1 BEFORE THE OHIO POWER SITING BOARD 2 - - - 3 In the Matter of the Application of AEP Ohio : 4 Transmission Company for a : Certificate of Environmental :Case No. 5 Compatibility and Public Need :16-534-EL-BTX for the Dennison-Y ager 138 kV : 6 Transmission Line Rebuild : Project. : 7 : In the Matter of the : 8 Application of AEP Ohio : Transmission Company for a :Case No. 9 Certificate of Environmental :16-535-EL-BTX Compatibility and Public Need : 10 for the Yager-Desert Road : 138 kV Transmission Line Rebuild : 11 Project. : 12 - - - 13 PROCEEDINGS 14 Before Doug Jennings, Administrative Law Judge, 15 held at the offices of the Public Utilities 16 Commission of Ohio, 180 East Broad Street, 17 Hearing Room 11-C, Columbus, Ohio, on Wednesday, 18 January 25, 2017, at 10:00 A.M. 19 20 - - - 21 22 Armstrong & Okey, Inc. 222 East Town Street, 2nd Floor 23 Columbus, Ohio 43215 (614) 224-9481 - (800) 223-9481 24 25 - - - ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 Ms. Erin Miller 3 AEP Ohio Transmission Company 1 Riverside Plaza 4 Columbus, Ohio 43215 5 On behalf of AEP Ohio Transmission Company. 6 7 Mr. Werner L. Margard Assistant Attorney General 8 30 East Broad Street, 16th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215 9 Appearing on behalf of the Staff 10 of the Ohio Power Siting Board. 11 12 13 14 15 - - - 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 3 1 INDEX TO WITNESSES 2 - - - 3 DIRECT CROSS 4 AEP WITNESSES 5 Ronald Howar 18 6 STAFF WITNESSES 7 Jonathan Pawley 11 8 9 10 - - - 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 4 1 INDEX TO EXHIBITS 2 - - - 3 STAFF EXHIBITS MARKED ADMT 4 1 Staff Report in 10 24 Case No. 16-534-EL-BTX 5 6 AEP OHIO TRANSMISSION EXHIBITS 7 1 Application in 15 24 Case No. 16-534-EL-BTX 8 2 Proof of Publication in 16 24 9 Case No. 16-0534-EL-BTX 10 3 Proof of Publication, Letters 16 24 to Property Owners and Tenants 11 in Case No. 16-0534-EL-BTX 12 4 Proof of Copies of Applications 16 24 Served on Public Officials and 13 and Public Agencies 14 5 Proof of Publication, Letters 17 24 to Property Owners and Tenants 15 in Case No. 16-0534-EL-BTX 16 6 Proof of Publication, Letters 17 24 to Property Owners and Tenants 17 in Case No. 16-0534-EL-BTX 18 7 Proof of Publication in 17 24 Case No. 16-0534-EL-BTX 19 8 Prefiled Testimony of 17 24 20 Ronald M. Howard 21 22 JOINT EXHIBITS 23 1 Joint Stipulation and 18 24 Recommendation 24 25 - - - ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 5 1 Wednesday Morning, 2 January 25, 2017. 3 - - - 4 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: The Ohio 5 Power Siting Board as assigned for evidentiary 6 hearing at this time and place Case No. 7 16-534-EL-BTX which is captioned In the Matter 8 of the Application of AEP Ohio Transmission 9 Company for Certificate of Environmental 10 Compatibility and Public Need for the 11 Dennison-Yager 138 kV Transmission Line Rebuild 12 Project. 13 The Ohio Power Siting Board has also 14 scheduled for evidentiary hearing Case No. 15 16-535-EL-BTX which is captioned In the Matter 16 of the Application of AEP Ohio Transmission 17 Company for a Certificate of Environmental 18 Compatibility and Public Need for the 19 Yager-Desert Road 138 kV Transmission Line 20 Rebuild Project. 21 These cases were consolidated for 22 hearing by an entry issued on December 5th, 23 2016. My name is Doug Jennings, I am 24 the Administrative Law Judge assigned by 25 the Ohio Power Siting Board to preside over this ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 6 1 evidentiary hearing. 2 At this point I would request that 3 the parties make an appearance on the record. 4 Let's begin with the company. 5 MS. MILLER: Thank you, your Honor. 6 Good morning. Erin Miller on behalf of AEP Ohio 7 Transmission Company, Inc. Our business address 8 is 1 Riverside Plaza, Columbus, Ohio 43215. 9 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Thank 10 you. 11 MR. MARGARD: Your Honor, on behalf 12 of the Staff of the Power Siting Board, Mike 13 DeWine, Ohio Attorney General, William Wright, 14 Section Chief, of the Public Utilities Section, 15 by Assistant Attorney General Warner L. Margard, 16 30 East Broad Street, 16th Floor, Columbus, 17 Ohio. 18 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Thank 19 you. And I don't believe we have anyone here 20 that filed to intervene. 21 MS. MILLER: Not to my knowledge. 22 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 23 Thank you. Let's see. 24 There was a local public hearing on 25 January 11, 2017. Are there any updates since ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 7 1 that local public hearing that you would care to 2 bring to the attention of the Bench? 