►
From YouTube: Interim Joint Committee on Agriculture
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
Thank
you,
Mr,
chair
I
am
privileged
to
have
as
my
guest
today
the
associate
Dean
for
facilities
at
the
UK
College
of
AG,
who
I
also
happen
to
call
Dad
Dad
raise
your
head,
raise
your
hand,
so
I
hope.
The
committee
will
make
him
feel
welcome
today.
Welcome.
A
A
To
point
out
he's
my
Constitution
awesome:
all
kinds
of
connections
I
want
to
introduce
a
college
intern
or
graduate
fellow
that'll
be
with
us
for
the
next
year.
I
understand
Emily
Wiley.
If
you
stand
and
be
recognized,
everyone
may
not
can
see
you
there.
She
is
welcome
Emily.
A
C
You
Mr
chairman:
it's
come
to
my
attention
that,
because
of
her
late
arrival
into
the
Senate,
a
lot
of
house
members
may
not
know
our
newest
member,
so
I
know
she
just
introduced
her
dad,
but
I
think
she
should
also
if
it's
okay
with
you
Mr
chairman,
be
given
the
opportunity
to
introduce
yourself.
So
everyone
on
the
committee
knows
her.
Yes,.
B
A
We
were
about
to
bypass
Susan
here,
I
was
so
anxious
to
get
into
the
business.
So
let's
pause
for
roll
call.
D
E
F
E
D
A
We
have
a
quorum
and
now
we
can
get
started
with
our
business,
so
we'll
bring
up
Gordon
Sloan
and
his
group
Kentucky
Department
for
natural
resources
and
I'll.
Ask
you
guys
once
you
get
seated
there
push
the
button
on
your
mic.
The
green
light
should
stay
on
and
then,
if
you
will
introduce
yourself
for
the
record.
A
A
E
G
Scott
Schneider
I'm
the
state
conservation
engineer
for
the
USDA
natural
resources
conservation
service
in
Kentucky.
Thank.
A
A
E
Thank
you
good
chairman.
We
may
have
rescheduled
things
a
little
bit
for
you
I'm,
going
to
go.
First,
I,
don't
have
a
lot
I'm
going
to
talk
about
water
shirt,
Watershed,
Conservancy
districts
and
Watershed
dams
Scott
here
from
the
natural
resources
conservation
service,
is
going
to
have
a
more
robust
presentation,
so
I'm
going
to
have
him
go
second,
if
that's
okay
with
you,
yes,.
E
You
so
we're
going
to
talk
about
con
Watershed,
Conservancy
districts
and
Watershed
dams.
Most
of
these
Watershed
dams
were
built
in
the
1960s
and
70s
Kentucky
has
200
of
those
dams.
They
were
mostly
constructed
to
have
a
lifespan
of
either
50
or
perhaps
in
a
few
cases
up
to
100
years.
So
if
you
start
doing
the
math,
they
were
built
in
60s
and
70s
50-year
lifespan.
Most
of
them
have
reached
the
limit
of
their
design.
E
So
what
do
we
do?
Next?
One
of
the
important
pieces
is
the
local
sponsors
and
that's
where
I'm
going
to
talk
about
Watershed
Conservancy
districts.
Most
of
these
Watershed
dams
in
Kentucky
are
owned
and
maintained
by
Watershed
Conservancy
districts.
Some
are
owned
by
City
governments
or
County
governments,
but
the
bulk
is
by
the
Conservancy
District.
E
They
are
a
creation
of
Statute.
They
are
a
sub-district
of
Soil
and
Water
Conservation
District
in
the
county.
D
E
Gets
a
little
more
complicated
but
I'm
not
going
to
get
into
the
weeds
too
much
just
let's
just
say
within
each
County,
there
is
a
Soil
and
Water
Conservation
District,
and
if
there
is
a
Soil
and
Water
con
Conservancy
District,
it's
it
reports
back
up
the
chain
to
the
Conservation
District,
and
these
Watershed
Conservancy
districts
are
responsible
primarily
for
flood
control
within
that
Watershed
erosion
control
and
the
dams.
Water
usage,
flood
prevention.
Things
like
that.
E
However,
those
assessments
are
typically
very
low.
Many
of
them
haven't
been
changed
since
they
were
first
instituted
they're
assessed
based
on
the
land
value
or
acreage
and
I
like
this
slide,
because
it
really
brings
home
that
these
levees
that
the
Conservancy
districts
are
able
to
Levy
are
monetarily
insignificant
to
funds,
a
dam,
Rehabilitation
project
or
to
repay
a
bond
or
to
cover
the
cost
of
Rehabilitation
projects.
E
So
Corey
is
going
to
cover
the
concert
or,
let
me
let
me
mention
one
more
thing.
So
Scott
from
nrcs
is
going
to
talk
about
paying
for
the
dams
a
little
bit
when
they,
then
they
need
a
rehabilitation
project,
but
the
cost
for
a
rehabilitation
project
can
be
many
millions
of
dollars.
