.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

5


General Information

What non-routine matters will be voted on at the annual meeting?

Each of theThe election of directors and the advisory vote on executive compensation is aare non-routine mattermatters on which brokers are not allowed to vote unless they have received voting instructions from their customers.

What is the effect of not casting a vote?

If you are a stockholder of record and you do not cast your vote, no votes will be cast on your behalf on any of the matters that properly come before the meeting.

If you hold your shares in street name, it is critical that you cast your vote if you want it to count in the election of directors and the advisory vote on executive compensation to be voted on at the meeting. In prior years, if you held your shares in street name, and you did not indicate how you wanted your shares voted in the election of directors, your broker, bank or other nominee was allowed to vote those shares on your behalf in the election of directors as they felt appropriate. However, recent NYSE rule changes have eliminated the ability of your broker, bank or other nominee to vote your uninstructed shares in the election of directors on a discretionary basis. Thus, if you hold your shares in street name, and you do not instruct your broker, bank or other nominee how to vote in the election of directors, the advisory vote to approve executive compensation or any other non-routine matter, no votes will be cast on your behalf on such matters. Therefore,matters, but your broker, bank or other nominee will not have discretion to vote your shares on the election of directors or the advisory vote on executive compensation if you do not instruct your broker, bank or other nominee how to vote on these proposals, as these are not “routine” matters under NYSE rules. Your broker, bank or other nominee will, however, continue to have discretion to vote any uninstructed shares on the ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm.

Where can I find the voting results of the annual meeting?

We plan to announce preliminary voting results at the meeting and publish final results in a Current Report on Form 8-K or an amendment thereto timely filed with the SEC. You may access or obtain a copy of this and other reports free of charge on the Company’s website atwww.quantaservices.com or by contacting our investor relations department atinvestors@quantaservices.com. Also, the referenced Current Report on Form 8-K, any amendments thereto and other reports filed by Quanta with the SEC are available to you on the SEC’s website atwww.sec.gov.

Who pays for the proxy solicitation related to the annual meeting?

The proxies being solicited hereby are being solicited by Quanta. The costs of soliciting proxies hereby, which may include the cost of preparing, printing and mailing the proxy materials, will be borne by Quanta. Our officers, directors and employees may, but without compensation other than their regular compensation, solicit proxies by further mailing or personal conversations, or by telephone, facsimile, postings on our website or other electronic means. We will also request banks, brokers and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries to forward proxy materials to beneficial owners of our Common Stock and obtain their voting instructions. We will, upon request, reimburse brokerage firms and others for their reasonable expenses in forwarding solicitation materials to beneficial owners of our Common Stock. Quanta has not engaged an outside proxy solicitor for the annual meeting.

Can I changeget more than one copy of the proxy materials if multiple stockholders are located at my vote?address?

Yes. YouIn some instances, only one proxy statement and annual report is being delivered to multiple stockholders sharing an address unless we have received contrary instructions from one of those stockholders. Quanta undertakes to promptly deliver upon request a separate copy of such materials to any stockholder at a shared address to which a single copy of the documents was delivered. Stockholders sharing an address may revoke youralso request delivery of a single copy of the proxy at any time beforematerials, but in such event will still receive separate proxies for each account. To request separate or single delivery of these materials now or in the voting polls are closed at the annual meeting,future, stockholders should notify Quanta by the following methods:

by signing, dating and delivering tocontacting the Corporate Secretary ofin writing at Quanta a proxy with a later dateServices, Inc., 2800 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2600, Houston, Texas 77056 or a written revocation of your prior proxy;

by voting at a later time on the websitewww.proxyvote.com, following the instructions included with your proxy card (not available to the holder of Series F Preferred Stock);

by votingphone at a later time by telephone, following the instructions included with your proxy card (not available to the holder of Series F Preferred Stock); or

by voting in person at the annual meeting by written ballot.

713-629-7600.

The powers of the proxy holders will be revoked with respect to your shares if you attend the meeting in person and vote your shares in person by completing a written ballot. Attendance at the meeting will not by itself revoke a previously granted proxy. If you hold your shares in “street name,” you may later revoke your proxy by informing the holder of record in accordance with that entity’s procedures.

What if I receive more than one proxy card?

If you hold your shares in more than one type of account or your shares are registered differently, you may receive more than one proxy card. We encourage you to vote each proxy card that you receive.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

6


Where can I find the voting resultsSecurity Ownership of the meeting?Certain

We plan to announce preliminary voting results at the meetingBeneficial Owners and publish final results in a Current Report on Form 8-K or an amendment thereto timely filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

Management

STOCK OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN

BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

The following table sets forth information, as of March 19, 2012,April 1, 2015, unless otherwise indicated, with respect to each person known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than five percent (5%) of the outstanding shares of our Common Stock, or Series F Preferred Stock or Series G Preferred Stock. Except as indicated otherwise, the beneficial owners named below have sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares indicated as beneficially owned.

 

Name and Address

of Beneficial Owner

    Title of Class    Number of Shares
    Beneficially Owned    
 TitlePercent
    of Class
Number of  Shares
Beneficially Owned
Percent
of Class(1)
 

T. Rowe Price Associates,The Vanguard Group, Inc.

Common Stock 20,949,51915,961,026(2) 10.17.8

100 E. Pratt StreetVanguard Blvd.

Baltimore, Maryland 21202Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355

BlackRock, Inc.

Common Stock 14,564,46012,184,270(3) 7.06.0

40 East 52nd52nd Street

New York, New York 10022

The Vanguard Group Inc.12988672 Alberta Ltd.(4)

Common Stock10,878,942(4) 5.2

100 Vanguard Blvd.

296,841
   * 

Malvern, PA 19355

Victor Budzinski, Trustee(4)

Series F 1(5)  100.0

708 Hollingsworth Green

Preferred Stock

Edmonton, Alberta T6R 3G6

1144809 Alberta Ltd.(6)

Series G1(7)  100.0

Box 23264

Preferred Stock

Grand Prairie, Alberta T8V 7G7

 

*

Percentage of shares does not exceed 1%.

(1)

The percent of class beneficially owned is calculated based on 207,255,983 shares of(i) with respect to our Common Stock, 204,495,383 shares, (ii) with aggregate voting power of an equal number of votes, and (B) one share ofrespect to our Series F Preferred Stock, one share, and (iii) with aggregate voting power of 3,909,110 votes, respectively,respect to our Series G Preferred Stock, one share, in each case issued and outstanding as of March 19, 2012.April 1, 2015. In addition, if a person has the right to acquire beneficial ownership of shares within 60 days following March 19, 2012,April 1, 2015, those shares are deemed beneficially owned by that person as of that date and are deemed to be outstanding solely for the purpose of determining the percentage of common stockCommon Stock that he or she owns. Those shares are not included in the computations for any other person.

 

(2)

Based on Schedule 13G/A (Amendment No. 4) filed on February 10, 2015 by The Vanguard Group, Inc. (“Vanguard”), an investment adviser, which has sole voting power over 373,309 shares, sole dispositive power over 15,612,517 shares, and shared dispositive power over 348,509 shares. The Schedule 13G/A (Amendment No. 4) further indicates that Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vanguard, is the beneficial owner of 289,909 shares as a result of its serving as investment manager of collective trust accounts, and Vanguard Investments Australia, Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vanguard, is the beneficial owner of 142,000 shares as a result of its serving as investment manager of Australian investment offerings.

(3)

Based on Schedule 13G/A (Amendment No. 5) filed on February 13, 2012 by T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (“Price Associates”), which has sole voting power over 4,977,073 of such shares and sole dispositive power over all such shares. The Schedule 13G/A (Amendment No. 5) further indicates that these securities are owned by various individual and institutional investors for which Price Associates serves as an investment adviser with power to direct investments and/or sole power to vote the securities. For purposes of the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Price Associates is deemed to be a beneficial owner of such securities; however, Price Associates expressly disclaims that it is, in fact, the beneficial owner of such securities.

(3)Based on Schedule 13G/A (Amendment No. 2) filed on February 10, 20129, 2015 by BlackRock, Inc., a parent holding company for a number of investment management subsidiaries, which has sole voting power with respect to 10,538,613 shares and sole dispositive power over all such12,184,270 shares.

 

(4)Based on Schedule 13G/A (Amendment No. 1) filed on February 10, 2012 by The Vanguard Group Inc.

As of April 1, 2015, Victor Budzinski, record owner of one share of Series F Preferred Stock, owned 100% of the equity interest in 12988672 Alberta Ltd., an investment adviser, which has sole voting powerAlberta corporation and shared dispositive power over 292,065record owner of such296,841 shares and sole dispositive power over 10,586,877 of such shares.our Common Stock.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

7


Security Ownership of Certain

Beneficial Owners and Management

 

(5)

As of March 19, 2012,April 1, 2015, the one issued and outstanding share of our Series F Preferred Stock had voting rights equivalent to 3,909,1103,500,000 shares, or 1.9%1.7%, of our Common Stock.

(6)

As of April 1, 2015, Jay Gunnarson owned 100% of the equity interest in 1144809 Alberta Ltd., an Alberta corporation and record owner of one share of Series G Preferred Stock.

(7)

As of April 1, 2015, the one issued and outstanding share of our Series G Preferred Stock had voting rights equivalent to 899,858 shares, or 0.4%, of our Common Stock.

Security Ownership of Management

The following table sets forth, as of March 19, 2012,April 1, 2015, the number of shares of Common Stock beneficially owned by (i) each of our directors and director nominees, (ii) each of our named executive officers listed in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table (the(collectively, the “NEOs”), and (iii) all of our directors and executive officers as a group.

 

 Shares of Common Stock
Beneficially  Owned(1)
 

Name of Beneficial Owner

Number(2) NumberPercent of Class(1) 

John R. ColsonDirectors:(3)

Vincent D. Foster

 1,391,876234,858(2) (4)(5)  *  

Vincent D. FosterBruce Ranck

94,325 (4)(6) 258,862(3)*  

Louis C. Golm

85,127 (4)(5)(6) *  

James H. HaddoxR. Ball

56,189 (4)(5)(6) *254,434

Bernard Fried

47,700 (4)(5)(6) *

J. Michal Conaway

24,723 (4)(5)*

Worthing F. Jackman

21,513 (4)(5)*

Pat Wood, III

16,506 (4)(5)*

Margaret B. Shannon

11,639 (4)*

Named Executive Officers:

James F. O’Neil III

210,553 (5)(7) *  

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.Jr

 119,708128,619 (5)(6)(7)  *  

Derrick A. Jensen

 116,695111,859 (5)(7)  *  

James F. O’Neil IIIJesse E. Morris

 110,1386,349 (5)(7)  *  

Kenneth W. TrawickSteven J. Kemps

 93,3291,453 (7)  *  

Louis C. GolmEric B. Brown

 81,631 (4)(8) *

James R. Ball

77,305 (5)*

Bruce Ranck

65,592*

Bernard Fried

50,204*

Pat Wood, III

26,438*

Ralph R. DiSibio

23,068*

J. Michal Conaway

22,127*

Worthing F. Jackman

20,517 *  

All directors and executive officers as a group (19 persons)

 2,824,5171,124,957 (4)(5)(6)(7) *1.4%  

 

*

Percentage of shares does not exceed 1%.

 

(1)

The percent of class beneficially owned is calculated based on (A) 207,255,983204,495,383 shares of our Common Stock with aggregate voting power of an equal number of votes, issued and outstanding as of March 19, 2012. In addition, if a person hasApril 1, 2015, adjusted as required by the right to acquire beneficial ownership of shares within 60 days following March 19, 2012, those shares are deemed beneficially ownedrules promulgated by that person as of that date and are deemed to be outstanding solely for the purpose of determining the percentage of common stock that he or she owns. Those shares are not included in the computations for any other person.

(2)Includes 804,142 shares pledged as collateral.

(3)Includes 7,500 shares of Common Stock that may be acquired by Mr. Foster upon the exercise of stock options.

(4)Includes 10,000 shares of Common Stock that may be acquired by Mr. Golm upon the exercise of stock options.

(5)Includes 7,500 shares of Common Stock that may be acquired by Mr. Ball upon the exercise of stock options.

(6)Includes 25,000 sharesSEC. Shares of Common Stock that may be acquired upon vesting of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) within 60 days of April 1, 2015 and vested RSUs that are not yet settled are deemed outstanding and beneficially owned by the exerciseperson holding such RSUs for purposes of stock options.computing the number of shares and percentage beneficially owned, but are not deemed outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage beneficially owned by any other person.

(2)

Except as otherwise indicated, the persons named have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of Common Stock shown as beneficially owned by them, subject to community property laws where applicable.

(3)

Mr. O’Neil is an executive officer and director of Quanta, but his beneficial ownership is reported with the executive officers.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

8


Security Ownership of Certain

Beneficial Owners and Management

(4)

Includes shares that may be acquired upon vesting of RSUs within 60 days of April 1, 2015 as follows: 6,511 shares for Mr. Ranck; 4,108 shares for each of the other non-employee directors; and 39,375 shares for all directors and executive officers as a group.

(5)

Includes RSUs that have vested or that will vest within 60 days of April 1, 2015 and for which settlement has been or will be deferred, as applicable, pursuant to the deferred compensation plans maintained by Quanta as follows: 8,953 shares for each of Messrs. Foster, Golm, Fried, Jackman and Wood; 6,531 shares for Mr. Ball; 7,306 shares for Mr. Conaway; 95,827 shares for Mr. O’Neil; 38,738 shares for Mr. Austin; 24,867 shares for Mr. Jensen; 5,261 shares for Mr. Morris; and 228,088 shares for all directors and executive officers as a group.

(6)

Includes shares held by family trusts or family limited partnerships as to which the named person and his or her spouse have shared voting and investment power as follows: 87,814 shares for Mr. Ranck; 76,174 shares for Mr. Golm; 47,236 shares for Mr. Ball; 38,747 shares for Mr. Fried; 20,000 shares for Mr. Austin; and 269,971 shares for all directors and executive officers as a group.

(7)

Does not include shares underlying performance units that are scheduled to vest, to the extent performance objectives are achieved, on either December 31, 2016 or December 31, 2017 as follows: 142,453 units for Mr. O’Neil; 50,293 units for Mr. Austin; 37,213 units for Mr. Jensen; 11,196 units for Mr. Morris; 18,561 units for Mr. Kemps; and 281,105 units for all directors and officers as a group.

(8)

Mr. Brown ceased to serve as an executive officer as of September 15, 2014, and therefore any shares beneficially owned by Mr. Brown are excluded from the total for all directors and executives as a group.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

9


Quanta Board of Directors

PROPOSAL NO. 1

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Board currently consists of eleventen directors, whose current terms of office all expire at the 20122015 annual meeting. The Board proposes that the following eleventen nominees be elected for a new term of one year or until their successors are duly elected and qualified or until their earlier death, resignation or removal. Each of the nominees has consented to serve if elected. If a nominee becomes unavailable to serve as a director, the Board may designate a substitute nominee. In that case, the persons named as proxies will vote for the substitute nominee designated by the Board. Proxies cannot be voted for a greater number of persons than the number of nominees named below.

The director nominees standing for election are:

 

Name

      Age       

Position(s) with Quanta

      Director Since       Age   

Position(s) with Quanta

  Director Since   

James R. Ball

   69    Director   1998   72  Director 1998  

John R. Colson

   64    

Executive Chairman and Director

   1998  

J. Michal Conaway

   63    Director   2007   66  Director 2007  

Ralph R. DiSibio

   70    Director   2006  

Vincent D. Foster

   55    Director   1998   58  Director 1998  

Bernard Fried

   55    Director   2004   58  Director 2004  

Louis C. Golm

   70    Director   2002   73  Director 2002  

Worthing F. Jackman

   47    Director   2005   50  Director 2005  

James F. O’Neil III

   53    

President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

   2011   56  President, Chief Executive Officer and Director 2011  

Bruce Ranck

   63    Director   2005   66  Chairman of the Board 2005  

Margaret B. Shannon

 65  Director 2012  

Pat Wood, III

   49    Director   2006   52  Director 2006  

James R. Ballhas been a member of the Board of Directors since 1998 and is a private investor. He previously served in various management positions with Vista Chemical Company for over twenty-five years, most recently as Chief Executive Officer and President from 1992 until his retirement in 1995. He also previously served as a director of Kraton Polymers, LLC from 2004 to 2008, ABS Group Inc. from 2003 to 2005, The Carbide/Graphite Group, Inc. from 1994 to 2002, and Rexene Corporation from 1996 to 1997. Mr. Ball holds a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics degree and a Master of Science in Management degree. The Board believes Mr. Ball’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his over twenty-five years of management experience, including three years as a chief executive officer, his years of service on boards of other public companies, and his extensive experience with corporate governance, financial analysis, business strategy and management.

John R. Colsonhas been a member of the Board of Directors since 1998 and has served as Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors since May 2011. Mr. Colson previously served as our Chairman of the Board from 2002 to May 2011 and as our Chief Executive Officer from December 1997 to May 2011. He joined PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc. (PAR), an electrical specialty contractor and now a subsidiary of Quanta, in 1971 and served as its President from 1991 until December 1997. He served as a director of U.S. Concrete, Inc. from 1999 to 2006. He is currently a member of the National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) and the Academy of Electrical Contracting, a director of the Missouri Valley Chapter of NECA, and a regent of the Electrical Contracting Foundation. The Board believes Mr. Colson’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his significant contributions and service to Quanta since its inception, including his day-to-day leadership of Quanta as its Chief Executive Officer, his four decades of electric power industry experience, as well as his years of service as a director of other public companies.

J. Michal Conaway has been a member of the Board of Directors since August 2007. He has served as the Chief Executive Officer of Peregrine Group, LLC, an executive consulting firm, since 2002. Mr. Conaway has been providing consulting and advisory services since 2000. Prior to 2000, Mr. Conaway held various management and executive positions, including serving as Chief Financial Officer of Fluor Corporation, an engineering, procurement, construction and maintenance services provider. Since 2008, Mr. Conaway has served as a director of GT Advanced Technologies, Inc., formerly known as GT Solar International, Inc. He previously served as a director of InfraSource Services, Inc. from February 2006 to August 2007 and Cherokee International Corporation from April 2008 to November 2008. Mr. Conaway holds an M.B.A. degree and is a Certified Public Accountant. The Board believes Mr. Conaway’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his prior service as the chief financial officer of multiple public corporations, including those within Quanta’s line of business, his years of service on boards of other public and private companies, his extensive financial and accounting expertise, and his advisory experience in strategic, operational and financial matters.

Ralph R. DiSibiohas been a member of the

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

10


Quanta Board of Directors since May 2006. He has been a senior consultant to Washington Group International, Inc., an integrated engineering, construction and management services provider, since April 2004. He served as President of Energy & Environment Business Unit, an engineering, construction and environmental services operating unit of Washington Group International, Inc., from November 2001 until April 2004, and Executive Vice President — Business Development of Washington Group Power, a power generation engineering, design and construction services operating unit of Washington Group International, Inc., from March 2001 until November 2001. Mr. DiSibio holds a Doctor of Education in Administration degree. The Board believes Mr. DiSibio’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his executive management experience, including at companies within Quanta’s line of business, as well as his extensive operational and risk management experience in the power industry.

Vincent D. Fosterhas been a member of the Board of Directors since 1998. He has served as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Main Street Capital Corporation, a specialty investment company, since March 2007. He also has served as Senior Managing Director of Main Street Capital Partners, LLC (and its predecessor firms), a private investment firm, since 1997. Since 2005, Mr. Foster has served as a director of Team Industrial Services, Inc. since 2005. Mr. Foster previously served as a director of U.S. Concrete, Inc. from 1999 to 2010, and Carriage Services, Inc. from 1999 to 2011.2011, and HMS Income Fund, Inc. from June 2012 to March 2013. Mr. Foster holds a J.D. degree and is a Certified Public Accountant. The Board believes Mr. Foster’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his significant contributions and service to Quanta since its inception, his experience as chief executive officer of a public corporation, his many years of service on boards of other public companies and his extensive tax, accounting, merger and acquisitions, financial and corporate governance expertise.

Bernard Friedhas been a member of the Board of Directors since March 2004. Since March 2011,June 2012, he has served as the Executive Chairman of OpTerra Energy Group, an energy conservation measures services provider. Mr. Fried continues to serve, since March 2011, as the Executive Chairman of Energy Solutions International, a software provider to the pipeline industry, and he has also been an independent consultant. He previously served as Chief Executive Officer and President of Siterra Corporation, a software services provider, from May 2005 to March 2011. From November 2003 until May 2005, he served as an independent consultant to the financial and software services industries. Mr. Fried served as Chief Executive Officer and President of Citadon, Inc., a software services provider, from 2001 until November 2003, and Chief Financial Officer and Managing Director of Bechtel Enterprises, Inc., a financing and development subsidiary of Bechtel Group, Inc., from 1997 until 2000. Mr. Fried holds a Bachelor of Engineering degree and an M.B.A. degree. The Board believes Mr. Fried’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his executive management experience, including at companies within Quanta’s line of business, his years of service on boards of public and private companies, and his extensive executive-level experience in operations, engineering, construction, project management, finance and international business.

Louis C. Golmhas been a member of the Board of Directors since July 2002 and from May 2001 until May 2002. He has been an independent consultant and senior advisor to the telecommunications and information management industries since 1999. Mr. Golm holds a Master of Science in Management degree and an M.B.A. degree. The Board believes Mr. Golm’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his numerous years of

executive management experience, including as chief executive officer of a large telecommunications company, his years of service as a director of other public and private companies, and his insight regarding sales and marketing, accounting/finance, risk mitigation and strategic development, and his telecommunications industry expertise.development.

Worthing F. Jackman has been a member of the Board of Directors since May 2005. He has served as Executive Vice President - Chief Financial Officer of Waste Connections, Inc., an integrated solid waste services company, since September 2004 and served as its Vice President - Finance and Investor Relations from April 2003 until August 2004. From 1991 until April 2003, Mr. Jackman held various positions with Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc., an investment banking firm, most recently serving as a Managing Director, Global Industrial and Environmental Services Group. Mr. Jackman holds an M.B.A. degree. The Board believes Mr. Jackman’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his experience as the chief financial officer of a public corporation and his investment banking experience, as well as his extensive financial and accounting expertise.

James F. O’Neil IIIhas been a member of the Board of Directors and has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since May 2011. He previously served as our President and Chief Operating Officer from October 2008 to May 2011, our Senior Vice President of Operations Integration and Audit from December 2002 to October 2008, and our Vice President of Operations Integration from August 1999 to December 2002. Mr. O’Neil holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering degree. The Board believes Mr. O’Neil’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his significant contributions to Quanta in strategy, mergers and acquisitions and internal audit, his operational and safety leadership service with Quanta, including as its President and Chief OperatingExecutive Officer, his technical expertise, and his extensive knowledge of the industries Quanta serves.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

11


Quanta Board of Directors

Bruce Ranck has been a member of the Board of Directors since May 2005.2005 and Chairman of the Board since May 2013. He has been a partner with Bayou City Partners, a venture capital firm, since 1999. Mr. Ranck served as Chief Executive Officer of Tartan Textile Services, Inc., a healthcare linen services provider, from August 2003 until April 2006. From 1970 until 1999, he held various positions with Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc., a provider of waste management services, most recently as Chief Executive Officer and President. Mr. Ranck served as a director of Dynamex Inc. from 2002 until February 2011. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Michigan State University in 1970. The Board believes Mr. Ranck’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his executive management experience, including as chief executive officer of a large public corporation, his extensive acquisition integration experience, and his years of service on boards of other public and private companies.

Margaret B. Shannon has been a member of the Board of Directors since December 2012. She served as Vice President and General Counsel of BJ Services Company, an international oilfield services company, from 1994 to 2010, when it was acquired by Baker Hughes Incorporated. Prior to 1994, she was a partner with the law firm of Andrews Kurth LLP. Ms. Shannon has served on the board of directors of Matador Resources Company, an exploration and production company, since June 2011. In addition, she is active in several not-for-profit organizations in Houston. Ms. Shannon received her J.D. cum laude from Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law in 1976 and her Bachelor of Arts degree from Baylor University in 1971. The Board believes Ms. Shannon’s qualifications to serve on the Board include vast experience in the energy industry, as well as in corporate governance, and her years of service on boards of other public and private companies.

Pat Wood, IIIhas been a member of the Board of Directors since May 2006. He has served as a Principal of Wood3 Resources, an energy infrastructure developer, since July 2005. From 2001 until July 2005, Mr. Wood served as chairmanChairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. From 1995 until 2001, he chaired the Public Utility Commission of Texas. Prior to 1995, Mr. Wood was an attorney with Baker & Botts L.L.P., a global law firm, and an associate project engineer with Arco Indonesia, an oil and gas company, in Jakarta. Mr. Wood has served as a director of SunPower Corporation since 2005, non-executive chairman of the board of directors of Dynegy, Inc. since October 2012 and director of Memorial Resource Development since June 2014. Mr. Wood previously served as a director of First Wind Holdings Inc. since 2010.from 2010 to June 2012. Mr. Wood holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering degree and a J.D. degree. The Board believes Mr. Wood’s qualifications to serve on the Board include his significant strategic and operational management experience, his unique perspective and extensive knowledge with regard to the legal and regulatory process and policy development at the government level, his years of service as a director of other public and private companies, and his energy infrastructure development expertise.

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a voteFOR the election of each of the director nominees.

INFORMATION CONCERNING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND COMMITTEES

Director Meetings

During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Board held nine meetings. All directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and the committees of the Board, if any, on which they served during the periods for which they have served as a director. We encourage, but do not require, the members of the Board to attend the annual meeting of stockholders. Last year, all of our directors attended the annual meeting of stockholders.

Board Composition

As of the date of this Proxy Statement, the Board is composed of eleven directors.

Committees of the Board

Information regarding the Audit, Compensation and Governance and Nominating Committees of the Board are as follows:

 

Committee    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

 

Current Members

12
  Number of
Meetings
During 2011


Corporate Governance

Duties of the Committee Include:

Audit Committee

Bernard Fried*

James R. Ball

J. Michal Conaway

Worthing F. Jackman

Eight

•      Monitoring the quality and integrity of Quanta’s financial statements

 

•      Appointing and compensating the independent registered public accounting firm

•      Considering the independence and assessing the qualifications of the independent registered public accounting firm

•      Reviewing the performance of Quanta’s internal audit function and the independent registered public accounting firm

Compensation Committee

Louis C. Golm*

Ralph R. DiSibio

Vincent D. Foster

Bruce Ranck

Eight

•      Overseeing the administration of Quanta’s incentive compensation plans, including the issuance of awards pursuant to equity-based incentive plans

•      Reviewing and approving salaries, bonuses, equity-based awards and other compensation of all executive officers and other management of Quanta and its subsidiaries

•      Reviewing and approving executive officer employment agreements

*Chairman

Committee

Current Members

Number of
Meetings
During 2011

Duties of the Committee Include:

Governance and Nominating Committee

Bruce Ranck*

J. Michal Conaway

Louis C. Golm

Pat Wood, III

Six

•      Developing and recommending corporate governance principles applicable to the Board and Quanta

•      Establishing qualifications for membership on the Board and its committees

•      Making recommendations regarding persons to be nominated for election or re-election to the Board and appointment to its committees

•      Evaluating policies regarding the recruitment of directors

•      Making recommendations regarding persons to be elected as executive officers by the Board

*Chairman

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

We are committed to having sound corporate governance practices that maximize stockholder value in a manner consistent with legal requirements and the highest standard of integrity. In that regard, the Board has adopted guidelines that provide a framework for the governance of Quanta. In addition, we continually review these guidelines and regularly monitor developments in the area of corporate governance. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate“Investors & Media / Corporate Governance.”

Board Leadership Structure

The Board believes that the leadership structure of Quanta’s Board should include either an independent non-executive Chairman of the Board or a Lead Director who satisfies Quanta’s standards for independence. The Board believes that the appointment of a Lead Director achieves many of the benefits claimed to result from the separation of the Chairman of the Board and the CEO roles. The Board reviews its leadership structure from time to time to assess whether it continues to serve the best interests of Quanta and its stockholders. The Board believes that this approach provides flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances, enabling the Board to fulfill its oversight role and allowing the Board to review the manner in which its leadership is configured with a view toward maintaining a structure that best serves Quanta and its stockholders.

Chairman of the Board

Quanta’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the Board will appoint a Chairman of the Board, who may but need not be an employee of Quanta. The Chairman of the Board presides over all regular sessions of the Board and Quanta’s annual meetings of stockholders. With input from the CEO (if the Chairman is an independent director), or in consultation with the Lead Director (if the Chairman is not an independent director), the Chairman sets the agenda for Board meetings, subject to the right of each Board member to suggest the inclusion of item(s) on any agenda. The Chairman of the Board may vote at any meeting of the Board on any matter called to a vote, subject to the legal, fiduciary and governance requirements applicable to all members of the Board. If the Chairman of the Board is an independent director, the duties and responsibilities of the Chairman of the Board generally include the following:

working with the CEO to ensure directors receive timely, accurate, and complete information to enable sound decision making, effective monitoring and advice;

encouraging active engagement of all directors;

directing discussions toward a consensus view and summarizing discussions for a complete understanding of what has been agreed;

encouraging the Board’s involvement in strategic planning and monitoring the CEO’s implementation;

coordinating, monitoring and maintaining a record of all meetings of independent directors and discussing Board executive session results with the CEO;

promoting effective relationships and open communication between the independent directors and the management team;

coordinating, together with the Compensation Committee, the formal evaluation of the CEO on an annual basis;

coordinating, together with the Governance and Nominating Committee, the succession plans for the CEO;

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

13


Corporate Governance

identifying matters specifically reserved for the decision of the Board and ensuring that the Board sets appropriate levels of authority for management;

coordinating, together with the Governance and Nominating Committee, a process for the annual evaluation of the Board, its members and its committees; and

reviewing management’s investor relations strategy and participating, where appropriate, in its implementation.

Additional duties and responsibilities of the Chairman of the Board may be established from time to time by the Board and the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board.

In May 2014, the Board re-appointed Bruce Ranck, an independent director, as non-executive Chairman of the Board to serve as such until his successor is duly elected and qualified at the next annual meeting of the Board or until his earlier resignation or removal. Mr. Ranck has served as Quanta’s non-executive Chairman of the Board since his initial appointment in May 2013. The Board may modify this structure in the future to ensure that the Board leadership structure for Quanta remains effective and advances the best interests of our stockholders.

Lead Director

In the event the Chairman of the Board is not an independent director, our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that a Lead Director will be elected exclusively by the independent directors. The Lead Director must be an independent director and will assist the Chairman of the Board and the remainder of the Board in assuring effective corporate governance in managing the affairs of the Board. A Lead Director is responsible for ensuring that the quality, quantity and timeliness of the flow of information between management and the Company and the Board enables the Board to fulfill its functions and fiduciary duties in an efficient and effective manner. In addition, the Lead Director will coordinate the activities of the other independent directors, preside over the Board when the Chairman of the Board is not present, consult with the Chairman of the Board as to agenda items for Board and committee meetings, and perform such other duties and responsibilities as the Board deems appropriate.

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

The Board oversees an enterprise-wide approach to risk management, designed to support the achievement of long-term organizational objectives and enhance stockholder value. The annual enterprise risk management assessment, led by Quanta’s President and Chief Executive Officer, provides visibility to the Board about the identification, assessment and management of critical risks and management’s risk mitigation strategies. In this process, risk is assessed throughout the business, including operational, financial, legal, regulatory, strategic and reputational risks. A fundamental part of risk management 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 the full Board in setting Quanta’s business strategy, both short-term and long-term, is a key part of its understanding of Quanta’s risks and what constitutes an appropriate level of risk for Quanta as well as how such risks are managed.

While the Board has the ultimate oversight responsibility for the risk management process, various committees of the Board also have responsibility for risk management. Specifically, the Audit Committee focuses on risks relating to financial reporting, internal controls and compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. In addition, the Compensation Committee focuses on risks relating to Quanta’s compensation policies and programs and, in setting compensation, strives to create incentives that are aligned with Quanta’s

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

14


Corporate Governance

risk management profile. Quanta’s Governance and Nominating Committee focuses on risks relating to Quanta’s corporate governance and Board membership and structure and also conducts an annual assessment of the risk management process and reports its findings to the Board. Finally, Quanta’s Investment Committee focuses on risks associated with prospective acquisitions, dispositions and investments, as well as capital investment strategies.

Board Independence

As of the date of this Proxy Statement, the Board is composed of ten directors. The Board has determined that Messrs. Ball, Conaway, DiSibio, Foster, Fried, Golm, Jackman, Ranck and Wood and Ms. Shannon have no material relationship with Quanta (either directly or as a partner, shareholderstockholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with Quanta) and are “independent” within the meaning of the NYSE’s corporate governance listing standards. The Board has made this determination based in part on its finding that these independent directors meet the categorical standards for director independence set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and in the NYSE corporate governance listing standards. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which include our categorical standards for director independence, are posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate“Investors & Media / Corporate Governance.”

Board Leadership Structure

The Board believes that Quanta’s Executive Chairman is best situated to serve as Chairman of the Board because, as an executive officer, he possesses detailed and in-depth knowledge of the issues, opportunities and challenges facing Quanta and its business and is thus best positioned to develop agendas that ensure that the Board’s time and attention are focused on the most critical matters. The Board believes that an executive officer serving as Chairman of the Board promotes strategy development and execution and fosters decisive leadership, clear accountability and effective decision-making. The Board believes that it has in place sound counter-balancing measures to ensure that Quanta maintains high standards of corporate governance and proper independent oversight. For instance, the Board holds executive sessions of the independent directors at every regularly scheduled Board meeting and, with With nine of the Board’s eleven directors deemed independent, the Board maintains a percentage of independent directors serving on the Board that is substantially above the NYSE requirement that a majority of directors be independent.

Additionally, given that the Chairman of the Board is not independent under the categorical standards for director independence set forth in Quanta’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Board considers it useful and appropriate to designate a Lead Independent Director to coordinate the activities of the other independent directors, preside over the Board when the Chairman of the Board is not present, and perform such other duties and responsibilities as the Board may determine. Accordingly, the independent members of the Board appoint, by majority vote, one of the independent members of the Board to serve as Lead Independent Director for a term continuing through the next annual Board meeting. The duties of the Lead Independent Director include presiding over executive sessions or other meetings of the independent directors and consulting with the Chairman of the Board as to agenda items for Board and committee meetings. In May 2011, the independent directors appointed James R. Ball to serve as Lead Independent Director, to serve as such until his successor is duly elected and qualified at the next annual meeting of the Board or until his earlier resignation or removal.

