PPL Corp – Lobbying Governance & Transparency

Sign up to access all our data and the evidence and analysis underlying our overall scores. Once you've created an account, we'll get in touch with further details:

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Strong	PPL discloses a structured governance system that links climate-related lobbying to board-level oversight and sets out review mechanisms for both its own advocacy and its memberships in trade bodies, indicating strong governance. The company states that PPLs Public Affairs department is in regular communication with executive leadership and provides an annual report to the board on key issues and advocacy positions, and that this report, alongside political-contribution disclosures, is reviewed by the Board of Directors Governance, Nominating and Sustainability Committee and the companys leadership team, including the chief executive officer. This committee is expressly charged with overseeing the companys practices and positions to further its sustainability strategy, showing a formal owner of lobbying alignment. For direct lobbying, PPL says it measures all proposed climate policies against three core principles of customer focus, sustainability and effectiveness, providing a clear test for whether advocacy supports the net-zero strategy. For indirect lobbying, It lays sut some of its governance ome of its governance oout in its 2023 Public Policy Engagement and Trade Associations report. However, this does not address the climate lobbying positions of trade associations or alignment processes. The company describes how senior executives sit on key bodies of EEI, AGA, the Kentucky Chamber, the Pennsylvania Chamber and others, and emphasises that to the extent [a trade association] may adopt climate policies that are not consistent with PPLs policies, PPL seeks to influence its position to be more aligned with PPLs, adding that such differences are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and, in the case of the Kentucky Coal Association, it notifies KCA and freely advocates against the position at issue. These disclosures demonstrate active monitoring and engagement to align association positions with the companys climate principles. However, PPL does not disclose a stand-alone climate-lobbying audit or a publicly available, systematic assessment of alignment for every association, and there is no statement that it will suspend or end memberships if misalignment persists, which limits the depth of its transparency. View Sources	B

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Strong

PPL discloses a structured governance system that links climate-related lobbying to board-level oversight and sets out review mechanisms for both its own advocacy and its memberships in trade bodies, indicating strong governance. The company states that PPLs Public Affairs department is in regular communication with executive leadership and provides an annual report to the board on key issues and advocacy positions, and that this report, alongside political-contribution disclosures, is reviewed by the Board of Directors Governance, Nominating and Sustainability Committee and the companys leadership team, including the chief executive officer. This committee is expressly charged with overseeing the companys practices and positions to further its sustainability strategy, showing a formal owner of lobbying alignment. For direct lobbying, PPL says it measures all proposed climate policies against three core principles of customer focus, sustainability and effectiveness, providing a clear test for whether advocacy supports the net-zero strategy. For indirect lobbying, It lays sut some of its governance ome of its governance oout in its 2023 Public Policy Engagement and Trade Associations report. However, this does not address the climate lobbying positions of trade associations or alignment processes. The company describes how senior executives sit on key bodies of EEI, AGA, the Kentucky Chamber, the Pennsylvania Chamber and others, and emphasises that to the extent [a trade association] may adopt climate policies that are not consistent with PPLs policies, PPL seeks to influence its position to be more aligned with PPLs, adding that such differences are evaluated on a case-by-case basis and, in the case of the Kentucky Coal Association, it notifies KCA and freely advocates against the position at issue. These disclosures demonstrate active monitoring and engagement to align association positions with the companys climate principles. However, PPL does not disclose a stand-alone climate-lobbying audit or a publicly available, systematic assessment of alignment for every association, and there is no statement that it will suspend or end memberships if misalignment persists, which limits the depth of its transparency.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Comprehensive	PPL Corp provides a highly detailed and specific picture of its climate-policy lobbying. It names numerous individual measures it has engaged on, including the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s resilience and electrification provisions, renewable-energy tax credits in the Build Back Better/Inflation Reduction Act, "KY Senate Bill 266 – an act relating to solar farms on agricultural lands," proposed SEC rules on climate-related disclosures, Pennsylvania’s potential entry into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, reforms to net-metering laws, and FERC Order 2222 on distributed energy resources. The company also explains how it seeks to influence these measures, describing both direct and indirect mechanisms and identifying the policymaking targets. Examples include having executives “meet with SEC commissioners and staff,” “work directly with lawmakers and through our trade associations” on federal infrastructure legislation, engaging “state officials as they develop programs to use IIJA funding,” and advocating to the U.S. Treasury on implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act; it additionally references outreach to FERC and the Kentucky General Assembly. Finally, PPL sets out clear, concrete policy outcomes it is pursuing. It backs “technology-specific or technology-neutral tax credits for renewable energy resources” to reduce customer costs, seeks “rules that allow for flexibility by registrants” in SEC disclosure requirements, supports “a more efficient and predictable permitting process for large infrastructure projects,” calls for a definition of grid resilience that values 24/7 generation resources, and favors federal carbon rules based on achievable unit-specific reductions. By specifying the changes it wants and the reasons behind them, PPL demonstrates a high level of transparency across policy focus, methods of engagement, and desired results.	A