►
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
A
I
pledge
allegiance
to
the
flag
of
the
united
states
of
america
to
the
republic
for
which
it
stands:
one
nation,
under
god,
indivisible
with
liberty
and
justice
for
all
all
right.
I
need
a
motion
for
us
to
prove
the
minutes
of
our
last
meeting
motion
in
a
second
all,
those
in
favor
sign
of
I
pose
likewise
emotion
carries
we
have
a
very,
very
busy
agenda,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
the
members
quickly.
A
If
you
have
any
special
introductions,
does
any
of
the
members
have
any
guests
they'd
like
to
introduce
or
any
comments
or
anything
they'd
like
to
share
with
us
before
we
get
started
all
right,
seeing
none
at
this
time
directly
to
your
packet.
A
The
much
anticipated
solar
bill
as
they
as
they
call
it
is
gonna,
be
presented
to
you
today.
So
we
ask
each
of
the
members
to
to
to
listen
in
and
make
notes
and
then
we'll
try
to
do
the
questions
as
you
wrap
up,
if
that's
okay,
senator
hornback,
but
at
this
time
I'll
go
ahead
and
turn
it
over
to
you
and
ask
you
to
identify.
Have
anybody
at
the
table
identify
themselves
our
records.
C
E
A
All
right
tom,
if
you
can
hear
us,
are
you
speaking
during
the
presentation.
Are
you
going
to
make
your
comments
after
senator
horne,
back
as
as
president
of
the
bill.
F
Mr
chairman,
I'm
here
to
assist
in
any
way
that
senator
hornbeck
needs
in
terms
of
explaining
the
process
by
which
we
got
here
and
and
also
responding
to
the
11th
hour
letter
that
the
psc
regulated
utilities
said
I
assumed
to
the
committee.
A
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
As
you
all
know,
and
just
referring
to
the
sub,
I
put
the
sub
out
last
week
so
that
everyone
would
have
the
ability
to
look
at
the
sub,
whether
it
be
the
merchant
generators,
the
electric
cooperatives
and
everybody
that
has
an
interest
in
this
bill.
I
want
to
make
sure,
mr
chairman,
that
everybody
had
ample
time
to
look
at
it.
C
I'll
tell
you
this
bill
is
not
the
perfect
bill
and
there
are
some
changes
that
that
I
know
myself
still
need
to
be
made
in
it.
There'll
be
some
floor
amendments
and
things
some
minor
technical
changes,
but
I'm
gonna
go
through
the
bill.
C
Mr
chairman,
I
know
you've
got
a
big
agenda
today
and
go
through
and
highlight
just
a
few
things
about
how
we
got
here
and
where
we're
at
this
all
started
back
in
the
springtime
back
in
may,
I
think,
is
when
we
started
meeting
and
I've
met
all
summer
long
with
various
groups,
those
parties
that
were
going
to
be
affected,
and
we
have
been
all
over
the
board
with
several
drafts
of
what
this
bill
is.
C
C
It's
somebody
that
is
over
10
acres
and
that's
sort
of
a
relative
number,
because
people
ask
me:
how
did
you
come
up
with
10
acres?
Well,
we
had
to
have
a
limit
somewhere,
and
I
think
mr
kent
chandler's
here
from
the
public
service
commission
today
and
sits
on
the
siding
board
as
chair
of
the
siting
board,
and-
and
I
know
that
if
we
went
too
small
on
acreage
that
they
would
just
be
overloaded
with
the
amount
of
applications
they
had
and
wouldn't
be
able
to
handle
them
all.
C
I
also
know
if
we
go
too
high
that
it
doesn't
suit
a
lot
of
people
out
there
in
the
commonwealth.
So
that's
just
a
number
that
we
came
up
with
on
on
where
to
start
at
on
the
emergency
generating
facility,
the
merchant
generating
facility
is
a
facility
that
is
not
regulated.
C
They're,
a
non-regulated
generating
facility
not
subject
to
the
psc
and
they're
selling
wholesale
on
the
grid,
is
what
they're
doing
so
they're
different
from
the
way
they've
been
getting
electricity,
they're
they're
they
just
they.
They
deliver
the
energy
a
little
bit
different
when
you
go
through
this
there's
two
things
that
we
wanted
to
do.
I
wanted
about
two
or
three
things
I
wanted
to
do
in
this
bill.
C
I
wanted
to
keep
home
rule
as
much
as
we
can.
I
think
those
local
people,
especially
the
counties
that
have
zoning,
which
is,
I
think,
is
about
67
counties
in
the
state
of
kentucky.
The
others
have
got
physical
courts
and
stuff.
I
wanted
them
to
have
the
ability
to
decide
what
suited
their
area
of
the
state
the
best
senator
turner
I
know
up
in
martin
county
and
whether,
if
that's
in
your
district
or
what
district
it
is,
you
know
we're
building
a
solar
or
the
solar
field's
going
to
be
built
on
an
old
strip
mine.
C
The
setbacks
need
to
be
different.
Senator
carpenter
there's
a
facility
going
in
up
your
way.
That's
that's
going
to
be
in
more
of
an
area.
That's
ag
land
some
residential
houses
around
there
and
I
think
that
the
local
zoning
board
needs
to
be
in
charge
of
deciding
what
setbacks
are.
So
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we
have
in
this
bill.
The
locals
can
take
precedence
over
that,
whether
it
be
in
setbacks
and
a
lot
of
other
restrictions
they
may
have.
I
wanted
the
locals
to
have
the
final
say
in
that.
C
C
In
my
legislation
they
do
have
to
notify
the
local
officials
180
days
before
they
go
to
that
siting
board,
because
even
though
it's
a
public
private,
a
deal
that
they're
doing-
and
we
need
to
respect
that-
and
we
need
not
to
impede
that
process
any
at
all
or
any
way
and
inflict
any
damage
to
especially
the
property
owner,
there's
still
the
rights
of
the
citizens,
because
these
are
such
large
facilities
to
be
notified
of
what
may
be
coming
to
their
county.
So
they
can
have
some
input
on
it.
C
So
there
is
a
notification
process
and
they
would
have
to
have
a
public
hearing
180
days
prior
to
going
to
the
sighting
board.
Now
this
is
the
time
and
if
you
look
at
time
frames,
this
is
a
time
when,
generally
from
what
I've
heard
from
amanda
and
evan
and
others
that
they've
already
been
out
and
done,
those
private
treaty
deals
with
the
landowners
on
if
they
need
their
land,
how
much
of
the
land
they
need
on
price
and
everything
else.
C
The
construction
contract
or
certificate
that
they
get
in
my
bill
lasts
for
three
years.
If
any
of
you
all
read
here
lately,
I
know
there's
a
problem
with
some
of
the
interconnections
with
some
of
the
companies,
not
all
of
the
companies,
but
there
is
a
problem
with
interconnection
and
because
our
grid
was
not
set
up
to
take
power
onto
the
grid
from
a
lot
of
different
places,
pjm
for
one
has
had
to
delay
some
of
their
projects.
C
Like
I
mentioned,
if
you
are
looking
through
the
bill,
the
things
like
setbacks
are
just
sort
of
a
state
recommendation.
C
Those
can
be
adjusted
by
the
local
officials
when
they're
having
it
from
the
zoning
board
or
somebody
else
in
my
bill.
The
construction
certificate,
this
siting
board,
has
all
the
jurisdiction
over
the
construction
certificate.
