UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.  )

Filed by the Registrant þ
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant o

Check the appropriate box:

o		Preliminary Proxy Statement
o		Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
þ		Definitive Proxy Statement
o		Definitive Additional Materials
o		Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12

 

PPL CORPORATION

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

 

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

þ		No fee required.
o		Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

	(1)		Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:
	(2)		Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
	(3)		Per unit or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):
	(4)		Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:
	(5)		Total fee paid:

o		Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
o		Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

	(1)		Amount Previously Paid:
	(2)		Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:
	(3)		Filing Party:
	(4)		Date Filed:

 

PPL Corporation

 

Notice of Annual Meeting
May 23, 2007

and

Proxy Statement

 

PPL CORPORATION
Two North Ninth Street
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101

 

Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareowners

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By Order of the Board of Directors,    

 

Robert J. Grey
Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary

 

April 13, 2007

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

PPL CORPORATION
Two North Ninth Street
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101

 

 

Proxy Statement
Annual Meeting of Shareowners
May 23, 2007
10:00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Time)

 

 

We are providing these proxy materials in connection with the solicitation by the Board of Directors of PPL Corporation of proxies to be voted at the company’s Annual Meeting of Shareowners to be held on May 23, 2007, and at any adjournment of the Annual Meeting. Directors, officers and other company employees may also solicit proxies by telephone or otherwise. Brokers, banks and other holders of record will be requested to solicit proxies or authorizations from beneficial owners and will be reimbursed for their reasonable expenses. We first released this Proxy Statement and the accompanying proxy materials to shareowners on or about April 13, 2007.

 

What am I voting on?

 

There are three proposals scheduled to be voted on at the meeting:

 

 

Who can vote?

 

Holders of PPL Corporation common stock as of the close of business on the record date, February 28, 2007, may vote at the Annual Meeting, either in person or by proxy. Each share of PPL Corporation common stock is entitled to one vote on each matter properly brought before the Annual Meeting.

 

What is the difference between holding shares as a shareowner of record and as a beneficial owner?

 

If your shares are registered directly in your name with PPL Corporation’s transfer agent, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., you are considered, with respect to those shares, the “shareowner of record.” The Notice of Annual Meeting, Proxy Statement, 2006 Annual Report, proxy card and accompanying documents have been sent directly to you by PPL Corporation.

 

If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account or by a bank or other holder of record, you are considered the “beneficial owner” of shares held in street name. The Notice of Annual Meeting, Proxy Statement, 2006 Annual Report, proxy card and accompanying documents have been forwarded to you by your broker, bank or other holder of record who is considered, with respect to those shares, the shareowner of record. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or other holder of record on how to vote your shares by using the voting instruction card included in their mailing or by following their instructions for voting by telephone or on the Internet, if offered.

 

How do I vote?

 

You can vote by mail, by telephone, on the Internet or in person at the Annual Meeting.

 

 

Be sure to complete, sign and date the proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided. If you are a shareowner of record and you return your signed proxy card but do not indicate your voting preferences, the persons named in the proxy card will vote the shares represented by that proxy as recommended by the Board of Directors.

 

If you are a shareowner of record, and the postage-paid envelope is missing, please mail your completed proxy card to PPL Corporation, c/o Shareowner Services^sm, P.O. Box 64873, St. Paul, Minnesota 55164-0873.

 

 

The telephone and Internet voting procedures we have established for shareowners of record are designed to authenticate your identity, to allow you to give your voting instructions and to confirm that those instructions have been properly recorded.

 

By telephone: You can vote by calling the toll-free telephone number on your proxy card. Please have your proxy card and the last four digits of your Social Security Number or Tax Identification Number available when you call. Easy-to-follow voice prompts allow you to vote your shares and confirm that your instructions have been properly recorded.

 

On the Internet: The Web site for Internet voting is at www.eproxy.com/ppl/. Please have your proxy card and the last four digits of your Social Security Number or Tax Identification Number available when you go online. As with telephone voting, you can confirm that your instructions have been properly recorded.

 

The availability of telephone and Internet voting facilities for shareowners of record will be available 24 hours a day, and will close at 12:00 p.m. (noon), Central Time, on May 22, 2007.

 

The availability of telephone and Internet voting for beneficial owners will depend on the voting processes of your broker, bank or other holder of record. Therefore, we recommend that you follow the voting instructions in the materials you receive from them.

 

 

You may come to the Annual Meeting and cast your vote there, either by proxy or by ballot. Please bring your admission ticket with you to the Annual Meeting.

 

If you mail to us your properly completed and signed proxy card, or vote by telephone or Internet, your shares of PPL Corporation common stock will be voted according to the choices that you specify. If you sign and mail your proxy card without marking any choices, your proxy will be voted:

 

 

Abstentions and broker non-votes are not counted as either “yes” or “no” votes.

 

We do not expect that any other matters will be brought before the Annual Meeting. By giving your proxy, however, you appoint the persons named as proxies as your representatives at the meeting. If an issue comes up for vote at the Annual Meeting that is not included in the proxy material, the proxy holders will vote your shares in accordance with their best judgment.

 

As a participant in the PPL Corporation Employee Stock Ownership Plan, how do I vote shares held in my plan account?

 

If you are a participant in our Employee Stock Ownership Plan, you have the right to provide voting directions to the plan trustee, Fidelity Investments, by submitting your ballot card for those shares of our common stock that are held by the plan and allocated to your account. Plan participant ballots are treated confidentially. Full and fractional shares credited to your account under the plan as of February 28, 2007 will be voted by the trustee in accordance with your instructions. Similar to the process for shareowners of PPL Corporation common stock, you may vote by mail, telephone or on the Internet. To allow sufficient time for voting by the trustee of the plan, your ballot must be returned by May 21, 2007 if by mail, and if voting by telephone or on the Internet, by 12:00 noon Central Time on May 18, 2007. Please follow the ballot instructions specific to the participants in the Employee Stock Ownership Plan.

 

If you do not return your ballot, or return it unsigned, or do not vote by phone or on the Internet, the plan provides that the trustee will vote your shares in the same percentage as shares held by participants for which the trustee has received timely voting instructions. The plan trustee will follow participants’ voting directions, and the plan procedure for voting in the absence of voting directions, unless it determines that to do so would be contrary to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

 

May I change or revoke my vote?

 

Any shareowner giving a proxy has the right to revoke it at any time before it is voted by:

 

 

Will my shares be voted if I do not provide my proxy?

