ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, August 22, 1996 TAG: 9608220009
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JEFF JANOSKO
IN RECENT letters to the editor (July 17, "This region needs the power line" by Charles A. Simmons; Aug. 13, "Bureaucratic block to the power line" by Robert A. Waid), employees of American Electric Power have decried the regulatory process by which power lines are approved. They argue that the current system is inefficient, incurring unnecessary delays. Most would agree that the process is cumbersome. However, when AEP employees criticize government regulations, one must wonder whose rules they would have us follow.
Ironically, the present regulatory system was designed by electric utilities. In the early 1900s, investor-owned utilities (like AEP) were facing stiff competition from public-owned utilities. Unable to compete with rapidly growing not-for-profit utilities, a group of investors led by J.P. Morgan designed the regulatory system that we still use today. In exchange for monopolized sales territories, the investors agreed to be regulated by state agencies. With large numbers of legally guaranteed customers, the investor-owned utilities soon dominated the market, driving most public utilities out of business.
Times have changed. Service territories that once protected the interests of investor-owned utilities have become too restrictive. Due to the feeble rate of growth in electricity's use in the United States, these utilities are scrambling for new customers. In the '80s, use increased at a rate of 3 percent annually; today, it's about 2.7 percent. As a result, utilities are looking beyond traditional sales territories.
Proposed in 1990, the power line complements the industry-led drive for deregulation. Since its inception, the line has been a joint venture with Virginia Power. If built, it will provide enough electricity to the Richmond area to power more than 2 million homes. Even as AEP threatens Southwest Virginia with blackouts, it signs new contracts with other utilities in North Carolina. The amount of electricity involved in these transactions exceeds the capacity of the proposed power line!
For six years, this project has been subjected to rigorous evaluation. Now that the U.S. Forest Service has ruled that the power line cannot be routed through the Jefferson National Forest, AEP has renewed attacks on the regulatory process. Without this process, however, comprehensive scientific data documenting the power line's effect on the forest would never have been collected.
Certainly there are faster ways to evaluate the worth of a power line. As Jeffrey Scott observed in his July 5 commentary (``Power-line decision highlights lack of land-use policy''), we would do well to follow the example of other industrialized countries that employ a more streamlined approach. But most utilities in Western industrialized countries are publicly owned. As a result, power lines are built with public service as the bottom line, rather than corporate profitability. Unlike AEP, publicly owned utilities answer to citizens rather than to investors.
Undeniably, the bureaucratic gridlock characteristic of regulatory action is an affront to that decision-making process. But so are the self-serving motives of a utility that threatens its customers with blackouts in an attempt to increase its sales. Deliberately misrepresenting the purpose of this power line to manipulate public opinion, AEP reinforces the need for the very regulatory process it condemns.
Jeff Janosko of Catawba is a member of the Roanoke County Preservation League.
LENGTH: Medium: 66 linesby CNB