3 MS. MILLER: If I may, can you 4 explain to Honorable Jennings our position as to 5 0535, Case No. 16-0535? 6 MR. MARGARD: I think it is 7 appropriate to note for the record where we 8 stand. 9 MS. MILLER: Absolutely. Your 10 Honor, if I may, the Company filed a letter in 11 the docket on, I would have to double check the 12 date, but on Monday of this week, and indicated 13 that we are considering a re-route modification 14 option as to Case No. 16-0535-EL-BTX. 15 Our right-of-way agents and other 16 agents of the Company have been in touch with a 17 Ms. Deusica Katic-Piatt who is an affected 18 property owner under the proposed route at this 19 time in this case. And we have been working for 20 some time now to come to an agreement as to a 21 route modification that would benefit her so as 22 to not have to affect her property and have to 23 take a small cottage that is located on the 24 northern side of her property. 25 So to that end the Company has now ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 8 1 reconsidered our proposed preferred route in 2 that case. We have filed the proposed route 3 modification. We have heard back from Staff 4 that they would like some additional 5 information, more substantive information, about 6 the proposed modification. 7 And at this time we have indicated 8 that we will have that information back to Staff 9 within about a week. So at this juncture I 10 believe that we haven't finalized an agreement. 11 While we have filed this joint stipulation and 12 recommendation in this case, we have had a 13 modification that has changed the course of that 14 agreement, and so I do believe, and I will let 15 Mr. Margard speak on behalf of Staff, but I do 16 believe that they will need to review the 17 information that we provided to them before they 18 can move forward as to that case. 19 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 20 MR. MARGARD: Your Honor, I believe 21 that is a fair representation. Based on what we 22 have been told and shown by the Company to date 23 we don't believe there will be any issues or 24 objections to the proposed re-route. We would 25 anticipate filing something by way of a ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 9 1 supplement to the Staff Report of Investigation 2 in that matter indicating Staff's evaluation of 3 that re-route once we have all of the 4 information. 5 We just believe we need a little 6 additional time to be sure that there aren't 7 more issues with that re-route. 8 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 9 What respect to Case No. 16-535, do the parties 10 intend to postpone the hearing for that case 11 until some future time? 12 MR. MARGARD: Yes, your Honor. I 13 believe that would be the appropriate course in 14 that matter. 15 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 16 Counsel, do you have any dates in mind? Have 17 you discussed dates? 18 MR. MARGARD: We haven't discussed 19 among ourselves, but we can go off the record at 20 some point this morning and do that. We do not 21 anticipate a lengthy continuance. 22 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 23 That being said, I will adjourn Case No. 16-535 24 for today and we will fill in the date sometime 25 later this morning. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 10 1 All right. Are the parties ready to 2 move forward on Case No. 16-534? 3 MS. MILLER: Yes, your Honor. 4 MR. MARGARD: We are, your Honor. 5 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 6 The Company. 7 MR. MARGARD: Your Honor, if I may 8 just to indicate for the record that we have 9 marked for purposes of identification as Staff 10 Exhibit No. 1 the Staff Report of Investigation 11 filed in that matter on December 27th of 2016. 12 The parties have agreed to the 13 admission of that exhibit as part of the 14 stipulation that was filed in this case. And so 15 I would so move consistent with the stipulation. 16 I do have Mr. Jonathan Pawley 17 available with me today if your Honor has any 18 questions with respect to the Staff Report of 19 Investigation. 20 And otherwise Staff would rest it's 21 case with respect to this matter. 22 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 23 Will there be any cross-examination? 24 MS. MILLER: On the Staff Report, no, 25 sir. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 11 1 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: If we 2 can have Mr. Pawley come to the stand. As far 3 as the order of witnesses, are your prepared to 4 go first? 5 MR. MARGARD: That is not a problem. 6 Mr. Pawley did not submit testimony. I have him 7 available if you have questions with respect to 8 the Staff Report. Otherwise, the Company has a 9 witness to speak to the stipulation in this 10 matter. 