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

The Board oversees an enterprise-wide approach to risk management, designed to support the achievement of long-term organizational objectives and enhance stockholder value. The annual enterprise risk management assessment, led by Quanta’s President and Chief Executive Officer, provides visibility to the Board about the identification, assessment and management of critical risks and management’s risk mitigation strategies. In this process, risk is assessed throughout the business, including operational, financial, legal, regulatory, strategic and

reputational risks. A fundamental part of risk management 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 the full Board in setting Quanta’s business strategy, both short-term and long-term, is a key part of its understanding of Quanta’s risks and what constitutes an appropriate level of risk for Quanta as well as how such risks are managed. While the Board has the ultimate oversight responsibility for the risk management process, various committees of the Board also have responsibility for risk management. Specifically, the Audit Committee focuses on risks relating to financial reporting, internal controls and compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. In addition, the Compensation Committee focuses on risks relating to Quanta’s compensation policies and programs and, in setting compensation, strives to create incentives that are aligned with Quanta’s risk management profile. Finally, Quanta’s Governance and Nominating Committee focuses on risks relating to Quanta’s corporate governance and Board membership and structure and also conducts an annual assessment of the risk management process and reports its findings to the Board.

Audit Committee

The Board has examined the composition of the Audit Committee and has determined that each of the members of the Audit Committee is “independent” within the meaning of SEC regulations, NYSE rules governing audit committees and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Audit Committee is established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). The Audit Committee operates under a formal charter adopted by the Board that governs its responsibilities. The Audit Committee Charter is posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate Governance.” The membership and number of meetings held during the last fiscal year and the primary responsibilities of the Audit Committee are described in “Committees of the Board” above. The Board has determined that Messrs. Conaway and Jackman are “audit committee financial experts” within the meaning of SEC regulations.

Compensation Committee

The Board has determined that each of the members of the Compensation Committee is “independent” within the meaning of NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Compensation Committee operates under a formal charter adopted by the Board that governs its responsibilities. The Compensation Committee Charter is posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate Governance.” The membership and number of meetings held during the last fiscal year and the primary responsibilities of the Compensation Committee are described in“Committees of the Board” above. For additional information on the Compensation Committee, including a description of its processes and procedures for the consideration and determination of NEO compensation, please see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Compensation Committee” below.

Governance and Nominating Committee

The Board has determined that each of the members of the Governance and Nominating Committee is “independent” within the meaning of NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Governance and Nominating Committee operates under a formal charter adopted by the Board that governs its responsibilities. The Governance and Nominating Committee Charter is posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate Governance.” The membership and number of meetings held during the last fiscal year and the primary responsibilities of the Governance and Nominating Committee are described in“Committees of the Board” above.

Code of Ethics and Business Conduct

The Board has adopted a Code of Ethics and Business Conduct that applies to all directors, officers and employees of Quanta and its subsidiaries, including the principal executive officer, principal financial officer and

principal accounting officer or controller. The Code of Ethics and Business Conduct is posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate Governance.” We intend to post at the above location on our website any amendments or waivers to the Code of Ethics and Business Conduct that are required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 5.05 of Form 8-K.

Executive Sessions of Non-Management Directors

In accordance with the NYSE corporate governance listing standards, our non-management directors, each of whom is “independent” within the meaning of NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines, meet in executive session without management at each regularly scheduled Board meeting.

Director Meetings

During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Board held eight meetings. All directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and the committees of the Board, if any, on which they served during the periods for which they have served as a director. We encourage, but do not require, the members of the Board to attend the annual meeting of stockholders. Last year, all directors attended the annual meeting of stockholders.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

15


Corporate Governance

Committees of the Board

The Board has four standing committees: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Governance and Nominating Committee, and the Investment Committee. The Board has examined the composition of each standing committee and has determined that each member of these committees is “independent” within the meaning of SEC regulations, NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. Each standing committee operates under a formal charter adopted by the Board that governs its responsibilities. The committee charters are posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Investors & Media / Corporate Governance.” The current membership and the number of meetings held during the last fiscal year and the primary responsibilities of each standing committee are set forth below:

Audit Committee

•         Monitoring the quality and integrity of Quanta’s financial statements

•         Appointing and compensating the independent registered public accounting firm

•         Considering the independence and assessing the qualifications of the independent registered public accounting firm

•         Reviewing the performance of Quanta’s internal audit function and the independent registered public accounting firm

Number of Meetings During 2014: 15

Committee Members

Prior to May 22, 2014After May 22, 2014
  James R. Ball (I)(F)

  J. Michal Conaway (I)(F)

  Bernard Fried (C)(I)(F)

  Worthing F. Jackman (I)(F)

  James R. Ball (I)(F)

  Vincent D. Foster (I)

  Bernard Fried (C)(I)(F)

  Worthing F. Jackman (I)(F)

Compensation Committee

•         Overseeing the administration of Quanta’s incentive compensation plans, including the issuance of awards pursuant to equity-based incentive plans

•         Reviewing and approving salaries, bonuses, equity-based awards and other compensation of all executive officers and other management of Quanta and its subsidiaries

•         Reviewing and approving executive officer employment agreements and other compensation arrangements

Number of Meetings During 2014: 7

Committee Members

Prior to May 22, 2014After May 22, 2014
Vincent D. Foster (I)

Louis C. Golm (C)(I)

Margaret B. Shannon (I)

Pat Wood, III (I)

Bernard Fried (I)

Louis C. Golm (C)(I)

Margaret B. Shannon (I)

Pat Wood, III (I)

(C)

Chairman of the Committee

(F)

Audit Committee Financial Expert within the meaning of SEC regulations, as determined by the Board

(I)

Independent within the meaning of SEC regulations, NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

16


Corporate Governance

Governance and Nominating Committee

•         Developing, recommending and periodically reviewing corporate governance principles applicable to the Board and Quanta

•         Establishing qualifications for membership on the Board and its committees and evaluating the structure of the Board

•         Making recommendations to the Board regarding persons to be nominated for election or re-election to the Board and appointment of directors to Board committees

•         Evaluating policies regarding the recruitment of directors

•         Making recommendations to the Board regarding persons to be elected as executive officers of Quanta and periodically reviewing the development of executive officers and succession planning

•         Making recommendations to the Board regarding compensation and benefits for non-employee directors

Number of Meetings
During 2014: 
5
Committee Members

J. Michal Conaway (C)(I)

Louis C. Golm (I)

Margaret B. Shannon (I)

Pat Wood, III (I)

Investment Committee

•         Considering and approving certain acquisitions, investments and dispositions by Quanta, including the terms, transaction structure, and the form and amount of consideration

•         Evaluating certain capital expenditures by Quanta

•         Monitoring ongoing activities in connection with certain investments and acquisitions

•         Tracking certain completed acquisitions and investments

•         Conducting a qualitative and quantitative review of certain historical acquisitions

•         Assessing policies regarding transactions that hedge certain commodity, interest rate, currency and other business risks

Number of Meetings During 2014: 7
Committee Members

Prior to May 22, 2014After May 22, 2014

James R. Ball (C)(I)

Vincent D. Foster (I)

Bernard Fried (I)

Worthing F. Jackman (I)

James R. Ball (C)(I)

J. Michal Conaway (I)

Vincent D. Foster (I)

Worthing F. Jackman (I)

(C)

Chairman of the Committee

(I)

Independent within the meaning of SEC regulations, NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

No member of the Compensation Committee served as an employee or officer of Quanta or any of its subsidiaries during 2014, was formerly an officer of Quanta or any of its subsidiaries, or had any relationship with Quanta requiring disclosure herein as a related party transaction. Additionally, no executive officers served on the compensation committee or as a director of another company, one of whose executive officers served on Quanta’s Compensation Committee or as a director of Quanta.

Code of Ethics and Business Conduct

The Board has adopted a Code of Ethics and Business Conduct that applies to all directors, officers and employees of Quanta and its subsidiaries, including the principal executive officer, principal financial officer and

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

17


Corporate Governance

principal accounting officer or controller. The Code of Ethics and Business Conduct is posted on our website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Investors & Media / Corporate Governance.” We intend to post at the above location on our website any amendments or waivers to the Code of Ethics and Business Conduct that are required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 5.05 of Form 8-K.

Communications with the Board

Stockholders and other interested parties may communicate with one or more of our directors, including any lead independent director or our non-management directors or independent directors as a group, a committee or the full Board by writing to Corporate Secretary, Quanta Services, Inc., 2800 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2600, Houston, Texas 77056. All communications will be reviewed by the Corporate Secretary and forwarded to one or more of our directors, as appropriate.

Director Qualifications

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines contain Board membership qualifications that the Governance and Nominating Committee considers in selecting nominees for our Board. Pursuant to these qualifications, members of the Board should possess the highest standards of personal and professional ethics, integrity and values, and be committed to representing the long-term interests of our stockholders. They must also have an inquisitive and objective perspective, practical wisdom, mature judgment, the willingness to speak their mind and the ability to challenge and stimulate management in a constructive manner. In addition, Board members should have diverse experience at policy-making levels that may include business, government, education, technology or non-profit organizations, as well as experience in areas that are relevant to our business. Further, they should have demonstrated leadership skills in the organizations with which they are or have been affiliated. Members of the Board must also be willing to devote sufficient time to carrying out their duties and responsibilities effectively and should be committed to serve on the Board for an extended period of time. The Governance and Nominating Committee also seeks directors representing a broad range of viewpoints and diverse backgrounds, including women and minorities that meet the above qualifications.

Identifying and Evaluating Nominees for Director

The Governance and Nominating Committee regularly evaluates the appropriate size of the Board and whether any vacancies on the Board are expected due to retirement or otherwise. In the event that vacancies are anticipated or otherwise arise, the Governance and Nominating Committee will consider candidates for Board membership suggested by incumbent directors, management, third-party search firms and others. The Governance and Nominating Committee will also consider director nominations by stockholders that are made in compliance with the notice provisions and procedures set forth in our bylaws. For a discussion of these requirements, see “Additional Information Stockholder Proposals and Nomination of Directors for the 20132016 Annual MeetingMeeting. below. All applications, recommendations or proposed nominations for Board membership received by Quanta will be referred to the Governance and Nominating Committee. The manner in which the Governance and Nominating Committee evaluates the qualifications of a nominee for director does not differ if the nominee is recommended by a stockholder.

The Governance and Nominating Committee has the authority to retain, at Quanta’s expense, a third-party search firm to help identify and facilitate the screening and interview process of potential director nominees, including screening candidates, conductingand the third-party firm may, among other things, conduct reference checks, preparingprepare a biography of each candidate for the Governance and Nominating Committee to review and helpinghelp coordinate interviews.

Once the Governance and Nominating Committee has identified a potential director nominee, the committee makes an initial determination as to whether to conduct a full evaluation of the candidate. This initial determination is based on whatever information is provided to the committee with the recommendation of the candidate, as well as the committee’s own knowledge of the candidate, which may be supplemented by inquiries to the person making the recommendation or others. The committee also may engage a third party to conduct a background check of the candidate. If the committee determines to further pursue the candidate, the committee then will evaluate the extent to which the candidate meets the Board membership qualifications described in “Director Qualificationsabove.below.

In addition, the Governance and Nominating Committee considers other relevant factors it deems appropriate, including the current composition of the Board (including its diversity in experience, background, gender and ethnicity), the balance of management and independent directors, the need for a certain Board committee expertise, and the nature and extent of a candidate’s activities unrelated to Quanta, including service as a director on the boards of other public companies. In connection with this evaluation, the committee determines whether to interview the candidate, and, if warranted, the committee interviews the candidate in person or by telephone. The committee may also ask the candidate to meet with members of Quanta’s management or other Board members. After completing this evaluation, if the committee believes the candidate would be a valuable addition to the Board, it will recommend to the Board the candidate’s nomination for appointment or election as a director.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

18


Corporate Governance

Director Qualifications

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines contain Board membership qualifications that the Governance and Nominating Committee considers in selecting nominees for our Board. Pursuant to these qualifications, members of the Board should possess the highest standards of personal and professional ethics, integrity and values, and be committed to representing the long-term interests of our stockholders. They must also have an inquisitive and objective perspective, practical wisdom, mature judgment, the willingness to speak their mind and the ability to challenge and stimulate management in a constructive manner. In addition, Board members should have diverse experience at policy-making levels that may include business, government, education, technology or non-profit organizations, as well as experience in areas that are relevant to our business. Further, they should have demonstrated leadership skills in the organizations with which they are or have been affiliated.

Members of the Board must also be willing to devote sufficient time to carrying out their duties and responsibilities effectively and should be committed to serve on the Board for an extended period of time. As such, our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that Board members should not serve on more than three additional public company boards, and Board members that are chief executive officers (or hold an equivalent position) with another public company should not serve on more than one public company board in addition to Quanta’s Board and their own company board. Board members will not be nominated for election to the Board if the election would occur after their 73rd birthday; however, the full Board may make exceptions to the mandatory retirement age in special circumstances. In February 2015, the Governance and Nominating Committee considered the nomination of Mr. Golm for election to the Board after his 73rd birthday, concluding that he continued to meet all of the other qualifications described above and that his continued service on the Board and the Compensation Committee would help facilitate oversight of Quanta’s new executive compensation incentive plans and ensure a smooth transition of the chairmanship of the Compensation Committee. Accordingly, the Governance and Nominating Committee recommended to the Board that Mr. Golm be nominated for election as a director at the 2015 annual meeting. After considering such recommendation and its reasoning, the Board granted an exception to the mandatory retirement age for Mr. Golm in February 2015.

The Governance and Nominating Committee seeks directors representing a broad range of viewpoints and diverse backgrounds, including women and minorities that meet the above qualifications.

Director Compensation

The Governance and Nominating Committee has the responsibility of recommending to the Board compensation and benefits for non-employee directors. The committee is guided by certain director compensation principles set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines. Directors who also are employees of Quanta or any of its subsidiaries do not receive additional compensation for serving as directors. Two of our directors, namely John R. Colson, Executive Chairman, and James F. O’Neil III, President and Chief Executive Officer, are employees of Quanta and thus receive no compensation for their services as directors of Quanta. The compensation received by Messrs. Colson and O’Neil as employees of Quanta is set forth in the 2011 Summary

Current Director Compensation Table on page 38.

Pursuant to our director compensation policy, each non-employee director currently receives a fee for attendanceEffective May 23, 2013, at each meeting of the Board or any committee according to the following schedule: $2,000 for attendance at a board meeting in person; $1,000 for attendance at a board meeting by telephone; $1,000 for attendance at a committee meeting in person; and $500 for attendance at a committee meeting by telephone.

Upon initial election to the Board at anevery annual meeting of stockholders at which a non-employee director is elected or re-elected, each such initially elected non-employee director receives an annual cash retainer payment of $50,000 and(i) an annual award of shares of restricted stockRSUs having a value of $150,000. $140,000 and (ii) the annual cash retainer(s) set forth below for board membership, committee membership, and board/committee leadership to which such non-employee director is appointed:

 Annual Membership
Cash Retainer
Annual Cash Retainer Supplement
For Committee Chairmanship

Board of Directors

$65,000N/A

Audit Committee

$15,000$15,000

Compensation Committee

$10,000$10,000

Governance and Nominating Committee

$10,000$10,000

Investment Committee

$10,000$10,000

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

19


Corporate Governance

Upon initial appointment to the Board other than at an annual meeting of stockholders, foreach non-employee director receives (for the period from the appointment through the end of the current director service year during which the appointment is made, each such initially appointed non-employee director receivesyear) a pro rata portion of both (i) anthe equity award and applicable cash amounts.

Our non-employee Chairman of the Board receives additional annual compensation in the amount of $163,800, of which 50% is payable in cash, retainer paymentand 50% is payable in RSUs. Upon the initial appointment of $50,000 and (ii) an annual awarda non-employee Chairman of shares of restricted stock having a value of $150,000. At everythe Board, other than immediately following the annual meeting of stockholders, at which a non-employee director is re-elected or remains a director, each such re-elected or remaining non-employee director receives an annual cash retainer payment of $50,000 and an annual award of shares of restricted stock having a value of $100,000.

In addition, at every annual meeting(for the period from the appointment through the end of the Board,current director service year) a pro rata portion of the non-employee directors appointed to the following positions receive the supplementaladditional annual cash retainers set forth below; provided, however, that any individual who serves as both Lead Independent Director and as a committee chairman receives only the supplemental annual cash retainer designated for the Lead Independent Director:compensation.

Lead Independent Director

  $15,000  

Chairman of the Audit Committee

  $14,000  

Chairman of the Compensation Committee

  $10,000  

Chairman of the Investment Committee

  $10,000  

Chairman of the Governance and Nominating Committee

  $7,500  

Unless the director’s Board service is interrupted, shares ofterminated earlier, restricted stock or RSUs awarded to non-employee directors generally vest over three years in three equal annual installments. Anyshortly after conclusion of the director service year. Subject to the terms of applicable award agreements, unvested shares of restricted stock will vest in full if theor RSUs held by (i) any non-employee director who is not nominated for or elected to a new term, including for example, due to a reduction in the size of the Board, age precluding a re-nomination, the identification of a new nominee, or the desire to retire at the end of a term, or (ii) any non-employee director who resigns at ourQuanta’s convenience, which shall be deemed to includeincluding any resignation resulting from the non-employee director’s failure to receive a majority of the votes cast in an election for directors as required by Quanta’s bylaws. IfBylaws, vest in full on the earlier of (a) May 28th following conclusion of the director service year, or (b) the date of such non-employee director’s termination of service. RSUs granted to non-employee directors are settled in shares of Quanta Common Stock.

Generally, meeting fees are not paid. However, in order to compensate for the time required to accommodate extraordinary meeting activity, each non-employee director voluntarily resigns(or committee member, as applicable) receives a fee for attendance at the tenth and any subsequent meeting of the Board or is removedthe tenth and any subsequent meeting of such committee, in each case during a single director service year, as follows: $2,000 for cause priorattendance at a board meeting in person; $1,000 for participation at a board meeting by telephone; $1,000 for attendance at a committee meeting in person; and $500 for participation at a committee meeting by telephone. Additionally, during 2014 the Board approved a special one-time $25,000 payment to vesting, all unvested sharesMr. Fried in recognition of restricted stock will be forfeited. the significant incremental time and effort required as chairman of our Audit Committee during 2014.

Directors are also reimbursed for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attendingto attend meetings of the Board or the committees thereof, and for other expenses reasonably incurred in their capacity as directors of Quanta. Directors who also are employees of Quanta or any of its subsidiaries do not receive additional compensation for serving as directors. Currently, nine non-employee director nominees are standing for election at the annual meeting. As President and Chief Executive Officer of Quanta, James F. O’Neil III received no compensation for his service as a director of Quanta. The compensation received by Mr. O’Neil as an employee of Quanta is set forth in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table.

2011Prospective Changes in Director Compensation

During the fourth quarter of 2014, the Governance and Nominating Committee retained Deloitte Consulting LLP (“Deloitte”) to, among other things, review Quanta’s non-employee director compensation, provide observations and recommendations regarding Quanta’s non-employee director compensation program, and highlight relevant trends in director compensation. Deloitte examined director compensation data for the same peer group used for the named executive officer compensation review, namely 17 companies similar to Quanta in terms of industry, revenue size and market capitalization, as well as director compensation survey data, and presented its findings and observations to the Governance and Nominating Committee. Further information about the peer group is disclosed in“Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Compensation Philosophy and Process – Role of Compensation Consultant.” 

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

20


Corporate Governance

In March 2015, after review of the information presented by Deloitte and upon recommendation by the Governance and Nominating Committee, the Board approved the following changes to the non-employee director compensation program, effective as of May 21, 2015, in order to better align with competitive peer group practices:

increased the annual Board membership retainer from $65,000 to $75,000;

increased the annual Compensation Committee chairmanship retainer from $10,000 to $15,000; and

increased the additional annual compensation for a non-executive Chairman of the Board from $163,800 to $180,000.

Additionally, upon recommendation by the Governance and Nominating Committee, the Board approved revised settlement terms for RSU awards to non-employee directors. Specifically, non-employee directors may elect to settle up to 50% of any RSU award in cash if the non-employee director is in compliance with Quanta’s stock ownership guidelines as of the date of settlement and is expected to remain in compliance immediately following settlement.

Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors

Non-employee directors are eligible to participate in a deferred compensation plan maintained by Quanta. No later than December 31 of each year, each non-employee director may voluntarily elect to defer all or a portion (in 5% increments) of his or her annual cash retainers, including but not limited to, compensation for board membership, committee membership and board/committee leadership, and RSUs to be earned with respect to services performed in the following year. Deferral elections are irrevocable and if no deferral election is made, no compensation is deferred.

Deferred cash amounts are allocated to a separate recordkeeping account maintained for the non-employee director that reflects the amounts deferred and any earnings (positive or negative). The account is credited with returns according to the performance of the deemed investment choices selected by the non-employee director from time to time, from among the deemed investment choices made available by Quanta. However, Quanta has no obligation to provide any deemed investment choice other than a cash account deemed invested in cash equivalents based on the mid-term annual applicable federal rate, as adjusted on the first day of each subsequent year. The interest rate earned on the deferred cash amounts is not above-market or preferential. Deferred RSUs are recorded in an account maintained for the non-employee director that reflects the number of shares deferred.

In general, deferred compensation is distributed to the non-employee director (or his or her beneficiary) upon the director leaving the Board or at a date elected in advance by the director. Additionally, deferred amounts can be distributed upon certain unforeseen emergencies suffered by the non-employee director or upon a change in control of Quanta.

Messrs. Ball, Foster, Fried and Golm elected to defer all or a portion of their cash compensation during 2014. Messrs. Ball, Conaway, Foster, Fried, Golm, Jackman and Wood elected to defer all or a portion of their RSU awards during 2014.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

21


Corporate Governance

Stock Ownership Guidelines for Non-Employee Directors

Non-employee directors are required to hold stock with a value equivalent to five times the annual cash retainer for Board membership (excluding the annual cash retainer for committee membership or any supplement for serving as a committee chairman or as chairman of the Board). Non-employee directors have five years from the fiscal year-end following initial election to the Board to accumulate the stock ownership prescribed by the guidelines. As of December 31, 2014, all non-employee directors exceeded the ownership level prescribed by the stock ownership guidelines.

2014 Director Compensation Table

The following table sets forth the compensation for each non-employee director during the 20112014 fiscal year.

 

Name

  Fees
Earned or
Paid in
Cash
($)
   Stock
Awards
($)(1)
   Option
Awards
($)(2)
   Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
($)
   Change in
Pension  Value
and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)
   All Other
Compensation
($)
   Total
($)
 Fees
Earned or
Paid in
Cash
    ($)    
 Stock
Awards(1)
    ($)    
 Option
Awards
    ($)    
 Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
    ($)    
 Change in
Pension Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
     ($)    
 All Other
Compensation
    ($)    
 Total
    ($)    
 

James R. Ball

   96,000     100,000                         196,000   101,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    236,564  

J. Michal Conaway

   72,500     100,000                         172,500   95,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    230,564  

Ralph R. DiSibio

   71,000     100,000                         171,000  

Vincent D. Foster

   72,000     100,000                         172,000   91,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    226,564  

Bernard Fried

   91,500     100,000                         191,500  

Bernard Fried(2)

 131,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    266,564  

Louis C. Golm

   86,500     100,000                         186,500   95,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    230,564  

Worthing F. Jackman

   70,000     100,000                         170,000   91,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    226,564  

Bruce Ranck

   89,500     100,000                         189,500   146,900   214,863   —    —    —    —    361,763  

Margaret B. Shannon

 85,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    220,564  

Pat Wood, III

   69,500     100,000                         169,500   85,000   135,564   —    —    —    —    220,564  

 

(1)

The amounts shown under “Stock Awards” reflect the aggregate grant date fair value (based on the closing price of Quanta’s common stockCommon Stock on the date of grant) of restricted stockRSUs granted during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011,2014, calculated in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 718. The value ultimately realized by the directordirectors upon the actual vesting of the award(s)awards may or may not be equal to this determined value. The average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant was used to determine the number of RSUs granted. As of December 31, 2011,2014, Mr. Ranck held unvested awards covering 8,026 shares, Ms. Shannon held unvested awards covering 5,004 shares, and each of the remaining non-employee directors identified in the table above held 9,502 shares of outstanding and unvested restricted stock.awards covering 5,623 shares.

(2)As of

The amount shown under “Fees Earned or Paid in Cash” for Mr. Fried includes a special one-time $25,000 payment approved by the Board and paid in December 31, 2011, three2014 in recognition of the non-employee directors identified in the table above had aggregate outstanding stock options, allsignificant incremental time and effort required as chairman of which were vested, as follows: Mr. Ball — options to purchase 7,500 shares; Mr. Foster — options to purchase 7,500 shares; and Mr. Golm — options to purchase 10,000 shares.our Audit Committee during 2014.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Until May 19, 2011, James R. Ball, Ralph R. DiSibio, Louis C. Golm and Bruce Ranck served as members of the Compensation Committee. Following May 19, 2011, Louis C. Golm, Ralph R. DiSibio, Vincent D. Foster and Bruce Ranck served as members of the Compensation Committee. None of these persons served as an employee or officer of Quanta or any of its subsidiaries during 2011, was formerly an officer of Quanta or any of its subsidiaries, or had any relationship with Quanta requiring disclosure herein as a related party transaction, except that Quanta employed David J. Ball, the son of James R. Ball, during 2011, as more particularly described in“Certain Transactions, and Vincent D. Foster served as president of Quanta on an interim basis from December 1, 1997 to December 19, 1997. Additionally, no executive officers served on the compensation committee or as a director of another company, one of whose executive officers served on Quanta’s Compensation Committee or as a director of Quanta.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Our current executive officers are as follows:

 

Name    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

 Age22  


Executive Officers

The current executive officers of Quanta are as follows:

Name

Age

Position(s) with Quanta

John R. Colson

64Executive Chairman and Director

James F. O’Neil III

56 53President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

James H. Haddox

63Chief Financial Officer

Kenneth W. Trawick

64President — Telecommunications and Renewables Division

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

45 42President — Electric Power Division and Natural Gas and Pipeline DivisionChief Operating Officer

Derrick A. Jensen

44 41Chief Financial Officer

Jesse E. Morris

Senior47 

Executive Vice President – Finance and Administration and Chief Accounting Officer

Corporate Development

Benadetto G. BoscoSteven J. Kemps

50 54Senior Vice President — Business Development and Outsourcing

Tana L. Pool

52Executive Vice President and General Counsel

Dale L. Querrey

50 President – Electric Power

Nicholas M. Grindstaff

52 49Vice President Finance and Treasurer

DarrenPeter B. MillerO’Brien

45 52Vice President — Information Technology– Mergers and AdministrationAcquisitions

Dorothy Upperman

52 Vice President – Tax

Wilson M. Yancey, Jr.

70 Vice President – Health/Safety and Environmental

For a description of the business background of Messrs. Colson andMr. O’Neil, seeProposal No. 1 – Election of Directors” above.

James H. Haddoxhas served as our Chief Financial Officer since November 1997. He previously served as our Secretary from December 1997 until March 1999 and as our Treasurer from December 1997 until September 1999. Mr. Haddox is a Certified Public Accountant.

Kenneth W. Trawickhas served as our President of the Telecommunications and Renewables Division since June 2004. He previously served as President of Trawick Construction Company, Inc., a telecommunications specialty contractor and now a subsidiary of Quanta, from April 2003 until May 2004, and as a Vice President of Quanta from June 2001 until March 2003. Mr. Trawick joined Trawick Construction Company, Inc. in 1974 and served as its Executive Vice President from January 2000 until May 2001.

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr. has served as our Chief Operating Officer since January 2013. He previously served as President of the Electric Power Division and Natural Gas and Pipeline Division from May 2011 to December 2012 and had responsibility for oversight of power and pipeline operations since MayJanuary 2011. He previously served as President of the Natural Gas and Pipeline Division from October 2009 to May 2011 and as President of North Houston Pole Line, L.P., an electric and natural gas specialty contractor and now a subsidiary of Quanta, from 2001 until September 2009. He is currently a director of the Southwest Line Chapter of NECA. Mr. Austin holds a Bachelor of Arts in Business Management degree.

Derrick A. Jensen has served as our Chief Financial Officer since May 2012. He previously served as our Senior Vice President Finance, and Administration and Chief Accounting Officer sincefrom March 2011. He previously served2011 to May 2012, as our Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer from March 1999 to March 2011, and as our Controller from December 1997 until March 2009. Mr. Jensen holds a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration degree in Accounting and became a Certified Public Accountant in the State of Texas in 1997.

Benadetto G. BoscoJesse E. Morris has served as our Executive Vice President – Corporate Development since January 2014. He previously served in various roles with Sysco Corporation, including Vice President and Chief Financial Officer – Foodservice Operations from September 2013 to December 2013, Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer – Broadline Operations from February 2012 to August 2013, Vice President, Business Process Management from May 2011 to January 2012, and Vice President, Business Transformation from January 2009 to April 2011. Mr. Morris holds a Bachelor of Business Administration in Finance and Accounting and a Masters in Professional Accounting.

Steven J. Kemps has served as our Executive Vice President and General Counsel since September 2014. Prior to joining Quanta, he served as General Counsel for Hess Retail Corporation from September 2013 to September 2014 until it was sold to Marathon Petroleum. He previously served in various executive management roles with Dean Foods Company, including Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary from 2008 to 2013 and Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel from 2006 to 2008. Mr. Kemps held various legal positions with increasing responsibility at Kimberly-Clark Corporation from 1997 to 2006. From 1993 to 1997, he was an attorney with Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, and from 1991 to 1993, he served as a law clerk to Judge Paul A. Magnuson of the United States District Court, Minnesota. Mr. Kemps holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Accounting and a Juris Doctorate degree, and he holds a Certified Public Accountant certificate.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

23


Executive Officers

Dale L. Querreyhas served as our Senior Vice President of Business Development and Outsourcing– Electric Power since May 2004.March 2015. He previously served as our Seniorpresident of PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc. (PAR), a wholly owned subsidiary of Quanta, from January 2011 to March 2015, and in various other roles with Quanta and PAR from November 2004 to January 2011, including Chief Operating Officer of PAR from August 2008 to January 2011. Prior to joining Quanta, he served in various roles with ABB Inc. and its affiliates, including Vice President of OutsourcingOperations from April 2003 until April 20042002 to October 2004. Mr. Querrey holds a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and as our Vice PresidentMechanical Engineering degree and a Master of Outsourcing from July 2002 until April 2003. From 1997 until joining Quanta, he was Vice President of Network/National Sales for Exelon Infrastructure Services, Inc., a provider of transmission and distribution infrastructure services to electrical, gas, telecommunications and cable industries. Mr. Bosco holds an M.B.A.Science in Electrical Engineering degree.

Tana L. PoolNicholas M. Grindstaffhas served as our Vice President and General Counsel since January 2006. Ms. Pool served as Senior Counsel with the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP from August 2004 until December 2005 and as Counsel with the law firm of King & Spalding LLP from May 2001 until July 2004. Ms. Pool holds a J.D. degree and is a Certified Public Accountant.

Nicholas M. Grindstaffhas served as our Vice President — Finance since May 2011 and our Treasurer since October 1999. He previously served as a Vice President from March 2010 to May 2011 and as Assistant Treasurer from March 1999 until September 1999. Mr. Grindstaff holds a Master of Science in Accounting degree.

DarrenPeter B. MillerO’Brienhas served as our Vice President – Mergers and Acquisitions since January 2014. He previously served as Vice President – Tax from May 2012 to January 2014 and as Tax Director from June 2000 to May 2012. Mr. O’Brien holds a Bachelor of Information TechnologyBusiness Administration in Accounting degree and Administrationa Master in Professional Accounting degree and became a Certified Public Accountant in the State of Texas in 1995.

Dorothy Upperman has served as our Vice President – Tax since October 2003.2014. She previously served in various tax management roles with Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., including Sr. Director, Income Tax from 2008 to October 2014 and Director of Federal Audits & SOX Controls from 2007 to 2008. From 1996 until May 2003, Mr. Miller1998 to 2004, Ms. Upperman held various positions with Encompass Services Corporation, a provider of facilities systems and services to the construction, healthcare, commercial realty and technology industries,Ernst & Young, LLP, most recently serving as SeniorSr. Manager. Ms. Upperman holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Accounting and is a Certified Public Accountant in the State of Texas.

