Duke consensus agreement concerns voiced

By Lisa Majors-Duff

Prior to the call for stakeholders to vote on the agreement, Westmoreland explained, he was restricted from soliciting options or lobbying for a position. Now that the informal process is set to expire this month, Jackson County will be asked to take a stand on the consensus agreement, which Duke plans to use as part of its Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing effort.

"We are at a point now that I need some further direction," said Westmoreland, who then explained his reasons for voting against the agreement.

The document fails to address the recreational needs of county residents, most specifically improvements requested at Andrews Park in the Lake Glenville Park Master Plan of 2000, Westmoreland said. The county asked that the plan be implemented on a 50-50 cost-share basis, he said.

"Only a small portion of those considerations were adopted by Duke," he said.

A variety of recreational needs are addressed in the agreement, but they are mostly geared toward special interests, the manager said. While this may be good for kayakers, it leaves out the person who wants to have a picnic with his kids at the lake.

The elimination of the Dillsboro Dam was another reason Westmoreland used for determining his position on the agreement.

"Not to compensate Dillsboro for the loss of the dam seems unfair," he said.

Duke announced plans to seek a 40-year license, as opposed to the previously sought 30-year license, at the last minute, Westmoreland said. Whatever is agreed upon will constitute the extent of Duke's required community involvement for the next 40 years, he said. The request for a trust fund to address issues that will emerge during this time was not included.

Westmoreland was one of many to express displeasure with the consensus agreement during Tuesday's commissioners' meeting at the Justice Center. Mark Jamison of Cullowhee, Roger Turner of the Western North Carolina Alliance, Susan Leveille of Webster's Planning Board, Bill Lyons of Cullowhee and T.J. Walker of Dillsboro all listed reasons why commissioners should look unfavorably on the agreement when it's their turn to voice an opinion.

"The key is that the agreement does not provide full and optimal access to the lakes (Glenville, Cedar Cliff and Wolf)," Turner said.

"Duke has not lived up to the FERC rules," Lyons said. "They have done serious damage here."

Any threat from Duke to increase customers' energy costs to pay for added amenities is just that, he said, because the N.C. Utilities Commission has said it would not approve such a rate increase request.

Webster was unable to sign the agreement, Leveille said, because it does not address the public's need commiserate with Duke's profits. Webster also is concerned about the length of the license Duke is seeking and feels other areas of the state are receiving the benefits of lower energy costs because of resources found here, she said.

The hydroelectric projects in Duke's Nantahala Area affected by the FERC relicensing project are on the Tuckaseigee and Nantahala rivers in Jackson, Swain and Macon counties. The company is seeking to relicense the projects because current federal operating licenses expire in 2005 and 2006.

All the power company's Tuckaseigee River projects are in Jackson County. Thorpe (Lake Glenville) and Tuckasegee are on the river's West Fork, and Wolf Creek, Tanassee Creek, Bear Creek and Cedar Cliff are on the East Fork. Dillsboro is the only project on the main stem of the Tuckaseigee, which flows from Jackson County and into Fontana Lake in Swain County.

Nantahala Hydro Project is located on the Nantahala River with diversion dams on White Oak Creek and Dicks Creek in Macon County.

Nantahala and Thorpe are, respectively, the largest and second largest generating plants and reservoirs in the Nantahala Area, and together they account for about two-thirds of the Nantahala Area's generating capacity.

Back to Archive: 06/12/03.