[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6262635,"mediaKeyId","3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328","parentId",3113014,"title","Committee pauses debate on H.3968 after expert testimony and utility objections to mandatory behind‑the‑meter programs","audioSeconds",3043,"startMs",838000,"endMs",3881000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328&start=838&end=3881","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328/thumbnail_838000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6262635/South-Carolina/Committee-pauses-debate-on-H3968-after-expert-testimony-and-utility-objections-to-mandatory-behindthemeter-programs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262635-d77c0d313a40311d8298ed826da77ca1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770569118&Signature=ECMU4k~UN8G22wIUZ7omz4W~uBcj4KhNrZ9N~P3nl6jRU-FxRKUHrRecIOUwakbGK7IDxZiZNEyVx5KlJZ8LwhUTHwWzife0o813fJ2qxv0QfjLg8cS88Rmz~VCOeXPnG2-2sjUUkR~L-YhCZDEs5iYkxeZ2DIf3kBiXgRIhRlVMhj8QO8KvNiXT7feVAx2LmoTXWp7tfSpWE-Wd4A1FSJ5k1spd5kHEjtgXRBDaemD3SSA9rq7G1pwdftQdUFUGHGP5e8qUDWZszANJN86i2CeDO8qOgHoczFbH1QphnKIWRR295vQJ8c8c8VHvaNztyVJbh4i2ppf5t~YsxWLcdQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","South Carolina Legislature","date","2025-04-24T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Kathy Landing, sponsor of H.3968, presented legislation that would add a new article to Title 1, Chapter 1 requiring the South Carolina Emergency Management Division (EMD) to produce an EMP/geomagnetic disturbance preparedness plan and set other state actions. The bill, as presented, would require a preparedness plan by January 1, 2026; direct utilities to offer a program allowing residential customers to pay for EMP protection for personal assets; provide grant incentives to municipalities and critical infrastructure entities that comply within one year; and request multi‑year funding in the 2026 Appropriations Act to implement the plan.

Representative Landing framed the bill as a response to both natural hazards (solar flares/coronal mass ejections) and possible hostile action that could create electromagnetic pulses. \"Geomagnetic disturbance, coronal mass ejection are the official terms,\" Landing said, and she said South Carolina EMD Director Kim Stinson indicated a six‑month timeline for producing an improved preparedness booklet, which informed the January 2026 deadline in the draft.

Two national experts and two retired senior military officers testified in favor of action. Ambassador Henry Cooper described historical tests and national vulnerability: \"If we had that sort of thing happen today over The United States, it would shut down our entire grid, and it would be down for months.\" Major General (ret.) Lehi Eisner described prior South Carolina work on the Lake Wylie project to identify critical nodes, urged rapid, phased action and argued the cost to protect critical infrastructure could be distributed and affordable.

Utility witnesses opposed provisions that would require utilities to install or finance behind‑the‑meter protection. Jeff Penland (Santee Cooper) asked the committee to remove a section that would require electric providers to offer installation and financing for customer‑side equipment, saying installation is \"behind the meter\" work that is currently a customer responsibility and that forcing utilities into that business would shift costs to all ratepayers. Penland said prior fiscal work on similar language had produced a substantial cost estimate for the utility; later in the hearing he said prior estimates were \"just shy of a billion dollars\" and that full implementation could take about a decade. Tiger Wells, vice president of government affairs for Duke Energy in South Carolina, highlighted three concerns: (1) the bill's scope and lack of a precise technical definition for the covered event or device, (2) EPRI and other standards bodies have not identified vetted residential protection devices, and (3) disclosure of some planning details could create operational risk.

After extended discussion, Representative Wooten moved to adjourn debate to allow sponsors and stakeholders to refine the bill; the motion carried on a show of hands. The transcript records committee direction to continue work with stakeholders rather than adopting the bill in its present form.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee -- L.C.I. Public Utilities Subcommittee Thursday, April 24, 2025 1:45","oneSentenceSummary","H.3968, a bill to require state emergency planning and programs to protect infrastructure from electromagnetic pulses (EMP) and geomagnetic disturbances, drew lengthy testimony from national security and utility experts; the subcommittee voted to adjourn debate so sponsors and stakeholders can refine the bill.","taxTitle","2025 Legislative Meetings, South Carolina","taxId",78666,"location","South Carolina","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6262640,"Subcommittee approves S.275 to bar utilities from using ratepayer capital to operate public EV chargers",376,459000,835000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328&start=459&end=835","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328/thumbnail_459000.jpg","/articles/6262640/South-Carolina/Subcommittee-approves-S275-to-bar-utilities-from-using-ratepayer-capital-to-operate-public-EV-chargers","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262640-02baceafae90c4006597bd6133f7d8ad/orig.mp4?Expires=1770569118&Signature=XgasUiKHrnYN4fMU57sUTtZiCj9IrizZjnttbJDmtbOkXv04lZ40JvKL6wA6Saxka2e3QFwt--OgawGsN4eEFzHAIN~zM2BPDBZmRoG1aJiR1pOiWaDUEo3X7jrj35AmDlILwvg8737Rdknknolr4PIlSueqvOsGXogAhUjRpLP~kFxhfPOa2LuIYh4anJv2ZcKqrAr4LN1J7KjP9d4qJEMUYTDuDv-4TkJYqV2s0ka-VphVgSTEodYjKgoa~Fs7FQAROydKSBrOUJBdmwVf5-sBL8lDru8nb0XIw-r0M0sqUkUSsIbhKImuogo0Rql82hL7Z9dAZ~0wzusFPE~fwg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The subcommittee voted to approve S.275, legislation that seeks to clarify state policy on electric vehicle (EV) charging by preventing public utilities from using ratepayer capital to build and operate public EV charging stations that would compete with private businesses.

