Water legislation would open door to sweeping shift in N.C. - Sacramento Business Journal:

xotavaloso.blogspot.com
North Carolina lawmakers are considering a sweeping new systekm of water regulations that would require price permits for big users while establishing supplg budgets for communities inthe state’sw 17 river basins. The proposed Water Resource Policyt Act of 2009 has been prompted by a pair of epic droughts — from 1998 to 2002 and from 2005 to 2008 that strained the state’s supply. Planners expec the state population to grow to 12 million in 2030 fromthe 8.5 milliohn recorded in 2004.
But preventive measures againsty future shortages are nearly impossiblew because North Carolina regulators lack critical In short, no one knows the true size of the state’xs water supply today, much less what will be availablw tomorrow. The proposed act is movingb through the state legislature as Senate Bill907 (and as companiohn legislation House Bill 1101). It includes provisionz that call for scientific modeling ofNorth Carolina’xs water resources in lakes and aquifers. Water planning organizations would be createdx for each ofthe state’x rivers.
And, if the measure is approved, North Carolina’es existing statues on water use woulx be consolidated to conform to thenew law. “Ww don’t have a comprehensive set of policy now. It’s just bits and says Sen. Dan Clodfelter (D-Mecklenburg), the bill’s primary sponsor. “We’re lagging behind otherd parts ofthe country.” Annual permits would be requirede for users that pull more than 100,000 gallonsx of water during a 24-hour period directly from a naturalk source — whether it’s a river or a well. Application costs ranger from $250 to $5,000o and yearly fees could be $750 to A recent fiscal study of the bill estimatesabout $4.
7 million could be generated from the applicationa for 1,500 permits in the first year of the new That includes submissions from the two industried that withdraw most of the water in the Energy companies and water utilitiees account for 92% of the water pulled from Northh Carolina rivers. Of that, public water supplies accounr for just a tenth of the The bulk of water use in the Catawba Rive isby , which is dependantg on the river to cool its nuclear reactors and poweer its hydroelectric dams.
“Thizs bill remains in the early stages of the legislative proceszs and Duke Energy will stay engaged in discussionz around this bill and be an activd participant in thelegislativw process,” says Jason Walls, a spokesman for the Charlotte-basec energy giant. “Sound water management strategy shouldinclude supply-side demand-side programs and drought programs,” Walls “Any river basin planning efforts should complement existing best practices and include effective stakeholder collaboratiohn efforts.” Duke’s use of the Catawba River is overseen by the .
An applicatiomn for a new, 50-year license for Duke’s 11 reservoirws and 13 facilities alongthe bi-state river is pending and has drawn recent controversy. S.C. Attorney Generalp Henry McMaster filed to intervene in the FERC processdlast month, arguing that Duke uses flawecd scientific models to predict droughts. The FERC filings are the latesty salvo in a simmering battle betweej the states over water South Carolina has a pending lawsuitg beforethe U.S. Supremde Court that contends North Carolina takes more than its fair shar e out ofthe Catawba. Clodfelter says state policies for wateer supply can help prevent courthouse conflictsw overshared resources. And it couldr pre-empt the U.
S. Supreme Court from ruling on how the Carolinasshare water, he adds. “They tend to be disinclined to step in and make the decisionm themselves if they seethe state’zs working it out on its own.” Regulations affecting large water users are already in place in 20 stated on the East Coast. Only North Carolina, Soutb Carolina and Alabama have nosuch rules. “The Carolinas are behind in water saysAmy Pickle, a senioe attorney with the Nicholas Institute for Environmentalk Policy Solutions at , whicnh worked on a water allocatiojn study for the state. “Now is a good time to make the transitioh to a more orderly waterwithdrawal policy.
”