We're
going
to
talk
about
a
few
of
them.
Scott
has
some
more
examples,
so
this
Levy
that
the
Watershed
Conservancy
districts
have
is
pretty
minute.
It's
certainly
not
enough
to
cover
their
local
cost
share.
E
H
Yes,
so
in
this
current
fiscal
year,
the
budget
Bill
allocated
five
million
dollars
for
this
purpose
for
rehabilitation
for
the
non-compliant
and
the
high
Hazard
Watershed
dams,
so
that
money
can
be
used
as
grants
for
the
dam.
Rehabilitation
and
the
districts
can
apply
for
this
through
the
Soil
and
Water
Conservation
Commission
and,
as
I
mentioned
they're
just
used
for
Grants
to
these
local
sponsors
to
help
aid
in
that
percentage
for
what
they
need
to
do.
The
rehabilitation.
E
So
that
35
percent
is
going
to
be
pretty
steep.
Let's
talk
about
some
of
the
priorities
that
the
nrcs,
the
national
resources
conservation
Services
come
up
with.
So
they've
identified
three
of
these
dams
in
Kentucky
as
the
top
priorities.
You
see
two
of
them
here.
The
top
two
are
both
in
Madison
County.
The
bottom
two
are
governed
by
The
Watershed
Conservancy
District
in
the
counties,
but
the
first
one
is
actually
owned
by
I.
Think
Berea.
The
cost
there
is
14
is
going
to
be
for
the
rehabilitation
project
between
14.3
to
20
million
dollars.
E
So
we
understand
that
Berea
has
that
match.
So,
let's
go
on
to
the
second
and
third
redlick
number
12
FRS
stands
for
flood
retarding
structure,
that's
in
Madison
County
and
the
total
estimated
cost
to
rehabilitate
that
dam
is
anywhere
from
eight
to
ten
million
dollars.
So
the
local
sponsors
share
is
going
to
be
somewhere
between
2.8
3.5
million
dollars,
the
other
one
that
the
nrcs
has
identified
as
a
top
priority.
E
Remember,
we've
got
200
of
these
throughout
the
state,
but
we're
only
going
to
talk
about
these
three
first
and
the
third
one
is
the
East
Fork
Clarks
River
FRS
flood
retarding
structure,
number
32
in
Marshall
County,
the
total
estimated
construction
costs
to
rehabilitate
that
dam
is
10
and
a
half
million,
so
the
local
Watershed
Conservancy
district
has
to
find
3.5
million.
F
You
and
thank
you
for
bringing
this
to
my
attention.
This
is
something
I
need
to
learn
more
about
I,
see
the
top
three
priorities.
I
looked
very
quickly
through
the
two
packets
of
handouts.
Do
we
have
a
listing
of
the
200
or
a
map
or
a
chart
where
we
can
see
where
these
are
all
across
the
Commonwealth.
E
I
Along
with
representative
King's
question
about
the
list,
do
you
all
have
these
ranked
by
the
condition
they're
in?
Do
you
have
any
kind
of
ranking
on
that?
So
maybe
we
would
know
in
our
area
which
ones
might
be
moderate
or
poor
or
fair.
That
might
be
coming
down.
The
pike
that
we
might
have
to
address
in
the
future.
J
Can
you
give
and
give
an
example
of
the
type
of
work?
That's
going
to
have
to
be
done
requires
that
type
of
expenditure
I
mean
just,
for
example,
I,
just
completely
rehabilitated
a
lake
that
I
owned
myself
for
40
acres
and
pipes
were
rusted
and
things
of
that
nature,
but
it
seems
like
when
we
get
the
government
by
all
the
cost
goes
to
the
roof.
G
Right,
so,
if
if
they
want
to
use
the
federal
matching
funds,
they
have
to
meet
the
federal
criteria,
and
that
typically
means
a
higher
storm
event
that
the
dam
has
to
deal
with,
usually
the
100
year
or
higher,
and
that
usually
typically
means
raising
the
dam
and
changing
the
spillway.
Raising
the
spillway
armoring,
the
spillway
or
you
know,
making
a
bigger
pipe
through
them
to
meet
those
criteria.
E
May
I
say
Scott
here
probably
had
is
going
to
cover
a
lot
of
the
questions
that
are
being
asked.
It
may
be
good,
you
just
go
ahead
and
let
him
speak
I
agree.
Thank
you
appreciate.
G
So
the
national
inventory
dams
with
the
nid
there's
93
000
in
Nationwide
and
29
500
dams,
nrcs,
assisted
with
and
of
those
29
500
there's
about
12
000.
That
would
be
considered
under
the
Watershed
program
that
we
assisted
with
the
others
that
the
nrcs
assisted
with,
would
be
like
just
regular
Farm
ponds,
but
they're
big
enough
to
make
the
nid
list
and
they
all
come
in
all
shapes
and
sizes.
Some
of
these
are
from
Kentucky's.