C
C
That's,
probably
one
of
those
things
that
needs
to
be
changed,
because
these
companies,
after
they
get
their
construction
certificate,
they're
going
to
make
changes
they're
going
to
find
out
during
construction
that
there
are
reasons
that
they
need
to
make
some
changes
in
it,
and
so
for
that,
because
the
sighting
board
is
the
one
that
does
that.
Originally,
the
sighting
board
also
has
two
local
officials
that
sit
on
that
siding
board.
So
in
order
for
them
to
continue
to
have
input
into
the
entire
process
until
the
construction
is
complete.
C
C
If
you're
going
back
to
the
decommissioning,
the
decommissioning
is
the
probably
the
one
issue
I
focused
on
more
than
anything.
You
know
the
life
of
these
panels
are
20
or
25
years.
If
you
look
back,
what's
happened
over
the
last
10
years
because
has
advanced
so
quickly.
A
lot
of
these
panels
are
being
replaced
within
10
years,
because
they're
a
lot
more
efficient.
Now
they
can
generate
a
lot
more
electricity.
C
C
But,
mr
chairman,
you're
from
the
coal
fields,
you
know
of
the
billions
of
dollars
worth
of
liabilities
that
state
has
in
coal
fields
abandoning
oil
and
gas
wells
you're
very
familiar
with
the
fact
that
every
time
you
go
fill
up
with
gas,
because
somebody
in
the
past,
in
the
legislature,
when
we
were
allowing
them
to
put
in
underground
storage
tanks,
didn't
think
about
the
decommissioning.
C
And
so
now,
when
you
go
to
fill
up
your
car
with
gas,
you
pay
a
portion
of
the
price
of
the
gas
to
go
to
cleaning
up
these
underground
storage
tanks.
I
personally
don't
want
taxpayers
to
be
on
the
hook
for
the
decommissioning
10
years
or
20
years
from
now.
Whenever
that
may
be,
I
don't
want
the
state
who's
ultimately
to
be
going
to
be
the
one
to
pay
for
these
cleanups
on
oil
and
gas
wells
and
everything
else.
C
C
So
in
the
decommissioning
it
is
pretty
strict.
It
has
a
bonding
requirement,
the
bonding
requirements
a
little
bit
different
from
things
that
we've
done
in
the
past
on
bonding,
whether
it
be
on
roads
or
anything
else,
because
this
project
can
be
a
20-year
project.
A
40-year
project
I've
seen
some
contracts
that
are
for
40
years.
We
don't
know
when
the
decommissioning
is
going
to
be
the
bonding
the
you
would
set.
A
third
party
would
set
the
bond.
C
They
would
take
into
account
the
recycling
value
of
those
products
that
are
out
there,
but
then
they
would
set
for
the
cleanup
and
everything
else
and
that's
all
spelled
out
in
the
bill
and
be
happy
later
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have
on
that.
C
That's
reviewed
every
five
years.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
that
bond
that
is
issued
today,
20
years
from
now
it
will
cover
the
full
decommissioning.
So
the
taxpayers
don't
have
to
pay
the
rest
of
it
or
the
state
doesn't
have
to
pay
the
rest
of
it.
So
to
be
looked
back
at
the
energy
environment,
cattle
do
that
and
they'll
look
back
at
it
every
five
years
and
make
sure
that
the
bond
is
keeping
up
with
it.
C
Who
knows
it
may
be
that,
20
years
from
now,
the
recycling
value
of
those
panels
may
be
higher
than
what
the
commissioning
costs
are.
We
don't
know
that
and
that's
why
I've
got
that
in
there.
So
with
that,
that's
just
a
brief
overview.
I
don't
want
to
take
up
all
of
your
time,
mr
chairman,
but
I
would
like
to
turn
it
over
to
evan
vaughn
for
evan
to
make
some
comments
to
us.
E
E
Our
projects
have
lifespans,
as
you
said,
measured
in
decades,
and
we
simply
cannot
build
a
project
without
the
support
of
the
communities
that
we
operate
in
and
that's
why
a
lot
of
the
elements
of
this
bill,
including
the
binding
decommissioning
plans
and
the
bonding
to
go
along
with
it,
are
already
a
standard
practice
for
the
solar
industry.
We
have
no
opposition
to
that
practice.
E
Being
codified
to
ensure
that
all
of
the
companies
beyond
merrick
actions
membership
are
following
the
best
practices,
I
will
say
that
the
businesses
comprising
our
membership
do
have
some
concerns
with
a
few
elements
of
this
bill
that
we
think
could
create
negative
unintended
consequences
for
the
private
sector,
economic
growth
and
job
creation
that
the
solar
industry
delivers.
However,
before
I
elaborate
on
those
concerns,
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
and
thank
you
senator
hornbeck
for
expressive
willingness
to
continue
to
work
to
refine
this
bill.
E
As
you
said,
it's
a
work
in
progress
and
we
are
very
happy
to
continue
the
conversations
with
you
to
get
into
a
place
that
I
think
all
parties
will
will
see
benefits,
and
I
think
that
before
before
I
go
there,
I
just
do
want
to
highlight
a
few
of
those
issues
that
we
see
concerning
for
the
committee's
consideration.
E
E
Again,
we
have
no
problem
with
the
decommissioning
plans,
bonds
and
similar
forms
of
financial
assurance
and
other
obligations
under
the
construction
certificate
staying
with
the
project
through
any
kind
of
an
ownership
transfer-
and
I
think
the
bill
was
extremely
clear
about
those
ongoing
responsibilities
being
in
place
and
again
we
have
no
problem
with
notifying
the
energy
and
environment
cabinet
or
other
government
entities,
as
well
as
local
officials,
in
terms
of
when
transfer
of
control
changes
for
a
project.
However,
it's
really
that
approval
of
a
private
business
transaction
that
gives
us
heartburn
to
our
knowledge.
E
E
Having
a
government
imposed,
suspension
of
an
energy
generating
project
can
have
really
significant
knock-on
implications
financially
and
otherwise
for
the
reliable
delivery
of
electricity
and
grid
services
that
our
companies
have
to
meet
in
order
to
meet
the
expectations
of
their
customers
in
the
bulk
electric
grid
and
then
finally,
we
do
hope
that
there
could
be
clarification
on
the
decommissioning
and
bonding
requirements
of
this
legislation
that
if
this
bill
does
pass
and
the
bonding
and
decommissioning
requirements
are
in
place
that
it
would,
our
projects
would
not
be
subject
to
duplicative
requirements
at
the
local
level.
E
So,
if
we're
going
to
have
a
bond,
if
we're
going
to
have
to
decommission,
that's
fine,
but
there
shouldn't
be
two
separate
bonds
or
two
separate
regulations
where
we're
posting
different
things.
So
we
just
want
consistency
there.
So
again,
thank
you,
senator
hormack
and
the
committee
for
allowing
me
to
speak
on
this
important
issue.
You
know
no
industry
wants
to
be
overly
regulated,
but
merrick
action
does
believe
that
if
these
previously
mentioned
issues
are
addressed,
the
legislation
could
enable
the
continued
responsible
growth
of
solar
in
kentucky,
and
we
certainly
want
to
to
do
that.
C
Yeah
we
evan-
and
I
have
talked
about
a
lot
of
these
changes
over
the
last
week
since
I
wrote
this
last
committee
sub
and
and
to
be
quite
open
with
you.
Some
of
these
would
have
been
incorporated.
