Indicates Matter Stricken
Indicates New Matter

The Senate assembled at 11:00 A.M., the hour to which it stood adjourned, and was called to order by the ACTING PRESIDENT, Senator SETZLER.

TO:       The Clerk of the Senate

The Clerk of the House

FROM:   Committee to Review Candidates for the

South Carolina Public Service Commission

DATE:     January 11, 2000

In compliance with the provisions of Sections 58-3-26 and 2-19-30(D), Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1976, it is respectfully requested that the following information be printed in the Journals of the Senate and the House.

Donald H. Holland, Chairman

Pursuant to Act No. 181 of 1993, the Committee to Review Candidates for the South Carolina Public Service Commission (hereinafter "Committee") was organized to consider the qualifications of candidates for the Second District of the South Carolina Public Service Commission (hereinafter "Commission"), created by the resignation of Commissioner C. Dukes Scott on June 7, 1999, whose term expires on June 30, 2002. The Committee is composed of ten members, six of whom are members of the General Assembly, and four of whom are members of the public. While its statutory mission does not include selecting or nominating the most qualified persons for service on the Commission, the Committee has determined that it does bear responsibility to supply the General Assembly with findings regarding each candidate's capabilities, giving special attention to any issue or concern which might limit a commissioner's effectiveness. In making its findings, the Committee is charged with "find[ing] the best qualified people giving due consideration to their ability and integrity."

The determination of legal qualifications is limited to a determination of the candidate's residence in the appropriate Public Service Commission district as established by Section 58-3-20, the candidate's eligibility for election as determined by Section 58-3-24, and the candidate's compliance with constitutional provisions limiting election to those persons eligible to be electors of this State.

To fulfill its mandate to determine fitness beyond mere legal qualifications, the Committee conducted an intensive review of each candidate's (1) experience, (2) temperament, (3) sensitivity to legal and ethical constraints on public service, and (4) knowledge of Commission operations.

An explanation of these four benchmarks which the Committee used to judge the qualifications of candidates is as follows:

By statutory mandate, this Committee is charged with considering the knowledge and experience of potential commissioners "in such varied fields as business, government, accounting, law, engineering, statistics, consumer affairs, and finance." The Committee looked for persons who have excelled in these fields and those persons' capability to transfer this success and knowledge to the operations of the Commission. The transcript contained in this report contains each applicant's background and employment history.

The Commission is neither a court, an executive agency, nor a legislative body, but a blend of all three. The Committee sought to determine if a candidate's sense of the role or roles he is to fill on the Commission is such that his work will be productive, proactive, and protective of the interests of all South Carolinians.

Each candidate carries a wealth of life experiences as well as business and personal relationships. The Committee realizes that there is little possibility of electing candidates with no pre-existing conflicts of interest. To do so would, in effect, be asking candidates to have

The Committee also strongly feels that candidates for the Commission who serve or have served as public officials, public members, or public employees must have demonstrated high ethical standards through compliance with all laws governing ethical behavior, most notably those provisions of Title 8. In order to withstand public scrutiny and to gain public confidence, these candidates for the Commission must have conducted and comported themselves with the highest regard for ethics in their actions as public officials, members, or employees.

In this regard, and pursuant to Section 58-3-26, the Committee has made findings as to integrity.

The Committee's findings are designated as follows:

QUALIFIED

UNQUALIFIED

The Committee acknowledges its statutory duty to recognize those candidates who are the most qualified in this regard. However, it would be patently unfair to require nonincumbents to have accumulated a wealth of knowledge about Commission operations specifically, or regulated utilities generally. Unlike incumbent commissioners, challengers have not had the benefit of a compensated opportunity to educate themselves in hearings or through conversations with

The Committee adopted a written format to assist in judging the substantive knowledge of each candidate. In previous screenings, where substantive knowledge was examined solely in an oral format, candidates whose screenings occurred toward the conclusion of the hearings were at a decided advantage. Because the Committee's hearings are open to the public, the content of questions relating to substantive knowledge could be readily discerned from the screening of an earlier-scheduled candidate. The sequestration of candidates did little to remedy the unfairness.

For this round of screening, a written format was used to preserve the integrity of the process and to survey a candidate's general and specific knowledge of the workings of the Commission. Candidates were instructed to choose three discussion questions among the six provided. No candidate had the personal advantage of access to the questions prior to other candidates; nor did any candidate have the opportunity to divulge the nature of the questions to another candidate. Each candidate was given the choice of writing his or her answers or using a computer.