Wilson M. Yancey, Jr. has served as our Vice President – Health/Safety and Chief Financial Officer. Encompass Services Corporation filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcyEnvironmental since April 2010. He previously served as Quanta’s Director of Health/Safety and Environmental from June 1999 to April 2010. Mr. Yancey holds a Bachelor of Science in November 2002.Business Management and has over thirty years of experience as a safety professional.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND OTHER MATTERS

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

24


Compensation Discussion and& Analysis

Executive Summary

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) describes Quanta’s executive compensation program for 2011.2014. We use this program to attract, motivate and retain the employees who lead our business. In particular, this CD&Asection explains how the Compensation Committee made its compensation decisions for our named executive officers, or NEOs, for 20112014 and describes how this compensation fits within the Compensation Committee’s guiding principles with respect to NEO compensation. The following individuals are our

Named Executive Officers

Our NEOs for 2011:2014 include five executive officers who are sometimes referred to herein as “continuing NEOs,” as well as one former executive officer, as follows:

Name

Position(s) with Quanta

James. F. O’Neil III

President and Chief Executive Officer

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

Chief Operating Officer

Derrick A. Jensen

Chief Financial Officer

Jesse E. Morris

Executive Vice President – Corporate Development

Steven J. Kemps

Executive Vice President and General Counsel

Eric B. Brown

Former Vice President and General Counsel

2014 Business Highlights and Overall Compensation Decisions

Overall, the Compensation Committee believes that the total compensation paid to Quanta’s NEOs in 2014 is reasonable and appropriate. Quanta completed another successful year in 2014 despite continuing to operate in a challenging business environment. Notably, Quanta achieved the following in 2014:

 

John R. Colson, who served as our Chief Executive Officer until May 19, 2011 and as Executive Chairman thereafter;generated record revenues of $7.85 billion, driven by organic revenue growth plus the contribution from companies that we acquired during the year;

 

James F. O’Neil III, who served as our Presidentgenerated nearly 17% revenue growth in the electric power infrastructure segment and Chief Operating Officer until May 19, 201131% revenue growth in the oil and as President and Chief Executive Officer thereafter;gas infrastructure segment;

 

James H. Haddox, our Chief Financial Officer;achieved record backlog of $9.76 billion at year-end 2014, an increase of approximately 12% from year-end 2013;

 

Kenneth W. Trawick, our President — Telecommunicationsestablished programs to improve safety, leadership development, operational performance standards and Renewables Division;results;

 

Earl C. Austin, Jr.,completed nine acquisitions, significantly enhancing our President — Electric Power Divisionelectric power infrastructure and Natural Gasoil and Pipeline Division;gas infrastructure service offerings in the United States and Canada and expanding our capabilities in Australia to include electric power service offerings; and

 

Derrick A.was awarded the two largest electric transmission projects in the history of the company.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

25


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

However, despite these accomplishments, the level of achievement for the 2014 company performance metrics failed to reach target levels and fell below the achievement level attained for the 2013 performance year. As a result, with respect to all NEOs, total cash compensation paid for the 2014 performance year was below target cash compensation, and with respect to the three NEOs who were also NEOs in 2013, total cash compensation paid for the 2014 performance year decreased as compared to the 2013 performance year. The following table details the decrease in cash awards and total cash compensation for these three NEOs:

Named Executive Officer

2013 Cash
Incentive Award(1)
2014 Cash
Incentive Award(2)
  Decrease  2013
Total Cash
Compensation(3)
2014
Total Cash
Compensation(3)
  Decrease   

Mr. O’Neil

 $    1,748,000    $    775,885    55.6 $    2,666,750    $    1,763,385    33.9

Mr. Austin

 $1,334,000   $564,280   57.7 $2,027,750   $1,345,530   33.6

Mr. Jensen

 $828,000   $384,093   53.6 $1,308,000   $921,593   29.5

(1)

The amounts shown reflect cash bonuses awarded to each NEO under the 2013 annual incentive plan.

(2)

The amounts shown reflect cash bonuses awarded to each NEO under the 2014 annual incentive plan.

(3)

The amounts shown reflect, for the applicable year, base salary paid and cash bonuses awarded to each NEO.

Furthermore, while we increased the target dollar amount of the long-term equity incentives awarded to our NEOs under our redesigned 2014 long-term incentive plan, 50% of those awards are subject to company performance conditions that have yet to be evaluated and remain subject to a 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016. The remaining 50% of the awards vest over a 3-year period and are designed to promote retention of our NEOs.

The transition to our redesigned long-term equity awards also resulted in 2014 reportable compensation for Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen under both the 2014 long-term incentive plan and the 2013 supplemental incentive plan. Recognizing that awards were made under multiple plans and that the aggregate amount of equity awards granted to these NEOs in 2014 is attributable to multiple performance periods and therefore appears higher than prior years, we have provided further explanation of the transitional disclosure implications and the resulting increase in reportable compensation in “Changes in Executive Compensation Implemented for 2014 – Recognition of Transitional Disclosure Implications Associated with Changes Implemented” below.

Say-on-Pay and Executive Compensation Changes

At Quanta’s 2014 annual meeting of stockholders, over 98% of our Senior Vice President — Financestockholders voting on the “say-on-pay” proposal approved the compensation of our NEOs as described in our 2014 proxy statement. Accordingly, the Compensation Committee did not implement changes to our executive compensation program as a result of the stockholder advisory vote. However, the Compensation Committee did implement certain changes to Quanta’s compensation program beginning in 2014 based on the comprehensive review of our executive compensation program that began in 2012, with the goal of identifying changes to ensure that our incentive compensation remains consistent with Quanta’s guiding principles on executive compensation. See “Changes to Executive Compensation Implemented for 2014” for additional information about these changes.

As Quanta moves forward into 2015, the Compensation Committee is aware of the difficult business environment, the continuing uncertainty in the marketplace, and Administrationthe resulting challenges with respect to executive compensation. The Compensation Committee monitors trends and Chief Accounting Officer.developments to ensure that Quanta provides the appropriate executive compensation incentives to remain competitively positioned to attract and retain executive talent and to ensure that management’s interests are aligned with our stockholders’ interests to support long-term value creation, while not encouraging excessive risk-taking.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

26


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Good Governance and Best Practices

We are committed to strong governance standards that ensure our executive compensation programs are closely aligned with the interests of our stockholders, as evidenced by the policies and practices described below:

We maintain meaningful stock ownership guidelines that align our executives’ long-term interests with those of our stockholders and discourage excessive risk-taking.

Our employment agreements with NEOs do not provide for gross-ups of excise taxes on severance or other payments in connection with a change of control.

We have a “clawback” policy that permits our Board to recover from our NEOs cash or equity incentive compensation in certain circumstances.

We have a policy that prohibits directors and executive officers from pledging Quanta securities as collateral for a loan absent pre-clearance and demonstration of financial capacity to repay without resorting to the pledged securities.

We have a policy that prohibits directors and executive officers from hedging the economic risk of ownership of Quanta Common Stock.

Our Compensation Committee has engaged its own independent compensation consultant, who performs an annual comprehensive market analysis of our executive compensation programs and pay levels.

We provide our stockholders with an annual opportunity to participate in an advisory vote on the compensation of our NEOs.

How Our Performance is Linked to Pay

Quanta’s NEO compensation is primarily comprised of base salary, annual short-term incentives and long-term incentives. Our compensation philosophy links executive compensation to both individual and company performance. Base salaries are generally targeted at or near the median of our competitive market. Target annual incentives reflect competitive market levels and practices, with significant upside opportunity for performance above company and individual performance target levels. Target award levels are designed to achieve total cash compensation slightly above the market median for superior performance, and performance measures are chosen to align the interests of executives with stockholders. Finally, long-term incentives, typically paid with equity, are designed to focus executives on the long-term financial performance of the company, along with achievement of certain strategic objectives.initiatives.

The Compensation Committee desires to provide target total direct compensation for each NEO within+/-20% of the median for comparable officers in our peer group. Additionally, the Compensation Committee believes that a significant portion of the target total direct compensation of the NEOs should be performance-based and, therefore, at risk.

Approximately 75% of target total direct compensation in 2011 for the Executive Chairman and 73% With respect to our continuing NEOs, all of the target total direct compensation in 2011 forshort-term cash incentive and half of the Chief Executive Officerlong-term equity incentive associated with the 2014 annual and long-term incentive plans was “at risk” performance-based compensation, variable based on the level of performance against incentive targets pursuant to the incentive compensation plans described below, with the largest percentage in equity awards.

Approximately 65%, on average, of target total direct compensation in 2011 for the remaining NEOs was “at risk” compensation contingent upon performance outcomes.

below.

The following graph sets forth the mix of target total direct compensation of our NEOs in 2011:

LOGO

We continued to operate in a challenging business environment during 2011, with increasing regulatory requirements and only gradual recovery in the economy and capital markets from recessionary levels. The individual and company short-term and long-term performance goals against which we measured performance were partially met in 2011, resulting in below-target awards to each NEO. Despite reduced incentive payouts in 2011 due to overall performance being below target, equity-basedEquity-based incentive awards for 2011 neverthelessunder our 2014 long-term incentive plan represented a substantial portion of each NEO’s compensation as a percentage of total direct compensation (base salary, short-term cash incentive and long-term equity incentive).

Of the total direct compensation of the Executive Chairman for 2011, approximately 51% was in equity, 37% was in base salary and 12% was in short-term cash incentive;

Of the total direct compensation of the Chief Executive Officer for 2011, approximately 44% was in equity, 42% was in base salary and 14% was in short-term cash incentive; and

Of the total direct compensation of the remaining NEOs on average, approximately 38% was in equity, 48% was in base salary and 14% was in short-term cash incentive.

The following graph sets forth the mix of total direct compensation of our NEOs in 2011:

LOGO

Equity-based awards will continue to play an important role in this challenging economic environment because they provide incentives for the creation of stockholder value and promote executive retention and an ownership culture. As Quanta moves forward into 2012, the Compensation Committee is awareFor our Chief Executive Officer, 64% of the difficult business environment,total target compensation mix

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

27


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

under the 2014 annual and long-term incentive plans was payable in equity awards, and for our other continuing uncertaintyNEOs, on average 40% of the total target compensation mix was payable in equity awards. The following graph reflects the marketplace,mix of target compensation of our CEO and the resulting challenges with respect to executive compensation. Theour other continuing NEOs in 2014:

2014 NEO Target Compensation Committee continues to monitor trendsMix

LOGO

Compensation Philosophy and developments to ensure that Quanta provides the appropriate executive compensation incentives and remains competitively positioned for executive talent, while not encouraging excessive risk-taking by management.Process

Compensation Committee

Overview

The Compensation Committee administers the compensation programs for all of our NEOs. As described above under “Corporate Governance – Compensation Committee,Committees of the Board,” the Board has determined that each member of the Compensation Committee is “independent” within the meaning of SEC regulations, the NYSE corporate governance listing standards and our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Compensation Committee’s guiding principles with respect to NEO compensation are:

 

to align our NEOs’ incentives with short-term and long-term stockholder value creation;

 

to attract, motivate and retain the best possible executive officer talent by maintaining competitive compensation programs;

 

to tie cash and stock incentives to the achievement of measurable company, business unit and individual performance goals that are associated with strategies intended to differentiate Quanta from its peers;

to tie stock incentives to the achievement of measurable company goals that are linked to our long-term strategic plans; and

 

to promote an ownership culture.

In the first quarter of each fiscal year, the Compensation Committee determines the terms of our annual and long-term incentive plans (each of which is described below) and establishes the company and individual performance metrics that will be used in evaluating the performance of each NEO under the plans. In addition, the Compensation Committee establishes prospective base salary rates and target incentive percentages and amounts for each NEO for the current fiscal year. The Compensation Committee also considers the parameters of our discretionary incentive plan (described below). Following the end of the fiscal year, the Compensation Committee meets to discuss our prior year’s financial performance, to evaluate the performance of our NEOs relative to applicable performance goals,metrics, and to

determine the amounts, if any, that will be awarded to each NEO under our annual, supplementallong-term and discretionary incentive plans (each of which is described below) for the prior fiscal year. In addition, the Compensation Committee establishes the current fiscal year’s company financial performance goals and individual strategic performance goals that will be used in evaluating the performance of each NEO under our incentive plans and establishes compensation targets for each NEO for the upcoming fiscal year. 

The Compensation Committee seeks to maintain the competitiveness of our executive compensation levels with those of our peers and competitors and considers various factors in determining overall compensation and the individual

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

28


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

components of compensation of each NEO, including (i) the results of compensation benchmarking studies which included an analysis of peer group and published compensation survey data,data; (ii) economic and market conditions,conditions; (iii) the effects of inflation,inflation; (iv) changes in our business operations,operations; (v) changes in the compensation practices of our competitors,competitors; (vi) the executive officer’s position, experience, length of service and performance,performance; (vii) company performanceperformance; and (viii) the judgment of each member of the Compensation Committee based upon prior experiences with executive compensation matters. The influence of these factors on NEO compensation is discussed further below.

UseRole of Compensation Benchmarking Studies and PublishedConsultant

The Compensation Survey Data

One of the Compensation Committee’s guiding principles isCommittee Charter grants to attract, motivate and retain the best possible executive officer talent, which is important to the success of our business. Consistent with this guiding principle, the Compensation Committee desiresthe authority to provideretain, at Quanta’s expense, compensation consultants, outside legal counsel and other advisors, and to approve their fees. These advisors report directly to the Compensation Committee. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2012, the Compensation Committee independently retained Deloitte to examine Quanta’s executive compensation program and pay practices, to review the competitiveness of our executive compensation program relative to a public company peer group and survey data, and to examine the design of Quanta’s incentive plans for its NEOs. The benchmarking and design studies (collectively the “Deloitte Compensation Studies”) assessed Quanta’s executive compensation program and pay practices, taking into account our compensation strategy and business objectives, as well as market conventions and leading practices. Deloitte utilized the following companies for the purpose of obtaining competitive data:

•      AECOM Technology Corporation

•      KBR, Inc.

•      Baker Hughes Incorporated

•      MasTec, Inc.

•      Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V.

•      MYR Group Inc.

•      Emcor Group, Inc.

•      Oceaneering International, Inc.

•      Flowserve Corp.

•      Pike Electric Corporation

•      Fluor Corporation

•      Superior Energy Services, Inc.

•      FMC Technologies, Inc.

•      URS Corporation

•      Foster Wheeler AG

•      Weatherford International Ltd.

•      Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

These companies were chosen based on (i) market competition, including companies that compete with Quanta for customers, executive talent and investors, (ii) organization size, with financial characteristics such as revenues or market capitalization similar to those of Quanta, and (iii) industry, including companies in the heavy construction industry and companies that serve oil and gas or power transmission companies. The Compensation Committee may periodically update the companies in future compensation studies as a result of mergers, acquisitions, new publicly traded companies and other changes, using the criteria outlined above.

The Deloitte Compensation Studies compared base salary, target total cash compensation, target annual and long-term incentive opportunities, and target total direct compensation for our NEOs within +/-15%to market medians. Deloitte also utilized several sources of the median for comparable officers in our peer group. To determine competitive market pay levels, the Compensation Committee utilizes a compensation benchmarking study and published compensation survey data by matching, to the extent possible, the job titles and responsibilities of our NEOs with those in the surveys to provide additional competitive compensation information. Deloitte did not provide, nor was it asked by the Compensation Committee to provide, recommendations as to specific compensation payments to our NEOs. Deloitte reported directly to the Compensation Committee, but was authorized by the Compensation Committee to communicate with executive officers and personnel in the human resources department to obtain information.

During the first quarter of 2014, the Compensation Committee referred to Deloitte’s examination of our executive compensation program and pay practices and the competitiveness of our executive compensation program relative to a public company peer group and survey data (a “Deloitte Benchmarking Study”) in

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

29


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

connection with approving prospective base salary rates and target incentive percentages and amounts for certain executive officers for 2014. Following the 2014 fiscal year end, the Compensation Committee assessed company financial performance metrics and individual performance metrics, approving the payouts under our industry that are prepared2014 annual incentive plan, and compiledreferred to a new Deloitte Benchmarking Study in connection with establishing prospective base salary rates and target incentive percentages and amounts for the committee by outside consultants. This data assistseach NEO under our 2015 incentive plans.

Compensation studies assist the Compensation Committee in establishing the overall compensation levelspractices that are consistent with our philosophy and guiding principles on executive compensation described above. Although compensation studies provide important data for establishing our NEOs and determining the relative weighting of individual components of compensation.

Although the compensation benchmarking studies play an important role in establishing competitive compensation practices and compensation design, the Compensation Committee uses such studies only as a point of reference and not as a determinative factor for structuring and determining the amount of our NEOs’ compensation. The Compensation Committee also exercises discretion in its use of compensation benchmarkingstudies, and the studies do not supplant the significance of individual and company performance that the Compensation Committee considers when making compensation decisions. Because the information provided by a compensation benchmarking study is just one piece of information utilized in setting executive compensation, the Compensation Committee exercises discretion in determining the nature and extent of its use.

The Compensation Committee Charter grants to the Compensation Committee the authority to retain, at Quanta’s expense, advisors and compensation consultants and to approve their compensation. These advisors report directly to the Compensation Committee.

In early 2011, the Compensation Committee independently retained Ernst & Young LLP (“E&Y”) to perform a compensation benchmarking study (the “2011 E&Y Compensation Benchmarking Study”) that provides market data on base salary, target total cash compensation (base salary plus target annual incentive compensation) and total direct compensation (target total cash compensation plus the value of long-term incentives) for each applicable NEO position. E&Y, with input from our management, assembled a group of companies for the purpose of obtaining competitive data and, with Compensation Committee approval, selected the following eleven companies for inclusion in the 2011 E&Y Compensation Benchmarking Study. These companies were chosen based on industry (i.e., either a direct competitor of Quanta or providing similar services to those offered by Quanta), scope of operations, company size (i.e., revenue, market capitalization, number of employees), and geography:

Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V.

Comfort Systems USA Inc.

Dycom Industries, Inc.

Emcor Group, Inc.

Fluor Corporation

Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

MasTec, Inc.

MYR Group Inc.

Pike Electric Corporation

The Shaw Group Inc.

URS Corporation

As a result of mergers, acquisitions, new public companies and other changes, the Compensation Committee will periodically update the companies in our future compensation benchmarking studies using the criteria outlined above.

The 2011 E&Y Compensation Benchmarking Study provided information regarding compensation programs, and the average and median compensation levels, of our peer group. E&Y also utilized several sources of published compensation survey data by matching, to the extent possible, with management’s input, the titles and job descriptions of our NEOs with those in the surveys to provide us with additional competitive compensation information. E&Y did not provide, and was not asked by the Compensation Committee to provide, recommendations as to specific compensation payments to our NEOs. E&Y reports directly to the Committee, but is authorized by the Committee to communicate with Darren B. Miller, our Vice President of Information Technology and Administration, to obtain information.

As described below underExecutive Compensation Decisions for the 2011 Performance Year — Executive Succession Matters, the Compensation Committee also retained E&Y in 2011 to provide benchmarking data (the “2011 E&Y CEO Succession Benchmarking Study”) with respect to companies that had recently experienced executive succession events involving the Chief Executive Officer, and particularly, companies for which the Chief Executive Officer transitioned to an Executive Chairman role, with an insider named as new Chief Executive Officer. The Compensation Committee has also engaged E&Y from time to time in the past to assist it in reviewing the structure of our compensation plans.

Our Governance and Nominating Committee separately engaged E&Y during 2011 to perform a benchmarking study providing market data for director and executive officer stock ownership guidelines, including prevalence of specific ownership multiples, types of equity included in ownership, and time periods to meet requirements. Our Governance and Nominating Committee has also engaged E&Y from time to time in the past to provide benchmarking data for board compensation. Additionally, management has engaged E&Y from time to time in the past to provide compensation benchmarking services with respect to executive and non-executive officer and management positions and to provide tax and transaction advisory services and valuation assessments. Additional discussion regarding the services provided by E&Y during 2011 is set forth in“Fees of the Compensation Committee Consultant” below.

Management’s Role in the Compensation-Setting Process

Our Chief Executive Officer plays an important role in setting the compensation of our NEOs (other than with respect to himself and the Executive Chairman)himself). Although our Chief Executive Officer, after taking into

account input from other members of management, makes recommendations to the Compensation Committee, the Compensation Committee has final authority and complete discretion in ultimately determining and setting NEO compensation plans, goals, incentive targets, salaries and cash and equity incentive awards.

In the first quarter of each fiscal year, our Chief Executive Officer and certain other executive officers meetmeets with the Compensation Committee to propose Quanta’s overall financial performance goalstargets and individual objectives for the incentive plans for the current fiscal year. The Compensation Committee reviews these financial goalsperformance targets and adjusts them as it deems appropriate. Each of our NEOs (other than the Executive Chairman)individual who is expected to be an NEO also proposes his individual strategic goalsobjectives for the upcoming fiscal year to our Chief Executive Officer. Our Chief Executive Officer reviews and modifies the submitted strategic goals,individual objectives, as he deems appropriate, and submits them, together with his own proposed individual strategic goals and those of the Executive Chairman,objectives, to the Compensation Committee for its consideration. The Compensation Committee then reviews, modifies, as necessary, and approves each NEO’s strategic goalsindividual objectives for the current fiscal year. If, later during the year, it is determined that an individual who was not previously identified as a potential NEO will be an NEO, including if such individual is hired during the performance year, the Compensation Committee promptly reviews, modifies, as necessary, and approves the NEO’s individual objectives. The financial performance goalstargets and strategic goalsindividual objectives approved by the Compensation Committee for the 2011 performance year2014 incentive plans are discussed below inElements of Executive Compensation”CompensationandExecutive Compensation Decisions for the 2011 Performance Year,2014. respectively.

Following the end of the fiscal year, the Compensation Committee uses Quanta’s financial performance goals,targets, along with each NEO’s strategic goals,individual objectives, to determine payouts under our executive compensationincentive plans. At the request of the Compensation Committee, our Chief Executive Officer and certain other executive officers also participate in the Compensation Committee’s review. The subject NEO is not present during the Compensation Committee’s discussion of such NEO’s individual performance relative to his respective individual objectives and awards. Our Chief Executive Officer presents to the Compensation Committee his evaluation of the performance of the other NEOs, (other than the Executive Chairman), taking into account each of their strategic goals,individual objectives, and his compensation recommendations as to each of them.

The Compensation Committee considers these evaluations in determining salaries for the upcoming fiscal year and the awardspayouts to be made, if any, pursuant to our incentive plans for the prior fiscal year. In addition, our Chief Executive Officer selects, subject to approval by the Compensation Committee, the participants in our annual and supplemental incentive plans for eachcompleted fiscal year under consideration, as well as salaries and incentive targets of the individuals to receive an award under our discretionary plan in anyNEOs for the current fiscal year.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

30


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

To assist the Compensation Committee as it makes its compensation decisions, management also provides detailed spreadsheets for the NEOs indicating, among other things:

the total direct compensation for NEOs, including base salarythings, actual performance relative to company financial performance targets and cash and equity incentive awards, approved by the Compensation Committeeindividual objectives for the NEOs under our incentive plans for the two years immediately preceding the year under consideration;

financial performance goals and individual strategic goals for the NEOs for the prior fiscal year;

the Chief Executive Officer’s recommendations as to base salary for the current fiscal year, as well as to the compensation payouts (other than as to himself and the Executive Chairman), both cash and equity, for the priorcompleted fiscal year under our incentive plans; and

the amounts of compensation that would be payable for the upcoming year to each of our NEOs (other than as to himself and the Executive Chairman) under target payouts under our incentive plans.

consideration. These spreadsheets combine severalthe elements of actual andthe targeted compensation, of our NEOs, so that the Compensation Committee may analyze both the individual compensation elements of compensation (including the compensation mix) and the total amount of actual and targeted compensation for each NEO for a particular performance year in connection with the Compensation Committee’s consideration of the factors influencing the various elements of NEO compensation.

The subject NEO is not present during the Compensation Committee’s discussion of such NEO’s individual performance relative to his respective goals and awards.

2011 Compensation Committee Meetings

The Compensation Committee met a total of eight times during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. The significant actions taken by the Compensation Committee with respect to executive compensation matters in 2011 include: (i) recommending that the Board adopt and present to stockholders for approval at the 2011 annual meeting the 2011 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan, (ii) approving the payouts under our incentive plans relating to the 2010 performance year; (iii) approving the financial performance and individual strategic goals and related compensation targets for the 2011 performance year; (iv) retaining E&Y to conduct the 2011 E&Y Compensation Benchmarking Study; (v) adopting our annual, supplemental and discretionary incentive plans for the 2011 performance year; (vi) retaining E&Y to conduct the 2011 E&Y CEO Succession Benchmarking Study; (vii) determining the compensation and other employment terms reflected in new employment agreements with the Executive Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer upon assuming their new roles; (viii) considering the results of stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation and recommending that future advisory votes on executive compensation occur every year until the next stockholder advisory vote on the frequency of same; and (ix) considering and implementing clawback provisions in connection with Quanta’s incentive compensation plans.

Changes to 2011 Compensation Program

As discussed in the proxy statement in 2010, the Compensation Committee undertook a comprehensive review of our executive compensation program in 2010 with the goal of identifying and implementing any appropriate changes to ensure that our incentive compensation remains consistent with the company’s guiding principles on executive compensation. In conducting its review, the Compensation Committee considered input from E&Y and senior management. As part of this review, E&Y prepared an analysis highlighting the pro forma impact of certain adjustments to (i) the multiplier applied to performance targets under the annual incentive plan (discussed below in “Elements of Executive Compensation — Annual Incentive Plan”) and (ii) the performance/payout scale under this plan for bonuses paid (or estimated to be paid) for the 2008-2010 performance years. In addition, E&Y performed a compensation benchmarking study that provided the committee with a comparison of the performance/payout scales among members of Quanta’s peer group and certain of Quanta’s customers, detailing performance at which incentive payouts begin (specifically, percentage of targeted financial performance goal required to be achieved) and the corresponding payout at such minimum required performance (specifically, percentage of targeted incentive payout), as well as the maximum potential incentive payout (specifically, percentage of targeted incentive payout) and the performance required to achieve such payout (specifically, percentage of targeted financial performance goal required to be achieved). This analysis also included the average and median of such minimum and maximum incentive payouts and corresponding required performance among these companies.

Based on this review and the E&Y benchmarking study, the Compensation Committee decided to implement certain changes to our executive compensation program for 2011. The first change involved our historical practice of applying a multiplier to adjust budgeted operating income for purposes of computing the target financial performance goal for compensation purposes. Acknowledging that Quanta was much smaller in size when the multiplier was initially implemented, the Compensation Committee revised the method of adjusting budgeted operating income, such that in lieu of adjusting by the former multiplier, performance against the budgeted operating income goal is measuredafter accrual of the incentive bonus payouts earned (both cash and equity) by corporate plan participants. A second change involved the sliding performance/payout scale in our annual incentive plan and supplemental incentive plan, in which incentive payouts begin at 75% of target performance and reach the maximum potential at 200% of target performance. Because Quanta has grown significantly since the payout scales were initially adopted, and because the performance targets are now also adjusted for acquisitions completed during the year, performance at the 200% level had become virtually impossible to achieve. Acknowledging that an incentive program with an unachievable maximum payout fails to appropriately incentivize executive officers to excel in the performance of their duties, the Compensation Committee adjusted the payout scale under both plans so that, given the appropriate level of performance,

executive officers are able to reach the maximum potential payout at 150% of target performance. The Compensation Committee believes that these changes establish more realistic incentives that appropriately reflect Quanta’s size, performance and market conditions, and offer a more consistent and competitive incentive program for our executive officers.

Consideration of Say-on-Pay Results

The Compensation Committee considered the results of the 20112014 advisory “say-on-pay” proposal in connection with the discharge of its responsibilities. Because 97%over 98% of our stockholders voting on the “say-on-pay” proposal approved the compensation of our NEOs as described in our proxy statement in 2011,2014, the Compensation Committee did not implement significant changes to our executive compensation program as a result of the stockholder advisory vote. In response to the stockholder vote,However, the Compensation Committee intendsdid implement certain changes to seek stockholder guidanceQuanta’s compensation program beginning in 2014, based on the comprehensive review of our executive compensation program that began in 2012, to ensure that our incentive compensation remained consistent with Quanta’s guiding principles on executive compensation. See“Changes to Executive Compensation Implemented for 2014” for additional information about these changes.

Exercise of Discretion in Executive Compensation Decisions

The Compensation Committee has complete discretion to withhold payment pursuant to any of our incentive compensation plans irrespective of whether we or our NEOs have successfully met the financial performance targets or individual objectives set under these plans. For example, awards earned pursuant to the annual incentive plan and long-term incentive plan described below are generally intended to qualify as performance-based compensation and are paid or issued as performance compensation awards under and subject to the terms of the Quanta Services, Inc. 2011 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan (the “Omnibus Plan”). The Compensation Committee may exercise negative discretion, as permitted by conducting future advisory votesthe incentive plans and the Omnibus Plan, to reduce incentive awards to amounts determined by the Committee to be appropriate.

“Clawback” Policy

A “clawback” policy, embodied in the 2014 annual and long-term incentive plans, permits the Compensation Committee to recover certain incentive compensation from executive officers and other key employees in accordance with applicable law where the payment was based upon the achievement of certain financial results that were subsequently the subject of a restatement. Based on its review and judgment, the Compensation Committee may seek to recover any amount that it determines was received inappropriately by these individuals.

Equity Award Grant Practices

The Compensation Committee meets in the first quarter of each fiscal year to, among other things, grant equity awards, including, as discussed above, equity awards to our NEOs. This meeting occurs after our earnings release for the fourth quarter of the prior fiscal year to allow the Compensation Committee to review complete financial results for the prior fiscal year when evaluating company and NEO performance. The Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, also grant awards throughout the year in connection with the hiring of a new executive compensation annually untilofficer or the next stockholder advisory vote onpromotion of an employee to an executive officer position. During 2014, the frequencyCompensation Committee granted (i) RSUs associated with the achievement of future advisory votes.2013 performance goals, (ii) RSUs associated with 2013 special transaction bonuses, (iii) RSUs in connection with the hiring of Messrs. Morris, Kemps and Brown,

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

31


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

and (iv) performance units and time-vested RSUs pursuant to our 2014 long-term incentive plan, all of which are set forth in the 2014 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table.

All equity-based awards granted during 2014 pursuant to our incentive plans for executive officers were made under the Omnibus Plan. Generally, the number of RSUs and performance units we grant is determined by dividing the aggregate dollar amount intended to be awarded by the average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant. RSUs and performance units are generally settled in our Common Stock upon vesting. It is not the intention of the Compensation Committee to time the granting of any awards under our incentive plans, including those made to newly hired or newly promoted executive officers, with the release of any material, non-public information.

Elements of Executive Compensation

The key components of our current compensation program for our NEOs are (i) base salary, (ii) awards under our annual, supplemental and discretionary incentive plans, and (iii) other compensation consisting primarily of matching 401(k) contributions and certain perquisites.summarized in the table below. Each component of our compensation program has a critical role in creating compensation payouts that motivate and reward strong performance and retaining the NEOs who deliver such performance. The Compensation Committee considers each compensation component individually and all compensation components in the aggregate when making decisions regarding amounts that may be awarded under each other compensation component.

Compensation
Element
Form of
Compensation

Performance

Criteria

Purpose
Base SalaryCashIndividual performance and experience in the role are factors in determining base salaries.To provide fixed compensation necessary to attract and retain key executives and to offset the cyclicality in our business that may impact variable pay year-to-year.
Short-Term IncentiveCashTied to the achievement of (1) adjusted organic earnings per share (“EPS”) growth target and (2) individual performance objectives, in each case established by the Compensation Committee.To provide incentives to our employees to achieve financial performance targets and individual objectives and to reward our employees for the achievement of those targets and objectives.
Long-Term Incentive

Performance units (50%)

Time-vested RSUs (50%)

Performance units cliff-vest at the end of a 3-year performance period and are tied to the achievement of 3-year financial performance targets and strategic initiatives, in each case established by the Compensation Committee.

Time-vested RSUs vest over three years in equal annual installments.

To create a strong incentive for our key management members to achieve our long-term financial performance targets and strategic initiatives, to align management’s interests with our stockholders’ interests, and to create an incentive for management to remain with Quanta.
Retirement Benefits

401(k) Matching

Non-Qualified Deferred

    Compensation Plan

N/ATo provide a competitive compensation package.
Perquisites

Executive Physical Program

Financial Planning Services

Corporate Housing

Relocation Package

N/ATo provide a competitive compensation package and, in certain cases, to optimize an executive officer’s time.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

32


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Changes to Executive Compensation Implemented for 2014

Comprehensive Review of Executive Compensation Program

The Compensation Committee previously undertook a comprehensive review of our executive compensation program with the goal of identifying and implementing prospective changes to ensure that our incentive compensation remains consistent with Quanta’s guiding principles on executive compensation. In accordance with the authority and responsibilities of the Compensation Committee as set forth in its charter, and reflecting on Quanta’s continued growth, the Compensation Committee focused on overall incentive plan design. In performing its review, the Compensation Committee considered input from Deloitte and senior management. As part of this review, Deloitte assessed Quanta’s executive compensation program and practices in comparison to Quanta’s compensation strategy, business objectives, market practices and leading practices. Deloitte’s observations regarding Quanta’s current executive compensation program, based on its review of Quanta’s public disclosures, Compensation Committee meeting materials, compensation plan documents, historical compensation awards, proxy advisory firm reports and discussions with key members of management and the Compensation Committee, were reflected in a 2012 report (the “2012 Deloitte Comprehensive Review”).

This effort focused on the more senior personnel within corporate management and operating unit management, while still allowing the Compensation Committee to exercise its authority on a summary level of aggregated amounts with respect to broader management groups. This initiative resulted in modification of the design of awards under the 2014 annual and long-term (formerly referred to as supplemental) incentive plans for Quanta’s senior leadership team, consisting of approximately 20 individuals, including the NEOs, other executive officers, corporate vice presidents and functional leads.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

33


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Summary of Changes Implemented

Based on the 2012 Deloitte Comprehensive Review, Deloitte’s report of Quanta’s competitiveness of our executive compensation program relative to a public company peer group and survey data in the fourth quarter of 2012 and information contained in the Deloitte Compensation Studies, the Compensation Committee decided to implement changes to our executive compensation program beginning in 2014, which are described below and summarized in the following table.

Incentive Compensation for 2013

Incentive Compensation for 2014

Annual Incentive Plan

Senior Leadership
Annual Incentive Plan

Number of metrics

Single metricMultiple metrics

Metric No. 1

Operating income

Threshold payout equal to 25% of target incentive for performance at 75% of operating income goal; maximum payout equal to 200% of target incentive for performance at 125% or more of operating income goal

Adjusted organic EPS growth (65% of the award opportunity)

A cash payout begins to accrue if adjusted organic EPS is greater than the prior year baseline adjusted organic EPS

An award can range from 0% to 200% of the target incentive amount attributable to this metric based on achievement relative to a target amount of adjusted organic EPS growth

Exemplary Award

N/A

Participants are eligible for an exemplary award, payable in time-vested RSUs, if achievement of adjusted organic EPS growth exceeds the level that earns the maximum cash award

An exemplary award cannot exceed an incremental amount equal to 200% of the target incentive amount

Metric No. 2

N/A

Individual performance objectives (35% of the award opportunity)

An award can range from 0% to 200% of the target incentive amount attributable to this metric based on achievement of the individual performance objectives

Payout currency

Cash

Cash

RSUs if an exemplary award is earned

Supplemental Incentive Plan

Senior Leadership
Long-Term Incentive Plan

Number of equity vehicles

Single vehicleTwo vehicles

Performance Units

N/A

50% of the long-term incentive target amount is awarded in unearned performance units that cliff-vest at the end of a 3-year performance period

The final amount of earned performance units can range from 0% to 200% of the amount initially awarded, based on achievement of 3-year company financial targets and strategic initiatives

RSUs

Performance-based grant of time vested RSUs, with payout calculated under a 25% to 200% performance scale based on achievement of an adjusted return on equity target and individual strategic objectives50% of the long-term incentive target amount is awarded in time-vested RSUs that vest ratably in equal annual installments over a 3-year period

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

34


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

With respect to awards for the 2014 performance year under the annual incentive plan, the Compensation Committee considered the number of metrics that would be appropriate and concluded that measuring performance against at least two metrics would better facilitate strategic growth while maintaining Quanta’s entrepreneurial culture. The Compensation Committee recognized the benefit of evaluating more than one performance measure and applying different weights to each measure. With respect to the type of performance metric, the Compensation Committee acknowledged the merits of utilizing a financial performance metric tied to profit, as well as performance metrics tied to strategic measures. The Compensation Committee believed that evaluating individual performance in the annual incentive plan, rather than in the long-term incentive plan, would better achieve its objectives and further, that adjusted organic EPS growth would be a more comprehensive measure for evaluating NEO performance than operating income. See “Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Annual Incentive Plan” for detailed information about the components of the annual incentive plan.

