4. Tri-State Water Wars
• Litigation began in 1990 when Alabama sued the Army
Corps of Engineers
• Georgia, Florida, various local governments,
hydropower customers and Alabama Power all got
involved.
• At issue is Corps’ management of ACF and ACT
systems, and whether Lakes Allatoona and Lanier can
be used for water supply by metro Atlanta.
• District Court said “no” to second question in 2009,
overturned by 11th Circuit in 2011; Supreme Court
declined to hear an appeal in June 2012.
5. Legal Option for Future Interstate
Litigation: Supreme Court Litigation
• Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in controversies
between states
• Alabama and Florida will have to show direct
interest and negative impacts for Supreme Court to
accept case
• If the Supreme Court agrees and accepts case,
Georgia has to show benefits of its water use outweigh
harm to FL and AL
• Standard that GA will have to meet is clear and
convincing evidence
6. Future Interstate Litigation
• Question the Supreme Court would answer is:
How well is each state managing its water
resources? Who has their house in order?
• Corps will be revising its water control manuals
over the next year: more fodder for litigation.
• Other statutes in play include Clean Water Act,
National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered
Species Act
7. South Carolina v. North Carolina –
recently in U.S. Supreme Court
Transfer proposed between Catawba and Yadkin Basins
8.
9. Water Management in Georgia
• Water withdrawals over 100,000
gallons per day require a permit from
EPD – “regulated riparian” system
• 2008 State Water Plan
• 2010 Water Stewardship Act
• 2011 Interbasin Transfer Rules
10. • Created in 2001 pursuant to the
Metropolitan North Georgia Water
Planning District Act.
• 15 county area
• No interbasin transfers into the District.
11.
12. Source: Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District Water Supply and Water Conservation Management Plan, September
13. Interbasin Transfers in Georgia
• 2011 rulemaking for interbasin transfer
water withdrawal permits
• List of 22 factors to be considered
when evaluating proposals
• Factors include economic costs, water
quality impacts, interstate impacts, and
cumulative impacts
14. Conclusions
• Water resources and population centers
are separated in Georgia.
• Must evaluate growth areas and
patterns in order to insure sustainable
future.
• Energy sources and their water
use/discharge practices are important
pieces of the puzzle.