You
can
tell
by
the.
B
G
Red
soil,
but
mostly
in
rural
areas,
is
with
our
place
and
they're
originally
there
to
help.
G
You
know:
flood
control
and
erosion,
control
and
sometimes
for
recreation,
and
so
a
lot
of
people
mention
the
the
current
program
law
that
is
under,
which
is
the
pl
566,
which
is
the
third
one
down,
but
there's
actually
a
total
of
four
different
parts
or
different
laws
that
this
was
funded
through
or
laws
that
were
enacted
so
that
we
could
use
federal
funding
to
to
build
some
of
these
dams
and
help
some
of
the
the
concerns
out
there
on
the
landscape,
Public
Law,
five
34.
G
G
That's
the
authorization
for
the
Watershed
program
and
historically,
the
warship
program
has
been
the
best
example
of
federal
state,
local
and
private
Partnerships.
The
federal
side
we
come
in
for
the
technical
and
financial
assistance,
your
local
sponsors
they're,
going
to
be
responsible
for
land
rides
operation
of
Maintenance
and
states
have
also
helped
with
funding
and
some
technical
support.
Where
and
there's
also
been
private
easement
donations,
here's
a
U.S
map
of
where
the
dams
are
located
and
47
of
the
50
states
have
Watershed
dams
on
them.
G
You
can
see
that
you
know
the
southeast
and
the
Southern.
Plains
have
a
lot
a
lot
of
these
dams
and
the
different
colored
dots
are
based
on
the
the
public
law
that
it
was
authorized
under.
G
And
you
know
why
do
we
get
into
the
program
in
the
first
place?
Well,
you
know
it
was
for
flood
control,
water
supply,
a
few
Municipal
Place
erosion
control,
Recreation,
Wetland,
restoration,
wildlife-
and
these
are
all
you
know-
Nationwide
equate
to
about.
You
know:
2.4
billion.
That's
the
reason
our
you
know.
G
Our
protesters
went
into
these
programs
and
built
these
dams
across
these
rural
communities
or
across
these
rules,
landscape,
and
we
must
mentioned
earlier
when
you
know
when
a
lot
of
these
dams
are
built,
but
you
can
actually
see
there
and
this
bar
graph
that
in
the
60s
they
were
actually
literally
building
two
a
day
of
these
dams
and
so
yeah
in
like
the
64,
it
looks
like
a
600
and
then,
of
course,
over
the
years,
it's
tapered
off
as
far
as
building
new
dams,
but
you
can
tell
where
the
majority
was
built
and
that
kind
of
equates
to
what
we've
mentioned
earlier,
that
there's
a
design
life
is
coming
due
on.
G
Most
of
these
dams
and
50
years
is
typical.
If
it's
a
low
Hazard
Dam,
if
it's
a
high
Hazard
Dam,
it
may
have
had
a
hundred
year
life
and
what
that
means
really.
Is
that
this,
the
sediment
that
I
was
going
to
collect
and
some
of
the
other
infrastructure
parts
were
supposed
to
last
100
years,
so
it
could
store
up
to
100
Years
of
sediment
or
it
could
store
or
the
the
pipes
and
the
infrastructure
that
it
contains
would
have
lasted
and
not
corroded
for
100
years.
G
That's
kind
of
the
criteria
we
went
off
of-
and
you
can
see
here
since
you
know
2022,
there
should
be
58
so
we're
over
halfway.
Now
of
these
dams
are
meeting
their
design
live,
Across
the
Nation
and
here's
some
examples
of
what's
happening.
Just
in
these
dance
and
the
attention
you've
got
a
corrosion
on
some
of
these
pipes,
a
deterioration
of
concrete
the
upper
right.
You
can
see.
Sediment
I
got
another
photo
of
that
one.
In
the
background
of
this
one
you
can
see.
Sediment
has
accumulated
in
that
stream.
G
That's
coming
in
and
fill
that
sediment
or
fill
that
stream
with
sediment
to
the
max
it
looks
like
and
then
the
foreground.
That's
a
pipe
going
through
the
dam,
and
this
was
the
same.
This
is
the
structure
in
1982
and
then
in
1995
there's
the
same
structure,
so
it's
completely
filled
in
now.
Not
this
is
not
necessarily
a
bad
design
of
any
kind.
It's
just
that
it's
meant
to
collect
it
for
50
years
and
then
it
can
be.
It
needs
to
be
rehabilitated.
G
Here's
a
camera
shot
of
inside
of
a
pipe,
it's
a
leaking
joint.
So
these
are
some
things
we
we
typically
see
that
are
going
wrong
with
these
dams,
but
in
the
most
thing
that
we
see
is
these
encroachment
of
Downstream
development
people,
building
homes,
businesses
Downstream
of
these
structures
that
the
Aries
don't
flood
anymore
because
of
these
structures
they're
doing
their
job
and
people
have
gotten
comfortable,
have
forgotten
the
flooding
risk?
G
Okay,
so
that
was
kind
of
a
national
picture.
