►
From YouTube: Budget Review Subcommittee On Economic Development, Tourism, And Environmental Protection (6-7-23)
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
C
A
Here
and
thank
you
all
for
coming
hope,
your
Summer's
going
good
and
thank
God
for
the
rain
on
the
way
up
here
this
morning.
We
need
some
rain
back
home,
but
today
we
have
Kent
Chandler
here
from
the
Public
Service
Commission,
going
to
present
an
overview
of
the
commission
and
legislation
that
we
passed
on
last
session.
If
you'd
come
to
the
table,
when
you
get
to
the
table,
raise
your
right
hand,
we'll
swear
you
in.
A
D
Thanks
representative
fugit
and
I
always
say
to
myself
at
the
BSC,
you
know
we
swear.
People
in
my
goal
in
life
was
always
to
be
the
person
asking
the
questions
and
never
being
the
person
that
haven't
answered.
But
here.
A
D
That's
right,
so
thank
you
all
for
having
me
today,
I'm
prepared
to
talk
today
just
a
general
overview
of
the
PSC,
especially
as
it
relates
to
budget
and
Appropriations,
and
then
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
we've
done
with
what
we
have
trying
to
look
at
ways
to
do
new
things
or
look
at
regulation.
D
That
makes
sense
for
for
in-use
consumers
and
then
at
the
end
of
the
presentation,
pivot
to
at
least
a
few
of
the
bills
that
were
passed
this
last
session,
that
impact
the
Public
Service
Commission,
or
that
we're
expected
to
hold
folks
accountable
to
so
the
Public
Service
Commission
is
a
three-person
administrative
agency.
That's
independent!
We're
attached
to
the
energy
and
environment
cabinet
for
administrative
purposes.
D
We
say
we
do
a
quasi-judicial
function,
there's
a
lot
of
case
law
out
there
about
how
we
do
what
we
do,
but
we
do
a
little
bit
of
legislative
work.
Actually,
setting
rates
is
a
legislative
function
and
then,
insofar
as
there
are
complaints
or
adjudicative
matters,
we
act
sort
of
like
a
court
where
it's
actually
one
person
one
entity
versus
another
entity,
but
we
do
it.
We
sit
and
hear
have
hearings
take
evidence,
and
then
we
ultimately
issue
our
decisions
in
written
orders
when
I
get
to
written
orders.
D
I
always
have
to
go
back
to
what
was
on
the
first
page.
My
presentation
today,
I
can
only
speak
for
myself,
not
on
behalf
of
the
other
Commissioners
or
the
commission
itself.
The
commission
can
only
take
actions
that
are
worth
any
salt
on
the
four
corners
of
an
order.
So
if
I
say
something
that
contradicts
what
we
set
it
in
order,
it's
the
order
is
what
actually
matters.
D
D
A
thousand
I'd
say
we
heavily
heavily
is
not
the
right
term.
We
really
regulate
probably
about
two
250
utilities.
On
an
active
basis.
Importantly,
we
don't
regulate
Municipal
Utilities,
except
for
two
specific
items.
First
is
for
gas
safety.
We
regulate
those
Gas
Distribution
Systems,
for
for
their
compliance
with
federal
law.
We
also
regulate
the
interaction
between
Municipal,
Water,
Systems
and
water
systems
that
we
regulate.
D
So
if
a
if
a
city
water
system
sells
water
to
a
water
district,
we
regulate
the
rate
in
which
they
can
sell
to
that
water
district
and
then,
finally,
there
are
a
number
of
electric
distribution
cooperatives
in
the
southern
part
of
the
state
that
buy
their
power
from
the
Tennessee
Valley
Authority.
Those
rates
are
regulated
by
TVA
effectively
and
therefore
we
don't
regulate
the
those
electric
cooperatives,
so
the
Public
Service
Commission
was
created
in
the
30s.
D
Everything
that
we
do
comes
back
to
our
one
of
our
primary
statutes,
which
is
that
a
utility
can
only
charge
rates
that
are
fair,
just
and
reasonable,
but
a
utility
also
has
an
obligation
to
provide
adequate,
efficient
and
reasonable
service.
Almost
everything
that
we
do
ends
up
coming
back
to
either
rates
or
service
issue
and
whether
either
one
of
those
are
in
accordance
with
the
statutory
requirements.
D
So
we've
had
a
good
amount
of
turnover
on
the
commission
since
2021
I'm,
beginning
to
think
it's
me.
We've
had
two
Commissioners
that
left
in
2021.
We
had
two
appointments
in
2020
21
to
replace
them.
Those
Commissioners
went
off
in
the
spring
of
2022.
We
got
another
appointment
last
about
11
months
ago,
and
then
we
got
our
third
appointment
to
the
commission
and
I
believe
February
or
March.
Both
of
those
individuals
were
confirmed
in
the
last
session,
and
so
we've
got.
D
We've
got
three
Commissioners
that
are
all
confirmed
for
the
first
time
in
a
while.
So
that's
really
nice.
The
PSE
has
about
half
the
employees
that
we
had
20
years
ago.
D
We
enter
significantly
more
orders
than
we
did
a
few
years
ago,
like
I
said
we
can't
take
any
action
other
than
an
order,
so
orders
are
pretty
there's
a
pretty
direct
correlation
between
the
amount
of
work
we
have
in
front
of
us
and
the
amount
of
orders
that
we
issue
we've
had
a
complete
turnover
in
the
entirety
of
our
management
and
the
financial
Financial
division
of
the
Public
Service
Commission.
D
Those
are
the
people
that
frankly,
have
the
most
experience
with
regards
to
accounting
economics
Finance
for
our
utilities,
our
annual
turnover
for
attorneys
is
between
20
and
35.
I.
Think
this
last
year
is
actually
closer
to
40
percent,
with
the
numbers
I've
seen,
but
it's
it's
at
least
20
to
35
percent
of
our
last
three
or
four
years,
where
once
they
come
in,
they
may
be
there
for
a
year
year
and
a
half
and
then
they
leave
that
has
effectively
required
us
to
have
more
attorneys
than
we
had
in
the
past.
D
Just
because
we
know
we're
going
to
have
the
constant
turnover
when
I
came
into
the
industry.
I
was
told
that
figuring
out
what
the
Public
Service
Commission
did
is
a
two
to
three
year
learning
curve.
So
you
can
imagine
if
we're
you
know
that
20
to
35
percent
includes
attorneys
that
we've
had
at
the
commission
for
20
years.
D
So
you
can
imagine
what
that
low
end
of
the
average
looks
like,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
attorneys
that
just
about
the
time
they're
getting
up
fully
to
speed,
to
figure
out
what
they're
doing
they're
taking
a
job
somewhere
else.
D
I
have
a
couple
of
Statistics
that
I
asked
for
and
and
pulled
ahead
of
this,
that
in
2021
and
in
2022
we
issued
hundreds
of
more
orders
than
we
did
about.
D
15
years
ago,
we
issued
about
1700
1770
orders,
the
last
couple
of
years,
for
instance,
in
over
the
past
15
years,
the
most
other
than
those
two
years
we've
ever
entered
is
1500
and
the
minimum
we've
entered
over
those
15
years
is
1200,
so
at
least
with
one
of
those
it's
almost
a
30
increase
in
2021,
the
Public
Service
Commission
processed,
more
utility
initiated
rate
cases
than
any
time
and
then
any
single
year
in
the
last
decade
in
2021,
when
we
did
that
we
had
69
employees
at
the
Commission
in
the
last,
the
10
years
before.
D
That
was
the
second
most
number
of
excuse
me,
the
second
most
number
of
rate
cases
that
we
had
that
we
had
processed
and
we
had
96
employees,
so
a
25
employee
difference.
We
have
72
employees.