 

It depends on whether you hold your shares in your own name or as the beneficial owner in the name of a broker, bank or other holder of record. If you hold your shares directly in your own name, they will not be voted unless you provide a proxy or vote in person at the Annual Meeting. Brokerage firms, banks or other holders of record generally have the authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares on certain routine matters. If your shares are held in the name of a brokerage firm, bank or other holder of record, such firm can vote your shares for the election of directors and for the ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting firm, as these matters are considered routine under the applicable rules.

 

Who can attend the Annual Meeting?

 

If you are a shareowner of record, your admission ticket is enclosed with your proxy card. If you hold shares through the Employee Stock Ownership Plan, your admission ticket is attached to your ballot card. You will need to bring your admission ticket, along with picture identification, to the meeting. If you own shares in street name, please bring your most recent brokerage statement, along with picture identification, to the meeting. PPL will use your brokerage statement to verify your ownership of PPL common stock and admit you to the meeting.

 

What constitutes a quorum?

 

As of the record date, there were 385,157,817 shares of common stock outstanding and entitled to vote and no shares of preferred stock of the company were outstanding. In order to conduct the Annual Meeting, a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote must be present, in

person or by proxy, in order to constitute a quorum. If you submit a properly executed proxy card or vote by telephone or on the Internet, you will be considered part of the quorum. Abstentions and “broker non-votes” will be counted as present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining a quorum. A “broker non-vote” occurs when a broker, bank or other holder of record who holds shares for another person has not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner of the shares and, under New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE, listing standards, does not have discretionary authority to vote on a proposal.

 

What vote is needed for these proposals to be adopted?

 

 

The nominees receiving the highest number of votes, up to the number of directors to be elected, will be elected. Authority to vote for any individual nominee can be withheld by writing the number, which is beside that person’s name in the list of nominees, in the box provided to the right of such list on the accompanying proxy or by following the instructions if voting by telephone or on the Internet.

 

 

In order to approve the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm, the proposal must receive a majority of the votes cast, in person or by proxy, by the shareowners voting as a single class.

 

 

In order to approve this proposal, the proposal must receive a majority of the votes cast, in person or by proxy, by the shareowners voting as a single class.

 

Who conducts the proxy solicitation and how much will it cost?

 

PPL Corporation will pay the cost of soliciting proxies on behalf of the Board of Directors. In addition to the solicitation by mail, a number of regular employees may solicit proxies in person, over the Internet, by telephone or by facsimile. We have retained Innisfree M&A Incorporated to assist in the solicitation of proxies for the Annual Meeting, and we expect that the remuneration to Innisfree for its services will not exceed $12,500. Brokers, dealers, banks and other holders of record who hold shares for the benefit of others will be asked to send proxy material to the beneficial owners of the shares, and we will reimburse them for their expenses.

 

How does the company keep voter information confidential?

 

To preserve voter confidentiality, we voluntarily limit access to shareowner voting records to certain designated employees of PPL Services Corporation. These employees sign a confidentiality agreement that prohibits them from disclosing the manner in which a shareowner has voted to any employee of PPL affiliates or to any other person (except to the Judges of Election or the person in whose name the shares are registered), unless otherwise required by law.

 

What is householding, and how does it affect me?

 

Beneficial owners of common stock in street name may receive a notice from their broker, bank or other holder of record stating that only one Proxy Statement and/or other shareowner communications and notices will be delivered to multiple security holders sharing an address. This practice, known as “householding,” will reduce PPL’s printing, shipping, and postage costs. Beneficial owners who participate in householding will continue to receive separate proxy forms. If any beneficial owner wants to revoke consent to this practice and wishes to receive his or her own documents and other communications, however, then he or she must contact the broker, bank or other holder of record with a notice of revocation. Any shareowner may obtain a copy of

such documents from PPL at the address and phone number listed on the back cover page of this Proxy Statement.

 

We have a classified Board of Directors, currently consisting of 10 directors divided into three classes. These classes consist of three directors whose terms will expire at the 2007 Annual Meeting, three directors whose terms will expire at the 2008 Annual Meeting, and four directors whose terms will expire at the 2009 Annual Meeting. John R. Biggar, who served on the Board and was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the company, retired on March 31, 2007.

 

The nominees this year are Stuart Heydt, Craig A. Rogerson and W. Keith Smith. The nominees are currently serving as directors. Dr. Heydt and Mr. Smith were elected by the shareowners at the 2004 Annual Meeting, and Mr. Rogerson was elected by the Board of Directors effective September 1, 2005. If elected by the shareowners, Dr. Heydt and Messrs. Rogerson and Smith would serve until the 2010 Annual Meeting and until their successors are elected and qualified. Following the election of these three nominees, there will be 10 members of the Board of Directors, consisting of three classes: three directors whose terms would expire at the 2008 Annual Meeting, four directors whose terms would expire at the 2009 Annual Meeting, and three directors whose terms would expire at the 2010 Annual Meeting.

 

The Board of Directors has no reason to believe that any of the nominees will become unavailable for election, but, if any nominee should become unavailable prior to the Annual Meeting, the accompanying proxy will be voted for the election of such other person as the Board of Directors may recommend in place of that nominee.

 

The Board of Directors
recommends that shareowners vote FOR Proposal 1

 

 

 

Attendance. The Board of Directors met six times during 2006. Each director attended at least 75% of the meetings held by the Board and the committees on which they served during the year, except for Ms. Goeser who attended 73% of the meetings. Due to two unavoidable instances when

Ms. Goeser was required to be at her job as the chief executive officer of her company in Mexico, she was unable to attend a board meeting and a committee meeting held over a two-day period, and another board meeting held in a subsequent month. The average attendance of directors at Board and Committee meetings held during 2006 was 96%. Directors are expected to attend all meetings of the Board, the Committees on which they serve and shareowners. All of our directors attended the 2006 Annual Meeting of Shareowners.

 

Independence of Directors. The Board has established guidelines to assist it in determining director independence, which conform to the independence requirements of the NYSE listing standards. In addition to applying these guidelines, which are summarized below and are available in the Corporate Governance section of our Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm), the Board considers all relevant facts and circumstances in making an independence determination. At its January 2007 meeting, the Board determined that the following nine directors (constituting all of PPL’s non-employee directors) are independent from the company and management pursuant to its independence guidelines: Drs. Bernthal and Heydt, Messrs. Conway, Deaver, Rogerson, Smith and Williamson, and Mss. Goeser and Stalnecker.

