S0902 creates the “Data Center Siting Act,” a new regulatory framework for locating, building, and operating data centers in South Carolina. The bill requires any data center with a connected electrical load of at least one megawatt to obtain a certificate from the Public Service Commission before beginning operations. It establishes a pre-application notice process, public notice and intervention rights, and a hearing-based certification proceeding with different review tracks for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 facilities based on size and expected impacts.
The bill also sets substantive standards for data center operations and site selection. It directs the Office of Regulatory Staff to adopt performance-based operational efficiency standards, and the Department of Environmental Services to adopt water efficiency standards measured by water use effectiveness metrics. It requires infrastructure adequacy assessments, environmental review, reasonable buffer requirements near sensitive areas, decommissioning plans and financial assurances for larger facilities, and measures to reduce noise, vibration, and light pollution. It also gives the Public Service Commission jurisdiction over utility rates, cost allocation, service agreements, and infrastructure cost recovery associated with data centers, with an emphasis on preventing non-participating ratepayers from subsidizing data center-related costs.
If enacted, the bill would add a new chapter to Title 58 of the South Carolina Code and significantly expand state oversight of data center development. It would centralize certification and rate oversight in the Public Service Commission, assign rulemaking and technical roles to the Office of Regulatory Staff and the Department of Environmental Services, and create new compliance, reporting, and enforcement obligations for data center operators and utilities. The bill would also affect local governments by preserving zoning and land-use authority while limiting local rules that are more restrictive than the chapter’s operational efficiency and infrastructure adequacy standards, and it would create confidentiality protections for proprietary data submitted during the review process.
Based on the bill text alone, the overall tone appears supportive of data center development but with substantial regulation and safeguards. The structure of the bill suggests an effort to balance economic development and infrastructure investment with environmental protection, ratepayer protection, and community impacts. The absence of committee transcripts or recorded votes means there is no additional public record here showing formal support or opposition, but the bill’s detailed, industry-specific framework indicates a policy approach aimed at facilitating siting while imposing clear state-level standards.
The main points of contention likely involve the balance between state control and local authority, the scope of environmental and infrastructure review, and who pays for utility upgrades needed to serve large data centers. The bill allows the commission to disregard local laws it finds “unreasonably restrictive,” which could concern local governments and residents. Environmental and community groups may focus on water use, wastewater, buffers near sensitive lands, noise, light, and cumulative impacts, while utilities and ratepayer advocates may scrutinize cost allocation, minimum contract obligations, self-generation rules, and financial assurance requirements. Data center operators may support the expedited review paths and confidentiality protections but could object to certification, reporting, and decommissioning requirements, especially for larger Tier 2 and Tier 3 facilities.