C
Had
I
decided
to
go
on
to
do
another
sub,
but
I
didn't
think
it
was
fair
to
your
members
or
others
that
were
interested
in
the
bill
to
draft
a
new
sub
and
one
other
comment.
I'd
like
to
make
is:
is
fitz
talked
about
the
last
minute
letter
that
a
lot
of
you
all
got
from
some
of
the
the
other
generating
facilities
that
we
have
that
are
psc
regulated.
I've
got
them
from
those
companies
on
both
sides.
C
I
don't
know
whether
everybody
else
did
or
not,
but
in
my
letters
in
the
last
couple
days,
emails
in
the
last
couple
days,
not
only
those
opposed,
but
those
regulated
utilities
that
also
are
in
favor
of
this
and,
like
evan,
said
of
moving
forward
responsibly
and
mr
chairman,
this
is
a
an
industry.
That's
relatively
new
to
kentucky.
C
We
need
to
do
something
whether
this
is
the
correct
bill
or
whatever
we
do.
We
need
to
do
something
we
need
to
do
it
for
the
protection
of
of
the
taxpayers
of
the
commonwealth
of
kentucky.
C
We
need
to
do
it
to
help
the
citing
board
and
what
regulations
they're
putting
on,
and
I
know
it's
going
to
be
changed
a
year
from
now,
two
years
from
now
senator
webb,
it's
going
to
have
to
be
updated.
Like
most
other
legislation,
it's
not
going
to
be
perfect,
the
first
time
we
pass
it
so
with
that.
Thank
you
very
much,
mr
chairman.
A
A
My
staff
has
been
at
your
disposal
to
work
with
you
as
you
guys
have
gone
through,
and
so
we
appreciate
that-
and
this
is
a
big
big
piece
of
legislation
that
has
the
ability
of
impacting
a
lot
of
different
other
organizations,
which
brings
me
to
my
point.
One
of
the
concerns
that
I
had
was
the
the
changes
to
the
site
assessment
report
of
the
sar,
and
I
think
it's
an
easy
fix.
It's
the
part
where
the
issue
with
the
decommission
requirements
on
future
electric
generation.
A
I
think
we
could
make
a
change
to
just
remove
the
reference
to
sar
regulation
of
krs,
2708,
278
708
sub
section
3,
paragraph
f.
We
can
just
remove
that
and
that
takes
out
any
attention
consequences
that
I
think
it
has
that's
going
to
be
to
coal
gas,
nuclear
hydroelectric
facilities
as
well.
I
don't
think
that
was
your
intention
no,
and
so
that
would
be
one
that
I
would
recommend.
I
understand
we
probably
will
do
something
like
that
on
the
floor.
If
that's
agreeable
to
you,
I've.
A
G
Thank
you
and
chairman
hornback.
You
know
that
this
issue
is
important
to
me
and
we've
did.
We've
discussed
certain
concerns
as
well,
and
I
appreciate
your
work
on
this
and
let
me
just
preface
the
fact
that,
as
an
underground
coal
miner
and
back
in
81-ish,
I
built
a
passive
solar
home,
so
I've
always
walked
the
walk
of
energy
diversification,
but
I
have-
and
I
believe
that
bonding
and
requirements
and
decommissioning
plans
are
good
thought
and
good
planning.
G
I
have
having
also
the
energy
environment
cabinet,
the
promulgation
of
regulations
pertaining
to
this.
My
question
is:
are
there
other
states
where
that
have
a
model
in
regards
that
are
doing
this
already
in
the
jurisdictional
aspects?
How
that
would
interface
with
entities
as
far
as
just
jurisdiction,
the
application
of
administration,
administrative
regulations?
I
see
fitz
is
on
here.
He
might
have
some
insight
on
that
too,
because
you
know
how
we
lawyers
are,
mr
chairman,
but
but.
C
G
The
the
due
process
component
of
of
this
section
on
page
19,
if
you
suspend
the
operations
of
of
an
operation,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
there's
adequate
due
process
or
the
ability
to
to
maybe
not
compromise
an
entity
over
something
trivial
or
change
administration
that
it
could
be
a
change
of
interpretation.
We
all
know
how
how
that
goes.
G
So
I
want
to
safeguard
also
that
that
there's
something
in
the
process
that
protects
and
as
regulations
will
move
forward,
but
I
kind
of
like
knowing
going
in
if
there's
any
models
out
there
or
anything
like
that
and
tom
tom
may
know
that
I
see
him
pop
up
on
the
screen
there.
So
I
would
anybody
that
can
answer
that
question
would
be
great.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
D
Good
morning
chairman,
thank
you
senator
webb,
for
your
question.
Many
states
are
picking
up
this
issue
and
it
has
become
quite
the
hot
topic
across
the
country
as
more
solar
is
coming
in
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge.
Regarding
your
question
regarding
suspension
of,
or
suspension
of
operations,
no
other
state
has
picked
that
up.
D
We
see
it
as
a
very
serious
consequence,
maybe
overstepping
not
only
for
private
business,
but
also
for
the
protection
and
reliability
of
the
grid.
We
would
be
welcome
to
expanding
or
continuing
conversations
regarding
enforcement
mechanism
mechanisms.
Excuse
me
ma'am
for
ensuring
that
people
follow
the
rules
and
regulations
presented
in
front
of
them
as
part
of
doing
business
in
the
state,
but
to
be
direct.
Regarding
your
question,
we
have
not
seen
suspension
language
in
any
other
state.
C
C
The
one
thing
I
would
like
to
mention
senator
curry
and
you're
a
lot
more
familiar
with
this,
and
I
am
you
and
senator
turner,
senator
smith,
the
ones
from
the
coal
fields.
The
reason
it's
like
that
is
because
I've
been
told
about
the
stories
in
the
coal
fields
where
they
were
it's
a
little
bit
different,
but
they
were
mining.
C
Coal
they'd
be
shut
down
for
not
or
they
would
be
fined
for
environmental
problems
and
a
lot
of
other
issues
and
then
because
they
were
producing
so
much
coal
in
the
valley-
and
this
is
just
an
example-
was
maybe
mining
ten
thousand
dollars
worth
of
coal
a
day
and
they
could
get
an
attorney
for
a
thousand
dollars
a
day,
and
they
just
tell
that
attorney
to
hold
this
up
for
five
years
and
look
at
the
money.
C
They've
made
that's
from
those
horror
stories
and-
and
you
all
from
the
coal
fields
know
that
better
than
I
do
and
but
it's
a
little
bit
different
with
merchant
generators,
because
there
are
the
grid's
gonna
be
relying
on
them,
because
their
business
is
a
completely
different
business.
What
it
is
goal,
but
that
is
how
that
got
in
there,
but
I
do
think
that's
pretty
drastic.
F
Mr
chairman,
members
of
committee,
tom
fitzgerald,
kentucky
resources
council,
former
director,
I
I
I
don't
disagree
with
with
the
point
that
evan
made
with
the
point
that
amanda
made
with
the
with
senator
hornbach.
I
think
any
compliance
mechanism
that
you
put
in
place
to
assure
compliance
with
a
certificate
or
an
approval
needs
to
be
graduated
so
that
you
are
yeah
and-
and
you
know
just
use
the
example
of
the
of
the
co.
You
don't
start
out
with
a
cessation
order.
