A backup plan for TVA's river duties

A backup plan for TVA's river duties

TVA's pending crisis over funding for non-
power programs is beginning to surface in relatively
small ways. One is the agency's decision, an-
nounced this week, to seek other government agen-
cies or private contractors to take over 11 lakefront
recreation areas and to quit providing lifeguards
at the Chickamauga Dam. Expect a lot more such
decisions — and a virtual avalanche in the fall — if
federal funding for nonpower programs is com-
pletely eliminated for the fiscal year beginning in
October, as is threatened.

This week's pinprick, and the more worrisome
scenario for October, ought to prompt discussion
across the TVA service area on ways to preserve
TVA's crucial nonpower programs for river naviga-
tion, land stewardship, dam operations and recre-
ation. These take the bulk of TVA's current $77
million in federal appropriations.

But don't look to TVA and power distributors
for creative solutions. They are focused on insist-
ing on the continuance of federal funding. One
good reason is that federal agencies administer
similar watershed responsibilities in other areas,
and the TVA region should not be singled out for a
cutoff.

Both also object strenuously to the alternative
outlined by controlling House Republicans in
budget hearings last year: To require TVA to
finance nonpower programs out of power reve-
nues. That would add to their rate costs and hurt
their ability to compete with outside utilities when
the electric industry is opened to competition.

But if congressional funding remains unlike-
ly, TVA customers will have to consider whether,
and why, revenue derived from TVA's hydro power
dams should help pay the costs of TVA's river-relat-
ed programs.

Since TVA is unwilling to discuss that — for
fear of inviting Congress to eliminate federal fund-
ing — the Tennessee Valley Energy Reform Coali-
tion is taking up the project.

TVERC suggests that TVA's hydro power reve-
nues be isolated and that a Tennessee River
Watershed Council be created to recommend allo-
cations of these funds as needed to pay for TVA's
river-related functions.

TVERC's rationale makes sense. TVA was
founded mainly to control seasonal flooding on the
Tennessee River and to create a navigable water-
way through a series of dams and locks. To fulfill
that mission, it was authorized to seize privately
held land along the river to create lakes and reser-
voirs, and charged with administering those wa-
ters and lands for the public good. Generation of
electricity was an adjunct to TVA's historical
mission. So it is logical to use hydro power revenue
to support TVA's river-related functions.

No public official wants to make that argu-
ment, nor should they while Congress supports
federal funding for similar duties in other areas by
the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department
of Interior, to name just two. But if Congress
proves unfair and ultimately forces TVA to bear
the cost of its river and land management duties,
there is a reasonable fear that TVA's focus on com-
petitive power rates will undermine funding for
nonpower functions.

In that event, there needs to be a backup plan
to make sure nonpower programs — and corre-
sponding public benefits — are not gutted. TVERC
is wisely looking to protect those benefits. Its pro-
posal merits consideration.