South Carolina's top prosecutor said Tuesday he's pleased with oral arguments before the nation's highest court as to why a city, a water supply company and a major utility should stay out of a water dispute with North Carolina.
"I was very happy to see the intense interest that they are taking in the case,'' South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster said by phone from Washington after the hour-long hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. "I have never seen the justices appear to be as interested and knowledgeable and active in their questions. They were highly engaged.''
At the heart of the case is a plan by North Carolina to allow two cities -- Concord and Kannapolis -- to pump up to 10 million gallons a day from both the Catawba and Yadkin river basins, both of which cross the state line with South Carolina. The Catawba River winds 225 miles through the Carolinas and provides drinking water to more than 1 million people and electricity to more than twice that many.
Arguing that the plan would deprive South Carolina of its equitable share of the Catawba's precious water, McMaster filed a federal lawsuit in 2007 to stop North Carolina from draining the basin. The high court, McMaster argued, should rule the water be apportioned between the states, not hoarded by the upriver state.
"North Carolina's position is that they can do whatever they want with the water, no matter the impact on South Carolina,'' McMaster said. "That is and would be a disaster for the economic prosperity and future of South Carolina. Our entire economy in our state depends on water.''
At issue Tuesday was the decision by the special master appointed to help resolve the dispute to allow the city of Charlotte, Duke Energy and a water system into the case. Duke, which has thousands of customers in both Carolinas, has argued its interests in the water aren't encompassed by either state, a contention also made by the Catawba River Water Supply Project. Charlotte, which sits perched on the border of the two states, said it should be allowed in as a major stakeholder in Duke's relicensing agreements.
McMaster says the water should be meted out between the states, after which the third parties can hash out their shares with North Carolina.
McMaster also has said the case may impact other southeastern water disputes. Tennessee and South Carolina have worried Atlanta may look to the nearby Tennessee or Savannah rivers for relief for droughts that often plague the area. And Georgia, Alabama and Florida have fought over how much water can be stored in north Georgia lakes.
"If an upriver state can turn our water off whenever they want to, then we're at an enormous disadvantage,'' he said. "And if they can do it, so could Georgia, for the Savannah River.''
The justices will issue their ruling over the interveners later.
The case is South Carolina v. North Carolina, 22O138 ORG.
Email
Facebook
Google
Twitter
Favorites
More
Advertisement