Eighth District Congressman Larry Bucshon, M.D. will host an informational session for all high school students interested in applying to one of the U.S. Service Academies on Saturday, April 29, 2017.

WHO:                 Congressman Larry Bucshon, M.D. (IN-08)

WHAT:               2017 Spring U.S. Service Academy Day

WHEN:               Saturday, April 29th, 9:00am to 11:00am CT (Registration begins at 8:30am CT)

WHERE:            VU Gibson County Center for Advanced Manufacturing and Logistics – 8100 South U.S. Highway 41 Fort Branch, Indiana 47648

The event will offer Eighth District high school students the opportunity to learn more about the United States Service Academies, the application process, congressional nominations, and the everyday life of a Service Academy Cadet.

Representatives from these five academies have been invited:

-          The U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, CO

-          The U.S. Coast Guard Academy in New London, CT

-          The U.S. Merchant Marine Academy in Kings Point, NY

-          The U.S. Military Academy in West Point, NY

-          The U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD

Each year, Congressman Bucshon has the privilege of nominating a limited number of high school students to attend four of the five service academies. The deadline to apply for a congressional nomination from Bucshon’s office for the class of 2022 is October 6, 2017.

For more information on the application process, students can visit –https://bucshon.house.gov/serving-you/military-academy-nominations or contact Erin Lucas in Congressman Bucshon’s District Office at 812-232-0523.                        

COA: Vectren Projects Fail To Meet TDSIC Requirements

The Indiana Court of Appeals has pulled the plug on a power company’s plan to hike rates without allowing the public to view and comment on the proposal.

In October 2015, the Indiana Gas Company Inc. and Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Company, collectively known as Vectren, filed an update petition with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission to raise rates to fund several projects.

Two years prior, the utility had gotten approval for its seven-year plan under the Transmission, Distribution, and Storage System Improvement Charges and Deferrals (TDSIC) statute, Indiana Code 8-1-39-1. This law, passed by the Indiana General Assembly in 2013, allows a utility to petition for a “tracker” which is a mechanism that enables a power company to hike rates in order to recover specific costs without having to go through a formal general rate case proceeding.


The IURC approved Vectren’s seven-year plan although the document only included project-by-project details for the first year. For the remaining years, the commission presumed the other projects to be eligible but specifics had to be provided.

When Vectren came forward with its October 2015 petition, it sought to recoup the costs for installing automatic meter reading equipment for its gas-only customers and a new transmission system in the Lafayette area, among other projects.

However, the IURC denied the petition, concluding it did not have the authority to approve projects that were not included in the power company’s original seven-year plan.



Vectren appealed to the Court of Appeals in Indiana Gas Company, Inc. and Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Company v. Indian Utility Regulatory Commission, et al., 93A02-1604-EX-943.

The utility asserted that commission erred by finding the TDSIC statute does not allow a utility to update its seven-year plan with new projects.

The IURC maintained its interpretation was supported by the statute. If a power company were allowed to change or alter its seven-year plan in any manner and without regard to its approved contents, that would defeat the requirement that the commission evaluate the plan in its entirety.



Vectern countered the legislative intent in enacting the TDSIC statute was intending to provide a timelier process for utilities to recover their costs. A broader application of the word “update” would support that intent by qualifying a wider spectrum of projects for timely cost recovery.



A Unanimous Court of Appeals Disagreed.



“Even if we accept Vectren’s argument that the Legislature’s intent in enacting the TDSIC statute was to provide a timely method of cost recovery for utilities, the Legislature clearly did not intend this cost-recovery method to apply to all projects, or even to as many projects as possible, as Vectren seems to suggest,” Judge Rudolph Pyle III wrote for the court. “… Vectren has not alleged that the Legislature repealed the process utilities have for recovering their costs under a general rate case. Accordingly, it is clear that the Legislature intended for utilities to recover some of their costs through general rate cases rather than TDSIC update petitions.”