Today
we
have
two
or
three
that
are
starting
in
June
of
the
72
that
we
have
today.
They
are
about
30
percent,
no
they're
about
50
percent.
Less
experienced
than
the
96
employees
we
had
in
2011.
in
2011,
our
average
months
of
service
was
something
like
10
years
or
months
of
service,
something
like
12
000.
D
Our
average
months
of
service
for
our
employees
at
the
end
of
May
was
something
like
8
500.
So
that's
what
six
or
seven
years,
and
that
was
skewed,
because
we
had
somebody
retire
on
the
end
of
May
that
had
37
years
experience
of
the
Public
Service
Commission,
so
that
that
number
is
going
to
go
down
significantly
when
we
add
two
new
people
with
no
experience
at
all
next
month,
the
average
so
between
2000
and
I'm,
going
for
remember
here,
chairman
so
you'll.
D
Excuse
me
if
I,
if
I,
maybe
get
it
a
couple
dollars
off
wrong
in
2006
our
average
philp,
our
average
position
cost
to
fill
a
position
was
about
seventy
one
thousand
dollars
today
to
fill
the
average
position.
It's
about
a
hundred
and
thirty
six
thousand
dollars.
That
cost
is
in
a
significant
part
due
to
the
change
in
the
the
retirement
rate
it
used
to
be
about
five
and
a
half
six
percent.
D
Now,
in
the
last
year
that
we
have
full
data,
for
it
was
in
the
upper
80s
or
mid
80s,
so
we
had
less
people,
but
it
cost
more
people
to
have
so
between
2006
and
2022.
Our
budget,
our
general
fund
appropriation,
was
effectively
flat
somewhere.
D
It
ranged
every
single
year,
but
somewhere
between
eight
and
a
half
million
and
ten
and
a
half
million
dollars
very
thankfully,
in
this
last
budget
in
2022
we
got
significantly
more
general
fund
appropriation
than
we
had
basically
ever
had
and
increased
our
budget
by
maybe
a
million
and
a
half
dollars
over
what
it
was
the
previous
year,
maybe
closer
to
two,
and
that's
allowed
us
to
find
eight
new
positions
at
the
Public
Service
Commission.
So
we're
certainly
appreciative
of
that.
D
I
know
the
other
employees
are
that
there's
more
shoulders
to
spread
workout
over
so
where
we
for
years
did
not
have
a
ton
of
resources
or
we
had
declining
resources.
We
had
to
figure
out
to
do
things
differently.
We
did
try
to
do
our
best
to
work,
smarter
and
harder,
because
we
knew
just
we
had.
We
had
less
opportunity
or
less
resources
to
to
address
the
issues
that
came
before,
so
we
really
went
under
a
number
of
internal
reviews
of
processes.
D
One
of
the
things
the
PSC
did
years
ago
was
actually
move
our
by
agreement
with
the
cabinet.
We
moved
our
Engineers
to
the
cabinet
and
that
way
we
would
have
more
cap
space
for
the
attorneys
and
the
financial
folks
that
we
needed
to
process
process
the
cases
that
we
have
more
quickly
and
then
trying
to
use
technology.
Actually,
we
received,
we
require
through
regulations
a
lot
of
information
from
utilities.
Over
the
years,
there's
been
less
and
less
people
to
look
at
that
information.
D
So
we
identified
we've
got
to
have
something
has
to
change
because
we're
getting,
if
not
more
cases,
certainly
more
complex
cases.
So,
even
if
the
cases
stay,
the
same
I
can
tell
you
right
now.
One
of
the
cases
that
we
have
in
front
of
us
is
probably
the
most
consequential
and
complicated
case
the
PSC
has
had
in
the
history
that
I
can
find.
So,
let's
call
it
35
40
years.
D
So
we
need
people
with
a
lot
of
technical
skills.
We
need
to
reduce
people.
We
need
to
reduce
the
turnover
of
the
people
that
we
have,
because
by
the
time
they
figure
out
what's
going
on,
they
get
really
good
at
their
job.
They
can
go,
make
money
somewhere,
better
money
or
or
have
an
easier
job
somewhere
else.
D
We
also,
in
addition
to
technical
skills,
we
have
to
focus
more
on
wholesale
issues,
a
lot
of
the
stuff
that
happens-
and
you
all
hear
this-
you
know
it's
most
public
with
rules
that
get
passed
by
the
EPA
right.
Certain
things
that
happen
at
the
federal
level,
there's
not
much
that
we
can
do
at
the
state
level.
That's
also
the
case
for
rates
and
services
when
it
comes
to
utilities,
because
many
of
the
rates
and
charges
that
our
utilities
incur
are
actually
set
by
federal
agency.
D
That
does
something
very
similar
to
us
and
once
that
Federal
agency
sets
those
rates
there's
effectively
nothing
we
can
do
from
passing
keeping
those
from
going
back
to
customers,
and
so
we've
engaged
more
and
more
actively
at
the
federal
level
so
that
we
can
be
at
the
table
because
it
really
does
come
down
to
the
old
saying
that
if
you're
not
a
table
you're
on
the
menu
that,
if
we're
not
in
the
room,
when
these
decisions
are
being
made
at
the
federal
level,
it's
likely
going
to
result
in
increased
costs
for
consumers
that
they
can't
avoid
here
at
the
retail
level.
D
So
a
couple
of
things
that
we've
done
over
the
past
or
are
doing
is
we've
opened
an
investigation
of
the
fuel
adjustment
clause
in
2020.
In
the
2022
session,
the
Senate
passed
a
resolution
asking
the
commission
to
review
the
fuel
adjustment
Clause.
The
fuel
adjustment
calls
regulation
itself
has
been
in
effect
for
40
years.
It's
barely
been
changed
in
that
entire
40-year
period.
It's
existed.
It
existed
prior
to
that.
It
was
in
the
utilities
tariffs
for
for
decades.
D
So,
for
instance,
if
if
a
utility
has
to
go
out
and
buy
a
bunch
of
coal
or
gas
and
it's
more
expensive
than
what
they
have
are
already
recovering,
they're
able
two
months
after
incurring
that
cost
to
pass
that
through
to
customers
same
thing.
If
they
go
out
and
purchase
fuel,
that's
less
than
what
they
had,
then
they
actually,
you
know,
can
create
a
savings
or
if
they
were
able
to
participate
in
a
wholesale
power
market
and
make
money
out
of
that
wholesale
power
Market,
they
can
actually
be
passing
a
credit
back
to
customers.
D
So
fuel
costs
make
up
a
very,
very
large
amount
of
end-use
customers
electric
bills
just
to
provide
you
an
example:
I
pulled
that
in
2021
Kentucky
utilities,
which
is
our
largest
utility,
that
they
had
approximately
1.64
billion
dollars
in
retail
sales,
which
equates
to
about
1.64
billion
dollars
in
costs.
That's
a
pretty
equal
comparison
of
that.
Almost
a
third
of
it
were
fuel
costs.
D
So
imagine
that
if
for
every
100
bill
that
a
customer
gets
about,
thirty
dollars
of
it
ends
up
being
fuel
expenses
and
almost
all
the
the
significant
amount
of
that
fuel
expenses,
or
at
least
the
increment
or
decrement
to
it,
is
being
passed
through
on
that
single
light
item.
Pursuant
to
a
40
year
old
regulation,
and
as
we
noted
as
a
lot
of
us
saw
through
2020,
2021
and
2022
demand
for
electricity
went
really
really
down
in
2020
power
prices
were
very,
very
low.
D
The
opposite
happened
in
2021
demand
went
way
up,
and
there
were
very
little
demand
went
up
much
faster
than
Supply
could
meet
it,
and
power
prices
were
at
10
and
15
year
highs
in
2021.
in
2022.