11 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. I 12 do have just a few brief questions for Mr. 13 Pawley. 14 (WITNESS SWORN) 15 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Thank 16 you. 17 - - - 18 JONATHAN PAWLEY 19 called as a witness, being first duly sworn, 20 testified as follows: 21 DIRECT EXAMINATION 22 By Mr. Margard: 23 Q. Would you state your name, please? 24 A. My name is Jonathan Pawley. 25 Q. And by whom are you employed? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 12 1 A. I am employed by the Ohio Power 2 Siting Board housed within the Public Utilities 3 Commission of Ohio. 4 Q. And what is your job position and 5 responsibilities? 6 A. My job position is a Sitting 7 Specialist 3. And my responsibility in this 8 case was Project Manager for Staff. 9 Q. And are your acquainted with what's 10 been marked as Staff Exhibit No. 1? 11 A. I am. 12 Q. And did you contribute to the 13 preparation of that report? 14 A. I did. 15 Q. Do you have any changes, corrections 16 or modifications to that report as it's been 17 submitted today? 18 A. I do not. 19 MR. MARGARD: Thank you. Your 20 Honor, I would tender the witness. 21 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 22 EXAMINATION 23 By the Administrative Law Judge: 24 Q. Mr. Pawley, do you have your Staff 25 Report available? ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 13 1 A. I do. 2 Q. Okay. I am going to ask you some 3 questions about the maps that have been included 4 in that report. 5 A. Okay. 6 Q. If you turn to -- start with Map No. 7 1. 8 A. Okay. 9 Q. Generally I would like you to 10 explain some of the major deviations between 11 the standard and the proposed and alternate 12 routes. 13 In Map No. 1 I see a deviation 14 there. Could you explain what is your 15 understanding, what is to be accomplished by the 16 preferred, the alternative route? 17 A. Sure. The alternate route in this 18 case and as is shown in all of the maps 19 essentially follows the center line of the 20 existing 69 kilovolt line that AEP is proposing 21 to replace in this case. 22 So, the route marked alternate route 23 is basically an overlay of that center line. 24 Because it is a 69 kilovolt line there is a 25 shorter or smaller in distance right-of-way. It ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 14 1 can vary based on the age of the right-of-way 2 and land agreements since approximately the 3 1920s in this instance with the affected land 4 owners. 5 So what AEP has done with the 6 preferred route in this instance is to expand 7 the right-of-way to 200 feet because this is a 8 138 kilovolt rebuild. We are going to replace 9 this 69 that is there now with a new higher 10 voltage line. So there is a higher or a greater 11 right-of-way distance. 12 So, the deviations that you see for 13 the right-of-way, or for the preferred route, if 14 you will, almost exclusively are done in order 15 to avoid predominantly residential structures 16 because of the expanded right-of-way, 17 structures that may have encroached into the 18 right-of-way over the last 80, 90 years. 19 And also ecological features such as 20 wetland, streams. And in some instances 21 cultural resources. 22 That is exactly what we see on Map 1 23 is -- the reason for the preferred route is 24 avoidance of significant features either 25 residential or ecological. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 15 1 Q. And turning to Map No. 3, would that 2 be an example of an attempt to avoid a 3 residential area? 4 A. That is correct. That is exactly 5 the rationale or reasoning behind that. 6 Which I should say Staff was supportive in our 7 report of the preferred route for such reasons. 8 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: I have no 9 further questions. Thank you. 10 MS. MILLER: No questions, your 11 Honor. Thank you. 12 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Thank 13 you, Mr. Pawley. 14 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 15 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Ms. 16 Miller. 17 MS. MILLER: Thank you, your Honor. 18 If I may at this time I would like to mark AEP 19 Ohio Transco exhibits, which I have several. 20 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 21 MS. MILLER: Okay. At this time I 22 would like to mark as AEP Ohio Transco Exhibit 1 23 the Application filed on July 22nd, 2016, which 24 was certified as complete by the Board on 25 September 20th, 2016. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 16 1 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: So 2 marked. 