As the PSC noted in its report on the 2003 ice storm in central and northeast Kentucky, en- suring “that elected officials and local commu- nities fully understand the situation and have current estimates of when critical services will be restored is very important.”
State and local elected officials are often the first persons that members of the public turn to in for information when a disaster occurs. Many state and local government agencies need to know information about restoration times and how they can provide assistance to the utilities. For example, the Kentucky Divi- sion of Water needs to know when power to sewage treatment and drinking water facilities has been cut off and when it will likely be re- stored so that officials can take appropriate steps to warn the public of any health haz- ards associated with a lack of clean water or from sewage spills into the creeks and streams into which wastewater facilities nor- mally discharge their treated effluent. Likewise, the Kentucky DEM has local and regional officers who coordinate the physical resources and the needs at the local level. (see Figure 10 on facing page) These emer- gency response coordinators are familiar with the response plans for the counties for which they have responsibility and know which state and county resources are available. They are the point of contact for requests for assis- tance for manpower or equipment that can be used to help utility crews access repair sites. Therefore, it is very important for all utilities to know who the emergency coordinators lo- cated in their service territories are long be- fore an emergency situation arises. This fa- cilitates effective communication during an emergency and alerts the emergency coordi- nators to what needs the utilities have, thus allowing efficient distribution of resources. During the 2009 ice storm, the jurisdictional utilities had varying degrees of success in maintaining communication with and coordi- nating their efforts with state and local gov- ernment officials. BREC, for example, did a very good job of keeping in contact with both elected officials and members of Kentucky state agencies and county and local govern- ment officials. On January 29, 2009, at the height of their outages, BREC personnel met with the Henderson County emergency ser- vices director, Henderson County engineer,
Henderson County judge/executive, a state senator and representative from BREC’s ser- vice area, Kentucky Air National Guard (to coordinate helicopter assistance to inspect BREC transmission lines), Kentucky Gover- nor Steve Beshear, and Kentucky Adjutant General Edward Tonini (to update them on the status of BREC system and request heli- copter assistance). BREC also spoke by phone with U.S. Coast Guard officials regard- ing a downed transmission line blocking barge traffic on the Cumberland River. By all accounts, Duke Kentucky did a very good job of keeping in contact with a variety of local, state and federal officials regarding the progress of their restoration efforts. Much of their communication efforts were via e- mail, as opposed to direct contact or tele- phone briefings.
While the information provided by the utilities regarding their communications was reasona- bly detailed, the Commission was not able to draw any conclusions regarding the efficacy of e-mail communications over telephone or
direct briefings by or discussions with utility officials. However, utilities may find that com- municating by e-mail to local and state offi- cials may help the utility to “speak with one voice” and to avoid miscommunication or contradictory information being passed on. As it was, Duke Kentucky was able to communi- cate with many different agencies and organi- zations in a number of counties.
During the first few days following the ice storm, Duke Kentucky sent daily or twice daily e-mail updates to the emergency man- agement directors in Boone, Campbell and Kenton counties. They supplemented their e- mail communications with phone calls on January 28th, 29th, and 30th. In addition, Duke Kentucky e-mailed and called the county judge-executives of Boone, Campbell, and Kenton Counties, as well as all mayors in the various localities throughout those three counties. Duke Kentucky also sent e-mail alerts to the following public officials in its ser- vice area: city administrators and clerks, county commissioners and county administra- tors for Boone, Kenton and Campbell coun-
Figure 10: Kentucky Division of Emergency Management regional office coordination areas
ties, economic development organizations, Northern Kentucky University Chamber presi- dent, Northern Kentucky Area Development District director, university and college presi- dents, school superintendents - including the Covington Diocese, the general manager for Sanitation District No. 1, and the Northern Kentucky Water District.
The Commission believes that Duke Ken- tucky deserves recognition for the thorough- ness of its efforts to keep state and local offi- cials informed about its restoration efforts during the 2009 ice storm and its diligence in documenting those efforts, allowing for both this review and Duke Kentucky’s own internal evaluation and improvement during the next major outage event.