Excuse
me,
so
those
fluctuations
by
default
show
up
in
that
fuel
adjustment,
Clause
line
item.
D
So
the
commission,
when
opening
the
investigation,
asked
a
number
of
questions,
including
what
changes
to
the
regulation,
if
any,
could
reduce
the
monthly
volatility
of
customer
bills.
What
changes
to
the
regulation
if
any,
could
reduce
exposure
of
the
actual
utility
to
volatility
and
wholesale
power
markets,
and
then
how
does
the
current
structure
of
the
regulation
affect
the
efficiency
and
reliability
of
power
plants?
D
You
know
there's
some
question
that
if
a
utility
is
able
to
buy
power
from
the
market
and
pass
it
through
to
Consumers
without
any
regard
for
what
the
cost
of
that
power
is,
then
what
what
interest
of
the
utility
is
there
to
make
sure
that
they're
maintaining
their
power
plants
to
run
as
opposed
to
just
depending
on
the
markets?
So
these
are
the
types
of
questions
that
we're
asking.
D
Hopefully
we
can
get
an
answer
by
the
end
of
the
year:
commenters
varied
utilities,
public
interest
groups,
the
Attorney,
General's
office,
industrial
groups,
suggested
a
number
of
amendments,
including
cost
sharing,
levelizing
different
charges,
as
opposed
to
it
being
up
and
down.
D
Maybe
like
an
average
and
then
stricter
review
of
purchases
by
utilities,
so
the
case
is
open
and
pending
I
just
want
to
talk
about
some
of
the
objective
things
that
have
been
said
in
that
I
can't
really
comment
on
anything,
but
beyond
that,
but
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
all
knew
it
was
going
on
and
that
at
any
time,
if
you
were
individually
interested,
it's
still
open.
If
anybody
would
like
to
file
a
comment
in
it,.
D
So
regulating
utilities
at
base
is
really
about,
and
this
is
this
is
my
personal
world
view.
I,
don't
know
that
anybody's
put
this
down
in
a
textbook,
but
it's
really
about
regulating
utility
incentives,
so
utilities,
kentuckies
and
Kentucky
are
not
competitive
businesses,
but,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
actually
have
their
rates
and
their
services
regulated.
They
can't
charge
more
than
what
they're
approved
to
charge.
D
Historically,
there
was
a
concern
around
the
duplication
of
the
same
service,
so
two
different
electric
companies
want
to
serve
a
single
site
running
two
different
sets
of
of
lines
to
that
home.
That
that
that's
wasteful
duplication
is,
is
what
the
legislature
effectively
decided
that
it
only
makes.
You
only
need
one
set
of
wires
to
be
running
to
the
home,
and
we
only
have
a
limited
amount
of
capital
available
in
the
economy
to
make
all
the
Investments
we
need.
D
We
don't
need
to
be
wasting
that
running
multiple
lines
to
homes,
multiple
pipes
to
homes,
and
so
the
fix
to
that
was
to
was
to
give
utilities,
monopolies
or
effectively
monopolies.
The
issue
with
giving
utilities
monopolies
is
twofold.
The
first
is
that
once
somebody
knows
somebody
is
their
customer
for
eternity.
There's
not
much
interest
in
actually
meeting
quality
standards,
because
there's
nowhere
else
for
that
customer
to
go
so
the
first
risk
of
a
monopoly
is
a
risk-4
service.
D
The
second
is
that
the
Monopoly
charges
rates
or
charges
prices
and
excess
of
the
cost
that
they
incur,
and
so
the
solution
that
the
legislature
came
up
in
the
1930s
is,
let's
regulate
their
rates
and
regulate
their
service,
hold
them
accountable
for
how
much
they
can
charge
and
the
minimum
level
service
that
they
provide.
So
the
rate
setting
is
a
function
of
costs.
When
we
set
a
utilities
rates,
we
figure
up
what
we
think
the
costs
to
serve
are
going
to
be,
and
then
we
turn
those
into
rates
to
charge.
D
D
I
may
have
made
it
sound,
but
so
since
we
Society
have
a
concern
about
the
prices
that
a
monopoly
would
charge,
including
that
ious
could
charge
rates
in
excess
of
their
costs
or
even-
and
this
is
actually
far
more
common-
that
publicly
owned
utilities
with
charge
rates
that
are
below
their
costs
and
lose
money
rates
are
based
on
the
actual
cost
incurred
or
expected
to
be
Cur
incurred,
and
the
the
thing
to
think
about
that
is.
D
We
can
take
when
we're
setting
rates,
what
we
can
look
back
and
see
what
a
utility
actually
incurred,
the
cost
they
incurred
and
we
can
use
that
to
set
rates
going
forward.
But
it
also
is
a
matter
of
judgment
for
the
commission
and
saying
that,
if
a
utility
incurred
cost
that
we
don't
think
was
reasonable,
a
perfect
example
is
Country.
Club
dues
we've
had
in
our
regulations
for
years
that
utilities
can't
recover
from
customers
the
cost
of
Country,
Club
and
social
dues.
That's
a
cost.
D
Historically,
they
did
they
did
incur
and
did
try
to
pass
through
to
rate
pairs,
so
by
default
they
have
to.
We
remove
that
when
we
set
rates
going
forward.
So
it's
not
just:
did
they
incur
the
cost?
It's
was
it
a
reasonable
cost
for
them
to
recover
from
customers
going
forward,
so
different
entities
have
different
incentives.
I
mentioned
it
earlier.
The
big
distinction
is
for-profit
utilities
versus
not-for-profit
utilities.
For-Profit
utilities,
by
definition,
have
a
profit
motive.
Their
goal
as
an
as
a
for-profit
firm,
is
to
maximize
shareholder
value.
D
Customer-Owned
entities
have
a
motive
to
keep
costs
low
and
often
keep
costs
too
low
to
the
point
that
it
actually
degrades
service.
We
find
that
in
water
districts
that
that
have
no
interest
or
historically
don't
want
to
recover
depreciation
expense
so
that
the
depreciation
expense
is
then
available
to
reinvest
in
their
own
systems,
and
we
find
that
most
often
with
the
electric
distribution
cooperatives,
where
historically
the
place
defines
savings
so
that
they
can
make
it
year
to
year
is
to
just
not
incur
vegetation
management.
Expenses
is
to
just
cut
less
trees
around
power
lines.
D
The
trees
around
power
lines
for
a
couple
of
years
and
you're
going
to
have
an
increase
in
power
outages
and
it's
not
just
a
degradation
of
service.
What
what
I've
found
is
that
that
neglect
actually
leads
to
higher
rates
in
the
long
term.
For
two
reasons,
the
first
is:
when
you
have
power
outages,
you
have
to
send
people
out,
you
have
to
send
trucks
out
to
actually
fix
the
power
outage.
That's
incurring
additional
costs
that
you
are
not
anticipating.
D
The
second
is
it's
going
to
cost
more
to
catch
up
on
your
vegetation
management
if
you've
neglected
it
over
a
number
of
years,
then
to
just
do
a
minimal
amount
each
year,
and
so
it's
one
of
those
trying
to
save
money
today
ends
up
costing
you
more
in
the
long
run.
D
So
an
acknowledgment
that
different
entities
do
have
different
governance
structures
and
therefore
incentives.
We've
done
a
couple
of
things
to
try
to
approach
each
type
of
utility
a
little
bit
differently.
So
the
first
is
the
rural
electric.
The
first
is
the
water
districts.
We
had
an
investigation
right
when
I
was
coming
to
the
commission.
D
It
was
it
was
ending,
but
following
that
investigation
it
was
an
investigation
into
the
utilities,
the
dozen
or
so
Utilities
in
the
state
that
had
the
highest
water
loss,
and
some
of
these
utilities
were
were
only
selling
about
20
percent
of
the
water
that
they
were
producing
for
sale.
