Caldwell County coalition warns Charlotte's proposed interbasin transfer could strain Catawba River
Loading...
Summary
Anthony Starr of the Western Piedmont Council of Governments updated Caldwell County commissioners on Charlotte Water's proposal to increase interbasin transfers, saying the utility may seek to push transfers from 33 million to as much as 63 million gallons per day and urging local governments to engage the state study and legislators.
Anthony Starr of the Western Piedmont Council of Governments told the Caldwell County Board of Commissioners on Jan. 26 that Charlotte Water's proposal to expand interbasin transfers (IBTs) could have significant economic and environmental impacts on communities along the Catawba River.
Starr defined an IBT as "when a community such as the city of Charlotte withdraws water from the Catawba River ... and then discharges it into a different river basin," and said the coalition's research finds such transfers "have both economic and environmental negative impacts on the source basin." He said Charlotte Water currently holds a 33 million gallons-per-day (gpd) certificate from 2002 and is proposing increases that, in presentation slides, could reach 63 million gpd.
Starr highlighted regional drought vulnerability and infrastructure constraints, noting that the Catawba chain is densely populated and that reservoir intake elevations make low flows costly or unusable. He also said Charlotte Water loses about 19% of treated water through leaks and inefficiencies and argued the utility should address distribution losses before seeking larger transfers.
On alternatives, Starr cited options Charlotte could pursue that would not count as IBTs if the water is returned to the Catawba: building or buying treatment capacity in the Yadkin basin, or discharging wastewater back into streams that return to the Catawba. He challenged recent cost estimates for alternatives and said Charlotte could absorb increased capital costs through its forthcoming capital program.
Starr reviewed House Bill 850, a legislative moratorium on new or increased IBTs of 15 million gpd or larger and a directive to the North Carolina Collaboratory at UNC Chapel Hill to study the IBT approval process and provide recommendations. Starr said the moratorium remains in effect through March '7 and that the Collaboratory's study will inform the General Assembly.
Commissioners pressed Starr on procedural protections, asking whether environmental impact statements and Environmental Management Commission hearings will consider downstream impacts; Starr said the EMC hearing and the EIS are the venues in which stakeholders can challenge adequacy of impact analyses and seek conditions. Local officials repeatedly urged legal and intergovernmental advocacy: Caldwell County representatives pledged continued participation in the Catawba River Coalition and agreed to submit local letters to the Collaboratory describing local concerns.
Starr closed by asking local governments to share local perspectives with the study and with state legislators. He said coalition staff will provide materials to help counties prepare letters and that the next 50 years of regional growth will be influenced by decisions about IBTs.
What happens next: the Collaboratory's study and EMC processes were identified as the next formal steps. Local governments were asked to submit letters and to remain coordinated through the Catawba River Coalition.
