State senators want more hands-on control in nuclear project fiasco

February 7, 2018

Investigative Reports

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


Update: After this story was published this morning, a Senate Judiciary subcommittee voted to amend the joint resolution (S. 954) to drop the “experimental rate” language, which would effectively keep the V.C. Summer portion of South Carolina Electric & Gas electric rates pending a new order by the state Public Service Commission. The subcommittee was in general agreement that under the amended resolution, a decision by the PSC likely wouldn’t occur until February 2019, assuming the Legislature doesn’t officially adjourn until November, which Sen. Shane Massey pointed out is typical in election years.

S.C. Senate leaders want to delay utility regulators from issuing a new rate order tied to the failed V.C. Summer nuclear project – another apparent move by lawmakers to directly control the energy regulatory process.

A joint resolution by Senate President Pro Tempore Hugh Leatherman, R-Florence; Majority Leader Shane Massey, R-Edgefield; and Minority Leader Nikki Setzler, D-Lexington, would prevent the state Public Service Commission from issuing a rate order allowed by the Base Load Review Act until 90 days after the end of this year’s legislative session.

Lawmakers ended last year’s session on June 6. Using that date as an example, the PSC couldn’t issue a new order on South Carolina Electric & Gas’ rates related to the nuclear project until Sept. 6 of this year, under the Senate resolution (S. 954), which was introduced last week and is in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In the interim, however, the PSC “may issue an experimental rate order to revise the electric rates,” the resolution states. It doesn’t define “experimental rate,” but the House last week approved an amended  bill (H. 4375) that would set an “experimental rate,”  which it defined as a rate minus the V.C. Summer portion of an electric bill. The temporary rate would remain in effect pending any challenges before the PSC or courts.

The Base Load Review Act (BLRA), quietly passed by legislators in 2007, allowed the PSC to impose nine SCE&G rate hikes over the years for two never-finished reactors at the V.C. Summer plant in Fairfield County. The rate increases now account for $27, or 18 percent, of an average $147 monthly residential bill for 1,000 kilowatt hours; SCE&G customers collectively have paid nearly $1.96 billion toward the abandoned project, according to the state Office of Regulatory Staff.

The House bill claims that the S.C. Constitution gives lawmakers the authority to set “certain utility rates for the purpose of protecting the public interest until a determination can be made by the appropriate regulatory and judicial authorities.”

That section of the constitution, however, doesn’t specifically allow lawmakers to directly establish rates. Rather it says the Legislature “shall provide for appropriate regulation of common carriers, publicly owned utilities, and privately owned utilities serving the public as and to the extent required by the public interest.”

Cayce-based SCANA Corp., the parent company of SCE&G, and Virginia-based Dominion Energy have asked the PSC to approve a $14.6 billion merger involving the companies and allow the recovery of V.C. Summer costs under the BLRA.

Contacted Tuesday by The Nerve, SCANA spokesman Eric Boomhower declined to say whether the company believes that lawmakers have the constitutional authority to directly control utility rates. But in an email statement, he warned, “In the event that the BLRA-related legislation currently being proposed in the House and/or the Senate passes into law in its current form, SCANA will have no choice other than to seek legal recourse.”

The Legislature already exerts tremendous control over the energy regulatory process through the State Regulation of Public Utilities Review Committee (PURC), a six-lawmaker, 10-member committee that nominates and evaluates the seven-member PSC. PURC also controls the hiring and evaluation of the executive director of the Office of Regulatory Staff, which, among its duties, is supposed to represent ratepayers’ interests but signed off on the nine rate hikes for the failed $9 billion nuclear project.

Sen. Massey told The Nerve that under state law, SCE&G customers could continue to be charged for the abandoned reactors if the PSC didn’t act on the rate request by Dominion/SCANA within six months of their application, which he noted would put the deadline into July.

The Senate resolution requiring the PSC to delay issuing an order until 90 days after the end of this year’s legislative session would “give us sufficient time to evaluate the financial impact, the constitutional impact of the proposal, and anything else,” he said Monday.

“Dominion has been asking us to slow down and evaluate everything,” Massey said. “All we’re doing with (resolution) 954 is saying, ‘Ok, we’re gonna do that, but you gotta take the gun away from our head,’ and that gun is, there is a six-month time limit on it.”