3 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 4 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 5 MS. MILLER: Thank you. I would 6 like to move on and identify as AEP Ohio Transco 7 Exhibit 2 Proof of Notification filed in this 8 docket on April 15th, 2016. 9 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: So 10 marked. 11 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 12 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 13 MS. MILLER: I would like to have 14 marked as AEP Ohio Transco Exhibit No. 3 Proof 15 of Publication filed on May 5th, 2016. 16 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: It shall 17 be so marked. 18 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 19 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 20 MS. MILLER: Thank you. I would 21 like to have AEP Ohio Transco Exhibit No. 4, 22 Proof of Service filed on October 14, 2016. 23 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Shall be 24 so marked. 25 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 17 1 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 2 MS. MILLER: Thank you. I would 3 like to have AEP Ohio Transco Exhibit No. 5 4 marked as Proof of Notification filed on 5 December 9th, 2016. 6 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Shall be 7 so marked. 8 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 9 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 10 MS. MILLER: I would like to have 11 marked AEP Ohio Transco Exhibit No. 6 marked as 12 Proof of Publication filed on December 28th, 13 2016. 14 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Shall be 15 so marked. 16 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 17 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 18 MS. MILLER: Thank you. I would 19 like to have marked as AEP Ohio Exhibit No. 7 20 Proof of Publication filed on January 9th, 2017. 21 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: So 22 marked. 23 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 24 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 25 MS. MILLER: And lastly I would like ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 18 1 marked AEP Ohio Exhibit No. 8 as Prefiled 2 Testimony of Ronald Howard filed on January 3 19th, 2017. 4 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: So 5 marked. 6 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 7 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 8 MS. MILLER: Thank you, Your Honor. 9 And if counsel is agreeable I would like to have 10 marked as Joint Exhibit No. 1 the Joint 11 Stipulation and Recommendation filed in the 12 docket on January 19th, 2017. 13 MR. MARGARD: We are certainly in 14 agreement, your Honor. 15 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Shall be 16 so marked. 17 (EXHIBIT HEREBY MARKED FOR 18 IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES) 19 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Do we 20 have a witness to support the stipulation? 21 MS. MILLER: Yes, your Honor. At 22 this time the Company would like to call Ron 23 Howard to the stand, please. 24 (WITNESS SWORN) 25 - - - ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 19 1 RONALD HOWARD 2 called as a witness, being first duly sworn, 3 testified as follows: 4 DIRECT EXAMINATION 5 By Ms. Miller: 6 Q. Good morning, Mr. Howard. If you 7 would, please, state your name and business 8 address for the record. 9 A. Ronald M. Howard, Jr., 700 Morrison 10 Road, Gahanna, Ohio. 11 MS. MILLER: Okay. And, your Honor, 12 may I approach the witness? 13 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Yes. 14 Q. Mr. Howard, I am handing to you what 15 is marked as AEP Ohio Transco Exhibit 8. If 16 you would please identify this document for 17 the record. 18 A. It is the prefiled testimony of 19 Ronald M. Howard on behalf of the Ohio Transco 20 in support of the Joint Stipulation and 21 Recommendation. 22 Q. And, Mr. Howard, did you cause this 23 document to be filed in this docket on January 24 24th, 2017? 25 A. Yes, I did. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 20 1 Q. I apologize. January 19th, 2017. 2 A. Yes, I did. 3 Q. And if you would, Mr. Howard, please 4 state by whom you are employed and in what 5 capacity for the record. 6 A. I am employed by AEP Ohio Transco, 7 and I am a Siting Specialist, Senior. 8 Q. Okay. And if you could please 9 describe your educational and professional 10 background? 11 A. I have a Bachelor of Science in 12 Chemical Engineering with an environmental 13 specialty. I have been working in the 14 regulatory field since 1993 both with federal 15 and state agencies. 16 And since 2003 I have been working 17 on linear transportation and utility corridors. 18 Q. And what are your responsibilities 19 as a transmission siting specialist? 