Let
me
transition
into
where
Kentucky
stands.
We've
we've
actually
used
three
of
the
four
different
authorizations
in
Kentucky
to
to
build
Watershed
dams
and,
as
mentioned
earlier,
200
of
them
were
built
in
Kentucky
and
a
little
stats
of
those
48
are
considered
high
Hazard
potential
17
are
significant
as
a
potential
than
135
of
those
are
low
and
131
or
beyond
the
50
years
in
hold,
and
you
can
see
the
benefits
that
these
give
us
annually:
five
and
a
half
of
flooding
and
6.7
of
non-flooding.
G
So
a
total
of
about
a
12
million
total
of
benefits
and
there's
the
three
that
projects
that
we've
mentioned
that
are
currently
funded
and
they're
all
in
the
design
stage.
Redlick
one
Relic
12
and
Esports
Club
River
32,
and
we
do
have
a
completed
project
Plum,
Creek
18
we
did
in
2007
I'll
show
a
picture
of
that
later.
G
So
here's
a
map
of
all
the
sites
that
are
under
the
Watershed
program
in
Kentucky.
You
can
see
it's
heavily
to
the
West
a
lot.
A
lot
of
those
dams
are
low
Hazard,
but
you
can
see
that
a
lot
a
lot
of
the
dams,
the
majority
of
the
dams,
are
out
west.
G
Now
his
breakdown
of
the
high
Hazard,
that's
really
more
evenly
distributed
all
right,
the
east
and
the
West
are
about,
even
as
far
as
who
has
the
high
Hazard
dams.
Here's
significant
if
you're
curious,
mostly
out
west,
and
then
here
is
the
low
Hazard,
which
predictably
is
mostly
out
west
135
of
those.
G
And
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
Downstream
development
is
is
one
of
the
the
biggest
factors
that
we
see
for
making
our
these
projects.
The
need
to
have
Rehabilitation
done
of
that
48
that
were
high,
Hazard
24
were
originally
designed
to
meet
the
high
Hazard
potential
classification,
so
that
leaves
us
24
that
are
been
that
have
been
changed
over
their
life
to
to
classified
as
high
Hazard.
G
That's
mostly
because
of
the
downstream
of
development,
because
there's
no
authority
to
control
the
downstream
development
of
a
lot
of
these
dams
and,
like
I,
said
today,
we've
actually
rehabilitated
one
of
those
24.,
so
that
leaves
us
another
47
to
rehabilitate.
If
you
want
to
rehabilitate
all
of
the
48.
G
G
You
know
the
hazard
classification,
the
general
condition
of
the
dam
and
an
estimate
of
how
much
it'll
cost
that's
a
fairly
cheap
process
and
then
that'll
be
used
to
fund
the
next
phase,
the
planning
phase,
and
that
could
be
you
know,
a
million
dollar
a
phase,
and
then
the
design,
also
probably
a
million
dollar
phase
in
the
construction
phase
I
was
mentioned
earlier,
could
be
in
the.
G
G
G
Some
of
these
low
Hazard
dams
could
be
rehabilitated,
but
they
probably
wouldn't
rank
high
and
so
therefore,
probably
won't
get
that
Federal
funding,
because
Across
the
Nation
there's
many
more
High
Hazard
dams
that
are
in
need
of
funding
and
in
RCS,
we'll
we'll
pay
for
the
assessment.
The
planning,
the
design
and
then
65
percent
of
the
construction
cost
and
that
35
percent
would
be
on
will
be
on
the
sponsor
to
cover
main
triggers
again
age
of
damn
structure,
problems
sediment,
maybe
there's
some
damage,
dogs
or
Spillway,
but
the
big
one
and
bold.
G
There
is
Downstream
development
which
changes
the
classification
and
therefore
no
longer
meets
the
division
of
waters
criteria
or
the
national
criteria
for
for
safety.
G
If
you're
curious
about
the
federal
funding,
that's
out
there
or
has
been
spent
recently,
you
can
see
since
since
1998
2009
there
wasn't
a
whole
lot
of
funding
nationally
being
put
in,
but
since
then
is
really
taking
an
uptick
and
I
think
we're
pretty
secure
in
having
national
funding
there.
At
least
for
for
the
predictable
future
at
2003,
I
just
have
a
little
bit
shown
there,
but
there
is
the
actual.
G
You
know
the
2000
and
23
numbers
haven't
fully
come
in
yet,
but
here's
the
2022
numbers,
you
know
they
we've
allocated
112
million
dollars
plus
and
those
have
gone
into.
Damn
assessments,
the
plans,
designs
and
construction
so
safe.
To
say
that
there's,
the
federal
funding
part
is
is
pretty
secure.
I
guess
is
the
point
of
this
slide.
G
Budgeting
the
mess
I
mentioned
most
of
this
before,
but
the
sponsor
needs
to
show
evidence
that
they
are
committed
and
they
they
can
do
their
funding
part
and
they
can
do
operation
and
maintenance
of
it.