That,
following
that
investigation,
the
commission
placed
a
greater
emphasis
on
ensuring
that
Rural
Water
districts
had
sufficient
revenues
to
address
their
aging
systems.
The
water
loss
issues
they
had
and
other
problems
that
ultimately
degrade
service.
D
And
so
we
started
instituting
defined,
transparent
surcharges
that
the
utility
can
only
use
to
address
water
loss,
and
so
we
have
they
have
to
come
to
us
with
a
water
loss
reduction
plan.
They
have
to
seek
explicit
commission
approval
before
they
actually
spend
the
money,
but
as
a
line
item
on
customers
bills
that
customers
have
there's
a
transparency
and
appreciation.
I
think
that
they
know
when
they
paid
that
bit
of
of
extra
money.
D
That
might
that
month,
it's
going
directly
into
making
sure
that
the
system
gets
better
and
that
reduces
water
loss,
which
is
a
recurring
cost
that
ultimately,
is
ultimately
going
to
be
passed
through
to
customers.
Anyways.
The
other
acknowledgment
and
and
sort
of
change
in
regulation
is
that
the
rule
electric
cooperatives,
we
created
a
pilot
Steam
on
process,
streamline
process
to
incentivize
smaller,
but
more
frequent
frequent
rate
cases
by
the
rural
electric
cooperatives.
The
majority
of
costs
that
our
co-ops
charge
are
actually
passed
on
from
Big
rivers
and
East
Kentucky
Power.
D
There
are
a
limited
number
of
cost.
Jobs
covers
that
are
under
their
control.
Depreciation,
employee
wages
and
vegetation
management
are
the
big
three
one
of
those
three
vegetation
management.
I've
already
explained.
Why
not
having
enough
money
to
do
it
is
ultimately
bad,
and
so
we
created
the
streamlined
process
to
increase
the
frequency
of
rate
cases
while
reducing
the
size
of
the
increases.
D
It
should
actually
reduce
the
cost
of
the
utility
and
bringing
each
one
of
those
rate
cases
and
just
throw
out
there
and
I'm
going
to
skip
ahead
to
the
the
bills
passing
this
last
session,
but
just
throw
out
there
that
invest
your
owned
utilities
make
more
the
more
that
they
invest.
So
they
have
an
incentive
to
invest
more
and
more
between
rate
cases,
Rural
Electric
cooperatives
just
need
rates
that
are
low
enough
or
just
need
rates
high
enough
so
that
they
can
pay
off
their
debt.
D
D
Just
a
couple
of
things
we're
working
on
overhaul
of
our
regulations.
We
actually
started
it
at
the
outside
of
covid
and
then
realized
that
we
didn't
have
the
resources
to
see
it
through
we'll
be
starting
that
up,
hopefully
again
this
year
with
the
additional
employees
that
we
have
we're
going
to
take
our
streamline
process
that
we
came
up
with
by
rule
by
order
and
codified
in
regulation,
and
then
we've
talked
publicly
that
our
integrated
resource
plan
regulation
needs
to
be
overhauled.
D
The
integrated
resource
plan
is
a
triennial
plan
that
utilities
come
in
and
tell
us
how
they
electric
utilities
come
in
and
tell
us
how
they're
going
to
meet
their
future.
Customers
demand
what
kind
of
generation
they're
going
to
have.
What
kind
of
demand
do
they
think
they're
going
to
have
from
customers?
D
The
irps
have
not
been
good
enough.
That's
the
way
to
say
it.
They
we
can
do
better.
We
can
ask
more
questions.
The
commission
can
ask
more
questions.
The
utilities
can
ask
more
questions
of
themselves,
but
we
need
to
spend
more
time
and
more
effort
on
making
sure
that
we
have
an
adequate
amount
of
resources
at
any.
Given
hour
to
meet,
customers
demands
for
a
15-year
period
and
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
just
going
through
a
routine
planning
exercise
and
then
not
doing
what
we
said.
D
We
were
going
to
do
or
not
being
adequately
prepared
for
what
what's
on
the
horizon.
So
in
this
past
session
three
bills
I
want
to
bring
up
that
that
do
impact
the
Public
Service
Commission.
The
first
is
Senate
Bill,
four
related
to
the
retirement
of
fossil
fuel
fire
generators.
It
it
had
an
emergency
call,
so
the
case
is
already
or
the
bill
is
the
law?
Excuse
me:
it's
not
a
bill
anymore
right.
D
The
law
is
already
in
effect
and
we
are
actually
processing
our
first
case
under
the
law
and
I'll
come
back
to
Senate
Bill
4
for
a
sec
in
a
second,
there
were
Senate
bill,
192.,
that's
related
to
securitization.
It
goes
into
effect
later
this
month
and
then
there
was
house
bill
for
related
to
Merchant
solar,
and
it
also
goes
into
effect
later
this
month.
I
don't
have
much
on
House,
Bill,
4,
so
I'll
start
there.
D
The
Public
Service
Commission
does
not
regulate
Merchant
transmission
and
Merchant
generation.
The
way
that
well
at
all,
but
Merchant
transmission
and
Merchant
generation
is
not
regulated.
The
same
way
that
utilities
are
regulated
about
20
years
ago,
the
legislature
created
I
think
it's
called
the
Kentucky
state
board
on
electric
generation
and
transmission
sighting.
We
just
call
it
the
siding
board,
calling
it
a
board
is
a
misnomer.
D
A
board
is
actually
created
each
and
every
time
an
application
is
filed.
There
are
right
now
like
20
boards
15
boards.
There
are
always
lots
of
boards,
but
each
time
one
of
these
siding
boards
is
constituted.
It
has
seven
members
on
it.
D
There's
the
three
members
of
the
Public
Service
Commission,
the
secretary
of
the
energy
and
environment
cabinet
secretary
for
the
cabinet
for
economic
development
and
then
two
local
members,
one
of
which
is
appointed
by
the
governor
and
the
other
one
is
either
the
chair
of
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
or
the
judge
executive,
depending
on
whether
they
have
a
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
I
bring
this
up
and
you
may
say
well
you're,
on
a
board.
How
does
that
impact
the
PSC?
D
The
siding
board
is
actually
situated
with
the
Public
Service
Commission,
our
staff,
staffs,
the
Public
Service
Commission.
The
cases
for
the
siding
board
are
all
filed
on
our
website.
We
use
all
of
our
technology
to
to
you
know
to
process
them.
We
have
to
hire
Consultants.
The
statute
allows
us
to
hire
Consultants
to
process
those
cases.
The
PSC
actually
puts
those
rfps
out
and
chooses
those
Consultants
ahead
of
time.
So
really
we
make
the
siding
board
run
and
then
those
other
four
people
are
added
to
each
each
case
that
the
siding
board
runs.
D
D
It's
a
requirement
in
the
statute,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
costs,
especially
overhead
costs
and
time
and
effort,
and
things
like
that
that
that
necessarily
just
can't
be
passed
through
as
a
dollar
amount,
and
so
this
influx
of
merchant
cases
that
we've
gotten
has
really
taken
a
toll
on
our
resources.
At
the
exact
same
time
that
we
have
the
least
amount
of
resources
that
we've
had
I,
think
chairman
I
think
we've
probably
processed
before
2000,
maybe
I'm
going
for
remember
here,
10
or
12
sounds
about
right.
D
Merchant
cases
ever
we've
received
over
30
I,
think
more
than
35
now
notices
or
actually
applications
since
2020.
For
these
Merchant
cases,
so
it
has
been
a
a
tsunami,
is
a
good
word.
