COLUMBIA — A key architect of 2007's Base Load Review Act that led to the V.C. Summer $9 billion nuclear fiasco has his fingerprints on a new South Carolina energy plan that also could shift financial risks onto the backs of the public, documents reveal.
In a series of emails, Columbia attorney Belton Zeigler appeared to make numerous language changes to the current Statehouse energy reform bill — legislation opponents have characterized as a "giveaway" to the state's utilities industry.
The emails were obtained by the Conservation Voters of South Carolina through a request made to Santee Cooper under the state Freedom of Information Act.
Zeigler is one of South Carolina's longtime energy players and a lawyer with Womble Bond Dickinson, an international law firm with offices in Columbia, Greenville and Charleston.
Zeigler did not respond to an emailed request for comment, while messages to Santee Cooper and Dominion were not returned by press time.
Zeigler was one of many lawyers and lobbyists involved in drafting the 2024 bill, but his involvement also is a reminder of the power of industry lobbyists to shape laws, including the 2007 Base Load Review Act.
Emails of working drafts of the current 2024 bill show Zeigler wasn't the sole author. But he appeared to be deeply involved in helping clarify multiple facets of the legislation, from grammatical changes to defined policy proposals.
The documents also appeared to show Zeigler and Dominion's government affairs director, Jonathan Yarborough, adding language that effectively put the General Assembly's stamp of approval on the construction of a proposed natural gas plant at the former Canadys coal facility in Colleton County.
It also paves the way for a faster permitting process with limited chances for the public to weigh in or contest the project if the project had already been approved by the state's oversight body.
"It was good talking with you by phone today," reads an email from Zeigler to Santee Cooper general counsel Pamela Williams about proposed changes to the bill text.
"Attached is a revised version of the statute with our changes from this morning, along with a redline against the Duke version that Jonathan sent you earlier," it continues. "I have prepared a memo including our legal research that has deleted any legal advice or conclusions."
In addition to authorizing utility companies Dominion and the state-owned Santee Cooper to collaborate on the Canadys project, the sweeping 33,000-word bill proposes numerous regulatory changes to how the state vets proposed utilities projects, moves that if enacted into law would disproportionately benefit the state's utility companies.
One potential change involves the size of the state's Public Service Commission, which grants approval to those projects. The bill would slash the number of commissioners from seven members to three. New pipelines and infrastructure for gas plants would be expedited, and the South Carolina Supreme Court would have the final say over any projects.
The bill, according to its sponsors in the House of Representatives, had been a work in progress for more than a year and a half, drafted during months of meetings between conservationists and utilities over how to meet a looming energy generation shortage facing the Palmetto State.
Text of the legislation has only been available since mid-February and sped through the South Carolina House of Representatives with little substantial debate.
It has also elicited significant concerns from environmental groups who fear the bill maintains numerous similarities to the 2007 Base Load Review Act, which allowed utilities to rely on ratepayers to fund the construction of two reactors at V.C. Summer.
While natural gas plants are a proven technology, environmentalists have raised concerns about the long-term viability of the project. They note the recently released emissions standards by the Environmental Protection Agency, which they contend could balloon the cost of the project. Ratepayers, they argue, would be on the hook for funding that facility with a price tag that is currently uncertain.
It is not unusual for industry figures to be involved in the drafting of legislation impacting their industries: that's what lobbyists are employed to do.
But revelations Zeigler has been involved in the latest legislation has raised new concerns from environmental groups who have largely been sidelined throughout the legislative process this session.
"We need to make sure we know where these ideas are coming from and that we're learning from mistakes of the past," John Tynan, president of the conservation voters group, said in an interview. "Especially when it looks like these issues are not going away."
Zeigler has represented clients before regulators in more than 25 proceedings and has made numerous presentations at industry functions, ranging from cybersecurity to energy trends. He worked with the General Assembly to draft laws affecting natural gas and solar energy. In 2007, he also helped draft the Base Load Review Act.
At the time, he was with Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, a politically influential firm that had an office next to the Capitol Grounds. The bill he helped create began with the words: "An act to protect South Carolina ratepayers." The act helped smooth the way for a nuclear reactor north of Columbia. It did so by giving SCANA and Santee Cooper a green light to charge ratepayers as the utilities licensed, designed and built the reactors.
It was a significant change that allowed utilities to shift the risks of the project onto ratepayers, a change that backfired in a massive way. Delays, mismanagement and lax oversight plagued the nuclear project from the beginning. Santee Cooper and SCANA eventually canceled the project after spending $9 billion.
It was South Carolina’s most expensive scandal, one that led to lawsuits, prison for some executives, lost jobs for others and the sale of SCANA to Virginia-based Dominion Energy.
None of it likely would have happened without the industry-driven Base Load Review Act.
In 2017, state Sen. Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, told The Post and Courier that the Base Load Review Act was “probably the clearest case I could ever see of a special interest using all of its power and leverage to get something passed.”
