Yadkin Docs

This is not “compelling”… it is unreasonable.

It is not proper for parties to share incomplete information via the press in these types of proceedings until the discussions yield an agreement or officially cease.  Neither has occurred.

From the beginning, the County’s goals have been to ensure: (1) that the river is environmentally protected for generations to come, (2) that the use of water from the Yadkin River is best determined by citizens of North Carolina, and (3) that the flow of the river is used to maximize the impact of its resources for the benefit of its citizens.  

The goal of environmental protection is being addressed in the state 401 water quality permit process and includes the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Alcoa/APGI, Stanly County and the Yadkin Riverkeeper.

he County believes its intervention in this process will lead to numerous water quality improvements.

(1) The Board of Commissioners is legally responsible for the public health and well-being of its citizens.  These basic environmental protection measures will lead to cleaner surface and ground water for our citizens now and for generations to come.  It is impossible to put a price tag on the value of one citizen’s life or well-being.   (2) The value of water will only increase as growth demands in the Charlotte region, Piedmont Triad and along the I-85 corridor strain our available water resources.  Regional organizations to the east and west of the Yadkin River basin are planning for water use over the coming decades and our citizens need to be doing the same. (3) The water of the Yadkin belongs to the people and has tremendous value from an electrical generation perspective.  The benefits should not simply be given away to a global corporation to support its operations in other states and foreign countries. This simply transfers wealth out of our community and that is unacceptable. 

The County is seeking fair and reasonable compensation for the long-term use of the river.

  However, without long-term financial assurances these jobs and the associated taxable investment will remain over the course of a 30, 40 or 50 year license term, it would not be wise to simply drop our reasonable demands.

  Should our citizens accept a static amount for a settlement when the value of the resource will increase exponentially over the term of the license?

We, as Commissioners, will continue to seek the best outcome for Stanly County.

I’m so proud of (and awed by) the Commissioners for thinking of the bigger picture and the long term needs of the community. This is nothing short of blackmail — and failing that, bribery! –on Alcoa’s part. The only reason they’ve ever offered anything is because of the Commissioner’s strong stand against a massive corporate giveaway. Good for you Commissioners! I salute you.

Stanly County upheld its end of the bargain for 50 years. It’s time to reclaim use of the water for the betterment of all Yadkin Valley communities. Looks to me like Alcoa is the one stalling, not the commissioners.

We must put our fate in our own hands not with a corporation who has no responsibility to our region or our state.

I applaud the Commissioners’ continued resolve to do what is in the best interests of our citizens. Future prosperity in Stanly County depends on the Yadkin hydropower. Since the beginning of time, communities have only thrived because of their access to water …for drinking, recreation, trade and fuel. Had our water not been under the control of Alcoa for the last 50 years, we would be in much better shape economically. By leveraging the Yadkin hydropower, we could have already replaced our lost manufacturing jobs with higher paying jobs that reflect the needs of the 21st century. We would be absolute fools to once again relinquish control of our waters to Alcoa for another 50 years. We need to reserve the flexibility to control our own destiny—not “outsource” it to a multinational corporation that has a poor record of stewardship and corporate responsibility in our region.

“Since the operation of the Badin smelting works is dependent upon the availability of power supply, Carolina Aluminum must regard its smelting activities at Badin to be limited to the term of the license of the Yadkin Project, which is its source of power supply. In formulating its plans, and weighing the advisability of the $37,000,000 program, the management of Carolina Aluminum had to assume, therefore, that power would be available from the Yadkin Project at economically feasible rates only during the original license term. Under Section 14 of the Act, any project may be “recaptured” at the expiration of the license term. In formulating its plans, therefore, the management of Carolina Aluminum could not rely upon any assured source of power supply after the expiration of its license for the Yadkin Project”

The “project properties” are held in trust by the Government for the people. It is the “project properties” that a multi-national, foreign controlled, private enterprise is trying to “hijack” away from “we the people”.

Alcoa has never owned “the riverbed”. The do pay taxes in an attempt to lay claim to the riverbed. The state constitution and federal law does not support their claim. With that said, refer back to the 1958 license agreement. Alcoa gave up rights to the submerged land “the project property” in exchange for the monopoly use of the water as free fuel for a guaranteed profit for 50 years. Article 14 of the The Federal Power Act clearly spells out the option Alcoa gave the Federal Government in exchange for the use of the “peoples waters”.

At the time, Calisolar said it couldn’t meet construction deadlines linked to some state-based financial incentives.

Those are nice incentives, but what doesn’t add up is that by shifting to Mississippi, Calisolar gave up a $275 million DOE loan guarantee and a deal through Ohio Public Utility Commission that would have saved the company $100 million in utility bills over ten years.