G
And
the
sponsor
is,
you
know,
responsible
for
The
Upfront
reimbursement
and
then
the
federal
share
will
come
in
to
reimburse
them
and
so
just
to
kind
of
break
the
65
35
down.
So
for
every
dollar
the
sponsor
contributes.
You
know,
1.86
will
be
contributed
by
the
federal
government
towards
these
construction
projects,
and
but
we
won't
reimburse
for
any
expenses
that
are
for
permitting
licensing,
operation
and
maintenance
and
any
part,
that's
for
a
municipal
part
of
the.
D
G
That
would
be
on
the
sponsor
too.
So
if
there's
a
city
that
wanted
to
use
the
water
for
for
the
city,
then
that
structures,
piping
and
things
come
from
that
will
be
on
the
sponsor
to
to
fund,
but
it
would
be
under
the
design,
but
the
funding
for
for
those
additional
Parts
would
be
through
this
through
the
city
or
for
the
sponsor
I
mentioned
earlier.
This
is
one
of
our
success
stories
as
far
as
nrcs
has
been
involved
in
to
rehabilitate
and
it's
the
Plum
Creek
18
in
in
2007..
G
It
was
a
fairly
cheap
one.
We
re
replace
the
pretzel
Spillway
Riser
that
concrete
structure
you
see
in
the
water
and
then
we
were.
We
did
some
some
work
to
the
down
Downstream
toe
drain,
as
we
call
it
and
put
some
rock
rip
wrap
on
a
downstream
toe,
so
it
ended
up.
You
know.
The
final
cost
was
around
250
000
to
sponsor
I
was
responsible
for
some
of
that,
but
nrcs
covered
about
a
150
000
on
that.
G
Any
questions
of
kind
of
where
we
were
nationally
and
where
we
are
now
with
nrcs
in
the
Watershed
program.
A
We
do
have
some
questions,
we'll
start
with
representative
all.
K
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
thanks
for
the
information
and
presentation
I
think
we
heard
from
some
of
you
all
during
the
session
about
this
issue
as
well.
So
it's
certainly
good
to
have
the
follow-up
and
get
more
details.
I've
got
a
couple
of
questions
around
the
financing
piece
of
this,
so
these
top
three
priority
projects.
You
said
the
first
one,
the
local
bar
I,
guess,
Bria
City
or
Madison
County.
K
They
decided
to
go
ahead
and
be
the
sponsor
and
pay
for
their
match
and
go
ahead
and
do
that,
and
so
they
didn't
have
to
use
the
5
million
that
we
had
already
allocated
in
the
budget.
But
is
there
any
kind
of
requirement
to
assess
the
5
million
or
the
state
funds
for
the
local
entity
to
kind
of
like
co-sponsor
together
that
way,
the
entire
responsibility
of
that
35
percent
match
is
not
on
the
state
of
the
Kentucky.
E
So
the
Soil
and
Water
Conservation
Commission
they're
the
ones
that
will
decide
who
gets
what
so
we'll
leave
it
up
to
them.
That's
their
statutory
responsibility,
but
it
does
look
like
those
two
dams.
The
one
in
Madison
County,
one
in
Marshall
County,
will
eat
up
most
of
that
five
million
dollars.
That's
already
been
allocated,
but.
K
K
K
G
F
K
So
I
guess
my
question
would
be
to
how
many
total
dams
in
the
state
of
Kentucky
right
now
would
be
eligible
for
the
65
Federal
match.
And
how
much
do
we
have
a
total
number
of
dollars?
It
would
take
for
us
to
address
those
day.
G
G
Yeah,
so
we
yeah,
we
prioritized
12
of
those
24
and
the
number
we
came
up
with
to
to
do
the
construction
is
about
97
million
and
so
we're
looking
at
34
million
dollars
of
the
sponsor
share
for
those
12.
and.
L
G
N
Thank
you,
I'm,
just
glad
the
dams
are
getting
some
attention.
Gordon
knows
I've
sponsored
damn
legislation
for
a
long
time
and
and
this
I'm
glad
the
federal
government's
finally
kind
of
stepping
up
and
and
being
a
little
more
aggressive,
but
I
I'm
curious
as
the
aggressiveness
of
the
inspection
protocol,
whether
the
state
and
how
much
Reliance
or
division
of
that
responsibility,
state
and
federal-
and
you
mentioned
the
difference
of
criteria
and
I'm
a
little
interested
in
that.
How
much
of
a
difference
is
it
and
how's
Kentucky
doing
for
those
standards.
E
Scott,
if
you'll
address
the
the
difference
in
standards,
our
within
the
energy
environment,
cabinet,
the
department
for
Environmental
Protection
has
a
division
of
water
and
they
are
the
ones
responsible
for
inspecting
the
dams.
So
you
know,
just
in
the
case
of
the
red,
looks
number
12
in
Madison
County.
