Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Supply topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regional officials warn Charlotte Water transfer could strain Catawba River supply
Summary
A regional briefing to the Hickory City Council described a potential Charlotte Water request to transfer up to 63,000,000 gallons per day from the Catawba River, raised concerns about a roughly 19% system water loss and drought vulnerability, and urged engagement with a UNC study and pending moratorium on large transfers.
A regional water briefing at the Hickory City Council meeting on Jan. 6 focused on interbasin transfers (IBTs) and the potential consequences if Charlotte Water expands its transfers from the Catawba River.
Anthony Starr, executive director of the Western Piedmont Council of Governments, told council members that Charlotte Water “currently has a 33,000,000 gallons per day IBT certificate issued in 2002” and said Charlotte is reportedly preparing to ask to increase that to as much as 63,000,000 gallons per day. Starr said academic research links IBTs to environmental and economic harms for source basins and noted that the Catawba River has been called a threatened river because of demand and repeated droughts.
Starr highlighted drought history for the region and explained that severe droughts in the late 1990s and 2007–2009 produced significant reservoir drawdowns. He said Charlotte loses about 19% of the water it treats — “about 23,000,000 gallons per day” — to system leaks, and argued that approving large transfers without adequate accountability could limit future permitting and growth in upstream communities.
Starr described alternatives to IBTs — purchasing from other systems, constructing return infrastructure to discharge treated wastewater back to the Catawba, or building treatment capacity — and said Charlotte’s cited costs for those options have risen since 2001. He said a regional coalition is urging the UNC Collaboratory at UNC Chapel Hill to recommend policy changes, including a statutory “shot clock” that would limit how long a large IBT could operate and a drought‑mitigation fund to support impacted communities.
During Q&A, council members pressed technical and policy points. One council member criticized Charlotte’s approach, saying the utility “want[s] to take the cheapest way out,” and another asked how long the current moratorium lasts and what entity will rule on any application. Starr said the moratorium enacted by House Bill 850 applies to transfers over 15,000,000 gpd and runs through March 2027, the UNC study is due in January (year stated in the briefing but not specified in the transcript), and the Environmental Management Commission (housed in the Department of Environmental Quality) will review environmental impact statements unless the legislature changes the process.
Starr urged officials and residents to engage state legislators and to participate in the UNC study process. Mayor and council thanked Starr for the briefing; no regulatory decision was made at the meeting.