With respect to awards under the 2014 long-term incentive plan, the Compensation Committee considered both the number and type of vehicles utilized and the performance metrics employed for purposes of compensating senior management. Previously, awards under the supplemental incentive plan for senior management consisted of performance-based grants of restricted stock or RSUs that vested in equal annual installments over a 3-year period, with 50% of the award opportunity based on achievement of an adjusted return on equity target and the remaining 50% of the award opportunity based on attaining individual strategic objectives. The Compensation Committee considered the fact that many companies in Quanta’s peer group recognize long-term performance through grants of two types of equity vehicles, most commonly performance based awards and time-vested restricted stock or RSUs. The Compensation Committee concluded that providing time-vested RSUs as the equity vehicle for a portion of the long-term incentive would foster retention and enhance the competitiveness of Quanta’s compensation program for senior management. The Compensation Committee decided to employ a “portfolio approach” to long-term incentives in order to diversify the types of incentives and enable Quanta to achieve multiple parallel objectives. The Compensation Committee believed that a combination of multiple award types could simultaneously foster retention, emphasize pay-for-performance, and link compensation to stock price appreciation. See “Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan” for further information about the components of the long-term incentive plan.

Additionally, in January 2014 the Compensation Committee approved a nonqualified deferred compensation plan for certain employees, including the NEOs. See“Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Deferred Compensation Plan” for additional information about the deferred compensation plan and the 2014 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table for additional information about contributions to the plan, earnings/losses under the plan and aggregate balances for our NEOs under the plan.

Recognition of Transitional Disclosure Implications Associated with Changes Implemented

With the redesign of our long-term equity-based awards in 2014, the Compensation Committee recognized that, in this transition year, the 2014 Summary Compensation Table on page 51 and the 2014 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table on page 54 would reflect compensation decisions and equity awards under two distinct plan designs, one associated with a completed one-year performance period and the other relating to a prospective multi-year performance period. Consequently, the total compensation shown in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table and the equity-based awards shown in the 2014 Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table for Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen can be viewed asoverstated. This overstatement results from reporting in our 2014 compensation tables, as required by the SEC proxy disclosure rules, the value of both (i) awards granted in March 2014 relating to achievement of performance objectives under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan and special transaction bonuses associated with 2013 performance, and (ii) awards granted in March 2014 under the newly designed 2014 long-term incentive plan relating to a 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

35


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

To illustrate the transition year implications, we have provided the Supplemental Table for 2014 Executive Compensation within footnote (13) to the 2014 Summary Compensation Table, which excludes equity-based awards granted under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan and other awards based on 2013 performance. Additionally, the table below provides a summary of the effect on the total compensation reported in 2014 for Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen that was attributable to equity-based awards associated with 2013 performance:

Named Executive Officer

Total Compensation
    Reported in 2014(1)     
 Total Compensation Reported
in 2014 Attributable to

2013 Performance(2)
 Total Compensation
Reported in 2014 (Excluding
Compensation Attributable to

2013 Performance)(3)
 

Mr. O’Neil

$                  10,362,179  $                    4,606,821  $                    5,755,358  

Mr. Austin

$4,787,423  $2,040,014  $2,747,409  

Mr. Jensen

$3,275,018  $1,273,085  $2,001,933  

(1)

Represents amounts shown in the “Total” column of the 2014 Summary Compensation Table.

(2)

Represents equity-based awards granted in March 2014 relating to (a) achievement of performance objectives under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan and (b) special transaction bonuses associated with 2013 performance.

(3)

Represents amounts shown in the “Total” column of the Supplemental Table for 2014 Executive Compensation included within footnote (13) to the 2014 Summary Compensation Table.

Executive

Compensation Decisions for 2014

Base Salary

Base salary is a critical element of our NEO compensation because it provides NEOs with a base level of monthly income that is consistent with competitive practices. Base salaries for NEOs including our Executive Chairman and our Chief Executive Officer, are determined annually by the Compensation Committee, taking into account such factors as competitive industry salaries (especially the salary practices of companies in our peer group), a subjective assessment of the nature of the position, and the contribution, experience, level of responsibility and length of service of the NEO. While base salaries provide a basic level of economic security for our NEOs, a significant portion (generally greater than 65%) of an NEO’s target total direct compensation is performance-based compensation pursuant to the incentive compensation plans described below. The following table reflects the increases in base salaries approved by the Compensation Committee during 2014:

Named Executive Officer

2013 Base Salary Rate
(through March 30, 2014)    
 2014 Base Salary Rate
(effective April 1, 2014)    
 Percentage Increase     

Mr. O’Neil

$                950,000      $        1,000,000          5.3%      

Mr. Austin

$725,000      $800,000          10.3%      

Mr. Jensen

$500,000      $550,000          10.0%      

Mr. Morris

$425,000      $437,500          3.0%      

Mr. Kemps

$—     $450,000(1)       —     

Mr. Brown

$390,000      $390,000(2)       0.0%      

(1)

Mr. Kemps was appointed as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Quanta on September 19, 2014, and therefore his base salary rate was effective as of his appointment.

(2)

Mr. Brown’s base salary rate did not change effective April 1, 2014, as the annual salary adjustment date closely followed the date of his initial employment.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

36


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

The Compensation Committee approved base salary increases of 5.3%, 10.3% and 10.0% for Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen, respectively, concluding that a higher percentage increase than the other NEOs and Quanta’s other corporate employees was warranted, due in part to strong performance and also to better align their base salaries with those of executives with similar positions and responsibilities at companies in our peer group. Based on published compensation survey data and the 3% base salary raise generally approved for Quanta’s other corporate employees, the Compensation Committee decided to approve a 3% increase in base salary for Mr. Morris. No increase in the base salary for Mr. Kemps or Mr. Brown was approved because the decisions were made prior to the commencement of Mr. Kemps’ employment and shortly after the commencement of Mr. Brown’s employment.

Annual Incentive Plan

Our annual incentive plan for senior leadership is designed to provide our NEOs with performance awards payable annually in cash in recognition of Quanta achieving a specified financial performance goal that istarget and the NEO achieving specified individual performance objectives, which are approved by the Compensation Committee (as discussed below).Committee. The Compensation Committee elects to pay such performance awards in cash rather thancash. The NEO must be employed by Quanta on the date any bonus is paid under the annual incentive plan, and any NEO not employed forfeits any and all rights to such bonus. Awards for an eligible NEO that begins employment during the performance year will be pro-rated from the date of hire; however, in equity largelyany event, an NEO must be employed by October 1st of the performance year to keep our compensation program competitive with those of our direct competitors, which are predominantly private companies that pay all compensation in cash.be eligible for an award.

Each NEO’s award pursuant toThe payout for each NEO under the annual incentive plan is determined based oncalculated as a percentage of such NEO’s base salary (the “AIP Target Incentive”), a portion of which is then multiplied by the achievement percentage associated with the company performance component and the balance of which is multiplied by Quanta of an operating income goal, which the achievement percentage associated with the individual performance component, as set forth in the following calculation:

LOGO

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

37


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

The Compensation Committee, believes encourages our NEOsafter taking into account, among other things, the results of the Deloitte Benchmarking Study and recommendations from the Chief Executive Officer (other than with respect to increase stockholder value by focusing on growth in revenue, while maintaining cost discipline. For purposeshimself), as well as the individual NEO’s position, experience, level of responsibility and length of service, established the following AIP Target Incentives for the 2014 performance year:

Named Executive Officer

Base Salary AIP Target Incentive
(% of Base Salary)
AIP Target Incentive
(Amount)
 Pro-Rated
AIP Target Incentive
(Amount)
 

Mr. O’Neil

$    1,000,000  110%$        1,100,000   N/A  

Mr. Austin

$800,000  100%$800,000   N/A  

Mr. Jensen

$550,000  100%$550,000   N/A  

Mr. Morris(1)

$437,500    90%$393,975  $        387,499  

Mr. Kemps(2)

$450,000    90%$405,000  $114,288  

Mr. Brown(3)

$390,000    90%$351,000  $248,157  

(1)

Due to Mr. Morris’ appointment as Executive Vice President – Corporate Development of Quanta on January 6, 2014, the Compensation Committee concluded that his AIP Target Incentive with respect to the 2014 performance year would be pro-rated to 359/365 of the amount shown (based on the portion of the fiscal year during which he was employed).

(2)

Due to Mr. Kemps’ appointment as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Quanta on September 19, 2014, the Compensation Committee concluded that his AIP Target Incentive with respect to the 2014 performance year would be pro-rated to 103/365 of the amount shown (based on the portion of the fiscal year during which he was employed).

(3)

Pursuant to Mr. Brown’s severance agreement, effective as of September 15, 2014 and as more fully described below in “Executive Separation Matters,” his AIP Target Incentive in respect of the 2014 performance year was pro-rated to 70.7% of the amount shown.

AIP Company Performance Component

The company component of the annual incentive plan, operating incomewhich accounts for 65% of a participant’s annual incentive opportunity under the plan, is defined as operating income, excluding amortizationbased on Quanta’s achievement of intangibles, gain (loss) on saleannual adjusted organic EPS growth (the “AIP Company Performance Component”). Generally, short-term incentives motivate and reward achievement of, assets and non-cashperformance in excess of, Quanta’s annual business goals. The Compensation Committee also believes this metric rewards our NEOs for improving financial results for stockholders of Quanta and provides a means to connect cash compensation less interest expense, net of interest income. Performance against the budgeted operating income goal is measuredafter accrual of the incentive bonus payouts earned (both cash and equity) by corporate plan participants. For the 2011 performance year,directly to Quanta’s short-term performance. Specifically, the Compensation Committee initially establishedbelieves adjusted organic EPS growth encourages our NEOs to grow the operatingCompany profitably, without taking excessive risk.

To measure adjusted organic EPS growth under the annual incentive plan, the Company’s actual adjusted organic EPS for the performance year is compared to a baseline adjusted organic EPS amount, and a payout begins to accrue only if adjusted organic EPS for the performance year is greater than the baseline amount. The baseline adjusted organic EPS amount is calculated as the prior year’s net income financialattributable to our Common Stock,plusthe full-year effect of acquisitions made during the year, andadjusted for the full-year effect of depreciation, amortization, interest income/expense and compensation expense related to the acquisitions. Actual adjusted organic EPS for the performance goal at $379,660,000. This goalyear is calculated similarly, except that budgeted post-acquisition contributions by businesses acquired during the performance year are deducted in order to calculate adjusted organic EPS that is comparable to the baseline. For both the baseline and performance year adjusted organic EPS, certain other adjustments may be considered and approved by the Compensation Committee for company results and pre-acquisition results of any acquired companies, including but not limited to, currency fluctuations, unbudgeted legal costs and expenses, charges associated with long-term contract receivables, transaction costs, impairment charges, and stock repurchase activities.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

38


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Based upon the performance/payout scale and adjusted organic EPS growth target adopted by the Compensation Committee, NEOs could earn cash awards under the AIP Company Performance Component as follows (when performance falls between the designated payout points, the cash awards are determined by interpolation):

Percentage of Target
Adjusted Organic EPS Growth Obtained

Percentage of Target Payout

Under AIP Company
    Performance Component Earned    

0%

0%

36%

25%

61%

50%

82%

75%

100%

100%

116%

125%

131%

150%

145%

175%

158%

200%

The target adjusted organic EPS growth was subject to equitable

adjustments in the Compensation Committee’s discretion to account for events that significantly impact, positively or negatively, Quanta’s ability to achieve the originally established goal. Thetarget; however, no adjustments were made for the 2014 performance year. Additionally, if adjusted organic EPS growth exceeded 158% of the goal, resulting in a 200% payout pursuant to the above scale, participants would be eligible to receive an exemplary award equal to up to an additional 200% of the AIP Target Incentive amount, payable in RSUs that vest in equal annual installments over a 3-year period.

For the 2014 performance year, the Compensation Committee subsequently increasedconcluded that the operating income financial performance goal to $389,240,000 to adjust forCompany earned adjusted organic EPS of $1.71, against a baseline of $1.67 and a target of $1.78, thereby attaining approximately 35% of the contribution by five businesses acquired by Quantaadjusted organic EPS growth target and one businessresulting in which Quanta made a significant investment during 2011.an achievement percentage of 22.9%. The following table details the potential and actual payouts associated with the AIP Company Performance Component:

Named Executive

Officer

Total AIP
Target Incentive
 AIP Company
Performance Component
(Weighted %)
Target Payout
Under AIP Company
Performance Component
(Amount)
 Achievement
Percentage
AIP Company Performance
Component Incentive
Award Earned
 

Mr. O’Neil

$    1,100,000  65%$            715,000  22.9%$            163,735  

Mr. Austin

$800,000  65%$520,000  22.9%$119,080  

Mr. Jensen

$550,000  65%$357,500  22.9%$81,868  

Mr. Morris(1)

$387,499  65%$251,874  22.9%$57,679  

Mr. Kemps(1)

$114,288  65%$74,287  22.9%$17,012  

Mr. Brown(1)

$248,157  65%$161,302  22.9%$36,938  

(1)

Amounts shown in the “Total AIP Target Incentive” column reflect pro rata reductions for Messrs. Morris and Kemps based on the portion of the fiscal year during which they were employed and for Mr. Brown based on the terms of his severance agreement.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

39


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

AIP Individual Performance Component

The payout for each NEO under thesecond component of annual incentive plan, relates towhich accounts for the remaining 35% of a percentageparticipant’s annual incentive opportunity under the plan, is based on the NEO’s achievement of such NEO’s salaryindividual performance objectives established for the 2014 performance year (the “AIP Target Incentive”Individual Performance Component”). The Compensation Committee, after taking into account,Generally, these objectives may consist of safety statistics, return metrics, segment performance, safety leadership activities and other strategic initiatives, among other things, the results of the 2011 E&Y Compensation Benchmarking Study and published compensation survey data, as well as the individual NEO’s position, experience, level of responsibility and length of service, established the AIP Target Incentives for the 2011 performance year for Messrs. Colson and O’Neil as 100% of their respective base salaries and for Messrs. Haddox, Trawick, Austin and Jensen as 90% of their respective base salaries.others. The Compensation Committee believes providing Messrs. Colsonachievement of the objectives by the NEOs relates to both quantitative and O’Neilqualitative measures of performance that create stockholder value. The individual performance objectives, along with a higher AIP Target Incentive is appropriate considering that the job responsibilities of Messrs. Colsonrelated key initiatives and O’Neil pertain tosupporting metrics, for each NEO for the entire Quanta organization2014 performance year were as opposed to the more specific job responsibilities of Messrs. Haddox, Trawick, Austin and Jensen.follows:

Individual
Performance Objective

Key Initiatives / Achievement Metrics

Safety: Improve or maintain Quanta’s
total incident injury rate

•    Percentage achievement based upon performance in comparison to total incident injury rate from 2013 (applicable with respect to NEOs with responsibility for operations and acquisitions matters)

•    Administration and claims management (applicable with respect to NEOs with responsibility for accounting and legal matters)

Talent: Recruit, educate and develop employees to meet current and future needs of Quanta

•    Hire and successfully integrate individuals in key leadership positions

•    Establish repeatable and sustainable talent development and review process

•    Establish career development plans for key leaders

Property: Optimize use of property,
plant and equipment

•    Create actionable plan regarding restructuring of capital allocation decisions

•    Develop education and training for operating units to improve capital decisions

Based upon achievement of individual performance objectives as reflected below in the sliding performance/payout scale adopted by the Compensation Committee, as described above,each NEO is eligible to receive a payout under the AIP Individual Performance Component up to a maximum payout equal to 200% of the target payout under the AIP Individual Performance Component. There is no exemplary award opportunity for the AIP Individual Performance Component. Thus, the NEOs could earn cash awards under the annual incentive plan for 2011AIP Individual Performance Component as follows (when the attainment of the performance goal falls between the designated percentages in the table below, the cash awards are determined by interpolation):

 

Percentage of Operating Income

Goal Attained

  

Payout as a Percentage of
AIP Target Incentive

Less than 75%  0%
75%  25%
80%  40%
85%  55%
90%  70%
95%  85%
100%  100%
110%  130%
120%  175%
130%  185%
140%  195%
150% or greater  200%

Individual
    Performance Objective Attained    

Percentage of Target Payout
Under AIP Individual
    Performance Component Earned    

Does Not Meet

0%

Partially Meets

50%

Meets

100%

Exceeds

150%

Far Exceeds

200%

Quanta met or exceeded its financial

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

40


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

After an evaluation of each NEO’s achievement of his individual performance goal underobjectives during the annual2014 performance year, the Compensation Committee concluded that Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Morris each attained 133%, 160% and 185% of their safety, talent and property individual performance objectives, resulting in an overall achievement percentage of 159%, while Messrs. Jensen, Kemps and Brown each attained 125%, 160% and 185% of their safety, talent and property individual performance objectives, resulting in an overall achievement percentage of 157%. The following table details the target and actual payouts associated with the AIP Individual Performance Component:

Named Executive

Officer

Total AIP
Target Incentive
 AIP Individual
Performance Component
(Weighted %)
Target Payout
Under AIP Individual
Performance Component
(Amount)
 Achievement
Percentage
AIP Individual Performance
Component Incentive
Award Earned
 

Mr. O’Neil

$    1,100,000  35%$            385,000  159%$                612,150  

Mr. Austin

$800,000  35%$280,000  159%$445,200  

Mr. Jensen

$550,000  35%$192,500  157%$302,225  

Mr. Morris(1)

$387,499  35%$135,625  159%$215,643  

Mr. Kemps(1)

$114,288  35%$40,001  157%$62,801  

Mr. Brown(1)

$248,157  35%$86,855  157%$136,362  

(1)

Amounts shown in the “Total AIP Target Incentive” column reflect pro rata reductions for Messrs. Morris and Kemps based on the portion of the fiscal year during which they were employed and for Mr. Brown based on the terms of his severance agreement.

Long-Term Incentive Plan

Our long-term incentive plan for two of the past five performance years. For the 2011 performance year, Quanta achieved operating income as calculated pursuantsenior leadership is designed to provide our annualNEOs with long-term incentive plan of approximately $301,953,000, which represented approximately 78% of its operating income goalawards payable annually in equity-based awards. The total payout for each NEO under the annual incentive plan and equated to a payout of 34% of the AIP Target Incentive.

Supplemental Incentive Plan

Our supplemental incentive plan provides additional awards to our NEOs based upon Quanta’s performance against a specified financial performance goal and the NEOs’ individual performance against specified strategic goals. The first component, which accounts for 50% of the total target payout under the supplementallong-term incentive plan is baseddependent on Quanta’s achievement of a return on equity (“ROE”) financial performance goal (the “ROE Component”), while the second component, which accountsspecified dollar amount for the remaining 50% of the payout opportunity, is based on the NEO’s achievement of certain approved individual strategic goals (the “Strategic Goal Component”). The Compensation Committee believes that ROE measures our effectiveness in generating financial return relative to stockholders’ equity. The Compensation Committee also believes that the payout opportunity of the Strategic Goal Component allowseach NEO determined by the Compensation Committee to reward strong individual performance independent of whether Quanta has achieved its financial performance goals for a fiscal year.

The payouts under both components of the supplemental incentive plan are dependent on a fixed dollar amount that the Compensation Committee determines to be subject to the plan (the “SIP“Long-Term Target Incentive”). The Compensation Committee, considered,after taking into account, among other things, the results of the 2011 E&Y CompensationDeloitte Benchmarking Study and published compensation survey data,recommendations from the Chief Executive Officer (other than with respect to himself), as well as the individual NEO’s position, experience, level of responsibility and length of service, in establishingestablished the SIPfollowing total Long-Term Target IncentiveIncentives for the 2011NEOs in 2014:

Named Executive Officer

Total Long-Term
    Target Incentive    
 

Mr. O’Neil

$    3,800,000  

Mr. Austin

$1,300,000  

Mr. Jensen

$1,000,000  

Mr. Morris

$350,000  

Mr. Kemps(1)

$550,000  

Mr. Brown

$300,000  

(1)

Due to Mr. Kemps’ appointment as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Quanta on September 19, 2014, the Compensation Committee concluded that his Long-Term Target Incentive would be pro-rated to approximately 76.1% of the amount shown (based on the portion of the 3-year performance period during which he would be employed).

Generally, an NEO must be employed by Quanta on the date an award vests or is earned under the long-term incentive plan, and any NEO not employed forfeits any and all rights to such award. However, an NEO who ceased to be employed by Quanta prior to the completion of the 3-year performance year. Specifically,period described below has the potential to receive an award (or some portion thereof) represented by the equity award for that period, at the 2011discretion of the Chief Executive Officer and with the approval of the Compensation Committee. Awards for an

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

41


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

NEO added to the long-term incentive plan during the performance period are pro-rated from the date of hire; however, in any event, an NEO must be employed by October 1st of the first year of the 3-year performance period to be eligible for awards under the plan.

Long-Term Performance Unit Component

The first component of the long-term incentive plan, which accounts for 50% of a participant’s target incentive opportunity under the plan, is payable in performance units that cliff-vest at the end of a 3-year performance period based on achievement of 3-year company performance goals determined by the Compensation Committee (the “Long-Term Performance Unit Component”). Under the 2014 long-term incentive plan, in March 2014 the Compensation Committee approved the following performance unit awards:

Named Executive Officer

Total Long-Term
Target Incentive
 Long-Term
Performance Unit
Component
(Weighted %)
Target Long-Term
Performance Unit
Component
(Amount)
 Performance Units
Granted(1)
 

Mr. O’Neil

$            3,800,000  50%$     1,900,000   55,345  

Mr. Austin

$1,300,000  50%$650,000   18,934  

Mr. Jensen

$1,000,000  50%$500,000   14,565  

Mr. Morris

$350,000  50%$175,000   5,098  

Mr. Kemps(2)

$418,612  50%$209,306   6,366  

Mr. Brown(3)

$300,000  50%$150,000   4,369  

(1)

The number of performance units granted is determined by dividing the dollar amount of the target Long-Term Performance Unit Component by the average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant.

(2)

Amount shown for Mr. Kemps in the “Total Long-Term Target Incentive” column reflects a pro rata reduction based on the portion of the 3-year performance period during which he would be employed.

(3)

Mr. Brown did not remain employed by Quanta through the end of the performance period, and therefore the performance units he was awarded under the Long-Term Performance Unit Component were forfeited.

Though performance units representing the Long-Term Performance Unit Component target amount were granted to the NEOs in 2014, the number of performance units that will ultimately be earned and vest will be adjusted upward or downward (if necessary) based on company performance during the 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016. The number of performance units that can become earned at the end of the performance period ranges from 0% to a maximum of 200% of the amount of performance units granted in 2014. Any earned performance units will vest immediately and will be settled by the issuance of Common Stock.

For the 3-year performance period, the Compensation Committee established company performance goals relating to (i) the SIP Target Incentiveachievement of certain strategic initiatives, as measured by pre-tax income contributions, and (ii) improvement of return on invested capital (“ROIC”). Each goal has a 0% to 200% performance scale and is equally weighted when calculating overall company performance for purposes of determining the number of earned performance units for each of our NEOsNEO. The performance targets and results for these goals may be adjusted as follows: Mr. Colson, $1,800,000; Mr. O’Neil, $600,000; Mr. Haddox, $500,000; Mr. Trawick, $450,000; Mr. Austin, $500,000; and Mr. Jensen, $300,000. As described in“Executive Compensation Decisions forappropriate, at the 2011 Performance Year — Executive Succession Matters” below,discretion of the Compensation Committee, considered, among other things,to take into account any acquisitions or dispositions during the results of the 2011 E&Y CEO Succession Benchmarking Study, and subsequently increased Mr. O’Neil’s SIP Target Incentive to $1,300,000 upon his promotion to Chief Executive Officer.relevant period.

For purposes of the ROE Component, the ROE financial performance goal is broadly defined as the quotient of the budgeted amount of net income excluding amortization of intangibles (measuredafterStrategic Initiatives. accrual of the incentive bonus payouts earned, both cash and equity, by corporate plan participants), divided by average tangible stockholder’s equity, as adjusted for certain items. For the 2011 performance year,strategic initiatives goal, the Compensation Committee established targeted pre-tax income contribution amounts (including contributions of certain acquisitions and investments) from growth initiatives relating to certain customers, service markets, industry sectors and geographic regions. Total pre-tax income for the ROE financial performancestrategic initiatives goal at 12.1%. Based upon the sliding performance/payout scale adoptedmay take into account trailing twelve month pro forma contributions, 2017 estimated contributions or other measurements deemed appropriate by the Compensation Committee, for 2011 as described above, NEOs could earn awards underexcluding items deemed to be non-recurring. The Compensation Committee believes that

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

42


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

achievement of these strategic initiatives supports the ROE Component upCompany’s growth objectives and strategic intent to diversify into new markets and services. The Compensation Committee established the following amountsperformance/payout scale for the strategic initiatives goal (when the attainment of the performance goal falls between the designated percentages in the below table, the awards arepercentage of target incentive earned is determined by interpolation):

 

Percentage of ROE

Component Attained

  Payout as a Percentage of SIP
Target Incentive (ROE Component)
Less than 75%  0%
75%  25%
80%  40%
85%  55%
90%  70%
95%  85%
100%  100%
110%  130%
120%  175%
130%  185%
140%  195%
150% or greater  200%

Percentage of

Target Pre-Tax

Income Goal Attained

Percentage of Target

Incentive Earned

Less than 67%

0%

83%

50%

100%

100%

117%

150%

133% or greater

200%

Quanta met or exceeded its financial performance goal under the supplemental incentive plan for one of the past five performance years. ROIC.  For the 2011 performance year, Quanta achieved ROE of 10.3%, which represented approximately 85% of its ROEROIC improvement goal, under our supplemental incentive plan and equated to a payout of 55% of the ROE Component of the SIP Target Incentive.

The Strategic Goal Component is based on achieving certain individual strategic goals that are approved annually by the Compensation Committee for each NEOestablished a targeted increase in ROIC over the 3-year performance period. ROIC is designed to assess the Company’s efficiency at allocating capital under its control to profitable investments and whichis generally relate to both quantitativedefined as net operating profit after tax,divided by average invested capital (which is determined by taking the average of invested capital at the end of the performance period and qualitative measuresinvested capital at the end of performance that the prior year). The Compensation Committee believes createimprovement of ROIC is strongly connected to stockholder value. In determining payoutsvalue creation and improved capital allocation decisions. The Compensation Committee established the following performance/payout scale for the ROIC improvement goal (when attainment of the goal falls between the designated percentages in the table, the percentage of target incentive earned is determined by interpolation):

Percentage of Target
ROIC Growth Obtained

Percentage of Target

Incentive Earned

0%

0%

50%

50%

100%

100%

117%

150%

134%

200%

As soon as administratively practicable following the end of 2016, the percentage attained and the percentage of target incentive earned for the strategic initiatives goal and the ROIC goal will be determined, and the combined weighted percentage will then be multiplied by the number of performance units granted in 2014. This will result in a final number of earned and vested performance units, which will be settled in shares of our Common Stock.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

43


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Long-Term RSU Component

The second component of the long-term incentive plan, which accounts for the remaining 50% of a participant’s target incentive opportunity under the Strategic Goal Component, the Compensation Committee also considers each NEO’s demonstration of ethical behavior and compliance with our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct.

Awards under the supplemental incentive plan, can be paidis payable in cash, restricted stock or a combination thereof at the Compensation Committee’s discretion. In recent years, including the 2011 performance year, awards have been paid in restricted stock, which vests over three yearsRSUs that vest in equal annual installments providingover the 3-year period following the date of grant (the “Long-Term RSU Component”). The Compensation Committee believes these time-based awards provide a concrete link between our NEOs’ compensation and the creation of stockholder value and encouraging executive officer retention. To adjustencourage retention of our NEOs. Under the restricted stock awards to their cash equivalent,2014 long-term incentive plan, the Compensation Committee applies to

approved the following award amounts, which were granted in March 2014:

Named Executive Officer

Total
Long-Term
Target Incentive
 Long-Term
    RSU Component    
(Weighted %)
    Target Long-Term    
RSU Component
(Amount)
     RSUs Granted(1)     

Mr. O’Neil

$            3,800,000  50%$        1,900,000   55,345        

Mr. Austin

$1,300,000  50%$650,000   18,934        

Mr. Jensen

$1,000,000  50%$500,000   14,565        

Mr. Morris

$350,000  50%$175,000   5,098        

Mr. Kemps(2)

$418,612  50%$209,306   6,366        

Mr. Brown(3)

$300,000  50%$150,000   4,369        

the dollar value of each restricted stock award a multiplier intended to reflect the risk and liquidity premiums that a cash award has relative to a restricted stock award of the same dollar value. For the 2011 performance year, the Compensation Committee established the multiplier at 110%.

(1)

The number of RSUs granted for the Long-Term RSU Component is determined by dividing the dollar amount of the target Long-Term RSU Component by the average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant.

(2)

Amount shown for Mr. Kemps in the “Total Long-Term Target Incentive” column reflects a pro rata reduction based on the portion of the 3-year period during which he would be employed.

(3)

Upon termination of Mr. Brown’s employment, all of the RSUs awarded were forfeited.

Discretionary Incentive Plan

Awards under the discretionary incentive plan are madepresented to the Compensation Committee for approval at the discretionrecommendation of our Chief Executive Officer with the approval of the Compensation Committee, or at the discretion of the Compensation Committee, andOfficer. These awards are payable in cash, restricted stock, RSUs, or a combination thereof. These rewardsawards provide the Chief Executive Officer and the Compensation Committee with the flexibility to, among other things, reward exceptional performance. For the 20112014 performance year, the Chief Executive Officer did not recommend, and the Compensation Committee approved an awarddid not approve, awards to any NEO under the discretionary incentive planplan.

Transaction Bonuses

On December 6, 2013, we sold all of our equity ownership interest in Howard Midstream Energy Partners, LLC (“HEP”) for proceeds of approximately $220.9 million in cash which resulted in a pre-tax gain of approximately $112.7 million. Acknowledging the significant contribution to Messrs.Quanta’s 2013 results from the gain on the sale of Quanta’s investment in HEP, the Compensation Committee decided to award to certain executive officers a special transaction bonus in recognition of their contributions in connection with the Company’s strategic investment in HEP. Accordingly, in March 2014, the Compensation Committee awarded transaction bonuses to certain of our NEOs as follows: Mr. O’Neil, $400,000; Mr. Austin, $500,000; and Mr. Jensen, as discussed below.$200,000. The transaction bonuses were paid in RSUs that vest in three equal annual installments, with the initial vesting occurring in March 2014, and are reflected in the “Stock Awards – Restricted Stock & RSUs” column of the 2014 Summary Compensation Table and in the “All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units” in the 2014 Grants of Plan Based Awards Table. The number of RSUs granted to each recipient was determined by dividing the amount of the award by the average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

44


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Other Compensation

We have provided our NEOs with certain perquisites, including an annual executive physical program and an executive financial counseling program.program and, with respect to Mr. Kemps in connection with his hiring, certain relocation and commuting expenses. We believe these perquisites assist executives in dealing with the demands of their positions. The limited personal use of partially-owned aircraft by our NEOs in 20112014 consisted solely of spouses accompanying executives as additional passengers on certain business flights. The Compensation Committee reviews our policies with respect to perquisites on a regular basis to consider whether the perquisites should be maintained and whether, and to what extent, it may be appropriate to discontinue particular perquisites.

Our NEOs also receive matching contributions from Quanta to their 401(k) accounts, consistent with all other employees participating in Quanta’s 401(k) plan. Quanta matches 100% of an NEO’s pre-tax contributions up to the first 3% of such NEO’s base salary. Thereafter, Quanta matches 50% of an NEO’s pre-tax contributions up to the next 3% of such NEO’s base salary. All matching contributions are subject to certain limits as determined by law.

Exercise of Discretion in ExecutiveDeferred Compensation DecisionsPlan

The Compensation Committee has complete discretion to withhold payment pursuant to any of our incentiveUnder the nonqualified deferred compensation plans irrespective of whether we or our NEOs have successfully met the goals set under these plans. The Compensation Committee did not elect to withhold payment of any amounts under our incentive compensation plans with respect to the NEOs during 2011.

“Clawback” Policy

The Compensation Committee adopted a “clawback” policy embodied in the annual and supplemental incentive plans for the 2012 performance year that permits the Compensation Committee to recover certain incentive compensation from executive officers and other key employees in accordance with applicable law where the payment was based upon the achievement of certain financial results that were subsequently the subject of a restatement. Based on its review and judgment, the Compensation Committee may seek to recover any amount that it determines was received inappropriately by these individuals.

Grants of Equity Awards Practices

The Compensation Committee meets in the first quarter of each fiscal year to, among other things, grant equity awards, including, as discussed above, equity awards to our NEOs. This meeting occurs after our earnings release for the fourth quarter of the prior fiscal year to allow the Compensation Committee to have complete financial results for the prior fiscal year at the time that it evaluates our performance and that of our NEOs. The Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, also grant restricted stock awards throughout the year in

connection with the hiring of a new executive officer or the promotion of an employee to an executive officer position. Our practice with respect to restricted stock awards is to use the closing market price on the date of grant to determine the value of the award. It is not the intention of the Compensation Committee to time the granting of any awards under our incentive plans, including those made to newly hired or newly promoted executive officers, with the release of any material, non-public information.