Jordan Burns, representing Americans for Affordable Clean Energy, a coalition of fuel retailers that includes Kwik Trip, Love's, Travel Centers of America, BP Raceway and Circle K, told the subcommittee his members supported the bill because it would give private businesses the certainty they need to invest in costly fast‑charging infrastructure. \"The main goal of S.275 is to address the potential for competition between electric utilities and private businesses in the growing market for EV charging services,\" Burns said. He described two primary provisions in the bill: a prohibition on utilities socializing the cost of EV charging infrastructure using ratepayer dollars, and a requirement that all charging providers receive the same rates, terms and conditions for electricity.

Committee discussion included technical points about how current chargers are metered and paid for. Committee member Bill Hager described common practice from his experience: a charging provider arranges a meter and negotiates rates with the utility, then charges drivers for service. Several industry witnesses — including Michael Field and other convenience‑store representatives — declined to add to Burns's testimony but indicated support.

A motion to approve S.275 was made, seconded and adopted by a vote recorded as a show of hands; the transcript records no roll‑call tally or individual roll‑call votes.","S.275, aimed at encouraging private investment in electric vehicle charging by preventing public utilities from using ratepayer funds to build and operate public charging stations, passed the subcommittee after supporters representing fuel retailers testified in favor.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6262644,"Subcommittee approves resolution urging Santee Cooper to seek proposals for V.C. Summer units 2 and 3",446,0,446000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328&start=0&end=446","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3113014-7960f475aaa42580692ec6c4cce91328/thumbnail_0.jpg","/articles/6262644/South-Carolina/Subcommittee-approves-resolution-urging-Santee-Cooper-to-seek-proposals-for-VC-Summer-units-2-and-3","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6262644-6ddb45bc2d87a7b4950d99be5d3ec18b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770569118&Signature=OTW~60QM7n~BH328OIEqmwK9otYyn~lCYFOct3B-q-AX9uJSa8~jjHSTlXAbUg5-M3CSAMk~JYrqUFZGFl9j8aJwi1JvVqNlX04yjkTAZ7tHHbKi0QO-mFzgA5r5BwotuormDOdAPkNgkt94fxP4Zjj3RCTWJYIFs~ozLFM4X~NXQq09NWbKjSAcTII-jP0tNMEgGdYrR~cPouQNyNomIT3W2wwAWt-XwcSRTRXqDWaj1ND9mZGkwOmahjdLaQIpZo~bbWpyyRi-u0pmHVEFZp0cxz8iE8Cd0dNGuAae4OI18PFUMRwwTvqbJzA0NQ4-xGVPfb1YPXRN3aQrkTfftQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The subcommittee approved S.51 on a voice/hand vote after brief discussion about the scope and funding of the process. The resolution encourages Santee Cooper to issue a request for proposals (RFP) soliciting proposals from third parties interested in utilizing or repurposing assets associated with V.C. Summer Units 2 and 3.

Santee Cooper engineer and representative Jeff Penland told the subcommittee the utility opened a first‑phase expression‑of‑interest process in February and has received strong early interest. \"The close of that process is May 5,\" Penland said, adding the utility had \"over 80 interested parties inquire.\" He said Santee Cooper is funding the RFP phase and does not intend to take an investment stake in any restart: \"Santee Cooper does not intend to participate it from an investment standpoint in any part of the restart of construction. We are funding this RFP piece, but nothing else.\"

Sponsor language and staff explained that any transaction involving a transfer of real property interest would require approval by the Joint Bond Review Committee (JBRC) pursuant to Section 58‑31‑240. Committee members asked whether the RFP funding would come from public dollars; Penland replied that the RFP phase is being paid for by Santee Cooper and that the utility \"doesn't have a delineation of funds within our revenue, so that's being funded by our rate payers.\" He added the utility intends to seek reimbursement from any coalition that advances a restart once identified.

A subcommittee member moved to approve S.51, a second was heard, and the measure was approved by a show of hands. The transcript does not record a roll‑call tally or named votes.

The resolution dovetails with Santee Cooper's stated plan to evaluate proposals received May 5, identify promising parties and ideas, and encourage coalition formation to undertake due diligence and, if chosen, restart construction or repurpose existing assets. The committee did not adopt amendments and no further formal directions to staff were recorded.","A legislative subcommittee approved S.51, a joint resolution encouraging Santee Cooper to issue a request for proposals to solicit third‑party plans to repurpose or complete construction of V.C. Summer units 2 and 3; Santee Cooper said the RFP is funded by its customers and the RFP closes May 5.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee pauses debate on H.3968 after expert testimony and utility objections to mandatory behind‑the‑meter programs

Subcommittee approves S.275 to bar utilities from using ratepayer capital to operate public EV chargers

Subcommittee approves resolution urging Santee Cooper to seek proposals for V.C. Summer units 2 and 3