20 A. As a siting specialist for AEP Ohio 21 my role is to ensure that our project team, 22 project managers, right-of-way agents, 23 engineers, so forth, balance the needs of the 24 project relative to the environment and impact 25 to people. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 21 1 Q. And what is the purpose of your 2 testimony today? 3 A. The purpose of my testimony today is 4 to review the project for the Yeager to 5 Dennison, Case No. 16-0534. 6 Q. Okay. And is it your position that 7 you support the Joint Stipulation and 8 Recommendation? 9 A. Yes, I do. 10 Q. And do you sponsor any exhibits as 11 part of your testimony? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And that would be Joint Exhibit No. 14 1, is that correct, the Joint Stipulation and 15 Recommendation? 16 A. That's correct. 17 Q. Okay. And what are the major 18 provisions of the stipulation? 19 A. Major provisions of the stipulation 20 would be the Staff conditions represented by the 21 Power Siting Board. 22 Q. And what is the general need as far 23 as the project is concerned? 24 A. The need of the project is based 25 upon reliability for economic development and ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 22 1 other reasons. There was an existing 69 2 kilovolt transmission line and it needed to be 3 upgraded and replaced. 4 Q. Okay. And what criteria have you 5 used for reviewing and approving stipulations 6 among signatory parties? 7 A. The Ohio Revised Code. 8 Q. Okay. And if may I will direct you 9 to page 3 of your testimony. 10 A. Thank you. So, my understanding is 11 the stipulation must satisfy three criteria. 12 Must be a product of serious bargaining among 13 capable, knowledgeable parties. 14 The stipulation must not violate any 15 important regulatory principle or practice. 16 And the stipulation must as a whole 17 benefit customers and the public interest. 18 Q. And does the stipulation represent 19 the product of serious bargaining among the 20 signatory parties? 21 A. Yes, it does. 22 Q. And does the stipulation violate any 23 important regulatory principles and practices? 24 A. No, it does not. 25 Q. And does the stipulation benefit ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 23 1 consumers and the public interest? 2 A. Yes, it does. 3 Q. And if I may are there any specific 4 tax benefits to the project, something that the 5 community will reap the benefit of? 6 A. There would be, yes, based upon the 7 economic benefits of our line. 8 Q. Did AEP Ohio Transco take into 9 account the public input in developing its 10 preferred routes? 11 A. Yes. We did go through the public 12 and environmental process. 13 Q. And is it AEP Ohio Transco's 14 position that the stipulation meets the 15 three-part test regarding consideration of 16 stipulations and it should be, therefore, 17 adopted by the Board? 18 A. Yes, it is. 19 MS. MILLER: No further questions, 20 your Honor. 21 MR. MARGARD: I have no questions. 22 Thank you, your Honor. 23 MS. MILLER: Thank you for your 24 testimony. 25 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: All ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 24 1 right. I have no questions. Thank you. 2 MS. MILLER: That concludes our 3 testimony. Thank you. 4 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Okay. 5 The documents as presented and marked shall be 6 admitted into the record. 7 (EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE) 8 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Let's go 9 off the record for a moment. 10 (RECESS TAKEN) 11 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: I just 12 concluded a discussion with counsel as to 13 rescheduling the other case in this proceeding, 14 Case No. 16-535-EL-BTX. 15 The parties have agreed or noted 16 that they are available the afternoon of 17 February 9th. With that understanding I will 18 reschedule the continuation of that hearing 19 until February 9th, at 1:30. We will reconvene 20 at that time. 21 In the meantime it's my 22 understanding that the Company will provide 23 information to Staff and in the interim Staff 24 will have the opportunity to read that 25 information and make any revisions as necessary. ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481 25 1 The hearing is adjourned. 2 (At 10:30 A.M. the hearing was 3 concluded) 4 - - - 5 6 CERTIFICATE 7 I do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of the 8 proceedings taken by me in this matter on January 25, 2017, and carefully compared with my 9 original stenographic notes. 10 __________________________ 11 Michael O. Spencer, Registered Professional 12 Reporter. 13 - - - 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ARMSTRONG & OKEY, INC., Columbus, Ohio (614)224-9481