Skip to Main Content


A Review of the Public Service Commission
February 2003

FOLLOW-UP (PDF)     REPORT (PDF)     SUMMARY (PDF)

Members of the General Assembly requested the Legislative Audit Council to conduct an audit of the Public Service Commission (PSC). The review focused on whether the PSC was following the due process requirements in cases before the commission. In addition, we were asked to examine the issues of commissioner qualifications and agency structure. Our findings are summarized as follows.

  • We found several instances in which the PSC may have violated the prohibition on ex parte communications found in the Administrative Procedures Act. In addition, we found other examples of meetings and communications between PSC Commissioners and other parties both before cases were filed and when they were pending before the PSC. These meetings give the appearance of impropriety.
  • We found that the PSC has no procedure in place for training staff on ex parte communications or for reporting potential ex parte communications. In a survey of PSC staff, 45% reported they did not know to whom they should report suspected inappropriate communications.
  • PSC Commissioners are not subject to the state’s Code of Judicial Conduct. Also, South Carolina law currently does not require commissioners to disclose ex parte communications.
  • We found that there is a need for a separate staff for commissioners in order to provide them with sufficient expertise and to address concerns about potential ex parte communications.
  • There are no minimum education or experience requirements to become a PSC Commissioner. Most southeastern states also do not have minimum education or experience requirements for their commissioners. However, in our review of seven southeastern states, we found that 27 (90%) of the 30 commissioners had at least a college degree. When commissioners are elected that do not meet minimum requirements, there is less assurance that complex decisions are made effectively.
  • PSC Commissioners are currently elected to four-year terms which are not staggered. Staggering commissioner terms would better preserve invaluable experience on the commission and eliminate the possibility that all seven commissioners would be replaced in one election cycle. Also, with staggered terms, there would be more regular oversight by the General Assembly. In five (71%) of the seven southeastern states, commissioners have staggered terms.