Utility regulator quits, says SC energy bill may cause repeat of VC Summer nuclear fiasco

A state Public Service Commission member has resigned in protest from the utility oversight board because of concerns that a bill moving through the Legislature could lead to a repeat of the failed V.C. Summer nuclear project in South Carolina seven years ago.

Tom Ervin, a former state judge from Greenville, said in a letter to the Legislature he is leaving the commission effective March 31. Ervin later told The State the resignation is effective immediately.

In an interview with the newspaper, Ervin said the House bill “was hastily drawn’’ and needs more scrutiny.

Ervin said the proposal for a huge natural gas plant has parallels to a bill approved about 15 years ago that allowed two energy companies to begin expanding the V.C. Summer nuclear plant in Fairfield County. That bill gave utilities SCE&G and Santee Cooper substantial concessions to begin constructing two nuclear reactors to complement the existing reactor at the site.

Santee Cooper and SCE&G, Dominion Energy’s predecessor, walked away from the project amid delays and cost overruns. When they quit the project in the summer of 2017, the utilities had already spent $9 billion and raised rates for customers.

Now, Santee Cooper and Dominion want to jointly build the large natural gas plant, estimated to cost $1 billion.

“It’s of utmost importance to get this right,’’ Ervin said Wednesday afternoon. “We are on a path to repeat the mistakes that were made with V.C. Summer and all the fallout that resulted from that nuclear debacle. It can be avoided.. Just let the Public Service Commission do their statutory job.”

The bill Ervin is concerned about has been heavily criticized by clean energy advocates and environmentalists for an array of elements that they say would make it harder for the public to challenge new power plants, allow for higher rates, result in miles of new pipelines and curtail environmental regulations. A consultant hired by the PSC also questioned the need for a large new natural gas plant.

Ervin said the bill limits control from the PSC, a panel set up specifically to consider utility expansion and rate increases. The PSC currently hears testimony from utilities and citizens groups about proposed rate increases and the need for more power plants.

His letter to the Legislature, obtained by The State, listed an array of problems he said exist in the House bill. Among others, the bill makes it harder for solar companies to get bank loans, which could chill the expansion of renewable energy; bypasses the PSC’s ability to determine if a big natural gas plant in Colleton County is worth it; allows utility executives to meet privately with the PSC, outside of public view; gives greater weight to what utilities say than the public; and cuts out the state Consumer Advocate’s watchdog role on behalf of ratepayers.

Giving greater weight to utility arguments than the public “is a brazen attempt to undermine the ability of the commission to fairly decide what weight and credibility to give to all the testimony and evidence presented at the hearings,’’ his letter said.

Despite Ervin’s criticism, utilities dispute assertions that the new energy bill could lead to another V.C. Summer fiasco, saying a big natural gas plant is needed to provide for rising energy needs. The utilities have said a bill that allowed for the nuclear plant had different language and is substantially different from the current natural gas bill in the House.

Santee Cooper spokeswoman Mollie Gore did not provide a comment Wednesday, but Dominion spokeswoman Rhonda O’Banion said the utility is trying to end the state’s reliance on coal as a power source. O’Banion said the natural gas plant will get plenty of scrutiny from the PSC.

”Dominion Energy is focused on continuing to provide reliable, affordable and increasingly clean energy to our customers,” O’Banion said in an email. “Our proposed plans to build a natural gas (plant) is a key part of this commitment to help end reliance on coal as soon as possible. We must complete a thorough regulatory process with the Public Service Commission of South Carolina and other oversight agencies, which includes siting and permitting, to get approval on this proposed project — just as we would for any other project of this kind.’’

House Speaker Murrell Smith’s office declined to comment. Smith, R-Sumter, is one of the key legislators supporting the bill.

Rep. Russell Ott, a Calhoun County Democrat who was among multiple bill co-sponsors, said he’s sorry to see Ervin resign. But he said the resignation is “a warning that this is a big deal’’ and many issues need to be discussed.

Sen. Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, who has introduced his own version of the House bill in the Senate, didn’t know about Ervin’s resignation until told by The State.

Davis said he suspects the resignation results from Ervin perceiving that the Legislature is making energy generation decisions that Ervin believes is the province of the PSC.

”As for specific criticisms of the bill ... it is far more constructive to engage in the debate and try to persuade as to what you believe the best policy to be, and to not simply disengage from the process,” Davis said. “There will be ample opportunity to engage during the Senate committee process. Legislators need and depend on the input of people like Commissioner Ervin.”

But Ervin, a former state legislator, said he is resigning to speak out in the debate over the House bill and the natural gas plant proposal. He was unable to do that as a PSC member, he said. Ervin has been a Public Service Commissioner since 2018, dealing with much of the fallout from the nuclear construction debacle with his fellow commissioners.

Santee Cooper and SCE&G’s decision to walk away from the V.C. Summer project incensed ratepayers, led to an array of investigations and ultimately wound up with two power company executives being prosecuted criminally. The companies did not reveal the construction problems, as required.

South Carolina’s Public Service Commission is a quasi-judicial panel composed of seven members. They are largely limited to discussions in the commission meetings because they must judge cases. Commissioners make more than $100,000 annually.

John Tynan, director of the Conservation Voters of South Carolina, said Ervin’s assessment is accurate. The bill gives power companies a “blank check’’ to raise rates and bypass environmental protections that would otherwise be considered, he said.

“I can certainly see why a commissioner would not want to be forced to make those one-sided decisions,’’ Tynan said. “They would not have any decisions to make. The Public Service Commission is supposed to protect ratepayers against utility monopolies.’’

Tom Clements, a nuclear safety activist, said the bill that Ervin is concerned about also contains major concessions to the nuclear industry that are not warranted.