 

In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered transactions and relationships between each director or any member of his or her immediate family and the company and its subsidiaries. From time to time, our subsidiaries have transacted business in the ordinary course with companies with which several of our directors are or were affiliated. In particular, with respect to each of the most recent three completed fiscal years, the Board evaluated the following relationships:

 

 

The Board determined that all of these relationships were immaterial. Under the categorical standard of independence that the Board adopted for the company, business transactions between the company (and its subsidiaries) and a director’s employer or the employer of the director’s “immediate family member,” as defined by the rules of the NYSE, not involving more than 2% of the employer’s consolidated gross revenues in any fiscal year, will not impair the director’s independence. All of the transactions considered were significantly below 1% of any of the companies involved.

 

Also, pursuant to NYSE standards, a director is not independent from the company and management if, within the last three years, the director or an immediate family member of the director:

 

 

 

In addition to the independence requirements set forth above, the Board evaluates additional independence requirements under applicable Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, rules for directors who are members of the audit committee. If a director is considered independent pursuant to the standards set forth above, the director also will be deemed to be independent for purposes of being a member of our Audit Committee if:

 

Executive Sessions; Presiding and Lead Director. The independent directors meet in regular executive sessions during each Board meeting without management present. The Board has designated Mr. Deaver as the presiding director to chair these executive sessions. Mr. Deaver also serves as the “lead” director of the Board.

Guidelines for Corporate Governance. You can find the full text of our Guidelines for Corporate Governance in the Corporate Governance section of our Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm). The Guidelines are available in print, without charge, to any shareowner who requests a copy.

Communications with the Board. Shareowners or other parties interested in communicating with the presiding director, with the Board or with the independent directors as a group may write to the following address:

 

The Presiding Director or the Board of Directors
c/o Corporate Secretary’s Office
PPL Corporation
Two North Ninth Street
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101

 

The Secretary of the company forwards all correspondence to the respective Board members, with the exception of commercial solicitations, advertisements or obvious “junk” mail. Concerns relating to accounting, internal controls or auditing matters are to be brought immediately to the attention of the company’s Office of Business Ethics and Compliance and are handled in accordance with procedures established by the Audit Committee with respect to such matters.

Code of Ethics. We maintain our Standards of Conduct and Integrity, which are applicable to all Board members and employees of the company and its subsidiaries, including the principal executive officer, the principal financial officer and the principal accounting officer of the company. You can find the full text of the Standards in the Corporate Governance section of our Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm). The Standards are also available in print, without charge, to any shareowner who requests a copy.

 

The Board of Directors has five standing committees:

 

 

Each non-employee director usually serves on one or more of these committees. All of our committees, with the exception of the Executive Committee, are composed entirely of independent directors. The charters of all of the committees are available in the Corporate Governance section of the company’s Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm), and are available in print, without charge, to any shareowner who requests a copy.

Executive Committee. During periods between Board meetings, the Executive Committee may exercise all of the powers of the Board of Directors, except that the Executive Committee may not elect directors, change the membership of or fill vacancies in the Executive Committee, fix the compensation of the directors, change the Bylaws, or take any action restricted by the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law or the Bylaws (including actions committed to another Board committee). The Executive Committee met six times in 2006. The members of the Executive Committee are Mr. Miller (chair), Drs. Bernthal and Heydt and Mr. Deaver.

Compensation, Governance and Nominating Committee. The principal functions of the Compensation, Governance and Nominating Committee, or CGNC, are:

 

 

Another principal committee function is to develop and recommend to the Board corporate governance guidelines for the company. All of the members of the CGNC are independent within the meaning of the listing standards of the NYSE, the rules of the SEC and the company’s standards of independence described above under the heading of “Independence of Directors.” In addition, each member of the CGNC is a “Non-Employee” director as defined in Rule 16b-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and is an “outside” director as defined in Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. This committee met five times in 2006. The members of the CGNC are Mr. Deaver (chair), Mr. Conway, Ms. Goeser and Dr. Heydt.

 

Decisions regarding the compensation of our executive officers are made by the CGNC. Specifically, the CGNC has strategic and administrative responsibility for a broad range of issues, including ensuring that we compensate executive officers effectively and in a manner consistent with our stated compensation strategy. The CGNC also oversees the administration of executive compensation plans, including the design, performance measures and award opportunities for the executive incentive

programs, and certain employee benefits. Our Board of Directors appoints each member of the CGNC and has determined that each is an independent director.

 

The CGNC periodically reviews executive officer compensation to ensure that compensation is consistent with our compensation philosophies, company and personal performance, changes in market practices, and changes in an individual’s responsibilities. At the CGNC’s first regular in-person meeting each year, which it holds in January, the CGNC reviews the performance of executive officers and makes awards for the just-completed fiscal year.

 

To assist in its efforts to meet the objectives outlined above, the CGNC has retained Towers Perrin, a nationally known executive compensation and benefits consulting firm, to advise it on a regular basis on executive compensation and benefit programs. Towers Perrin provides additional information to the CGNC so that it can determine whether the company’s executive compensation programs are reasonable and consistent with competitive practices. Representatives of Towers Perrin regularly participate in CGNC meetings and provide advice as to compensation trends and best practices, plan design and peer group comparisons.

 

Annually, the CGNC requests Towers Perrin to develop an analysis of current competitive compensation practices and levels. This analysis begins with a general review at the committee’s July meeting and continues with a detailed analysis of competitive pay levels and practices at its year-end meeting. The CGNC uses this analysis when it assesses performance and considers salary levels and incentive awards at its January meeting following the performance year.

 

Senior management develops the business plan and recommends to the CGNC the related goals for the annual cash incentive program and the strategic goals for the long-term incentive program for the upcoming year, based on industry and market conditions and other factors. All of the incentive and strategic goals are reviewed and approved by the CGNC.

 

The CGNC has the authority to review and approve annually the compensation structure, including goals and objectives, of the chief executive officer, or CEO, and other executive officers who are subject to Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including all of the executive officers named in this Proxy Statement. The CEO reviews with the CGNC his evaluation of the performance and leadership of the executive officers who report directly to him and, with input from the Chief Operating Officer, evaluates the presidents of the major business lines who report to the Chief Operating Officer. The CGNC approves the annual compensation, including salary, incentive compensation and other remuneration of such executive officers.