F
You
start
out
with
a
notice
of
violation
that
identifies
a
problem,
gives
you
time
to
fix
it,
and
so
whatever
mechanism
ultimately
ends
up
being
the
compliance
mechanism,
whatever
agency,
whether
it
be
an
energy
and
environment
cabinet,
or
it
be
the
public
service
commission
that
assures
compliance
with
the
certificates.
It
needs
to
be
graduated
and
it
needs
to
be
metered,
and
it
needs
to
be
to
cognizant
of
the
fact
that
you
don't.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
guess
this
question
is
direct
to
mr
vaughn.
You
said
some
of
your
members
support
the
legislation
and
some
don't
would
you
have
any
breakdown
on
on
what
percentage
are
pro
and
what
percentage
are
conn.
H
E
E
You
know
we
want
to
be
treated
with
reasonable
regulations
that
you
know,
of
course,
protect
kentucky
landowners.
As
I
said,
the
communities
are
vital
to
our
industry,
but
we
do
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
treated
equitably
with
other
industries
and
that
we're
able
to
continue
to
grow
as
a
private
business.
E
Exactly
there's
a
lot
of
it's
very
common
in
the
solar
industry.
Just
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
context.
E
Often
a
project
is
an
llc
in
and
of
itself,
and
it's
a
common
financing
mechanism
project
financing
to
have
that
risk
contained
within
that
llc,
that's
specific
to
the
project,
and
so
if
a
project
is
constructed
under
the
terms
of
the
construction
certificate,
the
panels
are
in
place,
they're
generating
electricity
and
then
that
project
gets
sold
to
another
company.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I've
got
one
little
quickie
and
then
I've
got
a
more
of
a
question
on
page
five.
It
strikes
out
the
word
neighborhood
and
I'm
wondering
if
you
can
explain
somebody
whoever
you
is
explain
that.
C
If,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
the
definition
of
residential
neighborhood,
it's
it's
one
house
on
five
acres,
the
residential
meets
a
meets
a
populated
area
of
five
or
more
acres
containing
at
least
one
residential
structure
per
acre.
C
So
we
felt
that,
like
that
was
a
little
restrictive,
because
if
you
take
a
lot
of
areas,
you
know
they're
gonna
have
a
house
breaker
on
on
five
acres.
Well,.
C
F
F
What
I
think
a
number
of
your
constituents
around
the
state
have
have
indicated
was
a
concern
which
is
respecting
property
rights
of
neighboring
property
owners,
and
so
what
this
does
is
it
doesn't
look
to
residential
neighborhoods
in
a
way
that
would
discriminate
against
you
know,
sparsely
populated
areas,
as
opposed
to
more
densely
populated
it
looks
to
the
property
boundary
and
it
sets
setbacks
based
on
the
property
boundary,
as
well
as
as
structures
on
adjoining
properties.
So
it's
more
protective
of
the
rights
of
neighbors
and
rather
than
setting
a
larger
setback
from
quote,
unquote
residential
neighborhoods.
I
I
C
My
reason
for
emergency
calls-
and
I
might
have
to
refer
to
kent
with
the
sighting
board-
that's
here
because
he's
got
the
exact
numbers,
but
they
have
already
approved
a
few
of
these
merchant
utility
merchant
facilities
and
they've
got
several
that
have
applied,
and
if
we
let
this
bill
follow
the
normal
process,
then
it
doesn't
become
into
effect
until
july.
C
So
it's
one
of
those
things.
Do
you
want
the
sighting
board
to
continue
on
like
they
are,
and
just
without
a
lot
of
statute
to
back
them
up,
go
on
and
cite
these
facilities
or
if
we,
as
a
legislature,
get
a
bill
passed
that
we're
comfortable
with
that
it
gives
them
the
sighting
board
some
direction
as
to
what
to
do.
That's
reason
for
the
emergency
clause
is
because
there
are
a
lot
of
these
applications
out
there.
C
Now
now,
one
thing
I'll
say
these
applications
that
are
out
there,
and
this
is
a
change
coming
from
the
merchant
providers.
They
will
not
go
back
in
time
and
when
I
talked
about
the
180-day
time
frame
prior
to
going
to
the
sighting
board
that
they
had
to
notify
the
public
and
have
a
public
hearing
if
they're
closer
than
that
already,
they
don't
have
to
do
that.
So
we
did
make
sure
that
we
don't
want
to
slow
down
the
projects
and
that
they
can
keep
moving
forward.
C
I
Okay,
thank
you
I'll
just
register.
I
would
like
to
put
a
flag
on
this
residential
neighborhood
definition.
I'm
thinking
maybe
residence
or
something
is
a
better
word,
but
I
would
hate
to
protect
a
buffer
on
schools,
hospitals
and
nursing
homes
and
not
include
people's
private
houses
where
they
spend
a
lot
of
time
and.
C
J
Well,
as
former
chairman
of
this
committee,
I
can
tell
you:
solar
will
really
pack
the
house
a
lot
of
times
some
of
the
members
in
this
room
weren't
on
this
committee,
when
we
were
here
probably
three
years
ago,
talking
about
one
of
the
most
contentious
solar
issues
and
probably
one
of
the
busiest
times
in
frankfurt
before
covid
hit
and
people
actually
could
show
up-
and
I
mean
this
room
was
packed
and
people
were
protesting
and
we
had
lots
of
issues
pro
and
before
and
again
so
it
was
really
amazing
of
how
things
changed
in
a
short
amount
of
time.
J
J
So
a
couple
of
things.
Madison
county
is
one
of
the
counties
that
has
had
a
tremendous
amount
of
of
merchant
solar
facilities
come
into
our
area,
and
so
they
had
to
form
reagan.
Taylor
was
our
judge
executive.
It
really.
You
know
it
sounds
like
a
great
thing
and
you
want
to
see
opportunities
for
progress
and
and
commerce
come
into
your
community.
J
So
some
of
my
friends
that
on
farms
that
are
getting
a
little
older
in
life
and
they're
like
what
am
I
going
to
do
with
this
farm,
these
merchant
farm
merchant
facilities
would
come
in
and
offer
them.
You
know
a
pretty
nice
hefty
payment
for
their
property,
either
to
purchase
it
or
to
lease
it,
and
it's
a
lot
better
than
any
cattle.
I've
ever
run
on
any
of
my
farms.
I'll
promise
that-
and
so
you
know
it's
a
it's
an
opportunity
for
these
people
to
do
it.
J
But
in
the
thing
what
senator
southworth
was
talking
about,
you
had
people
who
owned
a
house
that
overlooked
a
hillside
or
a
valley,
and
they
went
to
the
board
of
adjustments
and
said
this
is
going
to
change
the
my
view
and
how
does
that
affect
it?
J
And
so
I
knew
lots
of
friends
that
were
on
the
board
of
adjustments
that
had
lots
of
heartburn
trying
to
figure
out
what
was
the
right
thing
to
do
or
wrong
thing,
and
as
a
guy
who's
developed
quite
a
bit
of
property,
it's
real
easy
for
somebody
who
owns
something
away
from
you
to
say
man.
I
can't
believe
you're
all
building
houses
over
there.
If
I
know
you
was
going
to
do
that,
I
would
I
would
have
bought
it
and
I
said
well,
you
should
have
bought
it.
What
do
you
think?
J
How
do
you
think
we're
going
to
pay
for
this?
If
we're
not
going
to
develop
it
or
do
something,
and
so
we
have
to
protect
both
interest?