Executive Compensation Decisions for the 2011 Performance Year

Base Salary

The following table reflects the increases in base salariesplan approved by the Compensation Committee in January 2014, certain employees, including the NEOs, are permitted to voluntarily defer receipt of up to 75% of base salary and up to 100% of other cash compensation and/or settlement of RSUs awarded pursuant to our incentive plans. In addition, with respect to each plan year, a plan participant who defers the maximum amount permitted by law under the 401(k) plan maintained by Quanta is credited with an employer matching contribution equal to the difference between (i) 100% of the first 3% of the compensation deferred under the plan, plus 50% of the next 3% of the compensation deferred under the plan, and (ii) the maximum matching contribution that could be contributed on behalf of the participant under the 401(k) plan maintained by Quanta. Matching contributions vest immediately. Quanta may also make discretionary employer contributions to the deferred compensation plan. Discretionary employer contributions will be subject to a vesting schedule determined by Quanta at the time of the contribution, provided that vesting accelerates upon a change in control and the participant’s death or retirement. All matching and discretionary employer contributions, whether vested or not, are forfeited upon a participant’s termination of employment for cause or upon the participant engaging in competition with Quanta or any of its affiliates, predecessors, designees or successors.

RSUs that are deferred may be settled only in Quanta Common Stock. The deferred compensation plan permits participants to allocate deferred cash amounts among a group of notional accounts that mirror the gains and/or losses of various investment alternatives. These notional accounts do not provide for above-market or preferential earnings. Each participant may direct investments of the individual accounts set up for the participant under the plan and may make changes in the investments as often as daily. Since each executive officer may choose the investment alternative (which may include a selection of funds ranging from fixed income to emerging markets, as well as other equity, debt and mixed investment strategies) and may change their allocations from time to time, the return on the investment depends on how well each underlying investment fund performed during 2011:the time the executive officer chose it as an investment vehicle. The obligation to pay the balance of each participant’s account is at all times an unfunded and unsecured obligation of the Company.

Generally, participants receive distributions of deferred amounts upon the earlier of separation from service, the occurrence of a disability, or a specified date (selected at the time of the deferral). Participants may elect to receive distributions in the form of a lump sum or installments, and, in some cases, may elect to delay distribution upon termination of employment for up to five years. Participants are also permitted to withdraw all or a portion of their deferred amounts under the plan in the event of an unforeseeable financial emergency.

 

Named Executive Officer

  Base Salary as of
April 1, 2010
   Base Salary as of
April 1, 2011
  Percentage Increase 

Mr. Colson

  $848,640    $874,100    3.0

Mr. O’Neil

  $436,800    $500,000(a)   14.5

Mr. Haddox

  $509,184    $524,460    3.0

Mr. Trawick

  $466,752    $480,755    3.0

Mr. Austin

  $408,000    $475,000    16.4

Mr. Jensen

  $269,352    $325,000    20.7

 

(a)As described in“Executive Succession Matters” below, the Compensation Committee subsequently increased Mr. O’Neil’s base salary to $750,000 per year, effective upon his promotion to Chief Executive Officer as of May 19, 2011.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

45

Based on


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

Quanta reserves the resultsright to amend or terminate the plan at any time and for any reason. Each NEO will be entitled to the amount credited to his account (if any) immediately prior to any amendment or termination.

A participant’s deferral elections must be renewed each year, and elections cannot be revoked or changed during the year. During 2014, Messrs. O’Neil, Austin, Jensen, Morris and Brown elected to defer a portion of the 2011 E&Y Compensation Benchmarking Study, published compensation survey data, the annual wage increase under Quanta’s collective bargaining agreement with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and certain other applicable unions, recent inflation data and the 3%their base salary raise generally approved for Quanta’s other corporate employees,and/or any award earned under our annual incentive plan. Also during 2014, Quanta made matching contributions but no discretionary contributions. For additional information on these contributions, see the 2014 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table.

Executive Appointment Matters

Effective January 6, 2014, Quanta appointed Mr. Morris as Executive Vice President – Corporate Development. In connection with his appointment, the Compensation Committee decided to approve a 3% increase inapproved an annual base salary for Messrs. Colson, Haddox and Trawick. The Committee approved base salary increases of 14.5%, 16.4% and 20.7%, respectively, for Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen, concluding that a higher percentage increase than the other named executive officers was warranted, based in part upon strong performance in light of individual performance objectives and also to better align their base salaries with those of executives with similar positions and responsibilities at companies in our peer group. As described in“Executive Succession Matters” below, the Compensation Committee subsequently increased Mr. O’Neil’s base salary to $750,000 per year, effective upon his promotion to Chief Executive Officer as of May 19, 2011.

Executive Succession Matters

On March 24, 2011, Quanta announced that Mr. Colson, then Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, would assume the role of Executive Chairman on May 19, 2011, and that Mr. O’Neil, then President and Chief Operating Officer, would succeed Mr. Colson as Chief Executive Officer at that time and continue to hold the position of President. In connection with this transition, the Committee examined the roles and responsibilities for Mr. Colson as Executive Chairman and for Mr. O’Neil as President and Chief Executive Officer as developed by the Governance and Nominating Committee and engaged E&Y for guidance with regard to benchmarking compensation associated with such roles and responsibilities, the results of which were presented to the Compensation Committee in the 2011 E&Y CEO Succession Benchmarking Study. E&Y identified 14 companies that had recently experienced executive succession events involving the Chief Executive Officer’s transition to an Executive Chairman role, with an insider named as new Chief Executive Officer.

Based on the benchmarking data and the Compensation Committee’s understanding that Mr. Colson would continue to work full time in the Executive Chairman role, the Compensation Committee concluded that

Mr. Colson’s compensation as Executive Chairman should remain unchanged from his compensation as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, namely a base salary of $874,100,$425,000, an AIP Target Incentive of 100%,90% of his base salary rate, and a SIPLong-Term Target Incentive in the amount of $1,800,000.$350,000 for Mr. Morris. The Compensation Committee also approved the grant of an equity award to Mr. Morris on January 22, 2014, consisting of the number of RSUs equal to the number of shares of Quanta’s Common Stock having a fair market value (based on the average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant) equal to $500,000, which shall vest in equal annual installments over a 3-year period following the date of grant.

Effective February 20, 2014, Quanta appointed Mr. Brown as Vice President and General Counsel. In addition,connection with his appointment, the Compensation Committee considered the increase in compensation and changes in the mix of compensation that would be warranted for Mr. O’Neil as incoming Chief Executive Officer. As a reference point, the Compensation Committee concluded that compensation within +/- 15% of the 25th percentile of competitive market total direct compensation for new CEOs in executive succession circumstances would be appropriate, given that Mr. O’Neil would be new to a CEO role. Therefore, the Compensation Committee concluded that effective upon Mr. O’Neil’s appointment as Chief Executive Officer on May 19, 2011,approved an annual base salary of $750,000 (increasing from $500,000 previously established for 2011),$390,000, an AIP Target Incentive of 100% (unchanged),90% of his base salary rate, and a SIPLong-Term Target Incentive in the amount of $1,300,000 (increasing from $600,000 previously established$300,000 for 2011) would be appropriate.Mr. Brown. The Compensation Committee also authorized a restricted stockapproved the grant of an equity award to be granted to Mr. O’NeilBrown on May 19, 2011,March 4, 2014, consisting of the number of RSUs equal to the number of shares of Quanta’s common stockCommon Stock having a fair market value as(based on the average of the closeclosing prices of business on suchQuanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant) equal to $250,000.$150,000, which was forfeited upon the termination of Mr. Brown’s employment on September 15, 2014.

Annual Incentive Plan

After an evaluation of Quanta’s achievement of the operating income financial performance goal during the 2011 performance year,Effective September 19, 2014, Quanta appointed Mr. Kemps as Executive Vice President and General Counsel. In connection with his appointment, the Compensation Committee awardedapproved an annual base salary of $450,000, an AIP Target Incentive of 90% of his base salary rate, and a Long-Term Target Incentive in the following cash incentives to the NEOs under the annual incentive plan:

Named Executive Officer

  Base Salary   AIP  Target
Incentive
  Percent Payout
of AIP
Performance Goal
  Incentive
Award  Earned
 

Mr. Colson

  $874,100     100  34 $297,194  

Mr. O’Neil

  $750,000     100  34 $255,000  

Mr. Haddox

  $524,460     90  34 $160,485  

Mr. Trawick

  $480,755     90  34 $147,111  

Mr. Austin

  $475,000     90  34 $145,350  

Mr. Jensen

  $325,000     90  34 $99,450  

Supplemental Incentive Plan

amount of $550,000 for Mr. Kemps. The Compensation Committee also approved awards under the supplementalgrant of an equity award to Mr. Kemps on September 19, 2014, consisting of the number of RSUs equal to the number of shares of Quanta’s Common Stock having a fair market value (based on the average of the closing prices of Quanta’s Common Stock for the twenty consecutive trading days immediately preceding the date of grant) equal to $300,000, which shall vest in equal annual installments over a 3-year period following the date of grant.

Executive Separation Matters

Pursuant to a severance agreement between Quanta and Mr. Brown, our then Vice President and General Counsel, effective as of September 15, 2014, Quanta made a lump-sum payment to Mr. Brown in the amount of $292,500, less applicable taxes, representing 9-months’ salary, in consideration for his execution of a release of all claims against Quanta. Mr. Brown also remained eligible to receive a pro rata amount of the cash bonus, if any, that would be payable to him in respect of the annual incentive plan for Quanta’s levelthe 2014 performance year. As discussed in “Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Annual Incentive Plan,” Mr. Brown was awarded a pro rata amount of achievement$173,300 under the annual incentive plan. The Company determined that the terms of the ROE Componentseverance agreement were warranted in light of Mr. Brown’s contributions during 2014 and his execution of the level of achievement with respect to each NEO’s Strategic Goal Component:release.

ROE Component

 

Named Executive Officer

  SIP Target Incentive
(ROE Component)
   Percent Payout of
SIP Performance Goal
(ROE Component)
  Incentive
Award  Earned(a)
 

Mr. Colson

  $900,000     55 $495,000  

Mr. O’Neil

  $650,000     55 $357,500  

Mr. Haddox

  $250,000     55 $137,500  

Mr. Trawick

  $225,000     55 $123,750  

Mr. Austin

  $250,000     55 $137,500  

Mr. Jensen

  $150,000     55 $82,500  

 

(a)As indicated inElements of Executive Compensation — Supplemental Incentive Plan Awards above, the supplemental incentive plan applies a multiplier to the dollar value of restricted stock awards issued in lieu of cash awards thereunder to adjust restricted stock awards to their cash equivalent. The supplemental incentive plan awards to NEOs for the 2011 performance year were paid in restricted stock, and Quanta issued shares of restricted stock in satisfaction of these supplemental incentive awards with an aggregate grant date fair value (based on the closing price of Quanta’s common stock on the date of grant) of 110% of the incentive award earned.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

46


Strategic Goal ComponentCompensation Discussion & Analysis

 

Named
Executive
Officer

  SIP Target
Incentive
(Strategic Goal
Component)
   

2011 Strategic Goals

  Percent
Achievement
of Strategic
Goals
  Incentive
Award
Earned(a)
 

Mr. Colson

  $900,000    

1.      Increasing foreign sourced revenues by securing new contracts exceeding a specified dollar amount for work outside North America

 

2.      Developing a plan to increase recurring revenue streams by investing in assets within Quanta’s general line of business

 

3.      Securing a new senior credit facility of a specified dollar amount

 

4.      Successfully managing strategic resource planning to efficiently execute on a record level of transmission projects

 

5.      Developing financial and operational metrics as part of the strategic planning process to drive corporate behavior

 

6.      Continuing to implement and monitor Quanta’s executive development plan

   80 $720,000  

Mr. O’Neil

  $650,000    

1.      Outperforming acquisition evaluation economics on selected acquisition transactions by delivering a specified dollar amount of operating income

 

2.      Achieving specified consolidated safety improvement goals

 

3.      Establishing a safety leadership program

 

4.      Generating a specified dollar amount of renewable energy projects

 

5.      Developing a specified dollar amount of project backlog through strategic project investments

   67 $433,550  

Mr. Haddox

  $250,000    

1.      Securing a new senior credit facility of a specified dollar amount

 

2.      Successfully implementing new financial software at two operating units within specified deadlines

 

3.      Arranging for a new Canadian banking partner to assist in Canadian financial operations and to participate in the credit facility with a specified minimum commitment

 

4.      Continuing to implement and monitor Quanta’s succession planning process and executive development plan

 

5.      Developing a robust methodology for evaluating potential acquisitions and communicating such evaluations to the Board

   90 $225,000  

Named
Executive
Officer

  SIP Target
Incentive
(Strategic Goal
Component)
   

2011 Strategic Goals

  Percent
Achievement
of Strategic
Goals
  Incentive
Award
Earned(a)
 

Mr. Trawick

  $225,000    

1.      Attaining a specified operating income margin in certain operating units in Quanta’s Telecommunications Division

 

2.      Achieving specified safety improvement goals for Quanta’s Telecommunications Division

 

3.      Obtaining a specified dollar amount of stimulus funded projects

 

4.      Implementing a safety leadership program by training the presidents of all operating units in Quanta’s Telecommunications Division

 

5.      Generating a specified dollar amount of renewable energy projects

 

6.      Obtaining renewal pricing with specified minimum dollar amounts on new contracts at a specified operating unit within Quanta’s Telecommunications Division

   50 $112,500  

Mr. Austin

  $250,000    

1.      Attaining a specified dollar amount of revenues and operating income in Quanta’s Electric Power Division

 

2.      Attaining a specified dollar amount of revenues and operating income in Quanta’s Natural Gas and Pipeline Division

 

3.      Optimizing operating margins at a specified operating unit through restructuring as evidenced by a written plan and achieving annualized savings of a specified dollar amount

 

4.      Outperforming acquisition evaluation economics on selected acquisition transactions by delivering a specified dollar amount of operating income

 

5.      Achieving specified safety improvement goals for Quanta’s Electric Power Division and Natural Gas and Pipeline Division

 

6.      Implementing a safety leadership program by training the presidents of all operating units in Quanta’s Electric Power Division and Natural Gas and Pipeline Division

   67 $167,500  

Named
Executive
Officer

  SIP Target
Incentive
(Strategic Goal
Component)
   

2011 Strategic Goals

  Percent
Achievement
of Strategic
Goals
  Incentive
Award
Earned(a)
 

Mr. Jensen

  $150,000    

1.      Securing a new senior credit facility of a specified dollar amount

 

2.      Successfully implementing new financial software at two operating units within specified deadlines

 

3.      Developing a methodology for repeatable and sustainable implementation of new financial software at operating units

 

4.      Continuing to develop executive managerial and communications skills, including with external constituencies

 

5.      Developing and managing an annual protocol for risk management, budget and public reporting initiatives

 

6.      Enhancing several software systems to optimize efficient dissemination of financial information

   80 $120,000  

 

(a)As indicated inElements of Executive Compensation — Supplemental Incentive Plan Awards above, the supplemental incentive plan applies a multiplier to the dollar value of restricted stock awards issued in lieu of cash awards thereunder to adjust restricted stock awards to their cash equivalent. The supplemental incentive plan awards to NEOs for the 2011 performance year were paid in restricted stock, and Quanta issued shares of restricted stock in satisfaction of these supplemental incentive awards with an aggregate grant date fair value (based on the closing price of Quanta’s common stock on the date of grant) of 110% of the incentive award earned.

Discretionary Incentive PlanChanges to 2015 Executive Compensation

The Compensation Committee believed it was appropriate to provide awards to Messrs. Austin and Jensen under the discretionary incentive plan to recognize extraordinary performance. The Compensation Committee acknowledged Mr. Austin’s contributionsQuanta’s executive compensation program will remain substantially similar in capturing and executing on significant growth in revenues and backlog in the electric power division and was pleased with his efforts toward reaching especially challenging individual strategic goals for 2011. The Compensation Committee acknowledged Mr. Jensen’s exceptional leadership and assumption of additional responsibilities throughout the year with respect to oversight of accounting, information technology, treasury and related functions. For the 2011 performance year,2015; however, the Compensation Committee approved a $250,000 award of restricted stockthe following modifications to Mr. Austinour 2015 annual and a $100,000 award of restricted stock to Mr. Jensen under the discretionarylong-term incentive plan. The Compensation Committee doesnot apply a risk and liquidity premium multiplier to restricted stock awards under the discretionary incentive plan.plans.

Conclusion

   
  20142015
AIP Company Performance Component Exemplary Award

An exemplary award is payable in time-vested RSUs for adjusted organic EPS growth exceeding 158% of the goal.

 

An exemplary award cannot exceed an incremental amount equal to200% of the target incentive amount.

An exemplary award is payable in time-vested RSUs for adjusted organic EPS growth exceeding 158% of the goal.

 

An exemplary award cannot exceed an incremental amount equal to100% of the target incentive amount.

Long-Term Target Incentive StructureFor all NEOs: (i)50% of the target amount is awarded in performance units and (ii)50% of the target amount is awarded in time-vested RSUs.

For our Chief Executive Officer: (i)53% of the target amount is awarded in performance units and (ii)47% of the target amount is awarded in time-vested RSUs.

 

For all other NEOs: (i)50% of the target amount is awarded in performance units and (ii)50% of the target amount is awarded in time-vested RSUs.

As indicated above, the Compensation Committee desires to provide target total direct compensation for each NEO within +/-15% of the median for comparable officers in our peer group. For 2011, the actual total direct compensation of Messrs. O’Neil, Haddox, Trawick, Austin and Jensen was approximately 59%, 28%, 32%, 30% and 40%, respectively,below the median target total direct compensation for comparable positions within our peer group. Mr. Colson’s compensation was not benchmarked in 2011 due to his transition to the Executive Chairman role, as Executive Chairman responsibilities vary widely by organization, which significantly impacts compensation and results in a high degree of variability in benchmarking data. The Compensation Committee believes that the actual total direct compensation for 2011 for these NEOs is appropriate considering that Quanta did not fully achieve its financial performance goals and the individuals did not fully achieve their individual strategic goals for the 2011 performance year.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

We expect all of our directors and executive officers to display confidence in us by ownership, after five years of service as a director or executive officer, of a significant amount of our stock. Our Governance and Nominating Committee has established minimum stock ownership guidelines for whichexecutive officers, with the amountsgoal of promoting equity ownership and aligning our executive officers’ interests with our stockholders. The ownership guidelines are calculated as follows:currently established at the following minimum levels:

 

for directors, the director’s annual cash retainer (excluding the supplemental annual cash retainer paid for serving as lead independent director or chairman of a committee of the Board) is multiplied by four (4) times; and

for our executive officers, including our NEOs, the executive officer’s base salary is multiplied by the appropriate multiple as follows:

Executive Chairman — 5x

Chief Executive Officer — 5x

Chief Financial Officer — 4x

Operating Division President — 3x

Other Executive Officer — 1x

Position

Guideline

Chief Executive Officer

    5 x base salary      

Chief Operating Officer

    4 x base salary      

Chief Financial Officer

    3 x base salary      

General Counsel

    3 x base salary      

Other Executive Officers

    1 x base salary      

The product obtained as described above is divided by the average closing price of Quanta Common Stock during the immediately preceding 12 months as reported by the NYSE to calculate the number of shares to be held by each director or executive officer under the guidelines. For purposes of determining compliance with the guidelines, the number of shares of Quanta’s common stockCommon Stock that each director and executive officeran individual is expected to own is calculated as of December 31st of each year, using the individual’s then current base salary or annual cash retainer, as applicable, and the stock ownership multiple applicable to such director or executive officer as of such date. Once calculated, the number of shares that a director or executive officeran individual is expected to own remains in effect, regardless of intervening compensation increases, promotions or stock price fluctuations, until January 1December 31st of the following year, at which time a new calculation and compliance assessment will be made. Once an individual is determined to be in compliance with the ownership guidelines as of the annual assessment date, the individual is deemed to remain in compliance, regardless of any subsequent stock price fluctuations, as long as he maintains ownership of at least the same number of shares required as of the annual assessment date at which he was previously compliant.

Each director and executive officer is expected to attain the applicable stock ownership under the guidelines within five years following the later of (i) the first annual assessment with respect to such individual or (ii) the first annual

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

47


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

compliance assessment at which a higher stock ownership multiple becomes applicable to such individual (due to a promotion or otherwise). The five-year phase-in period is intended to permit gradual accumulation of the incremental ownership associated with a new or higher multiple, and ratable forward progress is expected during the five-year period. Under the stock ownership guidelines, shares held by a person or entity related to or controlled by the director or executive officer, as well as unvested shares of restricted stock or unvested RSUs held by a director oran executive officer, and vested RSUs deposited into a deferred compensation plan or arrangement are included in the calculation of the amount of such director’s or executive officer’sindividual’s ownership.

As of December 31, 2011,2014, all of our directors and NEOsexecutive officers were in compliance with the requirements of our stock ownership guidelines.guidelines, either by exceeding the prescribed ownership level or being expected to exceed the prescribed ownership level within five years of its applicability.

Pledging, Hedging and Other Transactions in Quanta Securities

Effective as of April 1, 2014, the Board approved an amended and restated Quanta Services, Inc. Insider Trading Policy, which (among other things) prohibits directors and executive officers of Quanta from pledging Quanta securities as collateral for a loan unless the individual provides reasonable assurance of the financial capacity to repay the loan without resorting to the pledged securities and obtains pre-clearance of the pledge by a management committee or the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board. Transactions by directors and executive officers in Quanta’s securities involving short sales, puts, calls or other derivative securities, on an exchange or in any other organized market, are prohibited. Directors and executive officers are also prohibited from entering into hedging, monetization transactions or similar arrangements involving Quanta securities, such as prepaid variable forwards, forward sale contracts, equity swaps, collars, zero-cost collars and other derivative transactions. We believe these prohibitions ensure that levels of stock ownership in accordance with our stock ownership guidelines are effective in aligning each individual’s interests with those of our stockholders.

Employment Agreements

We have entered intoQuanta is (or was, in the case of one former executive) a party to an employment agreement with each of our NEOs. Under the terms of our employment agreements, each of the NEOsexecutive is entitled to payments and benefits upon the occurrence of specified events, including termination of employment or change in control of Quanta. The specific terms of these arrangements, as well as an estimate of the compensation that would have been payable had they been triggered as of fiscal year-end, are described below in the section entitledExecutive Compensation – Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control.” In the case of each employment agreement, the terms of these arrangements were set through the course of arms-length negotiations with each of the NEOs. The termination of employment provisions of the employment agreements provide these individuals with a fixed amount of compensation upon termination as an inducement to offset the potential risk of leaving their prior employer or foregoing other

opportunities in order to join or maintain employment with us, as applicable. At the time of entering into these agreements, the Compensation Committee considered our aggregate potential obligations in the context of the desirability of hiring or maintaining the employment of the individual, as applicable, and the expected compensation upon joining or maintaining employment with us, as applicable.

In connection with Mr. Colson’s transition to the role of Executive Chairman and the promotion of Mr. O’Neil to President and Chief Executive Officer, as described above in“Executive Compensation Decisions for the 2011 Performance Year — Executive Succession Matters,” the Compensation Committee determined the employment terms reflected in new employment agreements with Messrs. Colson and O’Neil upon assuming their new roles. The employment agreements entered into during 2011 with Messrs. Colson and O’Neil and the employment agreement entered into during 2010 with Mr. Austinour NEOs do not contain excise tax gross-up provisions,provisions. In connection with the appointment of Mr. Morris as Executive Vice President – Corporate Development, the appointment of Mr. Brown as Vice President and General Counsel, and the appointment of Mr. Kemps as Executive Vice President and General Counsel in 2014, the Compensation Committee no longer offered this benefit when Quantaapproved the terms reflected in their employment agreements, as described in “Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Executive Appointment Matters.

Indemnification Agreements

We have entered into these agreements. Under the employmentindemnification agreements in effect during 2011 with our directors and executive officers, in part to enable us to attract and retain qualified directors and executive officers. These agreements require us, among

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

48


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

other NEOs, namely Messrs. Haddox, Trawickthings, to indemnify such persons against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers, to advance their expenses for proceedings for which they may be indemnified, and Jensen, if benefits to cover such person under any directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy that we may maintain from time to time. These agreements are intended to provide indemnification rights to the fullest extent permitted under applicable Delaware law and are in addition to any other rights our directors and executive officers may have under our Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws and applicable law.

Risk Considerations in our Compensation Program

The Compensation Committee has discussed the concept of risk as it relates to our compensation program for 2014, and the Compensation Committee does not believe our compensation program encourages excessive or inappropriate risk taking for the following reasons:

The Compensation Committee structures executive compensation at the senior leadership level to consist of both fixed and variable compensation. The fixed or base salary portion of compensation is typically set at market levels and is designed to provide a steady income regardless of Quanta’s stock price performance so that senior leadership do not feel pressured to focus exclusively on stock price performance to the detriment of other important business metrics. The variable portions of compensation (described in detail above) are generally designed to reward both short-term and long-term corporate and individual performance as measured under several performance metrics and to provide long-term bonuses not tied to company performance or the achievement of individual goals. Equity-based awards under our long-term incentive plan vest either at the end of the 3-year performance period or over three years in equal annual installments, which the Compensation Committee believes encourages senior leadership to focus on sustained stock appreciation and promotes retention. The Compensation Committee believes that these variable elements of compensation are a sufficient percentage (generally greater than 50%) of overall compensation to motivate senior leadership to produce superior short-term and long-term corporate results, while the fixed element is also sufficiently high that they are not encouraged to take unnecessary or excessive risks in doing so.

The Board has adopted stock ownership guidelines for our executive officers, which the Compensation Committee believes provide a considerable incentive for management to consider Quanta’s long-term interests because a meaningful portion of their personal investment portfolio consists of Quanta Common Stock.

The Board has adopted a prohibition on hedging the economic risk of ownership of Quanta Common Stock applicable NEOs become entitledto our executive officers, which reinforces the alignment of our management’s long-term interests with those of our stockholders.

The Compensation Committee structures compensation at the corporate management and operating unit management levels to consist of both fixed and variable compensation. The fixed or base salary portion of compensation is typically set at market levels. The variable portions of compensation are subjectgenerally designed to excise taxesreward both short-term and long-term performance. With respect to corporate management, our annual incentive plan awards are based on the achievement of a certain annual company financial performance target and specified individual performance objectives, and our stock incentive plan awards are based on the achievement by the participant’s department of specific key performance indicators and achievement by the participant of specific key behaviors, which include entrepreneurship, teamwork, innovation, proactiveness and ownership. With respect to operating unit management, our annual incentive plan awards are based on the achievement by the operating unit of an annual operating income goal, and our stock incentive plan awards are based on the achievement

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

49


Compensation Discussion & Analysis

of an annual ROIC performance target and satisfaction of annual safety goals and talent development goals. Equity-based awards under our stock incentive plans for corporate management and operating unit management generally vest in three equal installments, which the Compensation Committee believes encourages plan participants to focus on sustained stock appreciation and promotes retention of key employees. The Compensation Committee believes these elements of compensation achieve objectives similar to those under our senior leadership incentive plans

The Compensation Committee believes the financial performance measures for determining payouts under Section 4999our incentive plans and the individual and departmental objectives approved for plan participants are aligned with Quanta’s short-term and long-term operating and strategic plans, as applicable, and are designed to achieve a proper risk/reward balance without encouraging unnecessary or excessive risk taking.

Awards are capped under our incentive plans, which the Compensation Committee believes mitigates excessive risk taking. Therefore, even if Quanta or an operating unit, as applicable, and the plan participant dramatically exceed their respective performance goals, awards are limited.

Quanta has strict internal controls over the measurement and calculation of the Internal Revenueperformance goals under our incentive plans, which are designed to keep it from being susceptible to manipulation by any employee. In addition, all of our employees are required to comply with our Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”), thenEthics and Business Conduct, which covers, among other things, accuracy of books and records.

The Compensation Committee believes that the NEOs generally will be entitledfinancial performance measures incorporated in our senior leadership, corporate management and operating unit management incentive plans and extended exposure to stock price performance through equity-based compensation achieve an additional paymentappropriate balance and discourage excessive risk taking.

Quanta has a “clawback” policy under each of its incentive plans that allows us to recover certain incentive compensation in an amount equal to the excise tax imposed plus any federal, state and local income taxes and additional excise taxes attributable to such payment.event of a misstatement of earnings.

Impact of Regulatory Requirements on our Executive Compensation Decisions

The Compensation Committee considers accounting and tax implications of its compensation decisions as one factor among many. Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits a company’s ability to deduct compensation paid in excess of $1 million during any fiscal year to each of certain executive officers unless the compensation is “performance-based” as defined under federal tax laws. To the extent possible, the Compensation Committee structures compensation and awards to preserve the federal income tax deductibility of the compensation payable to our NEOs. The Compensation Committee has in the most recent year and may in the future choose however, to provide compensation that may not be deductible if it believes that such payments are appropriate to ensure that our NEOs receive total compensation that is competitive with our peer group or reflects superior performance.

2011Conclusion

We believe our total executive compensation program is designed to pay for performance. It aligns the interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders and provides executive officers with the necessary motivation to maximize the long-term operational and financial performance of Quanta, while using sound financial controls and high standards of integrity. We also believe that total compensation for each executive officer should be, and is, commensurate with the execution of specified short- and long-term operational, financial and strategic objectives. We believe that the quality of our executive compensation program will continue to be reflected in positive long-term operational, financial and stock-price performance.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

50


Executive Compensation

2014 Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth the compensation paid or accrued by Quanta in the last three fiscal years to our NEOs:

 

Name and Principal Position

 Year  Salary
($)
  Bonus
($)
  Stock
Awards
(1)
($)
  Option
Awards
($)
  Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation(2)
($)
  Change in
Pension
Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)
  All Other
Compensation(3)
($)
  Total
($)
 

John R. Colson(4)

  2011    867,734    —      1,059,296    —      297,194    —      30,641    2,254,865  

Executive Chairman

  2010    844,482    —      1,435,496    —      466,752    —      29,856    2,776,586  
  2009    824,006    —      2,026,165    —      357,760    —      75,365    3,283,296  

James F. O’Neil III(5)

  2011    637,846    —      561,762    —      255,000    —      32,619    1,487,227  

President and

Chief Executive Officer

  2010    431,598    —      398,746    —      240,240    —      31,361    1,101,945  
  2009    411,994    —      494,303    —      178,880    —      29,062    1,114,239  

James H. Haddox

  2011    520,641    —      294,240    —      160,485    —      30,807    1,006,173  

Chief Financial Officer

  2010    506,688    —      404,255    —      252,046    —      30,156    1,193,145  
  2009    494,400    —      586,306    —      193,190    —      26,726    1,300,622  

Kenneth W. Trawick

  2011    477,254    —      240,066    —      147,111    —      30,600    895,031  

President — Telecommunications

and Renewables Division

  2010    464,466    —      321,747    —      231,042    —      30,051    1,047,306  
  2009    453,206    —      489,180    —      177,091    —      26,752    1,146,229  

Earl C. Austin, Jr.(6)

  2011    458,250    —      246,410    —      145,350    —      16,087    866,097  

President — Electric Power Division and Natural Gas & Pipeline Division

         
         

Derrick A. Jensen(6)

  2011    311,088    —      257,165    —      99,450    —      15,793    683,496  

Senior Vice President — Finance and Administration and CAO

         

Name and Principal Position

Year Salary
($)
 Stock Awards Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation(4)
($)
 Change in
Pension
Value and
NQDC
Earnings(5)

($)
 All
Other

Compen-
sation(6)

($)
 Total(7)
($)
 
Performance
Units(1)

($)
 

 

Restricted
Stock &
RSUs(2)
($)

 Total(3)
($)
 

James F. O’Neil III

 2014   987,500   1,962,534   6,569,355   8,531,889(13)  775,885      66,905   10,362,179  

President and Chief Executive

 2013   918,750      3,014,556   3,014,556   1,748,000      34,662   5,715,968  

Officer

 2012   806,250      870,147   870,147   1,600,500      33,979   3,310,876  

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.(8)

 2014   781,250   671,400   2,711,414   3,382,814(13)  564,280      59,079   4,787,423  

Chief Operating Officer

 2013   693,750      1,432,242   1,432,242   1,334,000      24,250   3,484,242  
 2012   531,250      585,491   585,491   1,067,000      16,842   2,200,583  

Derrick A. Jensen(9)

 2014   537,500   516,475   1,789,560   2,306,035(13)  384,093      47,390   3,275,018  

Chief Financial Officer

 2013   480,000      711,771   711,771   828,000      32,142   2,051,913  
 2012   387,257      522,761   522,761   733,320      16,549   1,659,887  

Jesse. E. Morris(10)

 2014   429,931   180,775   693,376   874,151   273,322         1,577,404  

Executive Vice President – Corporate

Development

Steven J. Kemps(11)

 2014   126,346   189,516   492,295   681,811   79,813      16,409   904,379  

Executive Vice President and

General Counsel

Eric B. Brown(12)

 2014   221,750   154,925   319,307   474,232   173,300      293,935   1,163,217  

Former Vice President and

General Counsel

 

(1)

The amounts shown for 2011 under “Stock Awards” reflect the aggregate grant date fair value (based on the closing price of Quanta’s common stockCommon Stock on the date of grant) of performance units granted during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014, and the probable outcome of the associated performance conditions, calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The value ultimately realized by the NEO upon actual vesting of the awards may or may not be equal to this determined value. Performance units generally vest upon completion of a 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016, with the amount that vests based on the achievement of certain company financial targets and strategic initiatives. The final amount of earned performance units can range from 0% to a maximum of 200% (assuming the highest level of performance) of the initial target amount of unearned performance units granted, and upon settlement shares of Common Stock are issued for each earned performance unit. The reported value of the contingent performance awards is computed based on the grant date estimate of compensation cost to be recognized over the 3-year performance period, which was 100% or the target amount. The value of the contingent performance awards on the grant date if the highest level of performance conditions were to be achieved would be as follows: for Mr. O’Neil, $3,925,068; for Mr. Austin, $1,342,800; for Mr. Jensen, $1,032,950; for Mr. Morris, $361,550; and for Mr. Kemps, $379,032. The performance units are described in further detail in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.” Assumptions used in the valuations are discussed in Note 12 to the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014 in its Annual Report on Form 10-K. Performance unit award agreements give holders the right to receive dividend equivalent payments as and when dividends are paid on Common Stock.

