ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Friday, July 5, 1996 TAG: 9607050020
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-7 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JEFFERY SCOTT
LIKE MOST landowners whose property may be affected by American Electric Power Co.'s proposed 765kV transmission line, I was very anxious to see the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on this project, prepared by the U.S. Forest Service. I have now had a chance to review that document, and I find it to be thorough, well-researched, and of course, totally inconclusive.
Why is it inconclusive? Well, because what everybody really wants to know is: Will the power line be built, and if so, where? The Forest Service won't answer that question, nor is it supposed to. By law, its only responsibility is to decide whether the line should be allowed to cross federal land, and the tentative answer is "no." But that doesn't necessarily mean the line won't be built, or even that it won't cross federal land.
The decision on whether the line is actually needed will be made by Virginia's State Corporation Commission and the West Virginia Public Service Commission. Theoretically, if the two commissions decide to permit the line, and the Forest Service holds fast to its refusal to allow it to cross federal land, the line could be built entirely on private lands, an alternative that is more destructive (and more costly) than any of the routes through the National Forest. In reality, if it is determined that we really must have this power line, the Forest Service probably will be forced to reconsider its decision.
In the meantime, Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Abingdon, has proposed that Virginia's need for electric power should be met by building new coal-fired generating plants within the state, rather than by importing power from West Virginia. This idea may have a great deal of merit, but it also has its own set of environmental impacts. So far as I am aware, no one is evaluating those impacts at the present time. If new generating plants are ever seriously considered, a lot of research will have to done, and that research hasn't started yet.
Whatever happens, I'm willing to bet it will take a long time, cost a lot of money, and probably end up in court. And it will leave a lot of people confused and wondering if we did the right thing.
This fragmented decision-making process does not serve the public interest. It is the result of having no national policy on land use, unlike almost every other industrialized Western nation. We have certain national standards for the use of air and water, but when it comes to land, decisions are made by a jumble of local, state and federal agencies. Some decisions belong to some agencies, others belong to other agencies; sometimes, as in the case of the power line, different parts of the same decision belong to different agencies.
This is due to Americans' rabid fear of centralization. Reactionary commentators have convinced us that government is our enemy, and big government is a bigger enemy. But how do you make the big decisions without a big organization?
Specifically, how do you make a rational decision on a proposed power line that will cross two states, six counties and one National Forest, when there is no single agency that has the authority to say yes or no? The answer, apparently, is that you pursue the question through a number of separate, noncooperating agencies, and hope that they eventually will agree upon a single answer.
Such a system is not fair to either the supporters or the opponents of the project, since no one is sure how or when the decision will be made. Often, political strategy and legal technicalities become more important than a reasonable analysis of costs, benefits and alternatives.
We need to develop a more sensible approach to major land-use decisions. Some states have begun to do this by adopting state planning legislation to require regional cooperation and to insure inter-agency coordination. Ultimately, such legislation is needed at the national level to insure cooperation among states. This approach need not be an infringement on local power. Decisions of purely local importance still could be made at the local level.
Land is our most important natural resource. It is time to create a system for making intelligent choices about how we are going to use it.
Jeffery Scott is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners and has had 16 years experience in land-use planning. Three of the 13 corridors analyzed in the draft environmental impact statement would affect his Giles County home.
LENGTH: Medium: 85 linesby CNB