I
guess
is
my
comment,
my
the
point
of
my
story,
and
so
that's
why
we
have
to
do
pieces
of
legislation
like
this
to
be
able
to
to
be
ahead
of
the
curve,
because
I
had
people
in
my
district
that
have
called
me
and
said
jared.
What
are
you
guys
doing
for
this?
Mr
chairman,
I
use
my
first
name
here.
J
Sorry,
but
they're
saying
what
are
we
doing
for
this?
What
are
we
doing
to
make
sure
we're
protected
and
I'm
like
we're?
We're
not
really
there
yet
we're
leaving
it
to
the
local
level.
But
one
of
my
comments
and
one
of
my
close
friends
he
said
you
know
I
would
like
to
see
you
all
pass
legislation
to
make
sure
that
it
has
a
bonding
issue
and
that's
what's
in
this
bill
because
they
said
if
he
comes
to
my
farm
leases
it
and
once
the
term
is
up
on
it.
J
So
this
is
an
issue
that
was
had
a
lot
of
concerns
and
people
had
brought
to
me.
So
I'm
glad
you
see
it
there's
lots
of
issues
here
and
there's.
You
know
my
phone
lights
up
every
three
seconds
here.
Somebody
sending
me
another
text,
message
of
something
that
they
think
we
need
to
do
or
change
or
or
alter,
and
I
know
the
I
know
the
utilities
are
are-
are
kind
of
nervous
of
how
this
is
going
to
affect
them.
Senator
hornback.
J
I
assume
that
you've
worked
with
utilities
and
you'll
continue
to
work
with
them
on
some
of
the
issues
that
they're
having
concerns
with,
because
they're
worried,
in
my
opinion,
of
the
merchants
being
able
to
come
in
and
do
these
things,
but
you
know
so
many
of
our
utility
companies
are
putting
in
these
same
solar
farms
and
they're
scared
that
some
of
these
restrictions
that
may
affect
the
merchants
is
going
to
affect
them
differently
because
we
are
using
their
transmission
lines.
I
understand
the
whole
impact
of
that.
J
When
I
do
a
development,
I
have
to
put
up
all
the
cost
to
run
it's
kind
of
a
weird
deal.
When
I
do
a
development
I
pay
for
all
the
utilities,
pay
for
the
wire
and
everything
to
run
into
my
development
and
then,
when
I
go
to
hook
up
the
electric
on
the
houses,
I
build
in
my
development
that
I
put
all
the
infrastructure
in.
I
have
to
pay
for
the
for
the
meter
and
I
have
to
pay
to
hook
up
to
it
pretty
good
deal
for
them.
J
But
because,
if
I
didn't
develop
it,
then
they
wouldn't
have
the
customers,
but
we
put
all
that
infrastructure
in,
and
so
I
understand
that
they
have
a
cost
to
maintain
that
infrastructure
to
get
to
get
to
where
a
merchant
farm
can
hook
up
to
the
line
to
send
it
to
other
folks,
and
so
I
assume
they're
just
wanting
to
kind
of
protect
their
investment.
Are
you
doing
some
stuff
to
to
work
going
forward
if
we
pass
this
legislation
today
on
some
of
those
issues,
senator
hornbeck.
C
Yes,
we
are,
I
mean
I've
been
in
conversations
with
him,
senator
carpenter,
and
you
know
this
with
the
merchant
generators
they
are
selling
wholesale,
so
that
is
a
a
private
treaty,
a
private
deal
that
they
can
work
about,
what
they're
going
to
pay
wholesale
and-
and
I
think
that
a
lot
of
those
providers
that
that
own
the
infrastructure
that
own
the
grid
that
in
that
wholesale
price
they'll,
take
into
consideration.
C
They
have
to
maintain
that
grid,
so
they
do
have
the
ability
to
cut
their
own
deals
when
they
talk
about
how
it
might
affect
them.
This
is
only
for
those
merchant
generating
facilities
that
sell
onto
the
grid
wholesale
and
are
not
regulated
by
the
public
service
commission.
So
if
you're
regulated
by
the
public
service
commission
you've
been
generating
onto
the
grid
and
you
own
and
use
the
electricity
that
is,
is
generated
there,
then
you
not
be
covered
under
this
bill.
J
Well,
I
commend
you
for
your
efforts.
I
know
this.
This
issue
is
not
one,
you
don't
just
throw
a
bill
out
there
and
everybody
like
hey
it's:
okay,
let's
just
roll
with
it.
I
mean
right.
That's
like
my
buddy
tom.
There
said
you're
gonna
have
issues
that
come
up
right
last
minute
and
there'll
be
issues
that
when
you
do
a
floor
amendment
that
we're
going
to
get
blown
up
right
at
the
last
minute
of
the
floor,
whether
people
do
their
job
or
don't
do
their
job.
There's
going
to
be
issues
that
somebody
says.
J
Well,
I
don't
really
like
the
way
this
looks,
and
so
you
know
in
my
mind
you
and
I
come
in
here
12
years
ago,
together
and
you've
done
an
outstanding
job
and
always
do
what
you
say
and
it's
never
scared
to
take
on
the
tough
issues.
I'll
say
that
for
you-
and
so
we
appreciate
that
and
that's
why
I'll
make
a
motion
to
move
the
bill
forward
at
this
time,
if
that's
allowed
senator
smith
chairman,
but
I'll
I'll,
let
that
be
on
the
record
that
I'll
make
a
motion
for
the
bill
very.
A
Good
and
the
motion's
there
we
do
still
have
other
people
that
are
signed
to
speak
but
appreciate
your
comment:
senator
carpenter,
as
we
have
senator
turner
who's
up
next,
please
go
ahead.
Senator
turner.
K
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
appreciate
all
the
work
you're
doing
in
this.
It's
I've
read
it
and
read
it
and
re-read
it
and
it's
complicated
and
got
calls
like
everybody
else
did
and
one
got
mixed
up
in
another
bill.
But
I
have
a
question
for
mr
vaughn
about
this
transferring
and
he
I
think
he
used
the
bank
of
america.
That
I'm
is
that
what
I
heard
him
say:
yes,
is
he
still
on
there
he's
there?
K
My
my
question
for
him
is
he
he
did
comment
that
it's
probably
going
to
be
owned
by
llc,
a
limited
liability
corporation
and
then
they're
going
to
sell
that.
I
don't
know
if
I'm
correct
the
bank
of
america
would
probably
be
paying
that
llc
for
it
and
then
selling
it
to
somebody
because
they're
not
going
to
be
a
person
or
a
group,
that's
going
to
be
running
or
operating
it.
So
I'm
trying
to
to
get
some
kind
of
question.
I'm
on
page
18
that
area
five.
K
K
So
I'm
thinking
that
maybe
he's
just
talking
about
them,
buying
it
or
putting
a
l,
you
know
they
could
buy
it
and
have
a
mortgage
on
it
like
buying
a
house
but
they're
still
not
mechanics
or
carpenters,
to
run
a
house,
and
I
don't
know
any
other
way,
though,
to
protect
the
public
without
maintaining
the
entity
that
actually
purchases
it
be
responsible
for
all
these
things,
so
it
don't
get
passed
down
and
we
bypass
what
this
paragraph
in
my
opinion
protects.
So
I'm
all
in
favor
of
keeping
that
part.
K
It
may
be
working
some
way
with
them
on
his.