They
have
identified
it
as
having
many
deficiencies,
so
that
is
why
it's
also
come
to
the
attention
of
the
nrcs.
G
Through
I
think,
our
standards
are
just
more
up
to
date
than
Kentucky's.
I
can't
be
for
sure
of
that,
because
I'm
not
familiar
exactly
what
the
division
of
waters
is,
but
I'll
give
you
one
example:
the
criteria
for
doing
the
hazard
potential
classification.
G
We
go
up
from
the
Top
If
it
the
dam
was
to
breach
and
the
water's
atop
a
dam.
Kentucky's
is
dogs
only
Spillway,
which
is
sometimes
you
know,
five
to
ten
feet
below
the
top
of
the
dam
so
and
I
think
the
division
of
water
is
flexible
enough
to
use
engineering
judgment
to
go
up
the
top
of
dam.
If,
if
need
be,
if
you
thought
that
well,
there
is
plenty
of
Hazard
Downstream.
We
maybe
should
go
that
route,
but
I
would
I,
don't
have
a
full
understanding
of
this.
N
G
G
All
I
can
go
off
of
is.
Has
that
my
previous
slide
and
we're
definitely
within
you
know
the
50
million
to
100
million
dollar
range
most
years
that
they're
committing
to
it.
N
And
the
budget
question
would
be,
you
know,
we're
going
into
a
budget
cycle
and
from
a
fairly
immediate
risk
and
in
light
of
flooding,
that's
already
been
highlighted
and
that
we've
lived
with
in
East
End.
You
know
West
Kentucky
what
what
would
be
a
fair
number
or
will
the
department
be
asked
ask
asking
for
a
specific
amount
to
address
some
of
this
in
your
budget
request
or.
E
I,
don't
think
we're
prepared
to
say
what
a
specific
request
would
be
because
we
do
have
to
work
with
the
nrcs
with
their
budget
when
that's
available
as
well.
As
you
know,
right
now
we
have
12
dams
that
are
at
the
highest
need.
So
this
is
not
going
to
be
something
that
we
can
do
immediately
but
which
we
think
it's
going
to
cost.
You
know,
probably
in
the
neighborhood
24
to
30
million
dollars
over
time,
so
we
haven't
identified
a
specific
amount
that
we
would
need.
N
E
J
J
Because
they're
not
built
to
100,
it
seems
like
to
me
sometimes
at
my
point
I'm
making
is
that
sometimes
I
think
the
government
comes
in
with
overkill
on
these
Hundred
Year
standards
and
so
I
I'm
interested
from
a
Kentucky
perspective
I'm,
maybe
somebody
that
has
been
involved
this
year.
You
know,
if
you
see
things
that
are
failing,
then
you
can
understand
why
they
would
be
changed
to
a
hundred
year
standard.
G
Right
so
there's
a
distinction.
We
probably
need
to
make
here
just
because
there's
a
high
Hazard
potential
that
doesn't
mean
it's
important
for
health
of
the.
If
you
will
of
the
dam,
it
just
means
that
it
doesn't
meet
the
the
criteria
for
a
large
storm
to
hit
it.
For
example,
they
could
be
a
perfectly.
G
You
know
well
maintained
everything's
in
working
order,
it's
just
that
it
could
over
top
and
that
over
topping
it
wasn't
designed
to
do,
for
example,
so
all
I
can
do
is
go
off
of
what
we've
got
so
far,
and
it's
it's
the
24
that
I
always
say
would
be
the.
In
my
opinion,
the
highest
need
I'm.
J
Primarily
concerned
about
the
additional
cost
and
might
be
involved
in
the
construction
from
Raising
it
from
a
50-year
flood
requirement
to
a
hundred
year,
then
the
only
other
question
I
have
is
you
mentioned
about
environmental
assessments?
Our
environmental
assessments
required?
Are
they
necessary
for
an
existing
structure?
I
can
understand
now,
if
you're
building
a
brand
new
one,
why
do
we
have
to
go
through
a
new
environmental
assessment
if
we're
just
rehabbing
an
existing
structure.
G
That's
a
great
question:
we
are
usually
raising
the
dam
as
I
mentioned,
or
lengthening
this
auxiliary
Spillway,
which
is
the
the
side
channel
that
it
will
go
across.
So
if
they're
like
50
feet,
we
may
increase
them
to
100
feet
wide
to
allow
more
water,
it
will
crease
the
top
of
dam
and
all
those
change
the
footprint
of
the
dam
or
the
impact
area
it
has
Upstream
for
flooding.
If.
E
G
B
G
B
So
I'm
curious
what
we
know
about
the
dams
that
might
currently
be
in
that
significant
risk
category
that
could
very
quickly
shift
to
high
Hazard
risk
based
on
development
and
what
sorts
of
systemic
Communications
we
might
have.
What
are
the
processes
to
communicate
with
local
governments
about
that?
