Ga., Ala. power companies have huge stake, influence in water wars

Georgia, Alabama and Florida have been quarreling for nearly 20 years over the Chattahoochee River. But there’s another player in the game, working mostly in the background, wielding enormous influence.

Georgia Power and Alabama Power, both owned by Southern Co. and both drawing huge quantities of water from the river, have huge stakes in the dispute. Perhaps predictably, their presence has simply given the states more to argue about.

The latest spat was prompted by Gov. Sonny Perdue’s recent decision to appoint the head of Georgia Power to lead a team of state business and political leaders that is advising the governor on how to proceed.

Alabama Gov. Bob Riley and Sen. Richard Shelby have decried the appointment of Georgia Power President Michael Garrett. But Perdue, calling the Alabama complaints “hypocritical,” pointed out Wednesday that Alabama Power has always had an active role in fighting the water wars.

Appointment sends a message

In letters to Southern Co. CEO David Ratcliffe, Riley and Shelby complained that the appointment of the head of Southern’s largest subsidiary sends a message that Southern is favoring Georgia over its neighboring states.

Riley said Georgia Power’s participation is “counterproductive to reaching an amicable resolution,” saying it is “only likely to harden the negotiating positions of the states.”

Shelby followed by accusing Southern Co. of “joining the lobbying arm of Georgia” and aligning itself with one state against the other two.

Ratcliffe said he found Riley’s accusations ironic as Georgians previously accused him of doing the same thing when Alabama Power remained an active party in the lawsuit and also advised the state on water matters.

“I want to assure you that Southern Company is not aligned with any state against another but rather encourages you and all involved to work collaboratively to achieve a resolution acceptable to all three states’ leaders,” he said in an Aug. 3 letter to Riley.

Garrett said Riley’s complaint “couldn’t be further from the truth.”

“Never have we had a CEO of Southern ask one operating company to take on a position that would damage another state,” Garrett said Tuesday.

Alabama Power has been an active negotiator in the water talks for years because it has a lot at stake. Its two nuclear reactors at Plant Farley supply as much as 18 percent of the company’s generating capacity and depend on the Chattahoochee River for cooling and navigation.

Bob Kerr, Georgia’s lead water negotiator from 1997 to 2004, said officials from Alabama Power were always at the table during previous attempts to work out a water agreement. Kerr acknowledged that Georgia Power was involved, as well, but not to the same degree.

“We were led to believe that Alabama Power was heavily involved in influencing the negotiations and the outcome of them. I still believe that,” he said.

Alabama Power's stance

Alabama Power takes basically the same stance as that of its home state: If metro Atlanta continues to use Lanier for drinking water, the loss of that water “would wrongfully deprive Alabama Power of water otherwise available resulting in adverse impacts to and interference with Alabama Power’s hydroelectric projects,” according to a 2005 court motion.

For Alabama’s part, Riley spokesman Todd Stacy said in an e-mail: “There is a difference between being a member of a team and being a coach of a team. Also, as the letter states, the primary concern was that Southern Company would favor a congressional solution, rather than a tri-state negotiation, since Mr. Garrett was selected to lead Georgia’s lobbying effort. However, Mr. Ratcliffe’s response makes it clear that Southern Company prefers, as we do, that the states negotiate a solution rather than hash this out in Congress.”

Garrett has ties to Alabama Power as well, having worked there for 10 years — and he helped with water negotiations in the 1990s, ones that Georgia Power also had a hand in.

If anyone has a vested interest in Georgia’s access to water it’s Garrett — his company is the largest water user in the state.

Garrett said he has to be worried about water flow because it’s a necessary component to providing electricity. But he said he’s more concerned that a battle over water will harm economic development on a state and regional basis.

“If they [companies] see we’re having water problems, they are going to go someplace else,” Garrett said.

In a meeting last week with AJC editors and reporters, Perdue said Garrett is supposed to inform and educate the business community and participate in the state’s discussions over water use.

Others say his place at the table just looks bad.

“When we found this out, I just rolled my eyes and thought, ‘There has to be somebody that doesn’t have these conflicts of interest and that would be able to work these negotiations,’ ” said Sara Barczak of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.

Garrett says there’s no conflict.

“We operate a lot of lakes in the state, and we understand the water issues,” he said. “If we’re going to get a water deal, having people that understand the issue is critical.”

Barczak remains unconvinced.

“I just honestly don’t know if they are going to be negotiating the interests of those three states or the interests of their company.”

A federal judge in July ruled that metro Atlanta has no right to use the water in Lake Lanier and gave the states three years to reach an agreement with Congress’ blessing.

A week after the ruling, an Alabama Power spokesman labeled it “very satisfying to us.”

“We’ve been involved in this case for a long time, primarily to ensure there is a sufficient flow of water for our Farley Nuclear Plant,” spokesman Pat Wylie said a week after U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson’s decision.