 

The CGNC manages a process for the Board of Directors to evaluate our CEO. Each director, other than the CEO, completes an evaluation of the CEO and submits the evaluation to the Chair of the CGNC, who is also the lead director. The evaluation is presented to the outside directors of the Board and discussed at the January meeting. A summary evaluation is compiled by the Chair of the CGNC, who then discusses the evaluation with the CEO. The CGNC determines the CEO’s salary and incentive awards at its January meeting, based on the Board’s evaluation.

 

The Board of Directors, with recommendations from the CGNC, determines the amount and form of director compensation. Towers Perrin also assists the CGNC with this determination.

 

The CGNC establishes guidelines for new directors and evaluates director candidates. In considering candidates, the CGNC seeks individuals who possess strong personal and professional ethics, high standards of integrity and values, independence of thought and judgment and who have senior corporate leadership experience. The company believes that prior business experience is valuable, and it seeks to have certain prior experience on the Board, such as financial, operating and nuclear.

 

In addition, the CGNC seeks individuals who have a broad range of demonstrated abilities and accomplishments beyond corporate leadership. These abilities include the skill and expertise sufficient

to provide sound and prudent guidance with respect to all of the company’s operations and interests. Finally, the CGNC seeks individuals who are capable of devoting the required amount of time to serve effectively, including preparation time and attendance at Board, committee and shareowner meetings.

 

Nominations for the election of directors may be made by the Board of Directors, the CGNC or any shareowner entitled to vote in the election of directors generally. The CGNC screens all candidates in the same manner regardless of the source of the recommendation. The CGNC’s review is typically based on any written materials provided with respect to the candidate. The CGNC determines whether the candidate meets the company’s general qualifications and specific qualities and skills for directors and whether requesting additional information or an interview is appropriate.

 

If the CGNC or management identifies a need to add a new Board member to fulfill a special need or to fill a vacancy, the CGNC usually retains a third-party search firm to identify a candidate or candidates. The CGNC seeks prospective nominees through personal referrals, independent inquiries by directors and search firms. Once the CGNC has identified a prospective nominee, it generally requests the third-party search firm to gather additional information about the prospective nominee’s background and experience. The CEO and at least one member of the CGNC then interview the prospective candidates in person. After completing the interview and evaluation process, which includes evaluating the prospective nominee against the standards and qualifications set out in the company’s Guidelines for Corporate Governance, the CGNC makes a recommendation to the full Board as to the persons who should be nominated by the Board. The Board then votes on whether to approve the nominees after considering the recommendation and report of the CGNC.

 

Shareowners interested in recommending nominees for directors should submit their recommendations in writing to:

 

Secretary

PPL Corporation

Two North Ninth Street

Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101

 

In order to be considered, we must receive nominations by shareowners at least 75 days prior to the 2008 Annual Meeting. The nominations must also contain the information required by our Bylaws, such as the name and address of the shareowner making the nomination and of the proposed nominees and certain other information concerning the shareowner and the nominee. The exact procedures for making nominations are included in our Bylaws, which can be found at the Corporate Governance section of our Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm).

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation. None of the members of the CGNC during 2006 or as of the date of this Proxy Statement is or has been an officer or employee of the company, and no executive officer of the company served on the compensation committee or board of any company that employed any member of the CGNC or the company’s Board of Directors.

Finance Committee. The principal functions of the Finance Committee are:

 

 

All of the members of this committee are independent within the meaning of the listing standards of the NYSE and the company’s standards of independence described above under the heading

‘‘Independence of Directors.” The Finance Committee met three times in 2006. The members of the Finance Committee are Mr. Smith (chair), Messrs. Conway, Deaver, Williamson and Ms. Stalnecker.

Nuclear Oversight Committee. The principal functions of the Nuclear Oversight Committee are:

 

 

All of the members of this committee are independent within the meaning of the listing standards of the NYSE and the company’s standards of independence described above under the heading “Independence of Directors.” The Nuclear Oversight Committee met three times in 2006. The members of the Nuclear Oversight Committee are Dr. Bernthal (chair), Messrs. Deaver, Rogerson and Dr. Heydt.

Audit Committee. The primary function of the Audit Committee is to assist the company’s Board of Directors in the oversight of:

 

 

The Charter of the Audit Committee, which specifies the Audit Committee’s responsibilities, is available on our Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm). The Audit Committee met nine times during 2006. The members of the Audit Committee are not employees of the company, and the Board of Directors has determined that each of its Audit Committee members has met the independence and expertise requirements of the NYSE, the SEC and the company’s independence standards described above under the heading “Independence of Directors.” The members of the Audit Committee are Dr. Heydt (chair), Dr. Bernthal, Mr. Smith and Ms. Stalnecker. Our Board of Directors has determined that Mr. Smith is an audit committee financial expert for purposes of the rules and regulations of the SEC.

 

The Audit Committee assists the Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to the integrity of the company’s financial statements. Company management is responsible for the preparation and integrity of the company’s financial statements, the financial reporting process and the associated system of internal controls. Ernst & Young LLP, the company’s independent auditor, is responsible for auditing the company’s annual financial statements, expressing an opinion as to whether the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the company’s financial position and results of operations in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, and expressing opinions as to management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the Standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. The Audit Committee’s responsibility is to monitor and review these processes. The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements with management and the independent auditor.

 

The independent auditor is ultimately accountable to the Audit Committee, which has the sole authority to select, evaluate and replace the independent auditor and to approve all audit engagement fees and terms. The Audit Committee has a policy to solicit competitive proposals for audit services from independent accounting firms at least once every seven years. The Audit Committee has

discussed with the independent auditor the matters required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, “Communication with Audit Committees,” as it may be modified or supplemented, including the appropriateness and application of accounting principles.

 

The Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from its independent auditor pursuant to Independence Standards Board Standard No. 1, “Independence Discussions with Audit Committees,” as it may be modified or supplemented, and has had discussions with Ernst & Young LLP about its independence. The Audit Committee also considered whether the provision of non-audit services by Ernst & Young LLP is compatible with maintaining the independence of such independent auditor.

 

In the performance of its responsibilities, the Audit Committee met periodically with the internal auditor and the independent auditor, with and without management present, to discuss the results of their examinations, their evaluations of the company’s internal controls, and the overall quality of the company’s financial reporting.

 

The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed management’s assessment of internal controls relating to the adequacy and effectiveness of financial reporting. The Audit Committee has also discussed with company management, the internal auditor and the independent auditor the process utilized in connection with the certifications of the company’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related SEC rules for the company’s annual and quarterly filings with the SEC.