D
D
D
Before
it,
a
utility
retires
a
power
plant
in
the
past,
their
utility
could
retire
a
power
plant
not
have
to
get
commission
approval
to
do
so,
the
only
time
it
would
that
the
commission
would
be
brought
into
it
is
if
the
power
plant
had
value
left
on
it
that
had
not
been
recovered
yet,
and
if
the
utility
wanted
to
recover
that
undepreciated
value
from
customers
they'd
have
to
come
and
see
commission
approval
to
do
that,
either
through
a
line
item
or
put
it
into
rates
whatever
it
may
be.
D
It's
it's
kind
of
the
I've
I
explained
it
once
as
the
commission
does
not
make,
did
not
historically
make
the
decision
on
retirement.
We
just
told
the
utility
what
the
economic
consequence
of
their
decision
was.
D
It's
different.
Now
the
the
statute
provides
a
standard
that
the
commission
has
to
apply
to
making
sure
that
if
a
utility
retires
a
fossil
fuel
fire
power
plant
or
a
number
of
power
plants
that
it
does
not
net
impact,
the
reliability,
resilience
and
dispatchability
of
the
utility
system,
Kentucky
Utilities
has
already
filed
a
case
under
this.
They
had
a
case
in
front
of
us
for
additions
of
generation
that
were
in
in
large
part
required
because
they
were
planning
on
retiring
things,
and
so
they
effectively
amended.
D
They
didn't
exactly,
but
they
effectively
amended
their
application
to
now
include
the
request
to
retired
generators,
and
so
that's
in
a
case
in
front
of
us
right
now
and
then
Senate
Bill
192
was
related
to
securitization
I'll.
Give
you
the
the
simple
securitization,
because
I
understand
about
70
of
it.
Securitization
is
a
process
that
a
state
can
set
up
by
Statute
that
would
allow
customers
of
a
utility
to
effectively
buy
an
asset
from
the
utility
using
money
provided
by
bonds
financed
by
lenders.
D
So
it's
often
called
securitization.
Bonds
are
often
called
rate
payer
backed
bonds,
but
the
Practical
effect
is
that
the
consumers
are
financing
a
cost
as
opposed
to
the
utility
financing
a
cost.
The
benefit
of
that
is
that
utilities
have
both
equity
and
debt.
Capital
and
Equity
Capital
requires
a
higher
return
than
debt,
because
debt
holders
get
the
first
call
on
the
on
the
utilities
assets
should
it
go
under
or
any
companies
asset
should
it
go
under,
and
so
because
debt
costs
less
than
Equity
capital.
D
If
you're
replaced
you're
effectively
just
replacing
you're
you're,
replacing
financing
that
had
debt
at
a
certain
rate
and
Equity
at
a
significantly
higher
rate
to
just
having
debt
at
the
low
rate
and
that's
the
benefit
of
securitization.
It's
not
just
any
regular
debt,
I'm
really
skipping
here,
but
it's
not
just
any
regular
debt.
D
It's
actually
because
of
the
way
that,
because
of
the
way
that
the
statutes
are
written
almost
without
exception,
the
bonds
that
are
issued
for
securitization
under
States
statutory
schemes
are
almost
always
given
Triple
A
ratings
and
because
they're
rated
so
high,
they
have
the
absolute
lowest
debt
rate
that
you
can
get
importantly,
the
debt,
although
it's
issued
effectively
pursuant
to
statute,
it
is
not
a.
D
I
really
want
to
find
that
it
is.
It
is
not
a
debt
of
the
Commonwealth,
the
Commonwealth's,
effectively
saying
we
will
make
sure
that
the
customers
of
this
utility
pay
this
debt
off,
but
it
is
not
an
obligation
of
the
the
state
that
that
allows
for
securitization,
so
there
have
been
numbers
thrown
around
that
if
a
particular
utility
and
I
think
it
was
referred
to
in
the
testimony.
D
I
I,
don't
know
these
numbers
for
a
fact
chairman,
so
I'm
just
telling
you
what
I
heard
but
Senator
wheeler
when
he
was
talking
about
Senate,
Bill
192
mentioned
that
if
the
Big
Sandy
retirement-
it's
not
the
Big
Sandy
retirement
are
the
Big
Sandy
decommissioning
writer.
If
it
was
securitized,
it
would
lead
to
at
prevailing
debt
rates
today
it
would
lead
to
millions
of
dollars
of
savings
per
year.
D
That's
that
is
an
objective
fact
that
if
it
was
financed
at
a
at
a
rate
that
only
included
debt
and
had
no
equity
return,
that
would
save
Millions,
if
not
I,
I-
think
a
fair
back
of
the
napkin
eight
to
ten,
maybe
12
million
dollars
a
year,
depending
on
whatever
the
prevailing
debt
rates
are
the
time
that
it
would
be
securitized.
That
is
the
only
that
is
the
only
facility
that
I've
heard
actively
being
discussed
or
publicly
being
discussed.
D
That
is
intended
to
be
securitized
under
Senate
Bill
192,
when
it
does
go
into
effect
as
it
relates
to
the
PSC
I.
Don't
expect
there
to
be
much
change
from
House
Bill
4
on
our
budget
or
on
our
operations
as
it
relates
to
the
PSC.
It's
really
changes
kind
of
around
the
margins.
D
D
It
allows
us
allows
the
Public
Service
Commission
to
go
out
and
get
experts
and
then
pass
those
off
to
be
included
in
the
amount
that
securitized
I.
Don't
expect
that
to
be
a
significant
cost,
if,
if
there
are
only
one
or
two
securitizations
ever
done
every
few
years,
I
don't
expect
there
to
be
a
significant
impact.
D
Long
term,
though
I
think
it's
important,
though,
that
we
have
people
and
we
we
are
able
to
retain
people
so
that
from
one
one
proposal
for
securitization
to
the
next,
that
we
have
the
some
people
there
that
have
had
some
some
knowledge
and
experience
with
doing
it.
It
would
be
really
really
difficult
if
the
people
that
we
have
there
are
new
every
single
time
that
we
have
one
of
these
securitization
processes
and
then
in
terms
of
the
impact
I
sent
it
before.
D
Senate
Bill
4
does
require
a
significant
amount
of
how
do
I
say
this,
whether
or
not
a
retirement
and
addition
of
generation,
especially
when
you're
doing
multiple
retirements
and
multiple
editions
of
generation
at
the
same
time,
is
an
incredibly
complicated
technical
process.
D
We
had
call
it
luck,
call
it
foresight,
I,
don't
know.
Thankfully
we
had
some
Consultants
that
we
already
had
that
responded
to
an
RFP
that
we
had
on
contract
already
in
case
in
in
the
event
a
case
like
this
came
up,
but
for
their
technical
expertise
a
case
understated
before
we
would
be
very
dependent
on
the
information
that
we
receive
from
the
utility
and
that
we
receive
from
the
handful
of
interveners.
D
In
that
case,
we
would
not
have
necessarily
the
technical
ability
to
determine
on
our
own
or
to
probe
the
Integrity
of
the
information
that
we
get
as
to
whether
or
not
the
proposal
actually
does
have
a
negative
impact
on
reliability,
a
negative
impact
on
dispatchability
or
a
negative
impact
on
resilience
I
about
a
week
ago,
setback
and
thought
to
myself.
I,
don't
know
what
we
would
have
done
if
it
wasn't
that
we
already
had
these
technical
experts
on
contract.
D
We
do
not
have
that
technical
expertise
in-house
we
historically
we
had
it,
but
the
way
things
have
gone,
the
last
20
30
years.
We
don't
have
it
anymore,
so
that
I
just
want
to
give
you
the
high
level
overview.
I
hope
that's
been
responsive
to
what
you
were
hoping
I
was
talking
about
today
and
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
A
We
do
have
some
questions:
Center
Smith.
F
Yes,
Mr
Chandler,
it's
good
to
have
you
with
us.