(2)

The amounts shown reflect the aggregate grant date fair value (based on the closing price of Quanta’s Common Stock on the date of grant) of restricted stock or RSUs granted, during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The value ultimately realized by the NEO upon the actual vesting of the award(s)awards may or may not be equal to this determined value. The table does not include information regarding equity-based awards related to 2011 performanceSuch amounts for 2014 reflect RSUs that were granted during 2014 to NEOs under both Quanta’s 2013 supplemental incentive plan in respect of the 2013 performance year,and Quanta’s 2014 long-term incentive plan in respect of the 3-year performance

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

51


Executive Compensation

period ending December 31, 2016. In addition, such amounts for 2014 reflect RSUs granted in March 2012, which awards will be reflected2014 to certain NEOs as payment for special transaction bonuses related to the sale of HEP in the 2012 Summary Compensation Table.2013. For a discussionsummary of these equity-basedthe equity awards for Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen excluding those in respect of the 2013 performance period, please read “Compensation Discussion and Analysis —see the Supplemental Table for 2014 Executive Compensation Decisions forwithin footnote (13) below. RSU awards under the 2011 Performance Year.” Shares of restricted stock2013 supplemental incentive plan and the 2014 long-term incentive plan vest over three years in equal annual installments commencing onin the applicable vestingyear following the grant date foryear in the quarter corresponding to the quarter in which the award is made, assuming the NEO continues to meet the requirements for vesting. Dividends are paid on restricted stockRSU awards associated with the special transaction bonuses vest in three equal installments commencing in March 2014, assuming the NEO continues to meet the requirements for vesting. For further discussion of these equity-based awards, please read “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan” and “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – ExecutiveCompensation Decisions for 2014 – Transaction Bonuses.” RSU award agreements give holders the right to receive dividend equivalent payments as and when dividends are paid on Common Stock.

 

(2)(3)Amounts

The amounts shown under “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation”reflect the total of the previous two columns – “Performance Units” and “Restricted Stock & RSUs.”

(4)

The amounts shown represent the dollar value of cash incentives earned under ourQuanta’s annual incentive plan.plan for the applicable performance year. For further details regarding thisthe 2014 annual incentive plan, see“Compensation Discussion and& Analysis — Elements of Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Annual Incentive Plan”Plan.” above. The cash incentives reflected in the table were earned during the 2011, 20102014, 2013 and 20092012 performance years as indicated, andbut were approved by the Compensation Committee and paid in March of 2012, 20112015, 2014 and 2010,2013, respectively.

(3)The amounts reflected under “All Other Compensation” for fiscal 2011 are identified in the All Other Compensation Table below.

(4)Effective May 19, 2011, John R. Colson was appointed Executive Chairman. Prior to this appointment, he served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.

 

(5)Effective May 19, 2011, James F. O’Neil III was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer. Prior

NQDC refers to this appointment, he served as President and Chief Operating Officer.nonqualified deferred compensation.

 

(6)Compensation information for 2009 and 2010 is not

The amounts reflected for Messrs. Austin or Jensen because they were not named executive officers for those years.fiscal year 2014 are identified in the 2014 All Other Compensation Table below.

20112014 All Other Compensation Table

The following table describes each component of the “All Other Compensation” column in the Summary Compensation Table for fiscal 2011:

 

   401(k) Matching
Contribution(a)
($)
   Financial
Planning
Reimbursement(b)
($)
   Incremental
Company-
Paid
Benefits(c)
($)
   Total(d)
($)
 

John R. Colson

   11,025     16,548     3,068     30,641  

James F. O’Neil III

   11,025     16,532     5,062     32,619  

James H. Haddox

   11,025     16,714     3,068     30,807  

Kenneth W. Trawick

   11,025     16,507     3,068     30,600  

Earl C. Austin, Jr.

   11,025          5,062     16,087  

Derrick A. Jensen

   10,731          5,062     15,793  
 401(k)
Matching
  Contribution(a)  
($)
 Financial
Planning
  Reimbursement(b)  
($)
 Corporate
Housing /
  Relocation(c)  

($)
 Company
Contributions to
  NQDC Plan(d)  

($)
     Other(e)    
($)
     Total(f)    
($)
 

James F. O’Neil III

 11,700      20,379   33,750   1,076   66,905  

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

 11,700      20,379   27,000      59,079  

Derrick A. Jensen

 11,700   17,127      18,563      47,390  

Jesse E. Morris

                  

Steven J. Kemps

       16,409         16,409  

Eric B. Brown

             293,935   293,935  

 

 (a)

Represents Quanta’s matching contributions to the NEO’s 401(k) account.

 

 (b)

Represents Quanta’s reimbursement of the NEO’s financial planning expenses under our executive financial counseling program.

 

 (c)

Represents the company-paid portionfollowing perquisites for 2014: (i) for Messrs. O’Neil and Austin, occasional use of the executive’s medical, dentala corporate apartment and vision insurance premiums that exceeds the company-paid portion(ii) for Mr. Kemps, as part of medical, dental,his relocation package, reimbursement for rental of a corporate apartment and vision insurance premiums for corporate employees generally.commuting expenses.

 

 (d)

Represents Quanta’s matching contributions under the nonqualified deferred compensation plan for certain key employees that would have been allocated to the NEO’s 401(k) plan account, but for applicable limits under the Internal Revenue Code. For additional information on these contributions and other potential contributions by Quanta, see “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Deferred Compensation Plan.”

(e)

Represents the following perquisites for 2014: (i) for Mr. O’Neil, reimbursement for a physical examination under our executive physical program and (ii) for Mr. Brown, reimbursement for a physical examination under our executive physical program and a lump-sum payment of $292,500 (representing 9 months’ salary) as a severance payment upon the termination of his employment, as further described in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Executive Separation Matters.”

(f)

When Quanta’s corporate aircraft is flying to a destination for a business purpose, only the direct variable costs associated with the additional passenger are included in determining the aggregate incremental cost. Spouses of NEOs occasionally fly on the corporate aircraft as additional passengers on business flights. In those cases, there is no incremental cost to Quanta, and as a result, no amount is reflected in the table.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

52


Executive Compensation

(7)

The amounts shown reflect the sum of the following columns: “Salary,” Stock Awards – Total,” “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” and “All Other Compensation.” For a summary of the total compensation excluding equity awards with respect to the 2013 performance year, please see the Supplemental Table for 2014 Executive Compensation within footnote (13) below.

(8)

Effective January 1, 2013, Mr. Austin was appointed Chief Operating Officer. Prior to this appointment, he served as President – Electric Power Division and Natural Gas & Pipeline Division.

(9)

Effective May 17, 2012, Mr. Jensen was appointed Chief Financial Officer. Prior to this appointment, he served as Senior Vice President – Finance, Administration and Chief Accounting Officer.

(10)

Effective January 6, 2014, Mr. Morris was appointed as Executive Vice President – Corporate Development. Prior to his appointment, he was not an employee of Quanta.

(11)

Effective September 19, 2014, Mr. Kemps was appointed as Executive Vice President and General Counsel. Prior to his appointment, he was not an employee of Quanta.

(12)

Effective February 20, 2014, Mr. Brown was appointed as Vice President and General Counsel. Prior to his appointment, he was not an employee of Quanta. Due to the termination of Mr. Brown’s employment, effective as of September 15, 2014, all unvested equity-based awards to Mr. Brown were forfeited, which included the entire amount reflected under the “Stock Awards – Total” column for Mr. Brown. Additionally, pursuant to Mr. Brown’s severance agreement, effective as of September 15, 2014, and as more fully described above in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Executive Separation Matters,” he remained eligible to receive a pro rata portion of the amount payable to him under the 2014 annual incentive plan. Further details regarding the payouts to Mr. Brown under the 2014 annual incentive plan are discussed under “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Annual Incentive Plan.” The cash amount earned by Mr. Brown under the 2014 annual incentive plan is reflected under the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column.

(13)

In March 2014, Quanta adopted an entirely new plan design for granting long-term equity awards (the 2014 long-term incentive plan), which prospectively replaced the supplemental incentive plan for the 2013 performance year. Under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan and in accordance with past practice, Quanta granted RSUs to Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen in March 2014 with respect to their performance during the2013 performance year (granted following publication of the 2013 audited financial statements). Under the new 2014 long-term incentive plan, Quanta granted RSUs and performance units to Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen in March 2014 with vesting and payouts to occur based on continued employment and, with respect to performance units, performance infuture years (granted at the beginning of a 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016). See “Changes to Executive Compensation Implemented for 2014 – Recognition of Transitional Disclosure Implications Associated with Changes Implemented.” The grant date fair value of all of these awards is included in the “Stock Awards” columns.

Recognizing that the required presentation in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table reflects equity-based awards granted to Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen during 2014 for both the 2013 performance year and for 2014, including performance units based on the 3-year performance period ending 2016, Quanta has provided the following Supplemental Table for 2014 Executive Compensation, which excludes (i) awards in respect of the 2013 performance year under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan and (ii) RSUs granted as payment for the special transaction bonus related to the sale of HEP in the 2013 performance year.

Supplemental Table for 2014 Executive Compensation

     Stock Awards       
   Year      Salary   
($)
   Performance  
Units
($)
      RSUs     
($)
      Total     
($)
 Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
  Compensation  
($)
   All Other  
Compen-
sation

($)
      Total     
($)
 

James F. O’Neil III

 2014   987,500   1,962,534   1,962,534   3,925,068    775,885    66,905    5,755,358   

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

 2014   781,250   671,400   671,400   1,342,800    564,280    59,079    2,747,409   

Derrick A. Jensen

 2014   537,500   516,475   516,475   1,032,950    384,093    47,390    2,001,933   

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

53


Executive Compensation

20112014 Grants of Plan BasedPlan-Based Awards Table

The following table sets forth information concerning annual cash incentive awards for 20112014 and restricted stockequity-based awards granted during 20112014 to each of the NEOs under Quanta’s non-equity and equity incentive plans.

 

Name

 Grant
Date
  Approval
Date
  Estimated Possible Payouts
Under Non-Equity Incentive
Plan Awards(1)
  Estimated Possible Payments
Under Equity Incentive
Plan Awards(2)
  All
Other
Stock
Awards:
Number
of
Shares
of Stock
or
Units(3)
(#)
  All
Other
Option
Awards:
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Options
(#)
  Exercise
or Base
Price of
Option
Awards
on
Grant
Date
($/sh)
  Grant
Date
Fair
Value
of
Stock
and
Option
Awards(4)
($)
 
   Threshold
($)
  Target
($)
  Maximum
($)
  Threshold
($)
  Target
($)
  Maximum
($)
     

John R. Colson

          218,525    874,100    1,748,200                              
  03/11/11    03/03/11                450,000    1,800,000    2,700,000                1,059,296  

James F. O’Neil III

          187,500    750,000    1,500,000                              
  03/11/11    03/03/11                125,000    500,000    750,000                311,755  
  05/19/11    03/23/11                            12,723            250,007  

James H. Haddox

          118,004    472,014    944,028                              
  03/11/11    03/03/11                125,000    500,000    750,000                294,240  

Kenneth W. Trawick

          108,170    432,679    865,358                              
  03/11/11    03/03/11                112,500    450,000    675,000                240,066  

Earl C. Austin, Jr.

          106,875    427,500    855,000                              
  03/11/11    03/03/11                100,000    400,000    600,000                246,410  

Derrick A. Jensen

          73,125    292,500    585,000                              
  03/11/11    03/03/11                56,250    225,000    337,500                157,162  
  04/01/11    03/23/11                            4,388            100,003  
               Estimated Possible Payments
Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards
 All
Other

Stock
Awards:
Number
of
Shares

of Stock
or Units
(#)
 Grant
Date

Fair
Value

of Stock
and
Option

Awards(5)
($)
 
          Estimated Possible Payouts
Under Non-Equity Incentive
Plan Awards(2)
 2013 SIP(3) 2014 LTIP(4) 

Name

 Grant
Date
 Approval
Date
 Incentive
Plan /
Year
 Grant
Type(1)
 Threshold
($)
Target
($)
 Maximum
($)
 Threshold
($)
 Target
($)
 Maximum
($)
 Threshold
(#)
 Target
(#)
 Maximum
(#)
 

O’Neil

        2014 AIP 1,100,000   3,630,000                          
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2013 SIPRSU       350,000   2,800,000   4,200,000               4,193,641  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPPU                13,837   55,345   110,690      1,962,534  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPRSU                         55,345(6)  1,962,534  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2013(7)RSU                         11,652(7)  413,180  

Austin

      2014 AIP 800,000   2,640,000                          
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2013 SIPRSU       125,000   1,000,000   1,500,000               1,523,539  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPPU                4,734   18,934   37,868      671,400  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPRSU                         18,934(6)  671,400  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2013(7)RSU                         14,565(7)  516,475  

Jensen

      2014 AIP 550,000   1,815,000                          
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2013 SIPRSU       87,500   700,000   1,050,000               1,066,495  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPPU                3,642   14,565   29,130      516,475  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPRSU                         14,565(6)  516,475  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2013(7)RSU                         5,826(7)  206,590  

Morris

      2014 AIP 387,499   1,278,747                          
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPPU                1,275   5,098   10,196      180,775  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPRSU                         5,098(6)  180,775  
 01/22/14   01/22/14  2014(8)RSU                         15,949(8)  512,601  

Kemps

      2014 AIP 114,288   377,150                          
 12/03/14   12/03/14  2014 LTIPPU                1,592   6,366   12,732      189,516  
 12/03/14   12/03/14  2014 LTIPRSU                         6,366(6)  189,516  
 09/19/14   09/10/14  2014(9)RSU                         8,181(9)  302,779  

Brown(10)

      2014 AIP 248,157   818,918                          
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPPU                1,093   4,369   8,738      154,925  
 03/12/14   03/04/14  2014 LTIPRSU                         4.369(6)  154,925  
 03/04/14   03/04/14  2014RSU                         4,584   164,382  

 

(1)

Types of awards include RSUs and performance units (PUs).

(2)

The amounts shown represent threshold, target and maximum awards that could be earned by the NEOs under the 20112014 annual incentive plan based on 20112014 base salary rates. There is no threshold award amount applicable to the 2014 annual incentive plan. The thresholdmaximum value representsincludes an exemplary award, payable in RSUs that vest over three years, which may be awarded if warranted under the lowest amount that could be earnedAIP Company Performance Component. The amounts shown for Messrs. Kemps and Morris are pro-rated based on the sliding performance/payout scale describedportion of the fiscal year during which they were employed, and the amount shown for Mr. Brown is pro-rated based on page 28, although the minimum payout is zero.terms of his severance agreement. For further details regarding this plan, see “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Annual Incentive Plan. Actual payouts under the 20112014 annual incentive plan were finally determined in March 20122015 and are reflected in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column of the 2014 Summary Compensation Table.

 

(2)(3)

The amounts shown represent the threshold, target and maximum dollar amount of RSU awards that could be granted to Messrs. O’Neil, Austin and Jensen in 2011 to2014 for the NEOs as determined pursuant to2013 performance year under the 20102013 supplemental incentive plan. The threshold value represents the lowest amount that could be earned based on the sliding performance/payout scale described on page 29,for the company performance component although the minimum payout is zero. These payoutsActual awards under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan were finally determined in March 2014 and are included in the “Stock Awards – Restricted Stock & RSUs” column of the 2014 Summary Compensation Table.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

54


Executive Compensation

(4)

The amounts shown represent the number of shares of Common Stock that could be inearned with respect to performance units granted under the form2014 long-term incentive plan. The number of cash, restricted stock or a combination thereof, providedperformance units that will become earned and vest, and the portionresulting number of shares of Common Stock to be issued, will be determined as soon as administratively practicable after completion of the incentive awarded in restricted stock is multiplied by 110% to reflect3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016, and the risk and liquidity premiumnumber of a cash award relativeshares can range from 0% to a restricted stock awardmaximum of 200% of the same dollar value, with the resulting amount divided by the closing price of Quanta’s common stock on the grant date.target number. Performance units are described in further detail under “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.”

 

(3)(5)The awards shown represent (i) in the case of Mr. O’Neil, a grant of restricted stock in connection with his promotion to CEO as authorized on March 23, 2011 and effective May 19, 2011, and (ii) in the case of Mr. Jensen, a grant of restricted stock in connection with his promotion to Senior Vice President — Finance and Administration on April 1, 2011. All of such restricted stock awards vest in equal annual installments over a three-year period (assuming continued employment), subject to the terms and conditions of the applicable restricted stock award agreements.

(4)The amounts shown reflect the aggregate grant date fair value (based on the closing price of Quanta’s common stockCommon Stock on the date of grant) of restricted stockRSUs or performance units granted during the fiscal year ended December 31, 20112014 to the NEOs, calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. With respect to the RSUs granted under the 2013 supplemental incentive plan and the 2014 long-term incentive plan, awards vest in three equal annual installments, assuming the NEO continues to meet the requirements for vesting, and the initial vesting occurred in the first quarter of 2015. With respect to the RSUs related to the special transaction bonuses, awards vest in three equal annual installments, assuming the NEO continues to meet the requirements for vesting, and the initial vesting occurred in the first quarter of 2014. With respect to the performance units granted under the 2014 long-term incentive plan, the amount represents the grant date fair value of the target award. The number of performance units that will become earned and vest, and the resulting number of shares of Common Stock to be issued, can range from 0% to a maximum of 200% of the target number. These awards are described in further detail under “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.” The value ultimately realized by the NEO upon the actual vesting of the award(s) may orRSU and performance unit awards may not be equal to this determined value. All

(6)

The amounts shown represent the number of such restricted stock awardsRSUs that were granted to all the NEOs under the 2014 long-term incentive plan. The RSUs awarded vest over three years in equal annual installments, overassuming the NEO continues to meet the requirements for vesting, and the initial vesting occurred in the first quarter of 2015. For further details regarding the 2014 long-term incentive plan and its components, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.”

(7)

The amounts shown represent awards related to special transaction bonuses paid in the form of RSUs granted to certain executives in March 2014, in recognition of the contributions of these executives in connection with the Quanta’s strategic investment in HEP, which was sold by Quanta in 2013. These RSU awards vest in three equal annual installments, assuming the NEO continues to meet the requirements for vesting, and the initial vesting occurred in the first quarter of 2014. For a three-year period (assuming continued employment), subjectdiscussion of the special transaction bonuses, please read“Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Transaction Bonuses.”

(8)

The amount shown represents an award in the form of RSUs granted in connection with Mr. Morris’ appointment as Executive Vice President – Corporate Development of Quanta in January 2014. The RSUs vest in three equal annual installments, assuming Mr. Morris continues to meet the vesting requirements, and the initial vesting occurred in the first quarter of 2015.

(9)

The amount shown represents an award in the form of RSUs granted in connection with Mr. Kemps’ appointment as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Quanta in September 2014. The RSUs vest in three equal annual installments, assuming Mr. Kemps continues to meet the vesting requirements, and the initial vesting will occur in the fourth quarter of 2015.

(10)

Due to the termstermination of Mr. Brown’s employment, effective as of September 15, 2014, all unvested equity-based awards to Mr. Brown were forfeited, which included: (i) 4,584 RSUs granted upon his initial employment; (ii) 4,369 RSUs granted in connection with the 2014 long-term incentive plan; and conditions(iii) 4,369 performance units granted in connection with the 2014 long-term incentive plan. Pursuant to Mr. Brown’s severance agreement and as more fully described in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Executive Separation Matters,” he remained eligible to receive a pro rata portion of the applicable restricted stockcash bonus award agreements. All restricted stock awards with a March 11, 2011 grant date represent awards earnedpayable to him under the 2010 supplemental2014 annual incentive plan. Further details regarding the payouts to Mr. Brown under the 2014 annual incentive plan are discussed in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Annual Incentive Plan.”

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

55


Executive Compensation

Outstanding Equity Awards at 20112014 Fiscal Year EndYear-End

The following table reflects outstanding option awards classified as exercisable or unexercisable, as well as restricted stock, RSUs and unearnedperformance units classified as unvested or unearned/unvested as of December 31, 20112014 for each of the NEOs. The table also reflects unvested restricted stock and unearned equity incentive plan awards held by each of the NEOs, assumingassumes a market value of $21.54$28.39 per share, the closing price of Quanta’s common stockCommon Stock on December 31, 2011.2014.

 Option Awards Stock Awards 

Name

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Exercisable
(#)
 Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
Unexercisable
(#)
 Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
(#)
 Option
Exercise
Price
($)
 Option
Expiration
Date
 Number
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That Have
Not Vested
(#)
 Market
Value of
Shares
or Units
of Stock
That Have
Not Vested
($)
 Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of

Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other Rights
That Have
Not Vested(1)
(#)
 Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market
or Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares, Units
Or Other
Rights

That Have
Not Vested(2)
($)
 

James F. O’Neil III

                262,918 (3)  7,464,242   55,345   1,571,245  

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

                113,332 (4)  3,217,495   18,934   537,536  

Derrick A. Jensen

                72,613 (5)  2,061,483   14,565   413,500  

Jesse E. Morris

                21,047 (6)  597,524   5,098   144,732  

Steven J. Kemps

                14,547 (7)  412,989   6,366   180,731  

Eric B. Brown(8)

                           

(1)

The amounts shown represent the number of shares of Common Stock that could be earned with respect to performance units granted under the 2014 long-term incentive plan, assuming the target number is earned and vested. The number of performance units that will become earned and vest, and the resulting number of shares of Common Stock to be issued, will be determined as soon as administratively practicable after completion of the 3-year performance period ending December 31, 2016, and the number of shares can range from 0% to a maximum of 200% of the target number. Performance units are described in further detail under“Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.”

(2)

The amounts shown represent the value of shares of Common Stock that could be earned with respect to performance units assuming the target number is earned and vested.

(3)

Includes unvested awards of restricted stock or RSUs covering (i) 109,218 shares that vested on February 28, 2015; (ii) 95,829 shares that vest on February 28, 2016; and (iii) 57,871 shares that vest on February 28, 2017.

(4)

Includes unvested awards of restricted stock or RSUs covering (i) 50,853 shares that vested on February 28, 2015; (ii) 41,845 shares that vest on February 28, 2016; and (iii) 20,634 shares that vest on February 28, 2017.

(5)

Includes unvested awards of restricted stock or RSUs covering (i) 29,834 shares that vested on February 28, 2015; (ii) 3,029 shares that vest on May 28, 2015; (iii) 24,869 shares that vest on February 28, 2016; and (iv) 14,881 shares that vest on February 28, 2017.

(6)

Includes unvested awards of RSUs covering (i) 7,014 shares that vested on February 28, 2015; and (ii) 7,016 shares that vest on February 28, 2016; and (iii) 7,017 shares that vest on February 28, 2017.

(7)

Includes unvested awards of RSUs covering (i) 2,122 shares that vested on February 28, 2015; (ii) 2,727 shares that vest on August 28, 2015; (iii) 2,122 shares that vest on February 28, 2016; (iv) 2,727 shares that vest on August 28, 2016; (v) 2,122 shares that vest on February 28, 2017; and (vi) 2,727 shares that vest on August 28, 2017.

(8)

Due to the termination of Mr. Brown’s employment, effective as of September 15, 2014, all unvested equity-based awards to Mr. Brown were forfeited, which included: (i) 4,584 unvested RSUs granted upon his initial employment; (ii) 4,369 RSUs granted under the 2014 long-term incentive plan; and (iii) 4,369 performance units granted under the 2014 long-term incentive plan.

 

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

 Option AwardsStock Awards

Name

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Exercisable
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Unexercisable
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
(#)
Option
Exercise
Price
($)
Option
Expiration
Date
Number
of Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
(#)
Market
Value of
Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
($)
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have
Not
Vested
(#)
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market
or Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights
That
Have
Not
Vested
($)

John R. Colson

127,894(1)2,754,837

James F. O’Neil III

48,003(2)1,033,985

James H. Haddox

36,071(3)776,969

Kenneth W. Trawick

29,311(4)631,359

Earl C. Austin, Jr.

30,865(5)664,832

Derrick A. Jensen

21,633(6)465,97556  


Executive Compensation

(1)Includes (i) 71,269 shares of restricted stock that vested on February 28, 2012; (ii) 40,819 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2013; and (iii) 15,806 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2014.

 

(2)Includes (i) 19,028 shares of restricted stock that vested on February 28, 2012; (ii) 4,241 shares of restricted stock that vest on May 28, 2012; (iii) 11,600 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2013; (iv) 4,241 shares of restricted stock that vest on May 28, 2013; (v) 4,652 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2014; and (vi) 4,241 shares of restricted stock that vest on May 28, 2014.

 

(3)Includes (i) 20,246 shares of restricted stock that vested on February 28, 2012; (ii) 11,434 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2013; and (iii) 4,391 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2014.

(4)Includes (i) 16,540 shares of restricted stock that vested on February 28, 2012; (ii) 9,189 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2013; and (iii) 3,582 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2014.

(5)Includes (i) 14,018 shares of restricted stock that vested on February 28, 2012; (ii) 3,645 shares of restricted stock that vest on November 28, 2012; (iii) 9,525 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2013; and (iv) 3,677 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2014.

(6)Includes (i) 9,212 shares of restricted stock that vested on February 28, 2012; (ii) 1,463 shares of restricted stock that vest on May 28, 2012; (iii) 5,688 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2013; (iv) 1,462 shares of restricted stock that vest on May 28, 2013; (v) 2,345 shares of restricted stock that vest on February 28, 2014; and (vi) 1,463 shares of restricted stock that vest on May 28, 2014.

2011 Options Exercised2014 Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table

The following table reflects certain information regarding the exercise of options and the vesting of stock awards by each of our NEOs during the 20112014 fiscal year:

 

   Option Awards   Stock Awards 

Name

  Number of Shares
Acquired
on Exercise
(#)
   Value Realized
on Exercise
($)
   Number of Shares
Acquired
on Vesting(1)

(#)
   Value Realized
on Vesting(2)
($)
 

John R. Colson

             77,447     1,893,747  

James F. O’Neil III

             18,794     418,730  

James H. Haddox

             23,823     530,776  

Kenneth W. Trawick

             18,404     410,041  

Earl C. Austin, Jr.

             16,882     294,920  

Derrick A. Jensen

             12,044     268,340  
Option AwardsStock Awards

Name

Number of Shares
Acquired
on Exercise
(#)
Value Realized
on Exercise
($)
Number of Shares
Acquired
on Vesting(1)
(#)
Value Realized
on Vesting(2)
($)

James F. O’Neil III

60,241 (3)2,107,545

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

33,896 (4)1,191,990

Derrick A. Jensen

21,790 (5)758,919

Jesse E. Morris

—    

Steven J. Kemps

—    

Eric B. Brown

—    

 

(1)

Shares acquired on vesting include shares ofassociated with restricted stock or RSU awards for which restrictions lapsed during fiscal 2011. An aggregate of 3,645 shares held by Earl C. Austin, Jr. vested on November 28, 2011, and the fair market value of our common stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $18.87 per share. All of the remaining shares vested on February 28, 2011, and the fair market value of our common stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $22.28 per share.year 2014.

 

(2)

The value realized reflects the taxable value to the NEO as of the date of the vesting of a restricted stock.stock or RSU award. The actual value ultimately realized by the NEO may be more or less than the value realized as calculated in the above table, depending on whether and when the NEO held or sold the stock associated with the vesting occurrence.

(3)

Includes (i) 52,117 shares that vested on February 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $35.01 per share); (ii) 3,883 shares that vested on March 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $36.10 per share); and (iii) 4,241 shares that vested on May 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $33.66 per share).

(4)

Includes (i) 29,042 shares that vested on February 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $35.01 per share) and (ii) 4,854 shares that vested on March 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $36.10 per share).

(5)

Includes (i) 15,357 shares that vested on February 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $35.01 per share); (ii) 1,941 shares that vested on March 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $36.10 per share); and (iii) 4,492 shares that vested on May 28, 2014 (the market value of Quanta’s Common Stock as of 12:01 a.m. on that date was $33.66 per share).

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

57


Executive Compensation

Risk Considerations in our2014 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation ProgramTable

The Compensation Committee has discussedfollowing table describes the conceptnonqualified deferred compensation activity for each of risk as it relates to our compensation program and the Compensation Committee does not believe our compensation program encourages excessive or inappropriate risk taking for the following reasons:NEOs during fiscal year 2014:

 

The Compensation Committee structures executive compensation to consist of both fixed and variable compensation. The fixed or base salary portion of compensation is typically set at market levels and is designed to provide a steady income regardless of Quanta’s stock price performance so that executives do not feel pressured to focus exclusively on stock price performance to the detriment of other important business metrics. The variable portions of compensation, which are described in detail above, are generally designed to reward both short-term and long-term corporate and individual performance as measured under several performance metrics. For short-term performance, our annual incentive plan awards bonuses based on the achievement by Quanta of a certain annual operating income goal. For long-term performance, our supplemental incentive plan awards bonuses based on the achievement by Quanta of a certain annual return on equity goal as well as on the achievement by the individual plan participant of certain strategic goals. Restricted stock generally awarded under our supplemental incentive plan vests over three years in equal annual installments, which the Compensation Committee believes encourages plan participants to focus on sustained stock appreciation and promotes retention of key employees. The Compensation Committee believes that these variable elements of compensation are a sufficient percentage (generally greater than 50%) of overall compensation to motivate plan participants to produce superior short-term and long-term corporate results, while the fixed element is also sufficiently high that plan participants are not encouraged to take unnecessary or excessive risks in doing so.

The Compensation Committee also structures executive compensation at the operating unit level to consist of both fixed and variable compensation. The variable portions of compensation are generally designed to reward both short-term and long-term operating unit and individual performance as measured under several performance metrics. For short-term performance, our operating unit annual incentive plan awards bonuses based on the achievement by a particular operating unit of an annual operating income goal and certain safety goals, as well as achievement by the individual plan participant of certain strategic goals. For long-term performance, our operating unit supplemental incentive plan awards bonuses based on the achievement by a particular operating unit of a certain annual modified return on asset goal. The Compensation Committee believes that these elements of compensation achieve objectives similar to those under our corporate incentive plans.

Name

 NEO
Contributions
in Last
Fiscal Year(1)
($)
 Company
Contribution
in Last
Fiscal
Year(2)
($)
 Aggregate
Earnings
(Losses)
in Last
Fiscal
Year(3)
($)
 Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions
($)
 Aggregate
Balance at
Last Fiscal
Year-End
($)
 

James F. O’Neil III

 141,158     33,750     306   —     175,214    

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

 69,857     27,000     110   —     96,967    

Derrick A. Jensen

 47,796     18,563     2   —     66,361    

Jesse E. Morris

 130,943     —     (30 —     130,913    

Steven J. Kemps

 —     —        —     —    

Eric B. Brown

 23,920     —     15   —     23,935    

 

As operating income, return on equity and, at the operating unit level, modified return on assets are the financial performance measures for determining incentive payments under our incentive plans, the Compensation Committee believes plan participants are encouraged to take a balanced approach that focuses on corporate profitability, rather than other measures which may incentivize management to enter into projects without regard to cost structure. Further, Quanta has strict internal controls with respect to capital expenditures as well as bid and project approvals, which are designed to prevent an individual from entering into projects that do not meet certain requirements. If performance goals are not met at the threshold level, there are generally no payouts under our incentive plans (excluding the individual strategic goal and safety goal components of our incentive plans). In addition, the strategic goals approved for each plan participant are aligned with Quanta’s short-term and long-term operating and strategic plans, and are designed to achieve a proper risk/reward balance without encouraging unnecessary or excessive risk taking.

(1)

The amounts shown are included in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table in the “Salary” and “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” columns. For a discussion of Quanta’s nonqualified deferred compensation plan for certain employees, including the NEOs, please read “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Deferred Compensation Plan.”

 

The Compensation Committee caps awards under our annual and supplemental incentive plans, which the Compensation Committee believes also mitigates excessive risk taking. Therefore, even if Quanta or the operating unit, as applicable, and the individual dramatically exceed their respective performance goals, awards are limited. If performance falls significantly short of expectations, no awards will be made.

(2)

The amounts shown are included in the “All Other Compensation” column of the 2014 Summary Compensation Table, as detailed in the 2014 All Other Compensation Table within footnote (6) to the 2014 Summary Compensation Table. The amounts represent Quanta’s matching contributions that would have been allocated to a participant’s 401(k) plan account, but for applicable limits under the Internal Revenue Code. For additional information on these contributions, see“Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Deferred Compensation Plan.”

 

Quanta has strict internal controls over the measurement and calculation of performance goals under our incentive plans, which are designed to keep it from being susceptible to manipulation by any employee. In addition, all of our employees are required to comply with our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, which covers, among other things, accuracy of books and records.
(3)

The amounts shown are not included in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table because earnings under Quanta’s nonqualified deferred compensation plan were not above-market or preferential.

 

The Compensation Committee believes that the combination of operating income and ROE/ROA financial goals (through our corporate and operating unit annual incentive plans) and extended exposure to stock price performance (through our equity compensation program and stock ownership guidelines) provides an appropriate balance and discourages excessive risk taking. For example, even if plan participants could inappropriately increase Quanta’s operating income (as defined under the corporate or operating unit annual incentive plan, as applicable) by excessive expense reductions or by abandoning less profitable revenue sources, this could be detrimental to Quanta in the long term and would be discouraged under our compensation program because it would ultimately harm our stock price and the value of their equity awards. Likewise, if plan participants were to add revenue sources at low margins in an attempt to generate a higher growth company multiple and increased stock prices, it could decrease operating income and the value of their cash bonuses under the annual incentive plan.

 

The Board has adopted stock ownership guidelines, which the Compensation Committee believes provide a considerable incentive for management to consider Quanta’s long-term interests because a meaningful portion of their personal investment portfolio consists of Quanta stock.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

58


The broad structure of our corporate incentive plans has not significantly changed for several years, and the Compensation Committee is not aware of any evidence that it encourages unnecessary or excessive risk taking.

