OCR Text |
Show -30- inevitably flows into the channels of interstate commerce.114 Not only are many aspects of electric generation within the zone of legal control left to the States by Supreme Court decisions, but it is extremely doubtful if these aspects are not within exclusive State control, forbidding Federal interven- - tion. Again, the problems of transmission are not capable of being drawn com- pletely within the area of solution by Congress, even if such a course were advisable. To be sure, the transmission of electricity across State borders is interstate commerce and as such subject to the Federal power evolved for the control of' such commerce with its immunity against discrimination by State action. 115 But to a considerable extent the future will have to deal, as does the present, with transmission and its facilities limited entirely to the con- fines of a single State. Yet some coordination of policy between these State- wide transmission systems and interstate transmission will call for a mechan- ism of control regional and not merely State-wide in its operation, in order to secure interconnection, exchange and distribution of power. Standardiza- tion of equipment may be found either necessary or desirable, not merely on interstate transmission lines but also on transmission systems confined to separate States. For all these purposes the Federal authority does not cover the field. The need for interstate cooperation must find expression through a continuous, dependable and flexible interstate arrangement. The same need is revealed in the control of distributing agencies. Dis- tributors of electric energy are localized in area. The interests of the con- sumer - what he gets and what he pays for - has a segregated local aspect, and is, therefore, a matter of local State concern.116 In the conventional phrases of constitutional law, these are matters not within the Commerce Clause of the Federal Constitution but within the police power of the State. In interstate transportation of goods or passengers, the service that is rendered and the_ service that is paid for is the carriage from State to State; but the distri- butor of electrical energy, itself the product of interstate transmission, sells, and the consumer buys, not the transmission but the power secured through transmission. The cost of transmission is an element in the cost paid Accounting methods can be prescribed, renewals and replacements required. An amortization fund for the reduction of the net investment, to be established out of the surplus earned by the enterprise after the first twenty years, is part of the plan under which these projects are authorized. See Merrill, Federal Water Power Act, and its Administration (1920) 12 Stone & Webster Journ. 25I5 Shields, Federal Power Act (1925) 73 U. Pa. L. Rev. lig. Hhc£. United Mine Workers of America v. Coronado Coal Co. U922J djj u. S. 3hk, U2. Sup. Ct. 5875 United Leather Workers International v. Herkert & Neisel Co, (I92W 265 U. S* i+57, hh Sup. Ct. 623; Heisler v. Thomas Colliery Co. (1922) 260 U. S. 21+5* U3 Sup. Ct. 833 and Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Lord (1923) 262 u. s. 172, U3 Sup. ct. 526. ^Pennsylvania v. West Virginia (1923) 262 U. S. 553* U3 Sup. Ct. 658. ^Public Utilities v. Landon (1919) 2l+9 U, S. 236, 39 Sup. Ct. 268; Penna. GaS Co. v. Public Service Comm. (1920) 252 U. S. 23, 1*0 ^p. Ct. 279? of. Missouri v. Kansas Natural Gas Co. (19210 265 U. S« 298, ill; Supt. Ct. 5W- |