Asked if the Senate resolution could increase the possibility of SCANA filing for bankruptcy, Massey replied: “I don’t think there’s been any credible evidence that doing this (repealing the BLRA) on a permanent basis would force them into bankruptcy. I don’t think doing it on a temporary basis would force them into bankruptcy, either.”

The credit-rating firm Moody’s on Monday downgraded both SCANA’s and SCE&G’s investment ratings, noting in a written statement that its review was “originally initiated as a result of escalating political and regulatory contentiousness” after the company’s decision last summer to abandon the V.C. Summer project. SCE&G’s junior partner in the project, state-owned utility Santee Cooper, also dropped out.

“Events over the past few months have led us to conclude the regulatory environment for SCE&G has deteriorated markedly and is now considerably below average,” Moody’s said in its statement.

In a letter Tuesday to the PSC, SCANA said Moody’s opinion concerning “the material negative impact that an immediate reduction in revenue would have upon SCE&G” is “consistent” with the company’s formal statements to the PSC on the issue.

The letter warned that a “write down of assets” related to the V.C. Summer project “could cripple SCE&G’s and SCANA’s balance sheet, lead to debt covenants being violated, result in short term notes becoming immediately due, cause the Company’s credit ratings to fall to junk status, damage SCE&G’s trade credit, and set in motion in a cascading series of events that could be financially detrimental to the Company.”

Hannah Hill, the South Carolina Policy Council’s senior policy analyst, contributed to this story. Brundrett is the news editor of The Nerve. Contact him at 803-254-4411 or Follow him on Twitter @RickBrundrett. Follow The Nerve on Facebook and Twitter.





  • Lyn Wilson

    First, since the state legislature put into law a requirement for SCE&G customers pay a percentage of their utility bill for something they will not own or have personal use of, they essentially created a tax, and an un-apportioned tax at that….they need to address that. Second, SCANA has propagated fraud…there needs to be legal action against the management and Board. Third, the PURC and PSC are complicit in the fraud, and at a minimum need to face ethics review. Fourth, as much as I hate it, SCANA is correct in stating that the legislature cannot legally change its Base Load agreement. My solution to this whole mess? Have the State revoke SCANA’s charter, and take over SCE&G’s assets under eminent domain and/or civil forfeiture. Turn over the management of the utilities to Santee-Cooper. SCANA needs to suffer the consequences of a whole series of bad decisions. The full page ads and television commercials touting the $1000 bribe to ratepayers with the potential merger with Dominion, plus the news stories of Pentagon and Walmart involvement in the process tell me that some powerfully-connected people stand to lose money if the merger doesn’t happen.

  • Philip Branton

    Mr Brundrett,

    Why do you NOT connect any of these rulings and delays to the simultaneous proceedings with Quinndom and #Probegate..? As Mr “Wilson” eludes too with his comment, with Walmart and the Pentagon “stepping” into the ring it makes your reporting and this article very “distractful” …..

    The BLRA is a…… Heist.

    Furthermore, the “Big SCANA Short” being operated presently via the markets has been anticipated and planned. Mr Brundrett , seriously, do you not think FBI and NCIS and IG Inspectors have not watched this scene from a movie and said to themselves … “.. Not again, not on my watch.. !”

    Mr. Brundrett… .. . I do hope you are better than a Moody’s reporter. That tax increase less than a year ago to fund a pension (SCANA Short) is going to be very manipulative in a court of law. Just think how many fellow Carolinians go to church each Sunday and are not warned. Not one Pastor is going to lead his flock across this state..? Now. ….. do I listen to each Pastor preach from his pulpit each Sunday … Nope. Maybe I have missed a sermon or two.


    SCANA time is…… Valuable. Just like “Tulsa Time” is. Mr Brundrett, you do know why this song would get a record executive to “short” Tulsa related stocks…. do you not ?

    Mr. Brundrett……if YOU, yes you were in charge of Dominion and SCANA advertising…how would you use corporate ad dollars to spike competing informational airtime to be used against you and a share price…..or vice versa?

    Ha.. . . Mr Brundrett, Jeff Bezos may call one day. …. What will the NERVE tell him?

  • cc

    I got to the second paragraph and there it was. leatherman. Didn’t have to read any further to know this a power grab.

  • Philip Branton
  • swampland

  • Tom Clements

    SCE&G is collecting 18% of the monthly bill for financing costs for the nuclear fiasco. But is that money being shifted to day-to-day operation costs? If so, is that legal? This matter needs investigating.