Senate subcommittee hears competing views on H.3309; debate centers on Kennedy's gas plant, rate impacts and solar procurement

At a Senate energy subcommittee hearing, stakeholders from conservation groups, utilities-adjacent developers, consumer advocates and residents discussed House Bill 3309 and related energy policy changes, focusing on how the bill could affect ratepayers, the proposed large combined‑cycle plant near Kennedy’s on the Edisto River, and the state’s plans for solar and battery deployment.

The hearing drew repeated warnings from environmental and community groups that the bill as drafted could increase costs for ordinary customers and weaken protections during siting and permitting. Taylor Allred of the Coastal Conservation League said H.3309 "will increase ratepayers' risk of paying higher bills than necessary and delay the growth in clean energy resources," and urged amendments on resource planning, rate design and energy efficiency to protect everyday customers.

Why it matters: committee members heard competing views on how South Carolina should meet rising demand from data centers and other large customers while retiring coal and avoiding another costly build‑out. The debate touched on four linked topics — a proposed joint plant at Kennedy’s, procurement and competitive processes for renewables, possible changes to siting thresholds and appeals, and whether large new customers should receive discounted economic development rates.

Conservation and community concerns

Robbie Maynor, who identified himself as a Southern Environmental Law Center staffer and a Kennedy’s resident, described local health and environmental impacts in the rural Kennedy’s community and the ACE Basin. Maynor said the utilities have not presented final cost estimates or a definitive site…