The state's actions would cut off a significant portion of South Carolina's water supply, and we are engaged in an unprecedented legal battle to stop it.

This fight is over our water, our jobs and our economic future.

North Carolina's actions, if unchecked, could cripple the economy of a large part of South Carolina and cause hardships for businesses and individuals throughout the region.

Further, its actions would give a green light to Atlanta and other Georgia cities to begin taking water from the Savannah River, from the Upstate to the Lowcountry, all to our detriment.

In January 2007, North Carolina approved an "inter-basin" transfer permit that would have allowed two of its cities, Kannapolis and Concord, to divert 10 million gallons of water a day from the Catawba River, water that now flows directly into South Carolina.

We discovered that earlier permits allowed such permanent withdrawals totaling an additional 62 million gallons per day, for a grand total -- to date -- of at least 72 millions gallons per day. South Carolina had no knowledge of these earlier permits, and we only learned of the one for Kannapolis and Concord while it was in progress.

Daily water diversions that large could dramatically cut the water supply to York, Chester, Fairfield, Kershaw, Lancaster, Sumter and Richland counties, as well as impair the water supply further downstream along the Santee and Cooper rivers.

The impact? Industries that depend on access to water could be lost and economic development efforts crippled at a time when we have the third highest jobless rate in the country. Businesses of many kinds, as well as tourism, agriculture and recreation would suffer.

We attempted to avoid litigation. For six months, North Carolina ignored us.

Given no alternative, we brought a federal lawsuit against North Carolina to stop it. We went directly to the United States Supreme Court, asking it to decide an equitable way to apportion water flow between the two states. The Supreme Court granted our request.

By now, the dispute could possibly have been resolved, or nearly so. But the process was significantly delayed in the fall of 2007 when Duke Energy, a North Carolina company, and the city of Charlotte filed petitions to intervene in support of North Carolina's petition. Among other things, the company is claiming legal title to any and all "excess" water in the river. Duke and Charlotte's intervention has complicated the case and greatly increased the cost of litigation.

Fortunately, others have backed our position in this struggle. This spring, the U.S. solicitor general announced its support of South Carolina's efforts to have Duke and Charlotte removed from the case.

Despite tight budgets, many of our state's business and political leaders have vigorously joined the effort. Our General Assembly has fully funded the case. South Carolina municipalities have contributed, too.

Our case has yet to be heard, but in the meantime, Duke applied for a certification from the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control for the five dams it operates on the Catawba-Wateree River system in South Carolina. North Carolina already had granted certification for the six dams there.

In its request, Duke agreed to provide only 25 percent of water to South Carolina along the Catawba River, a flow that in our calculations fails to protect our state from excessive water withdrawals and drought. Further, we contend Duke's application contains erroneous and incomplete data. As mentioned, Duke's support of North Carolina's unilateral actions concerning South Carolina's water supply threatens our legal position. A South Carolina agency issuing Duke a certification based on this faulty data, agreeing to a 25 percent share of water, could further jeopardize the case.

For that reason, I asked the DHEC board on July 9 to delay the certification so my office could work with DHEC to address our legal concerns. The DHEC board denied Duke Energy's certification request. This is a victory for common sense.

This case is of historic importance to South Carolina. The Catawba River is only one of many sources of interstate water we depend on. Lake Hartwell and the Savannah River are shared with Georgia. We also share the Pee Dee, Broad, French Broad and Lumber rivers with North Carolina.

If North Carolina and Duke Energy are not stopped on the Catawba, we are in jeopardy elsewhere to our north. And if North Carolina can do it, so can Georgia.

This is a fight for South Carolina rights. It's a fight for our prosperity and well-being. No issue is more important to our state's economic future.