I
think
concern
about,
and
I
may
be
wrong,
but
I
would
assume
the
limited
liability
corporations
are
just
going
to
sell
it
bank's
going
to
buy
it
with
other
owners,
but
I
think
we
do
need
to
keep
language
in
here
to
protect
that,
and
I
thank
you
for
all
the
hard
work
that
you're
doing
on
it.
Thank
you.
That's
my
comment.
A
Okay,
this
time
we
have-
because
I
don't
want
to
run
out
of
time
and
have
members
have
to
leave
for
other
meetings.
We
do
have
another
group
that
signed
up
to
speak
center
hornback.
So
at
this
time
next
era,
I
guess
david
sanford,
if
you're,
if
they're
president,
they
want
to
come
up
to
the
table.
A
And,
as
you
all
come
to
the
table,
if
you
could
please
go
ahead
and
identify
yourselves
for
our
records
and.
M
Good
morning,
chairman
smith,
committee
members,
thank
you
for
this
opportunity
to
appear
before
you
today.
My
name
is
jennifer
d
valerio
of
nextera
energy
resources.
Nexera
is
a
diversified
energy
company
and
is
the
largest
generator
of
renewable
energy
from
the
wind
and
sun
in
the
world.
M
Our
business
model
is
to
build
own
operate,
our
electric
generation
facilities
through
the
life
of
those
facility
facilities,
which
includes
decommissioning.
We
establish
a
process,
a
presence
in
a
community
when
we
establish
a
process
presence.
Excuse
me
in
a
community.
Our
goal
is
to
be
a
trusted
and
reliable
community
partner.
M
My
purpose
today
is
twofold.
First,
I
want
to
thank
senator
hornback
for
his
work
on
solo
legislation.
During
the
interim
I
know
he
has
devoted
an
extraordinary
amount
of
time
on
sb
69
and
the
text
of
the
committee
sub
provided
to
stakeholders
last
week
was
much
improved
from
the
as
filed
version
of
the
bill.
M
Second,
I
want
to
convey
that
additional
work
is
necessary
to
assure
that
this
bill
is
good
policy.
The
transfer
of
control
provisions,
the
cabinet's
ability
to
shutter
an
operating
facility,
the
lack
of
means
to
reconcile
inconsistent
obligations
imposed
by
state
and
local
government
and
other
provisions
remain
worrisome.
M
L
L
I've
worked
with
public
utilities
who
purchased
the
power
and
then
turn
around
and
use
that
to
supply
renewable
energy
needs
for
customers,
industry
and
economic
development
prospects.
I've
also
represented
landowners,
who've
been
negotiating
leases
for
the
use
of
their
land
to
be
used
for
solar
development
and
then
for
a
period
of
about
five
years.
I
served
as
general
counsel
of
the
sighting
board.
So
I've
been
very
fortunate
in
my
career
to
be
able
to
see
this
really
from
every
single
angle
and
to
see
how
everything
fits
together.
L
The
goal
here
today
is
not
really
to
prevent
this
bill
from
moving
forward,
but
rather
to
just
point
out
several
areas
where
it
can
and
should
be
approved,
some
of
those
you've
heard
about
already,
but
there's
additional
ones.
Ironically,
I
don't
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
serious
dispute
as
to
what
the
outcome
should
be,
but
making
sure
that
we
have
the
correct
path
to
get.
There
is
very,
very
critical
for
a
number
of
reasons.
L
This
is
a
highly
technical
area
of
the
law,
with
many
complexities
that
span
just
the
legal,
but
also
the
engineering
and
the
operation
of
the
bulk
grid.
There's
issues
of
federal
law
that
come
into
play,
and
so
it's
critical
that
it
be
done
correctly
and
not
be
done
quickly.
The
the
purpose
of
the
citing
board
has
always
been
to
provide
a
backstop
for
situations
where
there
is
no
local
jurisdiction
that
has
the
authority
or
chooses
to
exercise
the
authority
to
make
decisions
that
have
implications
for
merchant
electric
generators
there
is.
L
There
is
a
couple
of
flaws
in
the
law.
One
of
them
is
decommissioning
which
is
not
addressed
and,
and
it's
important
that
that
would
be
addressed
in
any
new
legislation,
but
the
other
one
is
that
there's
no
way
right
now
currently
to
resolve
conflicts
between
any
government
mandate,
that
a
local
government
may
impose
upon
a
merchant
electric
generator
in
any
condition
that
the
citing
board
may
also
impose
on
that.
L
And
so
what
we
have
here
really
is,
although
it's
well
intentioned
committee
sub,
creates
administrative
burdens
on
a
merchant
electric
generating
facility
that
are
duplicative
of
what
already
exists
in
many
local
communities
and
in
fact
I
think,
they're
larger
than
what's
necessary
to
actually
solve
the
limited
problem
of.
How
do
we
make
sure
that
projects
have
an
adequate
decommissioning
bond
in
place?
L
The
redundancy
that
this
bill
creates
enhances
the
risk
for
inconsistent
and
conflicting
mandates
from
state
and
local
government
without
providing
any
means
to
address
them
house
bill
392,
which
I
think
is
also
before
this
committee
on
solar,
has
a
very
clear
primacy
provision
that
would
take
care
of
that.
This
amounts
to
new
and
additional
systemic
regulatory
risk
that
will
make
kentucky
less
attractive
relative
to
other
states.
L
Now
some
of
the
specific
problems
with
the
bill,
the
the
transfer
approval
process
in
section
seven
subsection,
five
page
18
of
the
bill
has
already
been
spoken
to
quite
a
bit
and
I'll
agree
with
everything
that
said,
it
is
very
critical
that
we
understand
whether
or
not
transfer
of
control
approval
is
necessary
when
a
construction
is
being
constructed,
which
is
the
current
law
or
whether
this
bill
is
intending
that
to
also
take
effect.
After
the
the
bill
the
or
the
plant
becomes
operational.
L
I
had
conversation
with
just
about
every
attorney
who's
practiced
before
the
citing
board
on
any
of
these
cases,
and
there
was
absolutely
zero
zero
consensus
as
to
what
this
language
of
this
bill
means,
which
creates
confusion
which
creates
uncertainty,
and
all
of
that
is
very
bad
from
a
developer's
point
of
view.
The
best
policy,
as
has
been
said,
is
that
there
should
be
notice
given
when
a
transfer
of
control
takes
place.
That
notice
should
include
who
the
new
owners
would
be.
What
the
decommissioning
bond
is
at
that
time
it
should
be
updated.
L
L
So,
what's
the
point
of
going
through
the
process
of
establishing
a
decommissioning
bond
that
names,
a
local
government
or
eec
as
the
beneficiary,
but
then
says
they
don't
have
any
responsibility
from
the
landowner's
point
of
view.
That's
the
worst
possible
public
policy,
because
now
I
have
to
wait
and
see
25
or
30
years
to
see
if
the
government
who
has
agreed
to
be
the
beneficiary
is
going
to
go
ahead
and
follow
through
with
its
commitment
to
do
the
decommissioning.
L
We've
already
talked
quite
a
bit
about
suspending
operations.
I
would
also
add
the
some
of
the
other
reasons.
Why
that's
a
that's
problematic
is
the
the
standard.
The
due
process
is
very
unclear.
How
that
would
play
out
it
may
conflict
with
the
federal
power
act.
It's
generally
federal
law
that
applies
to
how
the
grid
is
operated,
not
state
law.
L
L
The
loss
of
revenue
simply
limits
the
ability
of
a
utility
or
a
merchant
electric
generator
to
be
able
to
follow
through
on
whatever's
caused
this
problem.