Fees of the Compensation Committee Consultant

As discussed inUseCompensation Discussion & Analysis – Compensation Philosophy and Process – Role of Compensation Benchmarking Studies and Published Compensation Survey Data”Consultant,” above, the Compensation Committee independently retained E&YDeloitte in 20112014 to provide benchmarking data, review the competitiveness of Quanta’s executive compensation for the NEOs, and provide advice on the amount and form of executive compensation. E&YManagement supported, but did not make or recommend, the decision to engage Deloitte. Deloitte was also engaged to provide certain additional services to Quanta.

Our Governance and Nominating Committee separately engaged Deloitte during 2014 to provide benchmarking data, to review and comment on the competitiveness of Quanta’s non-employee director compensation, including compensation for significant additional time on board-related services performed by a director, and to provide an update on trends and recent developments in non-employee director compensation. Additionally, management has engaged Deloitte from time to time to provide tax, transaction and management advisory services and valuation assessments.

The aggregate fees billed by E&YDeloitte and its affiliates for services performed during 20112014 were as follows:

 

$163,929305,193 for (i) services for the Compensation Committee regarding executive compensation and executive succession matters, such as providing benchmarking data, reviewing Quanta’s incentive compensation plans, providing excise tax calculations for proxy statement disclosure, and participating in certain Compensation Committee meetings, and (ii) services for the Governance and Nominating Committee regarding non-employee director and executive officer stock ownership, such as providing benchmarking data and reviewing Quanta’s stock ownership guidelines;compensation;

 

$137,4751,268,154 for tax advisory services provided to Quanta, including (i) stateU.S. federal corporate income tax modeling, (ii) federal on-call engagements, (ii) tax return review services, (iii) Canadian federal and (iii)provincial tax return preparation and related assistance with ASC740 income tax accounting for Canadian operations, (iv) documentation of transfer pricing methodologies, (v) sales and testinguse tax advisory services, related(vi) tax return preparation services provided to Quanta’sQuanta and certain employees of Quanta in connection with international assignments, and (vii) Australian tax return preparation and compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002;matters;

 

$652,968528,617 for transactiontax and valuation advisory services provided to Quanta, including due diligence services, in connection with various business acquisitions;acquisitions, dispositions and restructuring transactions; and

 

$141,38415,000 for valuation services provided to Quanta in connection with severalASC350 goodwill impairment testing.

To prevent the perception of a potential conflict of interest involving Deloitte and its affiliates, (i) the individuals from Deloitte Tax LLP who provided the tax services to Quanta were not the same individuals who provided the consulting services to the Compensation Committee, (ii) the Deloitte consultants who provided services to the Compensation Committee assured the Committee that no portion of their compensation would be based on the amount or level of tax services provided by Deloitte Tax LLP, or any other services provided by Deloitte’s affiliates, to Quanta, (iii) the Deloitte consultants who provided services to the Compensation Committee do not own any stock in Quanta or otherwise provide any other services to Quanta, other than consulting services to the Compensation Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee, and (iv) the Deloitte compensation consultants have no business acquisitions.or personal relationships with members of the Compensation Committee or Quanta’s executive officers.

The Compensation Committee approved the services and related fees above to the extent related to executive compensation. The Compensation Committee did not review or approve the other services provided by E&YDeloitte and its affiliates to Quanta, as the decision to engage E&YDeloitte to perform these other services was made by another Board committee or by management in the normal course of business.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The material features of our equity compensation plans are described in Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of Part II of Quanta’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011. The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2011 with respect to our equity compensation plans, all of which have received stockholder approval.

 

Plan category

  Number of Securities
to be Issued
Upon Exercise of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(a)
  Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
of Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(b)
   Number of Securities Remaining
Available for Future Issuance
Under Equity Compensation
Plans (Excluding Securities
Reflected in Column (a))
(c)
 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

   462,414(1)  $12.15     11,727,034(2) 

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

              
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

   462,414(1)  $12.15     11,727,034(2) 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(1)Includes 430,814 options with a weighted-average exercise price of $12.34 that were assumed in connection with Quanta’s acquisition of InfraSource on August 30, 2007.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

59

(2)Includes 151,997 shares of common stock issuable as of December 31, 2011 under the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, which provides that the aggregate amount of common stock with respect to which stock options or restricted stock may be awarded may not exceed 4,000,000 shares, and 11,575,037 shares of common stock issuable as of December 31, 2011 under the 2011 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan, which provides that the aggregate amount of common stock with respect to which equity awards may be granted may not exceed 11,750,000 shares.

Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

Employment and Separation Agreements

Each NEOQuanta is (or was, in the case of one former executive) a party to an employment agreement (as amended, an “Employment Agreement”) duringwith each of our NEOs. Under the 2011terms of our employment agreements, the executive is entitled to payments and benefits upon the occurrence of specified events, including termination of employment or change in control of Quanta. The specific terms of these arrangements, as well as an estimate of the compensation that would have been payable had they been triggered as of fiscal year. In connectionyear-end, are described below. The termination of employment provisions of the employment agreements provide these individuals with Mr. Colson’s transitiona fixed amount of compensation upon termination as an inducement to offset the rolepotential risk of Executive Chairman andleaving their prior employer or foregoing other opportunities in order to join or maintain employment with us, as applicable. At the promotiontime of Mr. O’Neil to President and Chief Executive Officer, as described above in“Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Executive Compensation Decisions for the 2011 Performance Year — Executive Succession Matters,”entering into these agreements, the Compensation Committee determinedconsidered our aggregate potential obligations in the context of the desirability of hiring or maintaining the employment terms reflected in new Employment Agreementsof the individual, as applicable, and the expected compensation upon joining or maintaining employment with Messrs. Colson and O’Neil upon assuming their new roles effective May 19, 2011. The discussion below addresses the Employment Agreements that were in effectus, as of December 31, 2011 with respect to Messrs. Colson, O’Neil and our other NEOs.applicable.

The Employment Agreements with Messrs. Colson and O’Neilour NEOs have an initial term of two years that will subsequently renew automatically for a one-year term unless Quanta or the executive provides at least six monthsmonths’ prior written notice of non-renewal. The Employment Agreements with the remaining NEOs renew automatically each year for an additional one-year term. Under the Employment Agreements, the applicable NEOs are eligible to receive base salary, as well as bonuses and benefits, and, at the Compensation Committee’s discretion, may be entitled to participate in any other compensation, perquisite, incentive or retirement plans, policies and arrangements that are provided generally to our other executive officers. The Employment Agreements contain customary non-competition covenants restricting the ability of the NEOs to compete with Quanta during the term of their employment and for a period of two years thereafter, with respect to Messrs. Colson and O’Neil, or one year thereafter with respect to the remaining NEOs, and prohibiting them from disclosing confidential information and trade secrets. If Quanta notifies Mr. Colson or Mr. O’Neilan NEO that it will not renew his Employment

Agreement and he remains employed through the end of the employment term, the covenants restricting competition and solicitation of customers and employees apply for a reduced period of one year following the notice of non-renewal.

The Employment Agreements generally terminate upon the NEO’s (i) death, (ii) disability, (iii) termination by Quanta for “cause” (as defined in the Employment Agreements and generally described below), (iv) resignation or voluntary termination by the executive, (v) termination by Quanta without cause, or (vi) termination by the executive for “good reason” within twelve months following a “change in control” (as these terms are defined in the Employment Agreements). In addition, the Employment Agreements entitle the executives to certain payments upon other events associated with a change in control.

Upon termination of employment, each applicablecontinuing NEO would be entitled to all compensation earned and all benefits and reimbursements due through the date of termination, and with respect only to Messrs. Haddox, Trawick and Jensen, any gross-up payments for related excise taxes.termination. The Employment Agreements for Messrs. Colson, O’Neil and Austinwith our NEOs do not contain excise tax gross-up provisions, as the Compensation Committee no longer offered this benefit when Quanta entered into these agreements in 2010 and 2011.agreements. In the event Messrs. Colson, O’Neil or Austinany of the continuing NEOs become subject to the excise tax, their severance payments will be reduced to the minimum extent necessary (but in no event less than zero) to avoid application of the excise tax, except that the full severance payments shallwill be made if, after payment by the executive of the excise tax and all other taxes, the executive would retain a greater after-tax severance benefit without such reduction. Under the Employment Agreements in effect during 2011 with Messrs. Haddox, Trawick and Jensen, if benefits to which the applicable NEOs become entitled are subject to excise taxes under Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code, then the NEOs generally will be entitled to an additional payment in an amount equal to the excise tax imposed plus any federal, state and local income taxes and additional excise taxes attributable to such payment.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

60


Executive Compensation

Additionally, termination of employment and change in control events entitle applicable NEOs to severance payments and other benefits under the respective Employment Agreements as set forth below:

 

Termination or Change in Control
Event

  

Potential Payments

  

Colson / O’Neil

Haddox / Trawick / Austin / Jensen

Termination upon death

  NoneNone

Termination upon disability

  Lump-sum payment of one year base salary, subject to such NEO’s execution of a waiver and release agreementLump-sum payment of one year base salary at the rate then in effect (and with respect to Mr. Austin only, subject to execution of a waiver and release agreement)

Termination by Quanta for cause

  NoneNone

Resignation or voluntary termination by the executive

  NoneNone

Termination by Quanta without cause (other than within 12 months

following a change in control)

  

Lump-sum payment of two years of base salary, subject to such NEO’s execution of a waiver and release agreement

Lump-sum payment of one year base salary at the rate then in effect (and with respect to Messrs. Haddox and Austin only, subject to execution of a waiver and release agreement)

Termination or Change in Control
Event

Potential Payments

Colson / O’Neil

Haddox / Trawick / Austin / Jensen

Termination by Quanta without cause within 12 months following a change in control

  

 

Lump-sum payment equal to three times annual base salary plus three times the higher of the highest annual cash bonus paid for the three preceding years or the target annual cash bonus payable for the current year, and continuation of employee and dependent welfare benefit plan coverage (medical, dental and vision) for three years

For Messrs. Haddox and Trawick only, lump-sum payment equal to three times annual base salary plus three times the higher of the highest annual cash bonus paid for the three preceding years or the annual cash bonus payable for the current year (annualized), and continuation of employee and dependent welfare benefit plan coverage for three years

For Mr. Austin only, lump-sum payment equal to three times annual base salary plus three times the highest annual cash bonus paid for the three preceding years, and continuation of employee and dependent welfare benefit plan coverage for three years
For Mr. Jensen only, lump-sum payment equal to three times annual base salary

Termination by executive for good reason within 12 months following

a change in control

  

Same as termination without cause within 12 months following a change in control

Same as termination without cause within 12 months following a change in control

Successor in change in control fails to timely assume Quanta’s obligations under the Employment

Agreement

  

None, but the executive may be entitled to terminate his employment for good reason

For Messrs. Haddox, Trawick and Jensen only, same as termination without cause within 12 months following a change in control, but actual termination of employment is not required to trigger payment
None with respect to Mr. Austin

Change in Control.  Under the Employment Agreements, of Messrs. Colson and O’Neil, a change in control generally occurs when (i) any person or entity acquires, directly or indirectly, the beneficial ownership of securities representing 50% or more of the total fair market value or total voting power of Quanta’s then outstanding voting securities, (ii) any person or entity acquires, directly or indirectly, within a 12-month period, the beneficial ownership of 30% or more of the total voting power of Quanta’s then outstanding voting securities, (iii) certain incumbent (and subsequently approved) directors cease to constitute a majority of the members of the Board within a 12-month period, or (iv) any person or entity acquires, directly or indirectly, within a 12-month period, assets representing 40% or more of the total gross fair market value of Quanta’s assets.

Under the Employment Agreements of Messrs. Haddox, Trawick, Austin and Jensen, a change in control generally occurs when (i) any person or entity acquires, directly or indirectly, the beneficial ownership of securities representing 50% or more of the total voting power of Quanta’s then outstanding voting securities, (ii) certain incumbent (and subsequently approved) directors cease to constitute a majority of the members of the Board, (iii) the stockholders approve a plan of complete liquidation or a sale or disposition of all or a substantial portion of Quanta’s assets, or (iv) with respect to Messrs. Trawick, Austin and Jensen only, the stockholders approve a merger, consolidation or reorganization of Quanta, or consummation of any such transaction if stockholder approval is not obtained, unless at least 50% (for Messrs. Trawick and Austin) or 75% (for Mr. Jensen) of the total voting securities of the surviving entity outstanding immediately after such transaction are beneficially owned by at least 50% (for Messrs. Trawick and Austin) or 75% (for Mr. Jensen) of the holders of outstanding voting securities of Quanta immediately prior to the transaction.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

61


Executive Compensation

Cause.  The Employment Agreements of Messrs. Colson and O’Neil generally define cause as the executive’s (i) gross negligence in the performance of, intentional nonperformance of, or inattention to, material duties and responsibilities, which continues for five business days after receipt of written notice, (ii) willful dishonesty, fraud or material misconduct with respect to Quanta’s business, (iii) violation of Quanta’s policies or procedures, if not cured within five business days following written notice, (iv) conviction of, confession to, or guilty plea or plea of nolo contendere with respect to, an act of fraud, misappropriation or embezzlement or any felony or other crime that involves moral turpitude, (v) use of illegal substances or habitual drunkenness, or (vi) breach of the Employment Agreement if not cured within five business days following written notice.

Good Reason.  The Employment Agreements of Messrs. Haddox, Trawick and Jensen generally define cause as the executive’s (i) willful, material and irreparable breach of the Employment Agreement, (ii) continuing gross negligence in the performance of or intentional nonperformance or inattention to material duties after notice of the same is given, (iii) willful dishonesty, fraud or material misconduct with respect to Quanta’s business, (iv) conviction of a felony, or (v) chronic alcohol or illegal drug abuse.

With respect to Mr. Austin, cause is generally defined as the executive’s (i) continuing failure or refusal to follow reasonable directives of his supervisor or the Board if not cured after notice is given, (ii) willful and continued failure to substantially perform his duties if not cured after notice is given, (iii) violation of Quanta’s policies or procedures if not cured following written notice, (iv) engaging in conduct which is materially and demonstrably injurious to Quanta, (v) conviction of, confession to, or guilty plea or plea of nolo contendere with respect to, an act of fraud, misappropriation or embezzlement or any felony or other crime that involves moral turpitude, (vi) use of illegal substances or habitual drunkenness, (vii) breach of the Employment Agreement if not cured within five business days following written notice, or (viii) repeated or continuous acts of gross neglect or gross or willful misconduct directly relating to Quanta’s business.

Good Reason. The Employment Agreements of Messrs. Colson and O’Neil generally define good reason as (a)(i) to the extent occurring within twelve months following a change in control, (i)(a) the assignment to the executive of duties inconsistent with his position, authority or responsibilities as contemplated under his Employment Agreement, or any other action by the employer that results in a diminution in such position, authority or responsibilities, if not cured after written notice is given, (ii)(b) any material breach of the Employment Agreement by the employer, including any requirement that the executive relocate to another geographic location, (iii)(c) failure by the employer to comply with the compensation provisions of the Employment Agreement, if not cured after written notice is given, (iv)(d) failure by the employer to continue in effect any cash or stock-based incentive or bonus plan, retirement plan, welfare benefit plan or other compensation, retirement or benefit plan and policy except in certain specified circumstances, if not cured after written notice is given, (v)or (e) the executive’s receipt of notice of termination or non-renewal from the employer; or (b)(ii) the failure of the successor in a pending change in control to timely assume in writing the employer’s obligations under the Employment Agreement.

Good reason exists underAs described above in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Executive Separation Matters,” the Employment Agreementsemployment agreement formerly applicable to Mr. Brown was superseded by a severance agreement, effective September 15, 2014, documenting the terms of Messrs. Haddox, Trawick and Jensen if, within twelve months following a change in control, the executive is offered a “lesser position” (as defined in each Employment Agreement) or is required to relocate to another geographic location. Additionally, Mr. Haddox will be entitled to receive the same severance payment and welfare benefits as upon termination by the executive for good reason within twelve months following a change in control if, during any change in control situation, he elects to terminateof his employment at least 5 days priorwith Quanta. Mr. Brown’s employment agreement contained substantially similar terms to those described above for the closing of the anticipated transaction giving rise to the change in control.continuing NEOs.

The Employment Agreement of Mr. Austin generally defines good reason as, to the extent occurring within twelve months following a change in control, (i) the assignment to the executive of duties inconsistent with his position, authority or responsibilities as contemplated under his Employment Agreement, or any other action by the employer that results in a diminution in such position, authority or responsibilities, if not cured after written notice is given, (ii) any requirement that the executive relocate to another geographic location, (iii) failure by the employer to comply with the compensation provisions of the Employment Agreement, if not cured after written notice is given, or (iv) failure by the employer to continue in effect any cash or stock-based incentive or bonus plan, retirement plan, welfare benefit plan or other compensation, retirement or benefit plan and policy except in certain specified circumstances, if not cured after written notice is given.

Equity Incentive Plans

Generally, subject to the provisions of the particular restricted stock award agreement, unvested shares of restricted stock or RSUs and unearned performance units granted pursuant to Quanta’s equity incentive plans are forfeited by the participant upon termination of such participant’s employment during the restriction period. Unvested shares of restricted stock generally become vested, and forfeiture restrictions lapse,However, upon the death of the participant during the participant’s continuous service or upon the occurrence of a “change in control” (as defined in the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2007“Stock Plan”) or the 2011 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan, (the “2011 Plan”), as applicable). Generally, options outstanding, (i) unvested awards of restricted stock or RSUs generally become vested, and forfeiture restrictions lapse and (ii) a portion of the participant’s unearned performance units granted under Quanta’s equity incentive plans may be exercised following athe Omnibus Plan become earned based on the achievement of the participant’s terminationapplicable performance goals as of service only to the extent provided in the option agreement. Upon adate of death or change in control outstanding options generally become immediately exercisable and are released from any repurchase or forfeiture rights.the forecasted achievement of such goals for the remainder of the performance period, as determined in the discretion of the Compensation Committee. Additionally, with respect to unearned performance units, a participant who resigns prior to completion of the 3-year performance period may, at the discretion of the Chief Executive Officer and with approval of the Compensation Committee, earn a pro rata portion (based on the portion of the 3-year performance period during which the participant was employed) of the shares ultimately awarded in respect of unearned performance units under the long-term incentive plan upon determination of actual achievement levels.

Under the 2007Stock Plan, a change in control is generally defined as the occurrence of any of the following events: (i) any person or entity becomes the beneficial owner, directly or indirectly, of securities representing 50% or more of the voting power of Quanta’s then outstanding securities, (ii) as a result of, or in connection with, any tender offer, exchange offer, merger or other business combination, a majority of the Board as of the

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

62


Executive Compensation

date immediately preceding such transaction is replaced, (iii) Quanta is merged with another corporation, and as a result, less than 75% of the outstanding securities of the surviving entity is owned in the aggregate by Quanta’s former stockholders, (iv) a tender or exchange offer is consummated for 50% or more of the voting power of Quanta’s then outstanding securities, or (v) Quanta transfers substantially all of its assets to an entity that is not controlled by Quanta.

Under the 2011Omnibus Plan, a change in control is generally deemed to occur upon (i) any sale, lease, exchange or other transfer of all or substantially all of the assets of Quanta, (ii) any person or entity becoming the beneficial owner, directly or indirectly, of securities representing more than 50% of the voting power of Quanta’s then outstanding securities, (iii) certain incumbent (and subsequently approved) directors ceasing to constitute a majority of the members of the Board within a two-year period, (iv) consummation of a merger or other business combination, unless all or substantially all of the beneficial owners of outstanding voting securities of Quanta immediately prior to the transaction beneficially own, directly or indirectly, more than 50% of the voting power of the resulting entity immediately following the transaction, or (v) stockholder approval of a complete liquidation of Quanta.

Deferred Compensation

Generally, participants will receive distributions of deferred amounts under Quanta’s deferred compensation plan upon the earlier of separation from service, the occurrence of a disability, or a specified date (selected at the time of the deferral) and, subject to specific limitations, upon the occurrence of an unforeseeable financial emergency. The terms of Quanta’s deferred compensation plan are discussed in further detail under “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Deferred Compensation Plan.”

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

63


Executive Compensation

Estimated Potential Payments

The tables below reflect the estimated amounts that would be paid to each NEO upon termination of employment or change in control in varying circumstances identified below. TheExcept as otherwise indicated, the amounts shown assume that termination or change in control occurred on December 31, 2011, assuming2014 and reflect a market value for Quanta common stockCommon Stock of $21.54$28.39 per share, the closing price on such date. Actual amounts to be paid can be determined only upon occurrence of an actual termination or change in control.

 

Name

 

Benefit

 Death  Disability  Termination by
Quanta for
Cause or
Voluntary
Termination
by Executive
(No Change in
Control)
  Termination by
Quanta
without Cause
(No Change in
Control)
 

John R. Colson

 Severance $   $874,100   $   $1,748,200  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                      —      
 Equity Benefit(2)  2,754,837              
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $2,754,837   $874,100   $   $1,748,200  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

James F. O’Neil III

 Severance $   $750,000   $   $1,500,000  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                
 Equity Benefit(2)  1,033,985              
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $1,033,985   $750,000   $   $1,500,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

James H. Haddox

 Severance $   $524,460   $   $524,460  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                
 Equity Benefit(2)  776,969              
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $776,969   $524,460   $   $524,460  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Kenneth W. Trawick

 Severance $   $480,755   $   $480,755  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                
 Equity Benefit(2)  631,359              
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $631,359   $480,755   $   $480,755  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Earl C. Austin, Jr.

 Severance $   $475,000   $   $475,000  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                
 Equity Benefit(2)  664,832              
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $664,832   $475,000   $   $475,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Derrick A. Jensen

 Severance $   $325,000   $   $325,000  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                
 Equity Benefit(2)  465,975              
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $465,975   $325,000   $   $325,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Name

BenefitDeath   Disability   Termination by
Quanta for Cause or
Voluntary Termination
by Executive
(No  Change in Control)
 Termination by
Quanta without Cause
(No Change in Control)
 

James F. O’Neil III

Severance$  $1,000,000  $                —  $2,000,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)            
Equity Benefit(2) 9,035,487           
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)            
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$9,035,487  $1,000,000  $  $            2,000,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

Severance$  $800,000  $  $1,600,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)            
Equity Benefit(2) 3,755,031           
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)            
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$3,755,031  $800,000  $  $1,600,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Derrick A. Jensen

Severance$  $550,000  $  $1,100,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)            
Equity Benefit(2) 2,474,983           
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)            
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$2,474,983  $550,000  $  $1,100,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Jesse E. Morris

Severance$  $437,750  $  $875,500  
Welfare Benefits(1)            
Equity Benefit(2) 742,256           
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)            
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$742,256  $437,750  $  $875,500  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Steven J. Kemps

Severance$  $450,000  $  $900,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)            
Equity Benefit(2) 593,720           
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)            
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$593,720  $450,000  $  $900,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Eric B. Brown(4)

Severance$292,500  
Pro Rata Incentive Award 173,300  
Welfare Benefits(1)   
Equity Benefit(2)   
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)   
     

 

 

 
Total$465,800  
     

 

 

 

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

64


Executive Compensation

 

(1)The welfare

Welfare benefits include an approximation of the cost of continued payment of insurance premiums for up to three years after termination. The insurance premium cost is based on the actual cost of premiums for 20122015 and the estimated costs of premiums for 20132016 and 2014.2017.

 

(2)

The equity benefit represents (i) the value of the unvested awards of restricted stock and RSUs held by the NEO as of December 31, 20112014 that would vest upon occurrence of the event.event and (ii) the value of unearned performance units held by the NEO as of December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2014, the NEOs held the following unearned performance units: 55,345 for Mr. O’Neil; 18,934 for Mr. Austin; 14,565 for Mr. Jensen; 5,098 for Mr. Morris; and 6,366 for Mr. Kemps. The actual number of unearned performance units that would become earned upon occurrence of the event is based on the achievement of the applicable performance goals as of the date of the event and the forecasted achievement for the remainder of the performance period, which can range from 0% to a maximum of 200% of the number currently held, which is the target number. Performance units are described in further detail in“Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.”

 

(3)

The excise tax gross upgross-up would be an additional payment in an amount equal to the excise tax imposed plus any federal, state and local income taxes and additional excise taxes attributable to such payment. The employment agreements with Quanta’s NEOs do not contain excise tax gross-up provisions. The cut-back would be the amount by which the severance payment is reduced, such that, after such reduction, no portion of the payments and benefits would be subject to the excise tax.

(4)

Mr. Brown resigned as Vice President and General Counsel of Quanta as of September 15, 2014. The table above reflects actual amounts paid to Mr. Brown in connection with the termination of his employment, effective as of September 15, 2014, as more particularly described in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Executive Separation Matters.”

Name

BenefitSuccessor Fails to
Assume Agreement
Upon a Change in
Control
(No  Termination
of Employment)
 Termination by
Quanta without Cause
within 12 Months
Following a
Change in  Control (4)
 Termination by
Executive
for Good Reason
Within 12 months
Following  a
Change in Control (4)
 

James F. O’Neil III

Severance$  $8,244,000  $8,244,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)    45,336   45,336  
Equity Benefit(2) 9,035,487   9,035,487   9,035,487  
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)         
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$      9,035,487  $      17,324,823  $      17,324,823  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr.

Severance$  $6,402,000  $6,402,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)    45,336   45,336  
Equity Benefit(2) 3,755,031   3,755,031   3,755,031  
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)         
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$3,755,031  $10,202,367  $10,202,367  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Derrick A. Jensen

Severance$  $4,134,000  $4,134,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)    45,336   45,336  
Equity Benefit(2) 2,474,983   2,474,983   2,474,983  
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)         
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$2,474,983  $6,654,319  $6,654,319  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Jesse E. Morris

Severance$  $2,495,175  $2,495,175  
Welfare Benefits(1)    52,538   52,538  
Equity Benefit(2) 742,256   742,256   742,256  
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)         
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$742,256  $3,289,969  $3,289,969  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Steven J. Kemps

Severance$  $2,565,000  $2,565,000  
Welfare Benefits(1)    52,538   52,538  
Equity Benefit(2) 593,720   593,720   593,720  
Gross-up/(Cut-back)(3)         
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
Total$593,720  $3,211,258  $3,211,258  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Name

 

Benefit

 Termination by
Executive Pending a
Change in Control
  Successor Fails to
Assume Agreement
Upon a Change in
Control
(No Termination
of Employment)
  Termination by
Quanta without Cause
within 12 Months
Following a
Change in Control(4)
  Termination  by
Executive
for Good  Reason
within 12 Months
Following a
Change in Control(4)
 

John R. Colson

 Severance $   $    5,372,700   $5,372,700  
 Welfare Benefits(1)          46,870    46,870  
 Equity Benefit(2)      2,754,837    2,754,837    2,754,837  
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $   $2,754,837    8,174,407   $8,174,407  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

James F. O’Neil III

 Severance $   $    4,500,000   $4,500,000  
 Welfare Benefits(1)          60,978    60,978  
 Equity Benefit(2)      1,033,985    1,033,985    1,033,985  
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $   $1,033,985    5,594,963   $5,594,963  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

James H. Haddox

 Severance $3,058,596   $3,058,596    3,058,596   $3,058,596  
 Welfare Benefits(1)  46,870    46,870    46,870    46,870  
 Equity Benefit(2)      776,969    776,969    776,969  
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $3,105,466   $3,882,435    3,882,435   $3,882,435  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Kenneth W. Trawick

 Severance $   $2,803,713    2,803,713   $2,803,713  
 Welfare Benefits(1)      46,870    46,870    46,870  
 Equity Benefit(2)      631,359    631,359    631,359  
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $   $3,481,942    3,481,942   $3,481,942  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Earl C. Austin, Jr.

 Severance $   $    3,022,050   $3,022,050  
 Welfare Benefits(1)          60,978    60,978  
 Equity Benefit(2)      664,832    664,832    664,832  
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)          (573,155  (573,155
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $   $664,832    3,174,705   $3,174,705  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Derrick A. Jensen

 Severance $   $975,000    975,000   $975,000  
 Welfare Benefits(1)                
 Equity Benefit(2)      465,975    465,975    465,975  
 Gross Up/(Cut-back)(3)                
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 Total $   $1,440,975    1,440,975   $1,440,975  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

65


Executive Compensation

 

(1)The welfare

Welfare benefits include an approximation of the cost of continued payment of insurance premiums for up to three years after termination. The insurance premium cost is based on the actual cost of premiums for 20122015 and the estimated costs of premiums for 20132016 and 2014.2017.

 

(2)

The equity benefit represents (i) the value of the unvested awards of restricted stock and RSUs held by the NEO as of December 31, 20112014 that would vest upon occurrence of the event.event and (ii) the value of unearned performance units held by the NEO as of December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2014, the NEOs held the following unearned performance units: 55,345 for Mr. O’Neil; 18,934 for Mr. Austin; 14,565 for Mr. Jensen; 5,098 for Mr. Morris; and 6,366 for Mr. Kemps. The actual number of unearned performance units that would become earned upon occurrence of the event is based on the achievement of the applicable performance goals as of the date of the event and the forecasted achievement for the remainder of the performance period, which can range from 0% to a maximum of 200% of the number currently held, which is the target number. Performance units are described in further detail in“Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.”

 

(3)

The excise tax gross upgross-up would be an additional payment in an amount equal to the excise tax imposed plus any federal, state and local income taxes and additional excise taxes attributable to such payment. The employment agreements with Quanta’s NEOs do not contain excise tax gross-up provisions. The cut-back would be the amount by which the severance payment is reduced, such that, after such reduction, no portion of the payments and benefits would be subject to the excise tax.

 

(4)

With respect to termination by Quanta without cause within 12 months following a change in control, and with respect to termination by the executive for good reason within 12 months following a change in control, the equity benefit is triggered upon a change in control, and the remaining amounts are triggered upon termination of employment.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The material features of our equity compensation plans are described in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of Part II of Quanta’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014. The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2014 with respect to our equity compensation plans, all of which have received stockholder approval.

Plan Category

Number of Securities
to be Issued
Upon Exercise of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(a)
 Weighted Average
Exercise Price
of Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(b)
 Number of Securities Remaining
Available for Future Issuance
Under Equity Compensation
Plans (Excluding Securities
Reflected in Column (a))
(c)
 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

 2,005,862 (1) $14.53 (2)  7,922,846 (3) 

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

         
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total

 2,005,862 (1) $14.53   7,922,846 (3) 
    

 

 

��

(1)

Includes (i) 63,274 shares issuable upon exercise of stock options that were assumed in connection with Quanta’s acquisition of InfraSource on August 30, 2007, (ii) 1,807,544 shares issuable in connection with unvested RSUs and vested RSUs the settlement of which has been deferred, and (iii) 135,044 shares issuable in connection with a target amount of unearned and unvested awards of performance units under the Company’s long-term incentive plan that will vest on December 31, 2016 based upon the satisfaction of 3-year company performance metrics as described further in “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Executive Compensation Decisions for 2014 – Long-Term Incentive Plan.”

(2)

Excludes unvested RSUs, vested and deferred RSUs and performance units because those awards do not have exercise prices.

(3)

Includes (i) 225,658 shares of Common Stock issuable as of December 31, 2014 under the Stock Plan, which provides that the aggregate amount of Common Stock with respect to which stock options or restricted stock may be awarded may not exceed 4,000,000 shares, and (ii) 7,697,188 shares of Common Stock issuable as of December 31, 2014 under the Omnibus Plan, which provides that the aggregate amount of Common Stock with respect to which equity awards may be granted may not exceed 11,750,000 shares.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

66


CERTAIN TRANSACTIONSCertain Transactions

Related Party Transactions

Transactions Involving Executive Officers and Directors

North Houston Pole Line, L.P. (“North Houston”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Quanta, is a party to certain facility leases with Properties, Etc., a general partnership of which Earl C. (Duke) Austin, Jr., one of our executive officers, is a general partner and 50% owner. North Houston paid an aggregate of $378,889 to Properties, Etc. in rent expense for 2014 related to these leases. These leases have various terms through September 2016, and as of December 31, 2011,2014, provided for aggregate remaining lease obligations of $1,397,460$650,738 through the conclusion of the lease terms. In addition, North Houston is a party to a facility lease with Mr. Austin which asand paid Mr. Austin $144,000 in rent expense for 2014 related to this lease. As of December 31, 2011, provided for2014, the aggregate remaining lease obligations of $665,419under this lease were $233,419 through the conclusion of the lease term in August 2016. Further, North Houston is a party to a facility lease with Mr. Austin’s father which asand paid Mr. Austin’s father $180,000 in rent expense for 2014 related to this lease and incurred $85,523 in costs associated with necessary leasehold improvements during 2014. As of December 31, 2011, provided for2014, the aggregate remaining lease obligations of $831,774under this lease were $291,774 through the conclusion of the lease term in August 2016. These leases relate primarily to facilities that were occupied by North Houston when Quanta acquired North Houston in 2001. We believe that the rental rates of the abovethese leases do not exceed fair market value.

North Houston employed Earl C. Austin, the father of Earl C. Austin, Jr., one of our executive officers, during 2011. North Houston paid Earl C. Austin an aggregate of $583,799 in salary, non-equity incentive bonus, health and welfare coverage and 401(k) plan matching contributions for 2011. In addition, during 2011, we granted to Earl C. Austin 3,746 shares of restricted stock, with a grant date fair value of $83,686, vesting in three equal annual installments beginning in February 2012. This restricted stock was granted on the same terms and conditions as restricted stock granted to other employees in 2011. North Houston’s employment of Earl C. Austin predated Quanta’s acquisition of North Houston in 2001.

Trawick Construction Company, Inc. (“Trawick Construction”), one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, employed Doug Trawick and Matthew Trawick, the brother and son, respectively, of Kenneth W. Trawick, one of our executive officers, during 2011. Trawick Construction paid Doug Trawick an aggregate of $374,256 and Mathew Trawick an aggregate of $233,316 in salary, non-equity incentive bonus, health and welfare coverage, 401(k) plan matching contributions and vehicle allowances for 2011. In addition, during 2011, we granted to Doug Trawick 792 shares of restricted stock with a grant date fair value of $17,693, and to Matthew Trawick 896 shares of restricted stock with a grant date fair value of $19,990, vesting in three equal annual installments beginning in February 2012. This restricted stock was granted on the same terms and conditions as restricted stock granted to other employees in 2011. Trawick Construction’s employment of Doug Trawick and Matthew Trawick, respectively, predated Quanta’s acquisition of Trawick Construction in 1999.

