Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 13 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
ginia’s lands soiled by still another giant powerline.
As is known, opponents of the powerline took the position that Vepco could and should make use of existing power corridors instead of carving up new virgin lands. Our Richmond attorneys submitted very able arguments and briefs to support this view.
It was Vepco’s position that this could not be done because it would cost more and because of the “reliability” factor; that is, a storm or earthquake or some other calamity would be more apt to knock out service for large areas if such lines were in one corridor instead of two.
The shallowness of this argument, one can only hope, will be readily apparent to members of the State Corporation Commission as it studies its evidence. If there are two corridors instead of qne for this service, lightning or earthquake or some other catastrophe would be twice as likely to damage one of the two powerlines. The odds balance
off, in effect.
Yet the firm hired by SCC to make the independent study of the pending application, Technical Associates, Inc., appeared to accept Vepco’s reliability argument without much resistence. It then went on to compute a ratepayers’ new corridor, usinga computer, which turned out to be virtually the same as Vepco’s proposed corridor, varying only in insignificant degree.
96.2%