To
begin
with,
it
also
makes
financing
very
different
pages,
are
section
six
section,
seven
section:
nine
expand
the
role
of
the
energy
and
environment
cabinet.
L
A
Gentlemen,
we've
got
here's,
what
I've
got.
I've
got
a
motion
in
a
second
and
I've
got
members
telling
me
that
they
have
got
they're
going
to
leave
to
go
to
another
meeting.
So
what
I
will
do
just
out
of
respect
to
everybody,
and
I
appreciate
that
you
guys
got
to
speak
last
and
I
apologize.
A
We
did
not
have
it
down
yet.
I
knew
that
I
had
been
informed
that
somebody
was
going
to
speak,
and
so
we
apologize
for
the
mix-up,
but
that's
that's
something
that
we
need
to
take
care
of,
but
nonetheless
we
have
a
motion
a
second.
If
you
want
to
just
take
a
few
seconds
to
wrap
up
to
make
your
point,
I
apologize
that
we
have
to
move
so
quickly.
L
A
I'll
say
this
to
you:
I
know
that
we've
got.
Obviously
I've
got
a
four
amendment.
I
want
to
talk
to
that's
agreeable
to
the
senator
and
that
I
will
promise
you
I
will
sit
down
with
you
all
make
myself
available,
as
I'm
sure
moses,
step
to
work
on
your
all's
concerns
and
I'm
sure
that
the
senator
will
as
well.
So
I
apologize,
but
I
I
will
have
to
cut
off
debate
at
this
time.
I'd
have
a
motion
and
a
second
at
this
time
I'll
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
roll.
A
We
all
know
in
our
communities,
that's
one
level
of
bureaucracy
that
feels
like
that.
They
don't
answer
to
the
people
and
it
puts
it,
puts
a
lot
of
businesses
at
risk.
Whenever
you
go
in
front
of
a
few
folks
that
are
in
charge
of
reading
a
book
about
this
thick
and
how
they
interpret
it,
they
like
to
operate
a
lot
in
the
gray
area,
and
so
that's
a
concern
that
I
have,
and
maybe
we
can
have
those
conversations
offline
central
back.
Thank
you.
G
Explain
my
vote.
I
like
turning
out
a
good
product
that
interfaces
well
with
the
federal
law
on
this
topic
as
well
as
interagency
law.
I
don't
think
this
bill
really
is
doing
that
appreciate
mr
goss's
expertise.
I
would
like
to
not
only
know
the
rest
of
his
concerns.
I
would
like
to
know
the
response
to
his
concerns
before
we
move
forward,
or
we
have
any
prior
to
even
drafting
floor
man
potential
floor
amendments,
so
I
think
time
is
of
the
essence
on
these.
G
H
Mr
chairman,
explain
why
I
vote.
Please
do
I
have
the
highest
respect
for
david.
He
and
I
go
way
back
and
I
respect
his
expertise
on
this
issue.
Nonetheless,
based
on
senator
hornback's
willingness
to
consider
some
floor
amendments
that
would
tighten
the
spill
up,
I
think
he
does
express
some
valid
concerns
about
the
decommissioning
process.
I
mean
we
don't
want
to
have
a
bunch
of
garbage
dumps
all
over
eastern
kentucky
and
the
rest
of
kentucky
with
solar
panels.
H
We
we've
we've
experienced
that
in
the
coal
industry
and
other
places,
so
I
actually
respect
and
applaud
his
efforts
to
make
sure
that
you
know
we
do
have
a
clean
environment
even
as
we
move
towards
clean
energy.
We
also
want
people
not
to
leave
their
mess
behind.
So
I
look
forward
to
seeing
what
his
final
product
is,
but
I'm
voting
I
to
move
it
along.
A
Yes-
and
I
vote
I
too,
and
I
apologize
for
the
time-
I
do
look
forward
to
the
fact
that
we
do
have
a
window
of
opportunity
between
now
and
the
the
bill
moving
forward.
That
seems
like
there's
a
lot
of
willingness
to
work
together
to
get
this
done.
So
thank
you
all
for
your
time.
Like
I
said
I
would
like
to
follow
up
with
you
all
personally.
If
we
could
meet
in
my
office,
but
with
that
said,
the
expression
of
the
opinion
at
the
same
should
pass
as
amended
with
this
committee
substitute
there
too.
A
So
with
that
said
that
that's
the
end
of
the
bill
moves
forward,
we
look
forward
to
getting
everybody
together
and
apologize
for
your
time
to
my
committee
members.
We
do
have
another
guest
here,
that's
going
to
come
to
the
table
quickly
and
I
apologize
to
him.
I
understand
you've
got
other
meetings
to
go
to.
This
is
on
the
rates,
the
utility
rates
that
we're
having
and
all
the
calls
many
of
us
are
getting
across
the
district.
A
As
you
take
the
table,
I'd
like
to
thank
you
for
coming,
I
know
the
many
years
I've
been
here.
It's
been
a
difficult
position
for
the
public
service
commission
to
come
with
so
much
on
your
plate
to
come
before
a
committee,
but
we
feel
like
this
is
extremely
important
to
us
and
at
this
point
I'll
I'll
turn
the
meeting
over
to
you
and
it
looks
like
we've-
got
about
probably
10
minutes
and
I
apologize,
but
you
can
just
kind
of
bring
us
up
to
speed
on
everything.
N
So,
as
always
so
I'll
introduce
myself
kent
chandler,
the
chairman
of
the
kentucky
public
service
commission,
just
the
quick
you
know
disclaimer,
I
can
only
speak
for
myself.
The
commission
can
only
speak
through
its
orders
and
anything
I
say
today
does
not
reflect
upon
the
remainder
of
the
public
service
commission.
First,
just
real
quick.
I
want
to
tell
senator
carpenter
for
his
information.
N
I
think
there's
probably
two
counties
that
are
doing
better
than
most
in
terms
of
their
you
know:
model
ordinances
and
legislating.
You
know.
Local
government
rules
and
laws
on
solar,
henderson
county
has
an
ordinance.
It's
very
good
and
madison
county
cups
have
been.
I
think
it's
something
that
other
counties
have
plenty
of
zoning
should
look
to
so
so,
as
as
all
you
know,
the
kentucky
public
service
commission
is
a
three-member
regulatory
agency
that
regulate
the
rates
and
service
of
water.
Electric
gas,
telecommunications
and
wastewater
utilities.
N
In
response
to,
I
think,
senator
smith
reached
out
to
us
yesterday
when
asked
us
to
come
and
talk
about
one
very
particular
thing
that
is
included
in
electric
utility
rates
for
those
utilities
that
we
do
regulate
and
again
we
don't
regulate
municipal
or
tva
utilities
and
that's
the
fuel
adjustment
clause.
The
fuel
adjustment
clause
is
actually
a
regulation
that
was
put
into
place.
This
is
the
40th
anniversary.
I
didn't
know
it
until
I
looked
back
this
morning
chairman
it's
40
years,
that
the
fuel
adjustment
clause
has
been.
In
effect.
N
It
is
a
fairly
straightforward
calculation
that
looks
at
a
base
amount
and
any
changes,
but
it's
actually
pretty
detailed
in
the
number
of
items
and
costs
that
it
can
include,
and
it's
it's
complicated
as
the
system
comp
gets
complicated,
so
go
back
a
couple
of
decades
before
there
were
wholesale
power
markets
and
utilities
effectively
depended
on
themselves
for
generating
electricity.