I
appreciate
you
coming
in
front
of
the
committee
and
the
work
that
you
are
doing
at
the
Public
Service
Commission
I.
Think
most
of
us
realize
in
Eastern
Kentucky
that
for
years
to
bring
Economic
Development
we
would
do
the
spec
buildings
that
was
sort
of
our
way
to
build
it.
F
They'll
come
sort
of
attitude
and
that
worked
for
us
in
Perry
County
on
several
occasions
with
DJ
Plastics
trust,
Joyce,
McMillan,
Haas
Industries,
a
lot
of
what
different
groups
came
in
there
because
we
had
the
facilities
for
them,
but
that's
changed
now.
And
what
do
you
see
in
these
industrial
parks?
F
Are
people
come
in
and
they
want
to
know
one
thing:
how
much
is
the
power
rate
more
so
than
anything
we've
ever
seen,
I,
don't
know
that
I've
ever
seen
a
time
that
power
became
such
an
economic
development
tool
as
it
is
now
and
if
you
went
out
there
and
told
industry
across
the
United
States
even
across
the
globe
that
you
could
guarantee
them
a
five-year
rate.
You
know
three
and
four
cents
power
below
six.
We
would
fill
up
these
industrial
parks
and
that's
how
important
it
is
for
the
power
raid
for
what's
happening.
F
Across,
America
and
many
other
countries
is
that
power
is
one
of
the
key
economic
driving
forces
that
we've
ever
seen.
The
buildings
are
secondary
a
lot
of
times.
They
don't
even
ask
about
it.
They
don't
care
as
they
stand
out
there,
because
without
that
power
rate
being
affordable
and
the
tech
industry
and
many
other
Industries
you're
not
going
to
be
here
regardless.
F
You
know
12
to
15
cent
increase,
that's
put
across
everyone's
bills
to
make
up
for
that,
and
that's
something
that,
as
industry
comes
into
Eastern
Kentucky
and
they
look
at
our
bills
and
say
why
are
you
so
much
higher
and
we're
trying
to
explain
to
them
that
we
were
basically
forced
and
decommissioning
a
plant,
and
now
that
cost
is
being
spread
out
across
people?
That
puts
us
again
at
another
disadvantage.
So
it
creates
another
economic
hurdle
at
a
time
that,
as
we've
just
discussed,
power
is
critical
for
industry.
F
So
that's
something
that
I
think
is
the
general
assembly
that
we
really
need
to
take
a
look
at
this
was
this
happened
to
us
because
Federal
pressure
on
the
industry
and
they
responded
and
now
we're
stuck
with
this
mess
out
there
and
I,
really
think
that
the
federal
government
should
play
some
role
in
coming
in
to
help
us
mitigate
these
costs
and
that's
what
you
all
are
over
there
struggling
with
right
now
with
all
the
different
ways
of
trying
to
take
care
of
these
high
and
lows
and
the
troughs
and
Peaks
to
to
make
it
more
more
affordable
for
the
people
that
we
serve.
F
And,
of
course
this
is
more
of
a
commentary
than
a
question,
but
we're
seeing
an
industry
or
as
far
as
power
in
a
way,
we've
never
seen
it
before
we're,
seeing
rolling
blackouts
now
they're
becoming
very,
very
common
and
we're
we've
seen
some
of
the
letters
and
natural
resources
that
were
passed
out
to
Industry,
telling
them
you're
going
to
be
without
power
so
many
hours
a
day.
But
the
good
news
is,
you
can
pick
when
these
hours
are
going
to
come.
That's
not
the
I!
F
Never
dreamed
of
Kentucky
with
a
rich
history
that
we
have
and
the
bill
to
providing
energy
and
all
the
natural
resources
that
we
have,
that
we
wind
up
like
a
Banana
Republic,
being
power
poor
and
that's
exactly
what's
getting
ready
to
happen
and
that's
happening
not
because
the
men
and
women
are
not
willing
to
go
out
there
and
provide
the
natural
resources
that
we
need.
That's
all
bad
government.
F
This
is
all
being
created
by
leadership
that
has
a
lack
of
understanding
and
what's
happening
in
the
world
of
energy
and
economic
development
and
how
Kentucky
plays
a
role.
So
this
is
something
that
we
can
fix.
It's
not
always
been
the
case,
but
I
think
that
we've
got
some
really
sharp
people
that
are
taking
a
look
at
this,
but
Kentucky
should
be
leading
the
way
and
I
think
Senate.
F
You've
done
an
amazing
job
over
there
and
you've
taken
every
call
that
I've
had,
which
is
a
neat
change
for
the
president
before
that
is
Chairman,
and
members
of
the
general
assembly,
as
we've
reached
out
to
the
cabinet
agencies,
you
are
advised
often
don't
go
over
there
and
it's
probably
a
pretty
smart
bet.
But
you
have
really
been
different
as
far
as
your
leadership
of
the
Public
Service
Commission
I
want
to
commend
you
because
it's
not
always
been
the
case
as
members
of
the
general
assembly.
F
We've
not
had
this
type
of
access
to
the
type
of
leadership
for
these
different
agencies
and
I
want
to
to
point
that
out.
That's
markedly
different
than
what
I've
seen
and
my
tenure
here
I
think
it's
been
wonderful
because
the
exchange
between
all
of
us
has
been
very
productive
and
just
wanted
to
comment
on
you.
How
much
I
appreciate
that
as
a
senator,
but
also
as
a
chairman
that
has
to
work
with
you
all?
Quite
quite
often,
but
that's
that's
something
that
is
very
different
from
the
past.
F
But
with
that
said,
we
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do.
Yeah
and
I
appreciate
the
leadership
you've
had
over
there.
There's
things
that
we
can
do
things
that
we
can't
do,
but
a
lot
of
the
stuff
that's
holding
Kentucky
back
is
literally
decisions
that
need
to
be
made
at
our
leadership.
So
with
that
said,
thank
you
for
coming
today
and
appreciate
the
chairman
giving
us
an
opportunity
to
speak
to
the
Public
Service
Commission.
A
F
G
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
I,
just
had
a
quick
question
of
first
I
want
to
say
thank
you
for
being
here,
I
appreciate
the
information
that
you
shared.
You
talked
earlier
in
your
presentation
about
kind
of
the
turnover
of
staff
and
looking
at
at
I,
think
you
quoted
within
the
last
year.
The
last
two
years,
there's
there's
been
a
a
100
turnover
in
the
financial
division.
G
Can
you
speak
to,
and
maybe
this
is
partly
opinion
on
your
part,
but
can
you
speak
to
why
that
would
be
the
case?
What
what
type
of
qualifications
are
needed
in
that
Division
and
and
then
why
do
you
feel
like
there
is
a
100
turnover
rate
yeah.
D
And
so
to
be
clear,
it's
a
100
turnover
rate
in
the
management
of
that
division,
so
that
would
be
three
or
four
people,
but
those
are
the
three
or
four
people
that
know
the
absolute
most
about
what
we
do
about
the
you
know,
the
the
financing,
the
economics,
the
accounting
of
of
utilities-
and
you
know
some
of
you
all-
may
know
a
gap.
The
general
generally
accepted
accounting
principles.
Gap
applies
to
these
utilities
and
then
they
have
a
entirely
separate
accounting
system
exclusive
to
utilities,
called
the
uniform
system
of
accounts.
D
D
It's
it
is
just
such
a
unique
skill
set
and
unique
experience
that
effectively
you
either
get
it
at
a
commission
or
you
get
it
at
a
utility,
and
there
is
nowhere
else
that
you
can
get
this
type
of
experience.
We've
had
one
person
that
previously
worked
at
Kia
that
dealt
with
utilities
that
that
was
a
you
know,
experience
that
Kaa
was
applicable
at
the
Public
Service
Commission.