Mears Group, Inc. (“Mears”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Quanta employed Travis Grindstaff, the brother of Nicholas M. Grindstaff, one of our executive officers, during 2011. Mears2014. Quanta paid Travis Grindstaff an aggregate of $128,504$183,373 in salary, non-equity incentive bonus, health and welfare coverage and 401(k) plan matching contributions for 2011.2014. In addition, during 2011,2014, we granted 437 RSUs to Travis Grindstaff, 560 shares of restricted stock, with a grant date fair value of $12,510,$15,496, vesting in three equal annual installments beginning in February 2012. This restricted stock was2015. The RSUs were granted on the same terms and conditions as restricted stockRSUs granted to other U.S. employees in 2011.2014.

Quanta employed David J. Ball, the son of James R. Ball, one of our directors, during 2014. Quanta paid David J. Ball an aggregate of $145,580 in salary, non-equity incentive bonus, health and welfare coverage and 401(k) plan matching contributions for 2014. In addition, during 2014, we granted 510 RSUs to David J. Ball, with a grant date fair value of $18,085, vesting in three equal annual installments beginning in February 2015. The RSUs were granted on the same terms and conditions as RSUs granted to other U.S. employees in 2014.

Transactions Involving Holder of Series F Preferred Stock

Valard Construction LP (“Valard”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Quanta, and Valard Construction Ltd. (“Valard Ltd.”), an affiliate of Valard Construction LP (“Valard”) and aalso wholly-owned subsidiary of Quanta, is a partyare parties to certain facility leases with 964125 Alberta Ltd., a corporation controlled by the spouse of Victor Budzinski, holder in a trustee capacity of the single outstanding share of Quanta’s Series F Preferred Stock. Valard and Valard Ltd. paid an aggregate of $1,503,035 to 964125 Alberta Ltd. in rent expense for 2014 related to these leases. These leases have various terms expiringthrough October 24, 2015,31, 2018, and as of December 31, 2011,2014, provided for aggregate remaining lease obligations of $2,158,444$2,906,641 through the conclusion of the lease terms. These leases relate primarily to facilities that were occupied by Valard and Valard Ltd. when Quanta acquired Valard Ltd. in 2010. We believe that the rental rates of the abovethese leases do not exceed fair market value.

In addition, Valard Ltd. and Valard rent temporary camp housing facilities from 964125 Alberta Ltd. for certain crews working in remote areas at a specified rate of $40 per person per day plus the cost of moving and setting up the camps. Valard Ltd. and Valard also rent office and wellsite trailers frompaid an aggregate of $1,301,373 in camp rental to 964125 Alberta Ltd. at a rate of

$1,000 and $1,500 per month, respectively. Valard Ltd. also leases certain personal property, including 3 trucks, from 654545 Alberta Ltd., a corporation controlled by Victor Budzinski’s spouse, at a rate of $1,400 per month.

during 2014. Valard occasionally secures from Bram Consulting Ltd., a corporation whose shares are held by one

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

67


Certain Transactions

of Victor Budzinski’s siblings, certain supervisory services, consisting of a distribution construction foreman, for $62 per hour,at an hourly rate, and the lease of certain personal property, including a track-hoe, at a monthly rate, resulting in payments by Valard to Bram Consulting Ltd. during 2014 in the rateamount of $6,000 per month.$62,924.

During 2014, Valard occasionally secures from Klondike Recreational Rentalsalso entered into two transactions with Westcan Tel Ltd. (“Westcan”), a corporation whose shares are heldCanadian company owned by onethe spouse of Victor Budzinski’s siblings, certain materials managementBudzinski. Specifically, Valard purchased heavy equipment, vehicles and other related equipment from Westcan for $3,596,460 and entered into a subcontract arrangement pursuant to which Valard performed services for Westcan and received payments in the amount of $2,199,796. We believe that the purchase price for the equipment, vehicles and other related equipment did not exceed fair market value and that the subcontract arrangement was at the rate of $52 per hour.market rates and conditions. We also believe that these transactions had a legitimate business purpose and were beneficial to Quanta.

Valard Construction 2008 Ltd. (“Valard 2008”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Valard Ltd., employed Victor Budzinski during 20112014 and paid him an aggregate of $352,565$925,047 in salary, bonus and health and welfare coverage in 2014. Valard 2008 also employed Adam Budzinski, the son of Victor Budzinski, and paid him an aggregate of $925,547 in salary, bonus, health and welfare coverage and retirement plan contributions in 2011.2014. Valard employed Adam Budzinski, the son of Victor Budzinski, and Maureen Budzinski, the sister of Victor Budzinski, during 20112014 and paid themher an aggregate of $310,642 and $143,693, respectively,$170,850 in salary, bonus, health and welfare coverage and retirement plan contributions in 2011.2014. Sharp’s Construction Services 2006 Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Valard Ltd.’s, employed Alexander Budzinski, the son of Victor Budzinski, during 2014 and paid him an aggregate of $128,199 in salary, bonus, health and welfare coverage and other compensation in 2014. In addition, during 2014, we granted (i) 2,572 RSUs to Victor Budzinski, with a grant date fair value of $91,203; (ii) 2,204 RSUs to Adam Budzinski, with a grant date fair value of $78,154; and (iii) 946 RSUs to Maureen Budzinski, with a grant date fair value of $31,227. Each of the awards vest in three equal annual installments beginning in February 2015. The RSUs were granted on the same terms and conditions as RSUs granted to other Canadian employees in 2014. The employment of Victor Budzinski, and Valard’s employment of Adam Budzinski, Maureen Budzinski, Michael Budzinski and MaureenAlexander Budzinski predated Quanta’s acquisition of Valard and its affiliates in 2010.

Quanta employed David J. Ball,All amounts associated with Valard and its affiliates, other than the son of James R. Ball, one of our directors, during 2011. Quanta paid David Ball an aggregate of $119,206 in salary, non-equity incentive bonus, health and welfare coverage and 401(k) plan matching contributions for 2011. In addition, during 2011, we granted to David Ball 354 shares of restricted stock, with a grant date fair value of $7,908, vestingRSU awards, were paid in three equal annual installments beginning in February 2012. This restricted stock was grantedlocal (foreign) currency. The amounts reflected above represent the U.S. dollar equivalent of the aggregate amounts reportable during 2014, based on the same termsspot exchange rate for such foreign currency to the U.S. Dollar on December 31, 2014, as reported by theWall Street Journal.

Transactions Involving Holder of Series G Preferred Stock

Northstar Energy Services Inc. (“Northstar”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Quanta, is party to a facility lease with Kehr Developments Inc., a corporation controlled by the Jay Gunnarson, beneficial holder of the single outstanding share of Quanta’s Series G Preferred Stock. Northstar paid $622,387 to Kehr Developments, Inc. in rental expense for 2014 related to the facility lease, and conditionsthe lease has a term through January 2024. As of December 31, 2014, the remaining lease obligations were $5,826,863. Northstar is also party to a residential crew house lease with Jay Gunnarson. Northstar paid an aggregate of $31,866 to Jay Gunnarson in rental expense for 2014 related to the crew house lease, and the lease has a term through January 2016. As of December 31, 2014, the remaining lease obligations were $34,174. These leases relate to properties that were occupied by Northstar when Quanta acquired Northstar on January 14, 2014. We believe that the rental rates of these leases do not exceed fair market value.

All amounts associated with Northstar were paid in local (foreign) currency. The amounts reflected above represent the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amounts reportable during 2014, based on the spot exchange rate for such foreign currency to the U.S. Dollar on December 31, 2014, as restricted stock granted to other employees in 2011.reported by theWall Street Journal.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

68


Certain Transactions

Review of Related Party Transactions

We have adopted a written policy and procedures for the review, approval and ratification of transactions with related persons. Under our policy, related persons include, among others, our executive officers and other senior level employees, directors, principal stockholders, immediate family members of such persons and any other person that could significantly influence our policies. The transactions covered under our policy generally include any business transaction between Quanta and a related person, including, among others, the sale of inventory or supplies to or the purchase of inventory or supplies from a related person, and the supply of services to or receipt of services from a related person. Related party transactions involving an amount exceeding $120,000 and in which any of our directors, director nominees, executive officers, beneficial owners of greater than five percent (5%) of any class of our voting securities, andor any immediate family members of the foregoing, respectively, may have an interest require the pre-approvalapproval of the Audit Committee. In considering the approval of any related party transaction, a legitimate business case must be presented that includes the reasons that the transaction is beneficial to Quanta and does not pose an actual conflict of interest.Quanta.

SECTIONSection 16(a) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCEBeneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our directors and executive officers and persons who own more than 10% of a registered class of our equity securities to file various reports with the SEC concerning their holdings of, and transactions in, our securities. Copies of these filings must be furnished to us. Based solely on our review of the copies of those forms furnished to us and written certifications from our directors and executive officers, we believe that, during 2011,2014, all of our directors and executive officers were in compliance with the applicable filing requirements.requirements, except that one report for Jesse E. Morris covering one RSU award was filed two days late and one RSU award for Peter B. O’Brien was inadvertently omitted from a report and was subsequently reported on a Form 5 filed on February 17, 2015.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

69


Committee Reports

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

We have reviewed and discussed the foregoing Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management. Based on our review and discussions with management, we have recommended to Quanta’s Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

This report is furnished by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.

Louis C. Golm, Chairman

Ralph R. DiSibioBernard Fried

Vincent D. FosterMargaret B. Shannon

Bruce RanckPat Wood, III

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

70


Committee Reports

REPORT FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

The Audit Committee is composed of four independent directors and operates under a formal written charter adopted by the Board of Directors.

As members of the Audit Committee, our primary purpose is to assist with the Board of Directors’ oversight of (1) the integrity of Quanta’s financial statements, (2) Quanta’s compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements, (3) the independent registered public accounting firm’s qualifications and independence, and (4) the performance of Quanta’s internal audit function and independent auditors. The Audit Committee is solely responsible for the appointment and compensation of Quanta’s independent registered public accounting firm. Management is responsible for Quanta’s financial reporting processes, including its system of internal controls, and for the preparation of the consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Quanta’s independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for expressing an opinion as to whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatements based on their audit. Our responsibility is to monitor and review these processes. In carrying out our role, we rely on Quanta’s management and independent registered public accounting firm.

We have reviewed and discussed Quanta’s audited consolidated financial statements with management. Management has confirmed to us that the financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

In addition, we have discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Quanta’s independent registered public accounting firm, the matters required to be discussed by the statement on Auditing StandardsStandard No. 61,16, as amended, as adoptedissued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3200T.Board.

We have received written disclosures and the letter from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent registered public accounting firm’s communications with us concerning independence, and we have discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP its independence from Quanta.

Based on our review and discussions referred to above, we recommended to Quanta’s Board of Directors that Quanta’s audited consolidated financial statements be included in Quanta’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011,2014, for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Bernard Fried, Chairman

James R. Ball

J. Michal ConawayVincent Foster

Worthing F. Jackman

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

71


Independent Auditor

AUDIT FEES

The Audit Committee of the Board has adopted a policy requiring pre-approval by the Audit Committee of all audit and permissible non-audit services to be provided by our independent registered public accounting firm. These services may include audit services, audit-related services, tax services and other services. On an annual basis, the Audit Committee reviews and, as it deems appropriate, pre-approves the particular services to be provided by our independent registered public accounting firm and establishes specific budgets for each service. The term of any pre-approval is 12 months from the date of pre-approval, unless the Audit Committee specifically provides for a different period. The Audit Committee must be informed promptly of the provision by our independent registered public accounting firm of each service that is pre-approved by the Audit Committee. In addition, the Audit Committee may periodically revise the list of pre-approved services and related fee levels, based on subsequent determinations. Any services expected to exceed pre-approved fee levels require the specific pre-approval of the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee may delegate pre-approval authority to one or more of its members.

The following table details the aggregate fees billed by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, for fiscal years 20112014 and 2010:2013:

 

  2011   2010               2014                              2013                

Audit Fees(1)

  $2,258,790    $1,776,529  $3,234,089  $2,449,557  

Audit-Related Fees(2)

   171,180     799,719   151,166   189,883  

Tax Fees

   70,343     20,000   20,000   10,000  

All Other Fees(3)

   2,869     2,573 �� 19,893   2,867  
  

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

 

Total

  $2,503,182    $2,598,821  $3,425,148  $2,652,307  

 

(1)

Represents fees for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual consolidated financial statements, reviews of our interim consolidated financial statements, reviews of documents filed with the SEC, evaluation of the effectiveness of Quanta’s internal control over financial reporting, state licensing pre-qualification filings, and the financial statement auditaudits of onecertain of our subsidiaries, as well as out-of-pocket expenses incurred in the performance of audit services.

 

(2)

Represents fees for professional services rendered for other assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our consolidated financial statements, including fees for consultations as to the accounting treatment of specific transactions based on current and proposed accounting standards, fees related to financial, tax and Foreign Corrupt Practices Act due diligence work associated with potential international ventures,acquisitions, and fees related to consultations in connection with Quanta’s correspondence with the SEC or other regulatory authorities, and consultation fees related to the implementation of information technology solutions, as well as out-of-pocket expenses incurred in the performance of audit-related services.

 

(3)

Represents fees for an accounting research software tool.tools.

The Audit Committee has reviewed the services performed by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and the related fees and has considered whether the provision of non-audit services by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP is compatible with maintaining the independence of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. During 2011,2014, no fees for services outside the scope of audit, review, or attestation that exceed the waiver provisions of 17 CFR 210.2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) were approved by the Audit Committee.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

72


Independent Auditor

PROPOSAL NO. 2

RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Audit Committee has appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as ourQuanta’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2012.2015. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP has served as ourQuanta’s independent public accounting firm since June 2002. We are asking our stockholders to ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm. Although ratification is not required by our bylaws or otherwise, the Audit Committee is submitting the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP to our stockholders for ratification as a matter of good corporate practice. In the event the stockholders do not ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee will reconsider the appointment. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee in its discretion may select a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in the best interests of Quanta and its stockholders.

Representatives of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP are expected to be present at the annual meeting and will be provided an opportunity to make a statement, if they choose, and to respond to appropriate questions.

Ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series FG Preferred Stock, voting together as a single class, present at the meeting in person or by proxy and entitled to vote on this proposal.

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a voteFOR ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm, and proxies executed and returned will be so voted unless contrary instructions are indicated thereon.firm.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

73


Advisory Vote to Approve

Executive Compensation

PROPOSAL NO. 3

ADVISORY VOTE ONTO APPROVE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The Board is committed to excellence in corporate governance. As part of that commitment, and as required by Section 14A(a)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Board is providing Quanta’s stockholders with an opportunity to provide an advisory vote to approve the compensation of Quanta’s NEOs, as described inExecutive Compensation and Other Matters” above, includingCompensation Discussion & Analysis”and Analysis,”“Executive Compensation” above, the compensation tables and the accompanying narrative disclosure, set forth in this proxy statement.

Based on the results of stockholder voting at the 2011 annual meeting, the Compensation Committee intends to seek stockholder guidance on executive compensation by conducting future advisory votes on executive compensation annually until the next stockholder advisory vote on the frequency of future advisory votes, which is scheduled to occur no later than the 2017 annual meeting. At the 2014 annual meeting of stockholders, over 98% of Quanta’s stockholders voting on the “say-on-pay” proposal approved the compensation of our NEOs as described in our proxy statement filed with the SEC on April 10, 2014.

The Compensation Committee establishes, recommends and governs all of the compensation and benefits policies and actions for the NEOs, as set forth herein under “Executive Compensation – 2014 Summary Compensation Table.” Additional information regarding the Compensation Committee and its role is described above in the “Compensation Discussion and& Analysis” section of this proxy statement and the related tables and narrative disclosure.

Quanta’s compensation philosophy is designed to align our NEOs’ incentives with short-term and long-term stockholder value creation;creation, to attract, motivate and retain the best possible executive officer talent;talent by maintaining competitive compensation programs, to tie cash and stock incentives to the achievement of measurable company, business unit and individual performance goals that are associated with strategies intended to differentiate Quanta from its peers, to tie stock incentives to the achievement of measurable company goals that are linked to our long-term strategic plans;plans, and to promote an ownership culture. Consistent with our compensation philosophy, Quanta’s executive compensation program links a substantial portion of compensation to both individual and company performance, with approximately two-thirdsa significant portion of target total direct compensation of NEOs each year being “at-risk” and, therefore, dependent upon performance against individual and company incentive targets. Moreover, equity-based awards provide an important role in our executive compensation program, providing alignment with stockholders, creating incentives for the increase of stockholder value and promoting an ownership culture. Finally, Quanta’s executive compensation program is designed to award superior performance and provide consequences for underperformance. The

Overall, the Compensation Committee believes that the total compensation paid and awarded to Quanta’s NEOs in 2014 is reasonable and appropriate. Annual cash incentives were aligned with 2014 company performance and the NEOs’ achievement of individual and company short-term and long-term performance goals against which we measured performance were partially metobjectives in 2011, resulting in below-target awards to each NEO. Despite reduced incentive payouts in 2011 due to overall performance being below target, equity-based incentive awards for 2011 nevertheless represented a substantial portion of executive compensation as a percentage of total direct compensation (base, short-term cash incentive and2014. Certain long-term equity incentive). Specifically:

Approximately 75%incentives awarded to our NEOs during 2014 rewarded achievement of target total direct compensationperformance objectives and specific transactions in 2011 for the Executive Chairman, 73% for the Chief Executive Officer, and 65%,2013. Other long-term equity incentives awarded to our NEOs under our new plan design either remain subject to further evaluation based on average for the remaining NEOs, was “at risk” performance-based compensation.

The total direct compensation paid for 2011 consisted of equity, base salary and short-term incentive as follows:

   Executive
Chairman
  CEO  Other NEOs
(on average)
 

Equity

   51  44  38

Base salary

   37  42  48

Short-term incentive

   12  14  14

For 2011, the actual total direct compensation of Messrs. O’Neil, Haddox, Trawick, Austin and Jensen was approximately 59%, 28%, 32%, 30% and 40%, respectively,below the median target direct total compensation for comparable positions within our peer group, and Mr. Colson’s compensation was not benchmarked. The Compensation Committee believes that the actual total direct compensation for 2011 for Quanta’s NEOs is appropriate considering that Quanta did not fully achieve its financial performance goals and the individuals did not fully achieve their individual strategic goals for the 2011 performance year.

The Compensation Committee continually reviews best practices in governance and executive compensation. In observance of such best practices, Quanta:

does not provide supplemental retirement benefits or non-qualified deferred compensation plans for the NEOs;

has incentive plans that discourage undue risk and align executive rewards with short-term and long-term company performance; and

encourages executivesperformance or are structured to have a meaningful ownership interest in the company and regularly reviews the NEOs’ holdings of Quanta common stock against pre-established ownership guidelines.promote retention.

For the reasons discussed above, the Board unanimously recommends that stockholders vote in favor of the following resolution:

“RESOLVED, that the compensation of Quanta’s named executive officers, as described pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission in Quanta’s proxy statement for the 2012

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

74


Advisory Vote to Approve

Executive Compensation

2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, including without limitation, the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the compensation tables and the accompanying narrative disclosure, is hereby APPROVED.”

Advisory approval of the resolution on Quanta’s executive compensation requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares of Common Stock, Series F Preferred Stock and Series FG Preferred Stock, voting together as a single class, present at the meeting in person or by proxy and entitled to vote on this proposal.

The results of this vote are not binding on the Board, whether or not the proposal is adopted by the aforementioned voting standard. While the resolution is non-binding, the Board values the opinions that stockholders express in their votes and in any additional dialogue. In evaluating the vote on this advisory resolution, the Board intends to consider the voting results in their entirety.

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a voteFORthe advisory resolution approving Quanta’s executive compensation.

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

75


ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONAdditional Information

Stockholder Proposals and Nominations of Directors for the 20132016 Annual Meeting

Stockholders who desire to submit a proposal for inclusion in ourQuanta’s proxy materials for our 2013the 2016 annual meeting of stockholders may do so by complying with the procedures set forth in Rule 14a-8 of the Exchange Act. To be eligible for inclusion in our proxy materials under Rule 14a-8, stockholder proposals must be received by Quanta’s Corporate Secretary at our principal executive offices no later than December 11, 2012.2015. Stockholder proposals should be addressed to Corporate Secretary, Quanta Services, Inc., 2800 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2600, Houston, Texas 77056.

Under our bylaws, with respect to any stockholder proposal that is not submitted for inclusion in next year’s proxy statement under Rule 14a-8, but instead is proposed to be presented directly at our 20132016 annual meeting, and with respect to any stockholder nominees for director election, a stockholder’s notice must be received by our Corporate Secretary at the address of our principal executive offices set forth above not earlier than January 17, 201322, 2016 and not later than February 16, 201321, 2016 (unless the 20132016 annual meeting date is before April 1721 or after July 26,June 20 in which case we must receive such notice not earlier than the close of business 120 days before such annual meeting date and not later than the close of business on the later of 90 days before such annual meeting date and 10 days after we first publicly announce the date of such annual meeting). However, if the number of directors to be elected at the 20132016 annual meeting of stockholders is increased and we do not publicly announce the nominee(s) for the new directorship(s) by February 6, 2013,11, 2016, a stockholder’s notice solely with respect to nominee(s) for the additional directorship(s) must be received by our Corporate Secretary not later than 10 days after we first publicly announce the increase in the number of directors. Any such stockholder proposal and director nomination must comply in all respects with the specific requirements included in our bylaws. Our bylaws are available on Quanta’s website atwww.quantaservices.com under the heading “Corporate“Investors & Media / Corporate Governance.” If a stockholder’s notice regarding a stockholder proposal or director nomination is received after the applicable deadline, our proxy materials for the 20132016 annual meeting of stockholders may confer discretionary authority to vote on such matter without any discussion of the matter in the proxy statement for our 20132016 annual meeting of stockholders.

Proxy Solicitation Costs

The proxies being solicited hereby are being solicited by Quanta. Quanta has not engaged an outside proxy solicitor for the annual meeting. The costs of soliciting proxies on the enclosed form, which may include the cost of preparing, printing and mailing the proxy materials, will be borne by Quanta. Our officers, directors and other employees may, but without compensation other than their regular compensation, solicit proxies by further mailing or personal conversations, or by telephone, telex, facsimile, postings on our website or other electronic means. We will also request banks, brokers and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries to forward proxy materials to the beneficial owners of our common stock and obtain their voting instructions. We will, upon request, reimburse brokerage firms and others for their reasonable expenses in forwarding solicitation materials to the beneficial owners of our common stock.

Other Matters

As of the date of this proxy statement, the Board does not know of any other matter that will be brought before the annual meeting. Pursuant to Quanta’s bylaws, additional matters may be brought only by or at the direction of the Board. However, if any other matter properly comes before the annual meeting, or any adjournment or postponement thereof, the person or persons voting the proxies will vote on such matters as recommended by the Board or, if no recommendation is given, in accordance with their best judgment and discretion.

In some instances, only one proxy statement and annual report is being delivered to multiple stockholders sharing an address unless we have received contrary instructions from one or more of those stockholders. Quanta undertakes to promptly deliver a separate copy of such materials to any stockholder at a shared address to which a single copy

By Order of the documents was delivered. A stockholder who wishes to receive a separate copyBoard of the proxy statement or annual report now or in the future, or stockholders sharing an address who are receiving multiple copies of the proxy statement or annual report and wish to receive a single copy of these documents, should notify Quanta by contacting our Investor Relations Department in writing at Quanta Services, Inc., 2800 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 2600, Houston, Texas 77056 or by phone at 713-629-7600.Directors,

LOGO

By Order of the Board of Directors,

Carolyn M. Campbell

Corporate Secretary

LOGO

Carolyn M. Campbell

Corporate Secretary

Houston, Texas

April 10, 20129, 2015

    LOGO

  2015 Proxy Statement

76


ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS OF

QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

May 17, 201221, 2015

Please date, sign and mail your proxy card in the

envelope provided as soon as possible.

i    Please Detach and Mail in the Envelope Providedi

Important Notice Regarding the Availability

of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting:

Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 17, 2012

The Notice & Proxy Statement and 2011 Annual Report to Stockholders is/are available atwww.proxyvote.com.

QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

PROXY FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON MAY 17, 201221, 2015

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned hereby appoints James H. HaddoxDerrick A. Jensen and Tana L. Pool,Steven J. Kemps, and each of them, with full power of substitution to represent the undersigned and to vote all of the shares of Common Stock in Quanta Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), that the undersigned is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company to be held on May 17, 2012,21, 2015, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, (1) as hereinafter specified upon the proposals listed on the reverse side and as more particularly described in the Proxy Statement of the Company dated April 10, 20129, 2015 and (2) in their discretion upon such other matters as may properly come before the meeting, including without limitation, to vote on the election of such substitute nominees as such proxies may select in the event any nominees named on this card become unable to serve as director. By granting this proxy, the undersigned hereby revokes any proxy previously granted by the undersigned (other than any proxy granted with respect to shares of Series F Preferred Stock or Series G Preferred Stock).

ALL SHARES OF COMMON STOCK REPRESENTED HEREBY WILL BE VOTED AS SPECIFIED. IF YOU SIGN AND RETURN THIS PROXY BUT DO NOT MAKE ANY VOTING SPECIFICATIONS, SUCH SHARES WILL BE VOTED “FOR” THE NOMINEES LISTED IN PROPOSAL NO. 1, AND “FOR” PROPOSAL NOS. 2 and 3.

 

Address Changes/Comments:
Address change/comments:

(If you noted any Address Changes/

(If you noted any Address Changes and/or Comments above, please mark corresponding box on the reverse side.)

(Continued on the reverse side.)

(Continued and to be signed on the reverse side)


ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS OF

QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

May 17, 201221, 2015

VOTE BY INTERNET - www.proxyvote.com

Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form.

ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF FUTURE PROXY MATERIALS

If you would like to reduce the costs incurred by our company in mailing proxy materials, you can consent to receiving all future proxy statements, proxy cards and annual reports electronically via e-mail or the Internet. To sign up for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions above to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access proxy materials electronically in future years.

VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903

Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions.

VOTE BY MAIL

Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED.

 

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE FOLLOWING NOMINEES:
ForAgainst  Abstain  
1.     Election of Directors    

    Nominees:

James R. Ball

¨¨¨

John R. Colson

¨¨¨

J. Michal Conaway

¨¨¨

Ralph R. DiSibio

¨¨¨

Vincent D. Foster

¨¨¨

Bernard Fried

¨¨¨

Louis C. Golm

¨¨¨

Worthing F. Jackman

¨¨¨

James F. O’Neil III

¨¨¨

Bruce Ranck

¨¨¨

Pat Wood, III

¨¨¨
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE FOLLOWING:
  For Against AbstainForAgainstAbstain
1. Election of Directors
2. To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm ¨ ¨ ¨

James R. Ball

¨¨¨

J. Michal Conaway

¨¨¨

Vincent D. Foster

¨¨¨

Bernard Fried

¨¨¨3. To approve, by non-binding advisory vote, Quanta’s executive compensation ¨ ¨ ¨

In their discretion, the Proxies are authorized to vote on such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

Louis C. Golm

¨¨¨

Worthing F. Jackman

¨¨¨

James F. O’Neil III

¨¨¨

Bruce Ranck

¨¨¨

Margaret B. Shannon

¨¨¨

Pat Wood, III

¨¨¨
NOTE: In their discretion, the Proxies are authorized to vote on such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.
To

For address change the address on your account, please check the box at the right and indicate your new address in the address space above. Please note that changes to the registered name(s) on the account may not be submitted via this method./ comments, mark here

(see reverse for instructions)

 ¨

Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by duly authorized officer.

 

Signature:

  

 

  Date:

 

Signature:

Date:  

 

Signature (PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX)DateSignature (Joint Owners)Date

Note: This proxy must be signed exactly as the name appears hereon. When shares are held jointly, each holder should sign. When signing as executor, administrator, attorney, trustee or guardian, please give full title as such. If the stockholder is a corporation, please sign in corporate name by duly authorized officer, giving full title as such and indicating full corporate name. If the stockholder is a partnership, please sign in partnership name by duly authorized person, giving full title as such and indicating full partnership name.


QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

PROXY FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON MAY 17, 201221, 2015

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned hereby appoints James H. HaddoxDerrick A. Jensen and Tana L. Pool,Steven J. Kemps, and each of them, with full power of substitution to represent the undersigned and to vote the share of Series F Preferred Stock in Quanta Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), that the undersigned is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company to be held on May 17, 2012,21, 2015, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, (1) as hereinafter specified upon the proposals listed herein and as more particularly described in the Proxy Statement of the Company dated April 10, 2012 (the “Proxy Statement”)9, 2015 and (2) in their discretion upon such other matters as may properly come before the meeting, including without limitation, to vote on the election of such substitute nominees as such proxies may select in the event any nominees named on this card become unable to serve as director. By granting this proxy, the undersigned hereby revokes any proxy previously granted by the undersigned (other than any proxy granted with respect to shares of Common Stock) to the extent necessary to avoid casting a number of votes greater than the number of votes that the undersigned holder of the Series F Preferred Stock is entitled to cast.

THE SHARE OF SERIES F PREFERRED STOCK REPRESENTED HEREBY WILL BE VOTED AS SPECIFIED. IF YOU SIGN AND RETURN THIS PROXY BUT DO NOT MAKE ANY VOTING SPECIFICATIONS, SUCH SHARE WILL BE VOTED “FOR” THE NOMINEES LISTED IN PROPOSAL NO. 1 AND “FOR” PROPOSAL NOS. 2 AND 3.

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the

Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be heldBe Held on May 17, 201221, 2015:

The Notice, Proxy Statement and 20112014 Annual Report to Stockholders are available atwww.proxyvote.com.

SERIES F PREFERRED STOCK

 

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE FOLLOWING NOMINEES:
ForAgainst  Abstain  
1.     Election of Directors    

    Nominees:

James R. Ball

¨¨¨

John R. Colson

¨¨¨

J. Michal Conaway

¨¨¨

Ralph R. DiSibio

¨¨¨

Vincent D. Foster

¨¨¨

Bernard Fried

¨¨¨

Louis C. Golm

¨¨¨

Worthing F. Jackman

¨¨¨

James F. O’Neil III

¨¨¨

Bruce Ranck

¨¨¨

Pat Wood, III

¨¨¨
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE FOLLOWING:
  For Against AbstainForAgainstAbstain
1. Election of Directors

Nominees:

2. To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm ¨ ¨ ¨

James R. Ball

¨¨¨

J. Michal Conaway

¨¨¨

Vincent D. Foster

¨¨¨

Bernard Fried

¨¨¨3. To approve, by non-binding advisory vote, Quanta’s executive compensation ¨ ¨ ¨

Louis C. Golm

¨¨¨

Worthing F. Jackman

¨¨¨

James F. O’Neil III

¨¨¨

Bruce Ranck

¨¨¨

Margaret B. Shannon

¨¨¨

Pat Wood, III

¨¨¨NOTE: In their discretion, the Proxies are authorized to vote on such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

SignatureDateCapacityNumber of Votes to be Cast as indicated herein

Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by duly authorized officer.


QUANTA SERVICES, INC.

PROXY FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON MAY 21, 2015

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned hereby appoints Derrick A. Jensen and Steven J. Kemps, and each of them, with full power of substitution to represent the undersigned and to vote the share of Series G Preferred Stock in Quanta Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), that the undersigned is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company to be held on May 21, 2015, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, (1) as hereinafter specified upon the proposals listed herein and as more particularly described in the Proxy Statement of the Company dated April 9, 2015 and (2) in their discretion upon such other matters as may properly come before the meeting, orincluding without limitation, to vote on the election of such substitute nominees as such proxies may select in the event any adjournment or postponement thereof.nominees named on this card become unable to serve as director. By granting this proxy, the undersigned hereby revokes any proxy previously granted by the undersigned (other than any proxy granted with respect to shares of Common Stock) to the extent necessary to avoid casting a number of votes greater than the number of votes that the undersigned holder of the Series G Preferred Stock is entitled to cast.

THE SHARE OF SERIES G PREFERRED STOCK REPRESENTED HEREBY WILL BE VOTED AS SPECIFIED. IF YOU SIGN AND RETURN THIS PROXY BUT DO NOT MAKE ANY VOTING SPECIFICATIONS, SUCH SHARE WILL BE VOTED “FOR” THE NOMINEES LISTED IN PROPOSAL NO. 1 AND “FOR” PROPOSAL NOS. 2 AND 3.

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the

Annual Meeting of Stockholders to Be Held on May 21, 2015:

The Notice, Proxy Statement and 2014 Annual Report to Stockholders are available atwww.proxyvote.com.

SERIES G PREFERRED STOCK

 

Signature:THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE FOLLOWING NOMINEES:THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE FOLLOWING:
ForAgainstAbstainForAgainstAbstain
1. Election of Directors

Nominees:

2. To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm¨¨¨

James R. Ball

¨¨¨

J. Michal Conaway

¨¨¨

Vincent D. Foster

¨¨¨

Bernard Fried

¨¨¨3. To approve, by non-binding advisory vote, Quanta’s executive compensation¨¨¨

Louis C. Golm

¨¨¨

Worthing F. Jackman

¨¨¨

James F. O’Neil III

¨¨¨

Bruce Ranck

¨¨¨

Margaret B. Shannon

¨¨¨

Pat Wood, III

¨¨¨
NOTE: In their discretion, the Proxies are authorized to vote on such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

  

 

  Date:

  

 

Signature  DateCapacity  Number of Votes to be Cast as indicated herein:

herein

Note: This proxy must be signedPlease sign exactly as the name appearsyour name(s) appear(s) hereon. When shares are held jointly, each holder should sign. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, attorney, trustee or guardian,other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If the stockholder is a corporation or partnership, please sign in corporate name by duly authorized officer, giving full title as such and indicating full corporate name. If the stockholder is a partnership, please sign inor partnership name by duly authorized person, giving full title as such and indicating full partnership name.officer.