 

Based on the reviews and discussions referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors, and the Board approved, that the audited financial statements be included in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

The Audit Committee has a Committee Charter that specifies its responsibilities. The Committee Charter, which has been approved by the Board of Directors, is available on the company’s Web site (www.pplweb.com/about/corporate+governance.htm). The Audit Committee’s procedures and practices comply with the requirements of the SEC and the NYSE applicable to corporate audit committees.

 

 

The Audit Committee

 

Frederick M. Bernthal

W. Keith Smith

Susan M. Stalnecker

Annual Retainer. Directors who are company employees do not receive any separate compensation for service on the Board of Directors or committees of the Board of Directors. During 2006, directors who are not employees of PPL received an annual retainer of $95,000, of which a minimum of $60,000 was mandatorily allocated to a deferred stock account under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan. Effective January 1, 2007, the annual retainer increased to $105,000, of which $65,000 is mandatorily allocated to a deferred stock account. The cash portion of the annual retainer is paid in monthly installments to each director, unless voluntarily deferred to their stock account or to their deferred cash account (as discussed below), and the stock portion is allocated in monthly installments to each director’s deferred stock account. Each deferred stock unit is equal in value to a share of PPL common stock, is fully vested upon grant, but does not have voting rights. Deferred stock units accumulate quarterly dividend-equivalent payments, which are reinvested in additional deferred stock units.

Committee Retainers. During 2006, each committee chair received an annual cash retainer of $6,000, which was paid in monthly installments. Effective January 1, 2007, the annual retainer for the Audit Committee Chair was increased to $11,000.

Presiding Director Retainer. The presiding director receives an annual cash retainer of $30,000, which is paid in monthly installments.

One-time Grant of Restricted Stock Units. Each non-employee director who was on the Board on January 1, 2004 received a one-time additional retainer fee, equal to 7,000 deferred restricted stock units (which reflects the 2-for-1 common stock split completed in August 2005), which was mandatorily allocated to such director’s deferred stock account under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan. Any new director joining the Board of Directors after that time also receives this one-time additional retainer fee of deferred stock units. These deferred stock units have a 5-year restriction period and are subject to forfeiture if the director leaves the Board of Directors before the end of the 5-year restriction period.

Other Fees. Each non-employee director also receives a fee of $1,500 for attending each Board of Directors meeting, committee meeting and other meetings at the company’s request, and a fee of $200 for participating in meetings held by telephone conference call. PPL also reimburses each director for usual and customary travel expenses.

Directors Deferred Compensation Plan. Pursuant to the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan, or DDCP, non-employee directors may elect to defer all or any part of the fees and any retainer that is not part of the mandatory stock unit deferrals. Under this plan, directors can defer compensation other than the mandatory deferrals into a deferred cash account or deferred stock account. The deferred cash account earns a return as if the funds had been invested in the Stable Value Fund of PPL’s 401(k) plans, which is managed by Fidelity Investments. For 2006, the total rate of return for this fund was 4.5%. Payment of the amounts allocated to the deferred cash account and accrued earnings, together with the deferred stock units and accrued dividend equivalents, is deferred until after the directors’ retirement from the Board of Directors, at which time they receive the deferred cash and stock in one or more annual installments for a period of up to ten years as previously elected by the director.

 

The following table summarizes all compensation earned during 2006 by our directors who are not employees.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 2006 Director Compensation Table provided above reflects the 2006 total expense recorded by your company for each director under applicable accounting rules. The following table illustrates the actual fees earned by each director during 2006, including the annual retainer (both cash and cash equivalent of deferred stock portion), annual committee retainers, the presiding director annual cash retainer and meeting fees for in-person and telephonic meetings.

 

 

 

All directors and executive officers as a group hold less than 1% of PPL’s common stock. The table below shows the number of shares of our common stock beneficially owned as of March 12, 2007 by each of our directors and each named executive officer for whom compensation is disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table, as well as the number of shares beneficially owned by all of our directors and executive officers as a group. The table also includes information about stock options, stock units, restricted stock, restricted stock units and stock units credited to the accounts of our directors under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan, or DDCP.

 

 

 

 

 

 

To our knowledge, our directors and executives met all filing requirements under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during 2006, except that we made a late Form 4 (Statement of Changes in Beneficial Ownership) filing on behalf of each of Paul A. Farr and Clarence J. Hopf, Jr. As previously disclosed, on January 26, 2006, the CGNC authorized grants to our executive officers, including Messrs. Farr and Hopf, of long-term incentive equity awards pursuant to our Incentive Compensation Plan. On the same day, the CGNC approved (1) an amendment to Mr. Farr’s existing retention agreement that increased the grant of restricted stock for Mr. Farr from 24,600 to 40,000 shares and (2) a new retention agreement for Mr. Hopf pursuant to which he was granted 40,000 shares of restricted stock. We made timely Form 4 filings on January 30, 2006 on behalf of each of Mr. Farr and Hopf to report their incentive awards pursuant to our Incentive Compensation Plan. However, these Forms 4 mistakenly did not report the grants of restricted stock made under the retention agreements for Messrs. Farr and Hopf. We consequently filed amended Forms 4 on February 2, 2006 on behalf of each of Mr. Farr and Hopf to report these additional grants.

 

 

The Board of Directors adopted a written related-person transaction policy in January 2007 to recognize the process the Board will use in identifying potential conflicts of interest arising out of financial transactions, arrangements or relations between PPL and any related persons. This policy applies to any transaction or series of transactions in which PPL Corporation or a subsidiary is a participant, the amount exceeds $120,000 and a “related person” has a direct or indirect material interest. A related person includes not only the company’s directors and executive officers, but others related to them by certain family relationships, as well as shareowners who own more than 5% of any class of PPL Corporation’s voting securities.

 

Under the policy, each related-person transaction must be reviewed and approved or ratified by the disinterested independent members of the Board, other than any employment relationship or transaction involving an executive officer and any related compensation, which must be approved by the CGNC. We collect information about potential related-person transactions in annual questionnaires

completed by directors and executive officers. We also review any payments made by the company or its subsidiaries to each director and executive officer and their immediate family members, and to or from those companies that either employ a director or an immediate family member of any director or executive officer. The company’s Office of General Counsel determines whether a transaction requires review by the Board or the CGNC. Transactions that fall within the definition of the policy are reported to the Board or the CGNC. The disinterested independent members of the Board, or the CGNC, as applicable, reviews and considers the relevant facts and circumstances and determines whether to approve, deny or ratify the related-person transaction. Since January 1, 2006, except for compensation for executive officers that has been approved by the CGNC, there have been no related-person transactions that were required either to be approved under the policy or reported under the SEC related-person transaction rules.