D
You
know
you
know
I'll
speak
generally,
so
that
I'm
not
too
specific
about
each
of
any
of
the
individuals.
But
these
individuals
have
skill
sets
that
if
they
took
that
skill
set
to
a
utility,
whether
they're
in
Kentucky
or
somewhere
else,
and
it's
very
applicable
to
other
states,
I
mean
all
50
states
use
the
same
thing.
These
people
would
easily
make
two
or
three
times
as
much
as
they
do
at
the
Public
Service
Commission,
with
the
skill
set
that
they
have.
That
is
a
significant
amount
of
it.
D
I
think
that's
a
large
driver
of
it
is
the
fact
that
we
have
people
that
leave
that
make
50
more
70,
more
or
double
or
triple
their
salary.
If
they
go
and
work
I'll
say
in
the
industry,
and
that
has
been
a
big
driver
of
our
turnover.
D
We,
we
have
tried
in
large
part,
to
address
the
turnover
issue.
Since,
thankfully,
we
got
a
larger
general
fund
appropriation
by
raising
a
significant
number
of
salaries
across
the
financial
analysis
division,
as
well
as
our
legal
division.
D
That
has
helped
to
a
certain
degree
of
keeping
the
people
that
we
have
we're
really
struggling
now
to
find
people
with
degrees
in
economics
and
Finance
and
Accounting
that
directly
out
of
school
want
to
come
and
work
at
our
entry
level
positions
at
the
Public,
Service
Commission,
and
so
we've
internally
over
the
last
couple
weeks,
actually
taken
steps.
D
We're
reaching
out
to
the
business
schools
in
the
state
to
speak
directly
to
the
folks
that
they
have
that
let
their
recent
graduates
know
about
job
openings,
but
we're
fine
I'll,
give
you
a
this
is
pretty
consistent,
we're
taking
applications,
maybe
we'll
put
out
a
position
we'll
leave
it
for
the
minimum
number
of
days
10
days
we'll
receive
maybe
10
or
15
applications
by
the.
We
can't
see
the
stuff
that
we
can't.
We
get
the
applications,
the
applications
close.
Then
we're
told
who
qualifies
for
the
position
that
usually
knocks
out
a
couple
of
people.
D
Let's
say
it
knocks
it
down
to
10
or
12.,
we'll
reach
out
to
people
by
the
time
the
two
or
three
days
after
they
qualify
will
have
reached
out
to
all
of
them.
Maybe
two
or
three
of
them
are
already
not
interested
they've
taken
a
job
somewhere
else,
so
we're
down
to
six
or
seven,
maybe
eight
by
the
time
we
interview
them
three
or
four
days
to
interview
them.
By
the
time
we
interview,
usually
one
or
two
people
have
already
dropped
out.
D
We
take
one
or
two
more
days
just
to
figure
out
who
we
want
to
hire.
This
is
less
than
a
week
and
a
half
time
period
we
find
out.
There's
probably
three
people
left
after
we've
done
interviews
figured
out
who
we
want
to
hire
and
tried
to
offer
the
jobs
and,
in
large
part
we're
offering
jobs
to
people
who
have
already
taken
a
job
in
that
two-week
period.
D
We
just
cannot
move
fast
enough
and
whatever
we're
offering
and
whatever
they
think
we
can
offer
them
is
apparently
not
enough
for
them
to
hold
out
versus
the
other
jobs
that
they're
taking.
So
we're
trying
to
really
look
at
doing
things
as
fast
as
possible,
but
we're
turning
things
around
in
a
half
a
day
when
we're
trying
to
hire
people
we're
trying
to
interview
in
less
than
a
week
three
four
five
six
people.
D
G
D
And
I,
don't
even
think
it's
taken
us
that
long
to
interview
I,
think
by
the
time
we
get
applications,
we're
trying
to
interview
every
single
person
and
come
up
with
a
who,
the
candidates.
We
think
we
should
offer
the
jobs
who
are
we're
doing
that
entire
process,
and
maybe
three
or
four
days
trying
to
do
it
in
three
or
four
days.
But
to
your
point,
yeah
that
three
or
four
days
we're
pulling
off
people
that
we
need
that
are
working
on
cases
that
are
trying
to
get
things
out
the
door
in
a
statutory
time
period.
D
We're
pulling
those
people
off
those
cases
and
working
around
their
schedules
to
try
to
set
those
interviews
up,
and
it's
just
it's
a
Confluence
of
different
things.
But
that's
certainly
one
of
them
that
that
when
we
have
so
few
resources,
historically
you're,
either
working
on
a
case
or
you're
doing
something
different.
But
if
you're
interviewing
someone
on
an
interview
panel,
then
that's
work.
You
can't
be
doing
on
these
cases
that
we
all
have
statutory
deadlines
for.
E
You
Mr
chairman,
thank
you,
Mr
Chandler,
for
your
testimony
today,
I
learned
a
lot
representative
Lockett.
This
is
at
least
the
second
time
you
have
taken
one
of
my
questions.
E
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
scary,
for
you
or
me,
but
along
the
same
lines,
there
I
was
going
to
ask
about
your
turnover
and
some
of
the
challenges
you've
had
there
and
you've
kind
of
addressed
that
already
so
I
do
want
to
go
to
another
question
or
point
I
had
so
I
have
several
constituents
in
the
Lansdowne
neighborhood
area
and
others
who
have
been
very
vocal
about
their
concerns
with
Kentucky
Utilities
and
their
tree.
E
Cutting
measures
and
historically
the
neighborhood
association
worked
directly
with
Kentucky
Utilities
on
selecting
the
types
of
trees
they
would
plant
in
this
median
that
they
managed
as
an
association
and
then
Kentucky
Utilities,
unilaterally
changed
their
own
guidelines
or
regulations
around
what
types
of
trees
and
how
they
were
going
to
maintain
those
trees
and
those
trees
that
they
decided
to
cut
down,
and
that
utility
were
nowhere
near
in
danger
of
getting
anywhere
close
to
the
power
lines.
E
And
despite
a
lot
of
public
pressure
and
the
mayor
in
Lexington
getting
involved,
eventually,
they
went
on
and
clear-cut
a
lot
of
the
trees
in
the
median.
Now
they
did
a
decent
job
of
going
back
and
replanting
new
trees
and
and
making
it
look.
You
know
presentable
for
the
constituents
and
people
that
lived
in
that
neighborhood,
but
I
have
several
folks
that
are
upset
that
we,
the
legislature
or
the
Public
Service
Commission,
could
not
prevent
that
or
make
Kentucky
Utilities
even
adhere
to
their
original
regulations
that
they
had
on.
E
You
know
the
books
in
the
past.
Is
there
any
role
that
PSC
could
have
in
the
enforcement
to
keep
them
and
other
utilities
whole
when
it
comes
to
that
sort
of
issue.
E
D
So
none
of
this
has
ever
been
put
in
front
of
the
commission,
but
the
determination
as
to
what
is
or
isn't
necessary
is
going
to
be
a
factual
determination
and
unless
somebody
puts
a
complaint
in
front
of
us
as
a
general
matter,
no,
it's
not
strictly
adhered
to
in
Kentucky,
but
generally
there's
there's
like
there's,
there's
a
broadly
applied
across
in
other
states.
D
This
business
judgment
role
as
it
relates
to
utilities
that
you
know
look
if
if
they're
and
it's
it
may
be
outdated,
yet
it
may
not
even
be
necessarily
applicable,
but
there
is
an
idea
that
look.
The
utility
is
under
a
service
obligation
that
they
have
to
provide
adequate,
efficient,
reasonable
service
if
they
go
out
and
do
things
to
Endeavor
to
meet
that
minimum
standard,
whether
their
actions
to
meet
that
were
reasonable
or
the
practices
that
they
took
were
fair.
