Duke Power does not want to dredge backlogged sediment from behind the Dillsboro dam before tearing it down despite both state and federal agencies insisting otherwise.

Duke filed an appeal this week protesting a decision by the Federal Regulatory Energy Commission that requires Duke to dredge the sediment before it removes the dam. The energy commission granted Duke permission to tear down the Dillsboro dam last month, on the condition that it dredge sediment from behind the dam. Duke must develop a sediment removal plan in conjunction with state and federal environmental agencies, and the energy commission must sign off on it before dam removal can begin.

The phrase “do the right thing,” the name of an early Spike Lee movie, has become a part of the lexicon of this generation. It’s a phrase that has often come to mind — as in, “we wish they would do the right thing ” — as we’ve watched Duke Energy throughout the negotiations to relicense its hydropower operations in the region.

Duke Energy has cleared a major hurdle in its efforts to tear down the nearly 100-year-old Dillsboro dam.

Duke got approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last month to tear down the dam. Removal could happen as early as next year, or it could be two to three years away depending on whether critics of dam removal appeal the decision.

The proposed removal of the Dillsboro dam on the Tuckasegee River is up for review by state water quality officers, who could make or break Duke Power’s controversial plans to tear down the dam.

The state must grant Duke Power a water quality permit before it can remove the dam. A written public comment period for the permit is currently underway.

By Sarah Kucharski • Staff Writer

Dillsboro Mayor Jean Hartbarger has retracted a letter that could have led to a legal squabble with Duke Power.

Hartbarger had signed a letter requesting that the N.C. Division of Water Quality hold a public hearing prior to re-issuing Duke Power water quality certifications for its dams on the Tuckasegee River. After Duke officials claimed that authoring the letter violated the rules of the original stakeholder agreement the town signed as part of the re-licensing process, Hartbarger asked for the letter back from the state.

By Sarah Kucharski • Staff Writer

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s final decision on Duke Power’s relicensing applications for its Western North Carolina hydropower plants heavily favors the proposals developed by the utility in a multi-year stakeholder process.

When a room full of elected officials pleaded with a U.S. senator and a congressman last week to step into the fray over Duke Power’s plan to manage waterways in three western North Carolina counties, they were arguing for the regular folks who use these waterways but often don’t take part in politics. We hope those politicians were listening.

By Sarah Kucharski • Staff Writer

As the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hones its final recommendations for the mitigation Duke Power should provide in exchange for using the region’s waterways to produce hydroelectric power, local officials are asking for one thing — more time.

Duke Power discounted accusations last week that a portion of the hydropower operation on the Oconaluftee River extends onto tribal land belonging to the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs is questioning whether Duke Power concealed the boundary of its hydropower operation on the Oconaluftee River to avoid sharing a portion of its profits with the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.