WATEREE

Operating

Hydro power plant

Capacity
56 MW
Primary fuel
Hydro
County
Kershaw County
Operator
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
Status
Operating
Commissioned
1919
EIA plant ID
3270
Generators
5
Technology
Conventional Hydroelectric
Net generation (2024)
255 GWh
Capacity factor (2024, EIA nameplate)
32%
Data vintage
EIA-860 2024 final; EIA-923 2022-2024 final
Coordinates
34.3356, -80.7022

See it on the map

WATEREE, a 56 MW Hydro power plant in Kershaw County, South Carolina. Operated by DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, commissioned 1919.

How WATEREE compares

With 56 MW of capacity, WATEREE ranks 35th among the 83 operating power plants Bywatts maps in South Carolina and 9th of the 28 operating Hydro plants in the state. It accounts for about 1.7% of South Carolina's operating Hydro capacity and 0.2% of all operating capacity in the state. Nationally it is the 264th-largest of the 1,243 operating Hydro plants in the database. Commissioned in 1919, it is older than 91% of the 82 operating South Carolina plants with a recorded commissioning year. Its operator, DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, runs 15 operating plants in South Carolina totaling 8,471 MW. It shares Kershaw County with one other operating plant, CAMDEN SOUTH CAROLINA.

EIA-860 lists 5 generators at the site with 91 MW of nameplate capacity, all conventional hydroelectric technology (this page's HIFLD capacity figure is 56 MW). Net generation was 255 GWh in 2024 (a 32% capacity factor), up 35% from 2022.

Grid neighborhood

The closest transmission line found within 10 miles is a 100 kV line, under 0.1 miles away. Another 6 operating power plants totaling 195 MW sit within 25 miles; the largest is CEDAR CREEK (45 MW, Hydro).

Computed by Bywatts from HIFLD power plant and transmission line records and EIA-860/923 survey data; distances are straight-line. Sources and methodology

Weather peril exposure

WATEREE is a 56 MW hydro power plant in Kershaw County, SC, operated by DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, commissioned in 1919. Kershaw County carries moderate modeled catastrophe exposure in the FEMA National Risk Index, scoring 2.4 of 5 at the 35th national percentile. Hurricane is the leading peril, rated Relatively Moderate by FEMA at the 83rd percentile.

The Bywatts loss layer is calibrated to solar PV hardware, so it is not applied to a hydro plant. The ratings below are the FEMA National Risk Index county hazard ratings for this location.

2.4 of 5Modeled catastrophe exposure
ModerateExposure band
HurricaneLeading peril
Relatively LowFEMA county risk rating

Kershaw County hazard ratings

PerilFEMA ratingNational percentilePeril scoreEvents per year
HurricaneRelatively Moderate83rd4.3 of 50.19
EarthquakeRelatively Low80th4.2 of 5<0.01
Ice stormRelatively High79th4.2 of 51.2
TornadoRelatively Moderate60th3.4 of 50.50
LightningRelatively Moderate59th3.4 of 557.8
WildfireRelatively Low53rd3.1 of 5<0.01
HailRelatively Low34th2.4 of 53.8
Strong windRelatively High27th2.1 of 55.3
Riverine floodingRelatively Low26th2.0 of 50.46
Heat waveRelatively Low25th2.0 of 54.1
Winter weatherRelatively Low4th1.1 of 52.3

Perils not assessed in Kershaw County

These perils carry no usable National Risk Index figure for this county, so they are excluded from the scoring rather than scored zero. A zero would claim the peril was assessed and found benign.

PerilWhy it is not scored
Coastal floodingFEMA rating is "Not Applicable" for this county

Model hail, wind and flood exposure for Kershaw County in the weather risk calculator

Ratings are the FEMA National Risk Index county hazard ratings; the peril score is a Bywatts transform of the FEMA national percentile. Full data sources and the solar vulnerability methodology are in the weather risk calculator.

Modeled estimate for screening and negotiation. Built from FEMA National Risk Index county hazard data and a solar vulnerability layer documented above. Not a quote, a binder, or actuarial advice, and not a substitute for a carrier's own model. Hazard data: FEMA National Risk Index December 2025, synced 2026-07-24. Resolution is county level, not site level.