You
know
were
reasonable.
D
That's
spoken
to
in
our
statute.
If
somebody
can
allege
that
if
somebody
can
prove
that
or
they
could
file
a
complaint
that
says
look,
this
practice
is
not
reasonable.
The
statute
already
provides
for
that,
but
whoever
is
alleging.
D
That
has
the
burden
of
proof
to
show
that
the
the
practice
of
the
utility
and
I'm
sort
of
talking
out
the
cuff,
not
really
prepared
to
I,
haven't
done
the
legal
research
in
in
a
long
time
with
this,
but
but
effectively
the
the
individuals,
the
people,
the
public
would
have
the
OB
the
legal
burden
to
show
that,
whatever
practice
that
the
utility
is
employing
and
trying
to
meet
their
statutory
standard
was
unreasonable
that
that
that
it
there.
That
is,
the
mechanism
that
has
existed
under
law
for
decades
and
decades
and
decades.
D
But
it
is
a
factual
determination
as
to
whether
these
were
necessary
actions
or
whether
these
were
unreasonable
actions
and
until
that's
in
front
of
the
commission,
with
all
the
evidence
in
front
of
it,
We've
not
really
You
Know
spoken
on
this
we've
not
taken
a
position
on
it,
but
big
picture
on
anything.
That
kind
of
sounds
like
this
big
picture.
That's
how
it
has
to
be
dealt
with.
C
D
So
yes,
and
no
so
we
don't
for
our
ordinary
attorneys,
we
have
gone
out,
and
a
few
of
those
members
of
this
committee
are
aware
of
this
and
they'll
be
more
aware
tomorrow
during
chairman
Smith's
meeting.
But
we
have
gone
out.
We
we've
tried
we've
gotten
an
attorney
once
to
try
to
help
with
the
siding
board
the
influx
of
those
Merchant
cases.
D
That
was
one
attorney,
but
it
we
don't
have
that
now
everybody
that
we're
using
for
the
siding
board.
Those
attorneys
are
all
in-house
attorneys
and
we
have
gone
out
and
I
think
the
the
contract
expires.
At
the
end
of
this
month,
we
did
go
out
and
hire
an
attorney
who
a
law
firm.
D
That
exclusively
does
legal
work
at
the
federal
level
at
the
Federal
Energy
Regulatory
Commission,
to
represent
the
Commission
in
a
couple
of
cases
up
there
primarily
related
to
the
proposed
transfer
that
now
resolved
didn't
go
through,
but
the
transfer
or
sale
of
Kentucky
Power
from
AEP
to
Liberty.
We
did
go
out
of
house
so
that
we
would
get
experts
that
that
only
practice
law
at
the
federal
level,
so
that
we
made
sure
that
we
had
the
appropriate
expertise
and
that
we
were
successful
there.
A
Commissioner
Chandler
thank
you
for
being
here
today
and
any
other
questions
or
I.
Think
you
know
my
just
my
comment
on
on
I
appreciate
what
y'all
do.
Obviously
in
East
Kentucky
we
feel,
like
you
know
the
the
rider
costs
that
we
have
to
pay
for
on
the
demolition
of
the
of
the
power
plant.
The
coal-fired
plant
was
has
been
detrimental
to
us
really
again.
This
is
a
broken
record,
but
I
thought
the
lady
that
I
talked
about
in
our
church
was
74,
but
she's
79.
A
and
she
lives
in
a
mobile
home
and
her
electric
bill
in
the
winter
was
five
six
hundred
dollars
and
she
only
draws
652
I
think
a
month
and
paying
I
mean
if
we
ask
the
question:
are
the
electric
rates
a
lot
higher
now
than
they
were
10
years
ago?
The
actual
electric
rate
may
not
be
that
much
higher,
but
all
those
demolitions
and
buying
another
Power
Plant
to
take
its
place
I
feel
like
it's
unfair,
because
the
investors
and
I
think
I'm
right.
Kentucky
power's
investor
owned
the
investors.
A
They
reap
the
benefits
of
of
their
Investments.
They
don't
have
to
face
the
consequences.
Basically,
what
I'm
saying
is
when
the
coal
fire
plant
was
destroyed?
Did
the
investors
also
have
to
pay
part
of
that?
No,
it
went
all
to
the
rate
payers,
and
so
the
investors
they
they
win,
they're
a
win-win-win
situation,
our
people
in
the
mountains.
A
It's
just
not
fair
to
them
that
and
that,
maybe
that's
nothing
you
could
change
or
the
Public
Service
Commission
could
change,
but
in
our
minds
the
people
of
East
Kentucky,
you
know
we're
paying
for
something
we
don't
have
any
say-so
in
it.
The
rate
payers
is
what
I'm
saying,
and
so
anyway,
if
there's
anything
that
we
could
do
as
far
as
looking
at
reliability
in
the
coal-fired
plants
and
then
the
equation
of,
are
we
going
to
destroy
coal-fired
plants?
Are
we
going
to
you
know?
Because
natural
gas
is
not
coal?
Solar
is
not
coal.
A
D
And
so
I
I
know
that
wasn't
so
much
of
a
question
dear
it
Senator
Smith's,
rubbing
off
on
you,
but
I
I,
just
I
just
make
one
statement.
I
hope
it
kind
of
came
through
the
presentation,
I
I'm
I'm
in
the
seat,
I'm,
just
keeping
the
seat
warm
right,
I
mean
I.
I,
don't
mean
it
like
I
we're
all
here
temporarily
right.
None
of
us
are
going
to
do
this
job
for
the
entirety
of
the
job.
D
There
were
people
that
sat
as
chair
of
the
commission
before
me
and
there
are
people
who
are
going
to
sit
in
this
chair
after
me,
but
the
commission
is
still
going
to
be
there
and
it's
still
going
to
be
necessary
and
there
really
are
long-term
detrimental
effects
to
the
economy
of
the
Commonwealth
into
our
individual
consumers
for
an
under-resourced,
Public,
Service
Commission,
a
Public
Service
Commission,
who
doesn't
either
have
that
opportunity
to
do
its
job
well
or
frankly,
doesn't
do
its
job
well
and
that's
why
I've
been
a
significant
advocate
for
making
sure
that
we
have
the
staff
that
stays
there,
even
as
Commissioners
rotate
in
so
that
some
of
the
decisions?
D
The
commission
makes
impact
Commonwealth
for
20
30
40
50
years,
and
we
can't
afford
to
have
multiple
mistakes
across
the
board
that
lasts
that
long
and
so
I.
Just
really
appreciate
you
giving
me
the
opportunity
to
talk
about
how
important
I
think
that
the
public
service
committees
to
the
Commonwealth
I
always
call
it
the
most
important
state
agency
that
no
one
knows
about
because
it
does.
Everybody
pays
a
power
bill.
Everybody
pays
a
water
bill.
C
D
F
Yeah,
we'll
just
take
it
up
tomorrow,
but
I
think
that
there'll
be
a
lot
more
discussion
based
upon
what
the
chairman
had
said
about
the
changes
of
what
happened
with
this
Liberty
deal
moves
into
the
rearview
mirror
and
we
go
forward
and
I
I
think
there's
a
possibility
on
the
table
for
us
that
I'm,
very
hopeful
about
and
so
I
think
it
could
turn
into
something.
F
Very,
very
positive
and
I
will
give
you
a
lot
of
credit
for
that,
because
I
think
you've
been
at
a
very
strong
Presence
at
the
wheel,
with
the
Public
Service
Commission
to
hold
all
these
utilities
accountable,
a
good,
bad
and
different
and
I.
Think
for
those
of
us
that
are
concerned
about
these
rates
that
that,
having
that
type
of
leadership
over
there
bodes
well
for
us
with.
What's
coming,
so
just
leave
it
at
that
all.