Other utilities were less successful in either maintaining regular contact with state and local officials or documenting their efforts. Taylor County RECC made contact with the PSC to report numerous outages and with the Kentucky National Guard to request assis- tance in road clearing but otherwise did not make contact with any other officials. Simi- larly, Shelby Energy made contact only with the PSC through its Web site outage report- ing system.
Some of the smaller utilities, such as Big Sandy RECC, Clark Energy, Farmers RECC, Inter-County Energy, and Licking Valley RECC maintained contact with the PSC as required and provided daily updates to their local judge-executives and mayors by way of e-mail, fax, or telephone calls. However, they did not keep written records of those con- tacts.
LG&E and KU did not keep written records of their contacts with state and local officials ei- ther. However, the companies stated that they maintained regular contact with local government officials including emergency management personnel across the affected
portions of their service territories. The com- panies stated that they made approximately 300 individual contacts with mayors and/or judge-executives across their service territo- ries as well as many contacts with officials in Lexington and Louisville. LG&E and KU also coordinated their communications with local school systems to advise them when power might be restored to their facilities. The com- panies also coordinated their restoration ef- forts with affected wastewater and water dis- tricts to set restoration priorities and provide regular updates on service restoration. Kentucky Power stated that it contacted a number of state and local officials on a daily basis throughout the 2009 ice storm, includ- ing the emergency management directors of Grayson, Johnson and Greenup Counties; the City of Ashland Utility Director; county judge-executives (who were faxed press re- leases concerning outage numbers, restora- tion efforts and estimated times of restora- tion); and the mayors in the affected areas. Kentucky Power’s customer service represen- tatives contacted the magistrates, mayors, and judge-executives to ensure that the gov- ernment agencies knew how to utilize Ken- tucky Power's Web site to determine the number of customers out of service in their respective county. These officials, in turn, checked with Kentucky Power to determine whether to establish shelters and which roads were in need of clearing or salting for crews to be able to access repair sites and to find out when water pumps and power to other vital infrastructure would be restored.
Kentucky Power noted that, since its Distribu- tion Dispatch Center reports its restoration efforts to the PSC twice daily during major outages like the 2009 ice storm, it might be more efficient for the PSC to “serve as a clearinghouse from which all state and local officials can receive information on restora- tion efforts,” as opposed to having the utilities be responsible for making all of the various contacts.
While the Commission understands Ken- tucky Power’s concerns, it does not agree that the PSC should serve as information clearinghouse or conduit between local officials and utilities. During an emer- gency or disaster the PSC’s primary duty under the state emergency management system is to monitor outages and the pro- gress of power restoration. During such outages, the PSC does field many ques- tions from local officials in the affected areas, but that does not relieve the utilities from the responsibility of communicating effectively and working with state and lo- cal officials until the restoration opera- tions are completed. This is an area which the Commission expects to be greatly im- proved by better emergency planning and participation in regional/statewide emer- gency drills, as discussed earlier.
Kenergy’s service area includes all or parts of 14 counties in the western part of Kentucky, which, as discussed later in this report, took a devastating blow to its landline and cellular telephone service facilities. Kenergy noted that “[v]ery little phone communication was available during this time,” so it provided the county judge-executives in its service area updated outage reports three times daily by e-mail. Kenergy representatives also at- tended several county emergency manage- ment meetings throughout its service territory during the course of the storm. All emergency management associations were updated with outage numbers three times daily and daily telephone conferences were held with emer- gency management personnel along with the county judge-executives. Maps indicating the areas where Kenergy crews were working to restore power were also provided to the judge-executives on a daily basis.
As discussed previously, Meade County. RECC, Nolin RECC, and Salt River Electric participated in a region-wide emergency drill entitled “Lincoln Trail on the Rocks” in April 2007. Those utilities appear to have benefited from that experience, as all three reported that they had ongoing communication with
their respective local DEM representatives, as well as some contact with the Kentucky National Guard, a briefing with Governor Bes- hear, and numerous telephone and e-mail contacts with local mayors and county judge- executives. In addition, during the first week following the ice storm, Nolin RECC met twice daily with the commanding general at Ft. Knox, to which it supplies power, to provide restoration progress updates. Meade County RECC also made contact with local sheriffs’ departments regarding location and phone numbers of available shelters as well as out- age updates and assistance with road clear- ing and possible security issues.