 

 

 

The Compensation, Governance and Nominating Committee has reviewed the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis and discussed that Analysis with management. Based on its review and discussions with management, the committee recommended that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be incorporated by reference into the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2006 and included in this Proxy Statement.

 

 

Compensation, Governance and Nominating Committee

 

John W. Conway

Louise K. Goeser

Stuart Heydt

 

Objectives of PPL’s Executive Compensation Program

 

PPL’s executive compensation program is designed to recruit, retain and motivate executive leadership and align compensation with the company’s performance. Since executive officer performance has the potential to affect the company’s profitability, the key elements of our executive compensation program seek to achieve the company’s business goals appropriately by encouraging and retaining leadership excellence and expertise, rewarding our executive officers for sustained financial and operating performance, and realizing both short-term and long-term value for our shareowners.

 

A key component of the program is direct compensation—salary and a combination of annual cash and equity incentive awards—which is intended to provide an appropriate, competitive level of compensation, to reward recent performance results and to motivate long-term contributions to achieving the company’s strategic business objectives. We evaluate the direct compensation program as a whole and intend to deliver a balance of current cash compensation and stock-based compensation. The program also balances a level of fixed compensation paid regularly—salary—with incentive compensation that varies with the performance of the company. The incentive compensation program focuses executive awards on annual and longer-term performance and, for executive officers including the named executive officers in the Summary Compensation Table on page 42, provides the major portion of direct compensation in the form of PPL stock, ensuring that management and shareowner interests are aligned.

 

Other elements of the total compensation program provide: the ability for executives to accumulate capital, predominately in the form of equity to align executive interests with those of the shareowners; a level of retirement income; and, in the event of special circumstances like termination of employment

in connection with a change in control of PPL, special severance protection to help ensure executive retention during the change in control process and to ensure executive focus on serving the company and shareowner interests without the distraction of possible job and income loss.

 

To ensure appropriate alignment with business strategy and objectives and shareowner interests, the Compensation, Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors, referred to throughout this section as the CGNC, reviews the executive compensation program and each of its components regularly.

 

Compensation Elements

 

Our executive compensation program consists of: (1) direct compensation; (2) indirect compensation; and (3) special compensation.

 

Direct Compensation

 

Broadly stated, the direct compensation program is intended to reward:

 

 

The direct compensation program includes salary, an annual cash incentive award and long-term incentive awards. Long-term incentive awards are granted in two forms of equity: restricted stock units and stock options.

 

In general, we offer a competitive direct compensation program that is intended to align with companies of similar size and complexity, which are also the companies with which we compete for talent. The CGNC and the company target direct compensation to be generally at the median of the competitive market. Each year, competitive data are developed by the CGNC’s compensation consultant, Towers Perrin, based on companies of similar size both in the energy services industry and general industry companies other than energy services or financial services companies. In developing this competitive data, Towers Perrin uses its published compensation surveys (typically their current-year Executive Compensation Database and Long-Term Incentive Report (approximately 900 corporate participants), Energy Services Industry Executive Compensation Database (approximately 100 corporate participants), and Benchmark Compensation Survey of Energy Trading and Marketing Positions (approximately 65 corporate participants)). When possible and appropriate, analyses are performed to size-adjust the survey data to achieve a closer correlation with the appropriate scope for the applicable PPL business position. The result of this analysis produces a competitive market reference point we refer to as the “PPL competitive data,” which we believe appropriately reflects the competitive marketplace in which we compete for executive talent.

 

PPL competitive data are used as a tool for evaluating salary levels as well as to set target incentive levels. For example, salary amounts are determined based on the PPL competitive data provided by the compensation consultant’s analysis for a particular position and the CEO’s and CGNC’s assessment of the individual’s expertise and experience. Total direct compensation in relation to other executives, as well as prior year individual performance and performance of the business lines for which the executive is responsible, are also taken into consideration in determining any adjustment.

 

In addition to assessing competitive pay levels, Towers Perrin reports to the CGNC each July on recent industry trends and emerging trends they perceive in the energy services industry.

 

The majority of direct compensation for executive officers consists of incentive compensation that varies with the performance of the company. A portion of incentive compensation is intended to reward annual or “short-term” performance; the rest consists of restricted stock units, which are intended to promote medium-term performance, and stock options, which are intended to promote longer-term stock price growth.

 

Table 1 below illustrates our allocation of direct compensation for our executive officers for 2006, which is shown as a percentage of total direct compensation. For example, the salary of the chief executive officer, or CEO, represents 20% of total direct compensation. Incentive compensation—annual and long-term—represents 80% of our CEO’s direct pay, with 60% stock-based and linked to long-term financial performance.

 

TABLE 1

 

Elements of Compensation as a Percentage of Total Direct Compensation—2006⁽¹⁾

 

 

 

 

Base Salary

 

We set base salaries to reward expertise and experience. Salaries are not “at risk” in the sense that, once established annually based on individual, and where applicable, business line performance and market comparisons, they are paid regularly and are not contingent on attainment of specific goals. We adjust executive salaries based on the expertise and experience of each executive, prior year individual performance and performance of the business lines for which the executive is responsible. Additionally, the critical need for a particular executive’s skill, overall assessment of an executive’s pay in relation to others within the company and level of pay relative to the PPL competitive data are considered in determining an individual’s base salary.

 

Generally, we seek to align salaries to the median of the market. Salaries are considered paid competitively if they are within 15% of the PPL competitive data, or within the PPL competitive range for a particular position. For example, if the PPL competitive data for the CEO position is $1,000,000, we consider appropriate market compensation for this position as ranging between $850,000 and $1,150,000, or 15% less than and 15% greater than the market reference point of $1,000,000.

 

Changes in base salary affect annual cash incentive awards and equity incentive awards. Because target incentive award levels are set as a percentage of salary, increases in salary also affect annual cash incentive award and equity incentive award opportunities.

 

In January of each year, the CGNC reviews base salary levels for all executive officers, including the named executive officers.

 

At its meeting on January 26, 2006, the CGNC approved base salaries for the named executive officers as follows:

 

TABLE 2

 

2006 Salary Adjustments by Position

 

 

 

 

The CGNC increased Mr. Hecht’s salary to reflect his continuing effective leadership of the company and sustained performance of the company, and in recognition of his achievement in transitioning the CEO role to Mr. Miller, his expected successor at the time, who was promoted to Chairman, President and CEO effective October 1, 2006. Given Mr. Hecht’s experience and performance, the CGNC increased his salary to the high end of the PPL competitive range.