Are
these
things
taken
into
account
when
local
governments
are
reviewing
zoning
and
development
plans,
and
do
we
have
any
sense
of
how
many
of
our
significant
risk
dams
could
very
quickly
become
High,
Hazard
risk
dams.
G
No
I
don't
have
a
good
answer
for
you
on
how
many
of
the
significance
could
be
high
Hazard,
but
if
it's
significant,
it
typically
means
there's
a
large
potential
for
property
damage,
meaning
maybe
a
road
would
get
impacted
or
there's
a
a
lot
of
significant
outbuildings
or
something
like
that.
Downstream
that
could
be
impacted.
The
bridge
could
be
impacted
fairly
significantly,
but
the
depth
of
water
over
it
would
not
inundate
or
excuse
me
be
a
detriment
to
passenger
vehicles.
G
So
it's
kind
of
in
that
judgment.
Zone
you're
like
well,
it's
it's
over
topping
stuff,
but
it's
not
really
creating
a
hazard
to
life.
You
go
to
Hazard
alive.
Then
you
go
to
the
high
Hazard
standards,
so
it
would
take
the
building
of
a
home
and
then
one
home.
It's
a
hazard
as
far
as
zoning
I
can't
speak
to
that.
L
You
Mr
chairman,
the
like
a
lot
of
these
things.
There's
a
a
lot
more
glory
in
building
the
project
and
maintaining
the
project,
and
it
sounds
like
the
state
of
Kentucky
has
a
lot
of
deferred
maintenance
staring
Us
in
the
face
and
if
I
can
sift
through
what
you're
saying
I'm,
we
have
a
100
million
dollar
need,
probably
like
an
immediate
need
and
clearly
the
feds
aren't
going
to
cover
their
65
percent
on
that.
L
If
we
have
100
million
to
cover
the
United
States
in
federal
funding
and
the
feds
have
only
taken
care
of
19
projects.
So
if
the
state
of
Kentucky
sees
this
as
a
need,
an
important
need-
and
we
want
to
put
some
more
money
into
it
and
we
want
to
bypass
the
federal
government
and
go
ahead
and
fund
some
of
these
projects.
G
So
I
want
to
clarify
there
that
in
the
government
or
federal
government
is
supplying
100
000.
Excuse
me:
100
million
annually.
L
G
G
L
E
Know
you
may
remember:
Scott
mentioned
the
the
number
of
years
to
assess,
make
a
plan
and
finally
get
into
construction
correct.
So
that
does
take
time.
I.
L
See
what
you're
saying
so,
if
we,
if
we
put
more
money
in
there's,
there's
a
certain
period
of
time
where
we
can
continue
to
go
after
those
federal
funds
and
pull
those
down?
If,
if
we
ever
reach
a
point
where
we
can't,
you
know
where
we've
Tapped
Out
the
federal
funds,
is
there
a
way
for
us
to
to
bypass
that
system
and
just
start
working
on
these
projects?
I.
L
G
No,
no,
they
would
need
to
meet
the
state
criteria
because
there
wouldn't
be
Federal
monies
involved
and
that's
all
they'd
have
to
do
if
they
want
to
rehabilitate
it
from
a
low
Hazard
to
a
high
Hazard
and
just
what
so
the
division
of
water
would
weigh
in.
There
is
what
they
have
to
do
to
to
get
get
up
to
that
level.
Thank
you.
O
Follow-Up
to
the
previous
question,
so
if
we
were
as
a
state
to
say
thanks,
but
no
thanks
we're
going
to
go
ahead,
we've
got
the
funds
to
do.
This
am
I
correct
to
assume,
though,
what
I
thought
I
heard
you
say
is:
it
would
have
to
be
at
the
state
level
as
far
as
the
build
would
that
make
us
ineligible
for
future
Federal
funding
on
anything
that
we
build.
If
we
don't
meet
the
federal
criteria.
Does
that
make
sense
if
I'm
understanding
that
correctly.
O
Yeah,
so
when
we
have
things
that
are
built,
what
I
thought
I
heard
is
that
there
is
a
state
there's
a
state
level
and
a
federal
level
as
far
as
maybe
the
way
things
are
built
and
the
way
that
they're
constructed
and
I'm
just
curious
about.
If
we
were
to
move
forward,
would
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we
are
building
things
at
a
federal
level
in
order
to
make
sure
that
down
the
road
50
years
100
years?
If
something
needs
research,
you
know
rebuilding
or
attention
that
we
wouldn't
make
ourselves
ineligible
for
funding.
G
No
no
you're
correct
there.
There
could
be
the
potential
I'm
going
to
give
you
an
example.
The
the
sponsor
is
fully
controlled,
what
they
can
do,
whatever
they
want.
You
know
as
far
as
the
federal
level
is
concerned,
but
your
question's
valid.
G
So
let's
say
that
to
meet
the
state
criteria,
all
they
need
to
do
is
lengthen
the
width
of
the
spillway,
and
then
that
would
pass
to
the
the
acceptable
storm
and
it
it
wouldn't
need
to
be
raised,
but
in
the
federal
sense
it
would
need
to
be
raised.