So
the
fuel
adjustment
cause
was
just
that
it
was
a
way
to
pass
through
the
increases
and
cost
of
fuel
fast
forward.
N
Now
many
of
our
utilities
are
part
of
larger
wholesale
power
networks
when
it
is
cheaper
or
more
convenient
to
buy
power
from
the
grid
they
do
so.
The
other
side
of
that
is,
it
provides
our
utilities,
more
flexibility
in
taking
their
generators
down
for
service,
because
they
don't
have
to
have
themselves
the
replacement
power.
They
can
buy
the
power
from
the
market
fast
forward
to
from
1982.
N
When
this
got
put
into
effect
to
this
last
year,
a
number
of
our
generators
that
I'm
a
bifurcate,
a
number
of
our
utilities,
are
in
one
bucket
and
another.
One
bucket
are
utilities
that
had
all
their
generation
up
and
just
experienced
higher
than
ordinary
fuel
prices.
That's
natural
gas
prices
and
coal
prices
there's
a
couple
reason
that
natural
gas
prices
are
higher
than
they
have
been,
particularly
over
the
last
10
years.
N
N
N
It
made
natural
gas
generators
more
expensive
to
run
and
relatively
cold
generators
less
expensive
to
run,
which
increased
the
amount
of
times
the
coal
generators
were
dispatched,
which
then
increased
the
demand
for
coal
and
thus
the
cost
of
coal.
So
we
saw
significant
spikes
through
the
september
october
and
november
time
frames
across
the
united
states
of
natural
gas
and
coal
prices.
Those
have
those
are
direct
inputs
into
utilities
costs
our
utilities
spend
about
a
billion
dollars
a
year
on
fuel
costs.
N
That's
relative
to
probably
that's
about
20
to
25
of
their
total
revenues
are
recovering
exclusively
fuel
costs,
so
it
has.
When
there's
a
change
in
fuel
costs.
It
has
an
outsized
impact
on
customers
bills,
a
a
fuel
adjustment
clause
on
on
folks
bills.
The
the
line
on
on
people's
bills
are
a
trailing
two
month:
recovery
of
fuel
costs.
N
So
if
fuel
costs
were
particularly
expensive
in
september
and
october,
those
september
fuel
costs
would
show
up
in
november,
and
those
october
fuel
costs
would
show
up
in
december
yeah
it's
a
it's
a
two-month
lag
and
so
the
the
higher
than
ordinary
bills
we
saw
for
those
utilities
that
were
able
to
generate
their
own
electricity
were
caused
by
their
own
fuel
being
higher
and
it
being
passed
through
two
months
after
they
experienced
those
those
higher
than
ordinary
fuel
costs.
N
Again,
the
market
prices
were
higher
strictly
because
all
generators
were
experiencing
higher
than
ordinary
fuel
costs.
So
I
just
the
one
thing
about
the
fuel
adjustment
calls:
that's
why
they
were
higher
and
that's
I'm
really
giving
the
brief.
The
brief
comments
now
senator.
A
But
maybe
I
could
help
you
if
the
second
part,
okay
legislators,
when
we
get
calls
in
from
our
constituents
and
businesses
and
they're
they're
explaining
to
us
they're
concerned
that
their
rates
are
not
200,
400
or
out.
You
know
one
particular
company
came
to
us.
Their
field
charges
were
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
more
for
the
last
quarter.
That's
a
significant
hit
to
your
bottom
line
as
legislators.
A
We,
you
know
you
look
at
some
of
the
stuff
in
there
that
can
cause
that
fuel
adjustment
there's
recommendations
about
how
much
stock
they
must
have
on
the
yard,
the
five-day
supply
to
make
sure
those
are
there,
and
I'm
not
sure,
if
those
to
try
to
adjust
those
bumps.
A
But
what's
the
procedure
for
us
to
go
back
home
and
explain
to
the
people
that
that
something's
being
done
about
it,
that
there's
a
true
issue
that
it
gives
the
consumers
confidence
that
we
can
we're
really
looking
into
this
to
try
to
get
them
relief
and
yeah.
Those
costs
are
valid.
I
guess
that
was
what
my
members
were
asking
us
is:
what's
the
step
through
process
for
that.
N
Right
so
so
we
know
why
the
costs
were
high.
We
know
how
they
flow
them
through
and
they're
able
to
get
real-time
recovery
for
that
through
this
fuel
adjustment
clause,
as
part
of
our
fuel
adjustment
clause
regulation
and
in
each
utilities
tariff
related
to
the
field
adjustment
clause,
it
sets
up
that
there
are
specific
six-month
and
two-year
reviews
of
those
costs,
so
the
six-month
reviews
are
not
as
in-depth
as
the
two-year
reviews,
but
the
six-month
reviews
specifically
look
at
I
just
before.
N
I
came
here
printed
off
one
of
the
utilities
tariffs-
and
this
is
what
it
says
verbatim
at
six
month
intervals,
the
commission
shall
conduct
a
formal
review
and
may
conduct
public
hearings
on
a
utilities.
Past
fuel
adjustments.
The
commission
shall
order
a
utility
to
charge
off
and
amortize,
which
would
be
not
allowed
to
recover
by
means
of
a
temporary
decrease
of
rates.
Any
adjustment
the
commission
finds
unjustified
due
to
improper
calculation
or
application
of
charges
or
improper
fuel
procurement
practices,
and
then
it
speaks
next
to
the
two-year
reviews
that
we
do
that.
N
So
if
we
find
that
a
utility
hasn't
calculated
or
procured
their
fuel
in
a
reasonable
manner
or
in
accordance
with
the
law,
we
can
not
only
require
them
to
refund
the
customers,
whatever
costs
that
it's
all
subject
to
review,
whatever
cost
were
inappropriate,
but
we're
also
able
to
if
we
find
that
the
violation
was
bad
enough.
We
can
actually
take
away
their
ability
to
use
the
fuel
adjustment
clause
moving
forward
and
they'll
have
to
recover
their
fuel
costs
in
a
different
manner,
so
the
the
mechanisms
are
already
there.
A
Said
I
appreciate
paul,
I
apologize
for
the
haste
of
being
here
at
the
end
with
it,
but
that's
what
we're
really
looking
for
is.
I
think
people
at
home
that
are
they're
desperate
and
when
a
bill
hits
you
to
the
point
that
it
topples
you
out
of
financial
stability
and
there's
children
in
the
house,
elderly
disability,
people
with
disabilities.
Then
we
have
to
show
them
that
there
is
a
mechanism
into
place
to
make
sure
they
were
treated
fairly.
A
To
offset
this,
each
state
does
something
differently,
I
think,
and
how
they
deal
with
this,
and
I
think
you
may
see
some
of
the
members
of
our
our
committee
are
going
to
be
trying
to
address.
Maybe
some
things
to
go
forward
and
love
to
have
your
input.
But
again,
thank
you
so
much
for
coming.
He
speaks
volumes.
I
don't
know
that
we've
had
the
public
service
commission
come
in
front
of
our
committee
for
some
time,
and
I
look
forward
to
talking
to
you,
maybe
sometimes
outside
of
a
committee
meeting,
to
work
on
this.
A
But
thank
you,
sir.
For
your
time.
I
apologize
to
my
members
and
the
audience
for
running
over
and
that's
with
the
motion
to
adjourn,
I
think
everybody's
gone.
We
stand
adjourned.