 

At the time the CGNC considered salary levels in January 2006, Mr. Miller’s position was considered at the level of chief operating officer for market comparison purposes. In light of the PPL competitive data at that time, he was being paid in the upper PPL competitive range. Because the CGNC expected that Mr. Miller would be named as the successor to Mr. Hecht during 2006, the CGNC increased his salary in recognition of his effective performance as COO, as well as in anticipation of his eventual promotion to CEO. The CGNC re-evaluated Mr. Miller’s base salary in September 2006

and increased his salary to the lower end of the PPL competitive range (about 88% of the PPL competitive market reference point).

 

The salaries of Messrs. Biggar and Grey were in the lower-half of the PPL competitive range. In light of their experience and effective performance, the CGNC approved salary increases to move them further into the PPL competitive range.

 

Mr. Champagne’s position was not benchmarked in 2006. He served as president of PPL EnergyPlus for the first six months of 2006 and was also responsible for certain smaller business lines. Given Mr. Champagne’s salary level in relation to other business line presidents, no salary increase was approved in 2006. Mr. Champagne received a one-time $16,000 lump-sum payment in lieu of a salary increase in recognition of his contribution during 2005. He was elected President of PPL Energy Services Group, LLC on July 1, 2006. No salary change was approved at that time.

 

Mr. Shriver, who is responsible for all energy generation (including fossil-fuel, hydro-based and nuclear generation), served in a critical role in light of the company’s strategic emphasis on generation and marketing of energy. Mr. Shriver reported to Mr. Miller, then COO. After consultation with Mr. Hecht, the CGNC agreed to emphasize the critical importance of Mr. Shriver’s role during the transition to a new CEO and new COO, as well as reward recent effective performance, by approving a salary increase and slightly exceeding the PPL competitive range for his position.

 

Annual Cash Incentive Awards

 

The annual cash incentive award program is designed to reward annual performance compared to business goals established at the beginning of the year. Unlike salary, where payment is a fixed amount paid regularly, this compensation element is “at-risk” because awards are based on achievement of prescribed business results. Awards may vary from the target award (that is, the result at which payouts would be at 100%) to zero or to the program maximum of 150% of target established for each position.

 

The CGNC makes annual cash incentive awards to executive officers under PPL’s shareowner-approved Short-Term Incentive Plan. The awards are based on objective corporate financial and operational measures. Specific written performance objectives and business goals are established by management and approved by the CGNC during the first quarter of each calendar year. The CGNC establishes target award levels, set as a percentage of salary for each executive, based on a review of the PPL competitive data and an internal comparison of executive positions.

 

The CGNC set the following target award levels for the positions listed for the 2006 annual cash incentive awards under the Short-Term Incentive Plan:

 

TABLE 3

 

Annual Cash Incentive Targets by Position for 2006*

 

 

 

The corporate financial goal for 2006, which was a fully diluted earnings per share, or “EPS” target described in detail below, represented 60% of the total award for the CEO, CFO and COO and other PPL Corporation executive officers and 40% of the total award for business line presidents. Various measures make up operational goals, including business line net income, marketing and trading gross margin, generation availability, operation and maintenance expense and capital expenditure amounts, safety and environmental performance and other measures critical to the success of the business lines.

 

The following table summarizes the weightings allocated to financial and operational results, by executive officer position, for determining 2006 annual cash incentive awards:

 

TABLE 4

 

Annual Cash Incentive Weightings Applied to Financial and Operational Results⁽¹⁾

 

 

 

 

At its January 2007 meeting, the CGNC reviewed 2006 performance results to determine whether the named executive officers had met or exceeded pre-established 2006 performance goals. Annual cash incentive awards are determined as summarized below by multiplying the results for financial and operational measures by the weightings in Table 4 above to determine the total performance result for each position. The total performance result is then multiplied by the target award opportunity as detailed in Table 3 above and then multiplied by salary as of December 31, 2006, the end of the performance period.

 

annual cash incentive award

=

result

×

weights (Table 4)

×

target award % (Table 3)

×

year-end salary (Table 2)

As a result, the CGNC approved the following annual cash incentive awards:

 

TABLE 5

 

Annual Cash Incentive Awards for 2006 Performance

 

 

 

 

The following table provides further detail for the weighting applied to goals established for the CEO and other PPL Corporation executive officers, including Messrs. Miller, Biggar and Grey. For Messrs. Champagne and Shriver, results differ from the weightings in the following table due to the weightings applied to their respective positions detailed in Table 4 above. Also, for Mr. Champagne, results are a blend of the weighting as President of PPL EnergyPlus for the first half of the year while he served in that role and as President of PPL Energy Services Group for the second half of the year while he served in that role.

 

TABLE 6

 

Annual Cash Incentive Awards for Corporate-level Executive Officers*

(executive officers other than presidents of major business lines)

 

 

 

 

As noted above, the total goal results are based on a blend of corporate, financial and operational results. The financial and operational goals are based on PPL’s business plan. The financial goals are set to meet management’s objectives and financial market expectations, and the operational goals are established to support financial results for both the short and longer term.

 

Generally, we expect awards, in the aggregate, to range from 90% to 110% of target. Awards may range from zero to 150% of target, although attainment at the maximum award level is not expected. Awards for the positions of the named executive officers over the last five years have ranged from 88.9% to 131.3% of target, with the average award for the corporate executive officers (including the CEO and CFO) 112.9% of target.

 

Financial Results. Target EPS for the annual cash incentive program was $2.20 per share for 2006, with a 150% payout goal of $2.30 and a 50% payout goal of $2.10. Results below $2.10 would result in a zero payout on this portion of the incentive goal.

 

The target EPS used for goal purposes is corporate reported earnings, net of specific items excluded at the beginning of the year and approved by the CGNC in March 2006. The excluded items for 2006 were:

 

 

After adjusting PPL’s reported corporate earnings for the above excluded items, the EPS achieved for purposes of the annual cash incentive program was $2.29 per share, or 140.9% of the target EPS for 2006.

 

Operational Results. Operating goals are detailed, quantifiable goals set specifically for each unit annually. The operational goals are structured to attain the target EPS for the year, while at the same time promoting near-term activities that benefit the operating assets in future years. Because the target EPS is a challenging goal relative to the previous year’s target, many of the supporting operational goals require difficult-to-reach elements in order to produce operating results that render the target EPS.