If
that
would
not
make
it
ineligible
for
rehabilitation
down
the
road,
they
would
not
know
that.
A
A
Some
of
you
are
on
this
committee
also
are
on
a
r
and
I
wanted
to
get
the
picture
of
what
the
financial
needs
are
going
forward,
doesn't
all
have
to
be
in
the
2024
budget,
but
we
need
to
get
a
line
in
the
budget
that
says,
there's
a
long-term
need
out
there
and
it's
well
there'll
be
a
need
for
ongoing
funding,
as
as,
as
we
go
down
the
road,
let's
switch
gears
and
bring
the
next
group
up,
because
it's
working
do
what.
A
E
Mr
chairman,
let
me
just
say
that
we
do
have
flooding
inundation
maps
on
our
cabinet
website,
or
we
can
send
you
that
link.
If
you
would
like
to
to
have
that.
A
Yes,
any
information
you
can
provide
would
be
great
and
I
will
say:
I
will
continue
to
meet
with
this
group.
We
have,
as
you
can
see,
it's
a
complicated
and
complex
there's.
A
lot
of
moving
Parts
representative
McPherson
has
set
in
on
some
meetings
with
me,
representative
Fister.
If
some
of
the
rest
of
you
have
a
keen
interest
in
this,
you
have
some
water
shed
dams
in
your
district,
and
you
want
to
be
involved
in
the
conversations.
A
Oh
we'll
include
you
on
the
invite
list
to
sit
down
and
help
us
figure.
This
thing
out,
as
I
briefly
mentioned,
I'm
looking
for
a
way-
and
this
is
where
I'm
asking
for
your
help
and
your
input
to
streamline
this
process
to
meet
the
needs
in
a
timely
manner.
I
think
it'd
be
very
unfortunate
if
some
of
these
high
Hazard
dams
broken
and
flooded,
Downstream
and
cost
property
damage-
and
you
know,
as
you
as
you
mentioned,
development
has
happened,
downstreams
homes
and
businesses.
A
Loss
of
life
is:
is
there
so
I
want
to
keep
this
front
and
center,
but
at
the
same
time,
I
want
to
look
for
a
way
to
bring
it
up
to
date.
This
was
started
for
the
most
part
50
years
ago.
The
individuals
that
were
around
when
this
started
are
not
there.
Now
the
the
I
think
the
understanding
of
why
the
dams
were
built
has
has
passed
with
time
the
individuals
that
that
started.
This
are
no
longer
around.
A
So
it's
it's
a
new
era
I'm
looking
for
a
way
to
to
streamline
it
and
modernize
it
and
bring
the
Reconstruction
of
these
dams,
the
the
to
a
faster
pace
for
lack
of
a
better
term.
So
that's
what
our
meetings
have
been
about.
That's
what
we're
working
on
now
to
try
to
hopefully
bring
legislation
before
the
general
assembly
in
2024
would
appreciate
help
in
input.
One
of
the
Visions
I
had
was,
and
I'll
use
the
example
of
our
road
fund.
A
Every
two
years
we
put
x
amount
of
dollars
in
the
road
fund
and
I
want
to
get
this
Conservation
District
and
our
Watershed
dams,
a
line
on
them
in
the
budget
and
be
able
to
put
some
money
towards
that
every
two
years,
as
as
you
identify
what
the
needs
are
and
what
the
dollar
amount
is.
A
As
you
said,
you
have
all
the
background
work
to
do
the
engineering
and
the
the
EPA
issues.
So
it
can
take
two
three
four
years
just
to
rehabilitate
one
Dam,
but
we
have
to
know
that
the
money
is
there
to
do
that
and
that's
that's.
My
vision
going
forward
is
to
get
this
a
line
item
in
the
budget
so
that
you
guys
know
that
money
is
there
and
we
can
start
moving
forward
on
getting
these
dams
rehabilitated.
A
With
that
being
said,
is
anybody
else
got
a
question
or
comment
before
we
wrap
this
up?
I
do
want
to
say
we
have
a
group
here
today
with
us
that
we
did.
We
didn't
take
the
time
to
introduce
and
I
won't
try
to
introduce
everybody
in
the
room,
but
our
Kentucky
Cattlemen's
Association.
The
executive
committee
is
visiting
with
us
today.
Why?
Don't
you
guys,
stand
and
be
recognized?
Because
not
everybody
knows
who?
Who
our
executive
committee
is
for
Kentucky
Cattlemen's
and
welcome.
A
Any
other
groups
to
be
recognized
or,
if
not,
then
we'll
item
number
three
on
your
agenda,
no
action
required,
but
if
you
have
an
interest
in
that,
we
have
that
information
available.
Our
next
meeting
will
be
Thursday
July,
the
9th
9
A.M
I'm.
Sorry
July
20th
at
9
00
a.m.
Here,
in
this
room,
Thursday
July
20th
there's
nothing
else.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.