BGE's `pipes and wires' aren't for sale The headline in...


May 10, 2002

BGE's `pipes and wires' aren't for sale

The headline in the April 27 business section "Constellation may sell BGE's `pipes, wires' " certainly caught me by surprise. But, as president of the pipes and wires business and one who took part in the discussions on which the reporter based her story, I can unequivocally state that BGE is not for sale.

The day before the article appeared, Constellation Energy Group's management discussed the company's first-quarter earnings in a conference call with financial analysts and in subsequent interviews with media, including The Sun.

During the lengthy interview with The Sun, Constellation Energy CEO Mayo Shattuck was asked about the possibility of the sale of BGE's electric transmission assets. His reply, the same one given to analysts, was that BGE, like every regulated utility, is subject to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which is still developing its policies governing the operation and ownership of high-voltage transmission assets.

As Mr. Shattuck explained, in the future (perhaps within five years) FERC is expected to make important decisions about regional transmission organizations, independent system operators, system interconnections, transmission companies and rate incentives for expansion.

FERC's new policies may obligate or provide incentives to utilities to sell or transfer their electric transmission assets to another entity. And Mr. Shattuck added that it was possible that Constellation Energy could own a stake in the resulting transmission operations company.

But, again, to set the record straight, nothing was said about selling BGE or the distribution pipes and wires.

Frank O. Heintz


The writer is president and CEO of BGE.

U.S. should embrace war crimes court

President Bush's arrogance and hypocrisy make me sick. With his unheard-of "unsigning" of the international treaty forming a war crimes court, he is saying that the United States is above all such standards ("Bush to reject treaty signed by U.S.," May 5).

Mr. Bush seems to think we can subject noncitizens to military tribunals with no input or oversight from other nations, and that we can do anything to anyone and not be held accountable.

Administration officials complain that U.S. citizens, from members of our armed forces to the president, could be subject to this war crimes court. But why shouldn't they be?

If Americans commit war crimes, or order others to commit them, I don't want that covered up and glossed over. I want them prosecuted.

Instead of rejecting the international court, we should take an active role in it to be sure that it lives up to our standards of justice.

How can we ask the rest of the world to stand with us in our fight against terrorism when we refuse to be part of the world community?

Carl Aron


Pakistan remains a dictatorship

The Sun commented accurately on the referendum that allows Gen. Pervez Musharraf five more years of power ("Eyewash in Pakistan," editorial, May 2). He remains a dictator, not a democratically elected leader, no matter the results of the rigged referendum. Our elected leaders for once should have the courage to tell Mr. Musharraf that enough is enough.

He was rightly praised for his help fighting the Taliban, but should be criticized for holding on to power by any means possible.

Surya Mundra


Progress pervades Patterson Park

As a four-year resident of Patterson Park, I was overjoyed to read Mary Gail Hare's article "Patterson pagoda has storied return" (April 28).

Prior to moving into the city, I had heard countless horror stories about Patterson Park, but my experiences on those 155 acres proved just how one-sided those tales were.

And Ms. Hare's article illustrated the incredible community support, most notably by the Friends of Patterson Park, that has enabled the park to be cleaned up.

Alexander Vasquez


Zollicoffer chose the wrong forum

I found Gregory Kane's attempt to portray City Solicitor Thurman W. Zollicoffer Jr. as some caped, heroic crusader for the Bill of Rights to be amusing, insulting and, like most stories of superheroes, pure fantasy ("Zollicoffer's actions show Fourth Amendment's worth," May 4).

Mr. Zollicoffer is an attorney. He knows all too well that the venue for making arguments regarding any alleged violation of a person's rights is in a courtroom before a judge, not by arguing with and threatening police officers attempting to perform their duties.

David R. Etheridge


City solicitor's deeds didn't abuse power

To those complaining of a racial double standard concerning City Solicitor Thurman W. Zollicoffer Jr.'s actions ("Double standard on race saves city solicitor," letters, May 7), I ask: Is there a difference between public and private acts?

Although he is a public figure, Mr. Zollicoffer's actions were those of a private citizen upset, rightly or wrongly, with government action. His behavior, for which he has apologized, involved no exercise of government power.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.