 

Operating goals in 2006 included the following:

 

 

Long-term Incentive Awards (Equity Awards)

 

We grant long-term incentive awards to align the interests of the executive officers with those of our shareowners. Long-term incentive awards for executive officers are made annually under the shareowner-approved PPL Incentive Compensation Plan.

 

The long-term incentive program is designed to reward mid- and long-term performance and is composed of three awards:

 

 

General

 

We grant restricted stock unit awards based on the achievement of prescribed business results. Restricted stock unit awards provide executives the right to receive an equivalent number of shares of PPL common stock after a restriction or holding period. These grants are therefore “at-risk” because awards may vary from zero to the program maximum of 150% of target. Restricted stock unit awards are also “at-risk” compensation because the awards are denominated in shares of PPL stock and are subject to vesting and potential forfeiture, and the ultimate value realized by the executives is directly related to PPL’s stock price performance.

 

Restricted stock unit awards made in 2007 for 2006 performance have a three-year restriction period, with restrictions scheduled to lapse in 2010. During the restriction period, each restricted stock unit entitles the executive to receive quarterly payments from the company equal to the quarterly dividends on one share of PPL stock, thereby recognizing both current income generation and stock price appreciation in line with PPL shareowners.

 

We also grant stock options. Stock options are granted at an exercise price equal to the market value of PPL stock on the grant date and will normally not be exercised by the holder if the stock price does not increase after the grant date. As a result, stock option awards are designed to reward executives for increases in PPL’s stock price.

 

Stock options granted in 2006 become exercisable over three years—one-third at the end of each year following grant—and are exercisable for ten years from the grant date, subject to earlier expiration following specified periods after termination of employment.

 

Under the terms of the company’s Incentive Compensation Plan, restricted stock units and unvested stock options are forfeited if the executive voluntarily leaves PPL, and are generally vested if the executive retires from the company prior to the scheduled vesting. However, any stock options granted within 12 months prior to an executive officer’s retirement date will be forfeited. See “Termination Benefits—Long-term Incentive Awards” for a description of conditions of the provisions and expiration dates applicable to awards.

 

From time to time, as an additional incentive to encourage and reward an executive’s superior performance and service with PPL and to retain key talent, we may also grant additional restricted stock under our company’s Incentive Compensation Plan. No such additional awards were made to the named executive officers in 2006. See “Retention Agreements” on page 56 for previous additional restricted stock awards granted to Messrs. Miller, Champagne and Shriver.

 

Structure of Awards

 

In order to balance equity-based incentives with underlying medium and longer-term goals for company performance, we determined that the total value of shares of PPL stock awarded should be divided equally between restricted stock units and stock options for 2006. The restricted stock unit portion of the long-term incentive program is further split, with 50% of the award tied to sustained financial and operational results and 50% of the award tied to strategic goals. Equity awards are intended to balance incentive pay with performance on specific business goals based on the company’s multi-year business plan.

 

Target award levels for each component of the long-term incentive program seek to balance executive focus on our business goals, to balance the internal compensation levels of executive positions and to reflect the PPL competitive data.

 

The target award levels for the named executive officers were set as a percentage of salary for 2006 and are provided below:

 

TABLE 7

 

Long-term Incentive Award Targets

 

 

A restricted stock unit award is made by the CGNC after the end of each year, based on the most recent three-year average results of the annual cash incentive program:

 

 

This award is designed to reward sustained financial and operational performance.

 

A second restricted stock unit award is made after the end of each year based on the achievement level of annually determined, objective strategic goals developed by the company and approved by the CGNC:

 

 

This award is designed to reward actions that drive achievement of the company’s strategic objectives.

 

The strategic goals for 2006 included the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A grant of stock options is made each year at each executive’s target award level:

 

 

The value of the long-term incentive awards as of the grant date, based on the targets, delivers a level of compensation intended to pay executive officers at a level that compares to the median of the PPL competitive data. The ultimate value of long-term incentive awards to executives is tied to the future value of PPL’s total shareowner return—stock price growth and dividends. To the extent total shareowner value increases, executives may realize values that exceed the values as determined on the grant date. Similarly, should shareowner value deteriorate, executive compensation levels for these awards could fall below the grant values, possibly to zero.

 

Awards for 2006

 

At its meeting in January 2007, the CGNC reviewed and certified the performance results for the 2006 cash incentive compensation award. These results impact the long-term incentive program as follows:

 

 

At its meeting in January 2007, the CGNC approved restricted stock unit awards for 2006 performance, and at its January 2006 meeting approved stock option awards for 2006. These awards are set forth in the table below. The cost of the stock option awards expensed by the company in 2006 is included in the Summary Compensation Table. However, because the restricted stock unit awards for 2006 performance were not expensed by the company until granted in January 2007, any amount expensed will not be included until next year’s Summary Compensation Table. The restricted stock unit awards reflected in this year’s Summary Compensation Table show the expense for the awards made by the company in January 2006 for 2005 performance. Such awards were also included and discussed in last year’s proxy statement. See “—Tax and Accounting Considerations—SFAS 123(R)” at the end of this CD&A at page 40 for further details on how equity awards are expensed.

 

TABLE 8

 

Long-Term Incentive Awards for 2006

 

 

 

In addition to the above annual awards, the CGNC granted Mr. Hecht a transition restricted stock unit award of 55,990 restricted stock units in lieu of stock options. The unit grant was determined based on 50% of the total long-term incentive target, or 150% of salary, converted to units as noted above. The restrictions on the stock unit award, unlike other restricted stock unit grants, do not lapse upon retirement; the restrictions lapse one year following retirement. Mr. Hecht did not receive a stock option award, since it was expected he would retire during 2006, and the CGNC views options as a forward-looking incentive to promote stock price growth and not as an effective means of compensating a retiring executive.

 

Changes to Target Award Levels for 2007

 

At its January 2007 meeting, the CGNC amended the long-term incentive targets for 2007. In addition, the CGNC decided to rebalance the value of restricted stock units as compared with stock options to 65% restricted stock units and 35% options, from the prior 50%-50% mix. Both decisions were based on changes noted in market practice and, in the case of the mix of long-term awards, on the CGNC’s view that stock options should receive less weight. The revised targets are reflected below:

 

TABLE 9

 

Long-term Incentive Award Targets for 2007