The Committee feels that the written format placed all candidates on a level playing field.

Candidates should also be generally aware of the time commitment necessary for productive service as a commissioner. Each candidate provided adequate assurance to this Committee of his or her commitment to meet the demands of the office.

A transcript of the Committee's extensive oral examination of the ten candidates on November 15, 1999, as well as the mandatory written examination given on November 5, 1999, are appended to this report as required by law.

In consideration of these findings of fact, the Committee finds all ten candidates to be legally qualified for service as Public Service commissioners. The Committee makes the following findings of fitness and ability for individual candidates for the Commission:

James Blake Atkins
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   86/100

Dr. Atkins is currently a research Associate Professor with the Earth Sciences and Resources Institute of the University of South Carolina. Dr. Atkins' educational background includes a B.S. in Marine Science from the University of South Carolina, a M.S. in Environmental Systems Engineering from the Clemson University, and a Ph.D. in Marine Science from the University of South Carolina. He has worked as a senior scientist for SCDHEC's bureau of drinking water, as an engineer for the S.C. Water Resource Commission, and for the N.C. Department of Natural Resources. Dr. Atkins has served on a variety of committees which deal with environmental and water issues. He currently serves as a member of the S.C. Public Service Commission's Water Issues Steering Committee. Dr. Atkins has also been involved with a number of community and church organizations including the S.C. Section of the American Water Resources Association, the S.C. Wildlife Federation, and the S.C. Student Judicial Council.

Lynwood A. Avin
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   61/100

Mr. Avin currently owns and operates a Columbia collection agency. Mr. Avin served in the U.S. Army from 1950 to 1953. Mr. Avin received a GED from the University of North Carolina and attended the University of Miami for a year prior to accepting a position as Vice-President with the Peoples American Bank. His past work experience includes positions with the Greensboro Redevelopment Authority and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Mr. Avin was recognized for outstanding production of assisted housing in South Carolina and for introducing the State to solar energy use in assisted housing. Mr. Avin is a member and past Master of the Richland

Michael L. Bell
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   64/100

Mr. Bell is currently a sales associate with Del Webb Communities, which sells homes to customers within the active adult community. His educational background includes a B.A. degree from Albany State College and some post-graduate study at Webster University's extension campus in Beaufort. His previous work experience includes consulting real estate developers and serving as Senior Planner of the Long Range Planning Division for the Town of Hilton Head. Mr. Bell has served on the Beaufort Jasper Water Sewer Authority since 1992 and has at various times served as secretary, treasurer, vice chairman, and chairman of the Water Sewer Authority. He has also been involved in a variety of community and church organizations including the Board of Directors for Leadership Hilton Head, Habitat for Humanity, and Hilton Head Island Recreation Center.

Darrell W. Boyd
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   64.5/100

Mr. Boyd is currently retired from Saudi Aramco Oil Company where he worked as a senior consultant. Mr. Boyd has also worked for the Public Service Company of Indiana as a senior engineer. His educational background includes an associates degree in Electrical Engineering Technology from Indiana University at Kokoma, and a B.S. in Electrical Technology from Purdue University in Indianapolis. Mr. Boyd is a member of several professional organizations including the American Businessmen's Association and Senior Member of the Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineers. He was recognized in the 1999 Who's Who in Engineering Science and will be recognized in the 2000 issue of Who's Who in the World. His community service activities have included managing a little league team and being president of a golf club.

Jonathan W. Brown
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   52/100

Mr. Brown currently works as an assistant supervisor for the Naval Hospital in Beaufort. Mr. Brown served in the United States Navy for twenty years including service in the Vietnam War. After retiring from the Navy, he returned to school and received a degree in Management

David Gibson
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   77/100

Mr. Gibson was CEO of the Coalition for Trucking Deregulation from 1993-1998. His educational background includes a B.A. from San Jose State University, a M.A. from Washington State University, as well some post graduate study at Washington State University. His past employment history includes working with the New York State Department of Transportation and the Illinois Commerce Commission (Public Utilities Commission). He is a member of numerous professional organizations including the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, the Southeastern Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, and the American Management Association. Mr. Gibson's involvement with community activities includes the Young Men's Christian Association and the American Heart Association.

John A. McAllister
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   72.5/100

Mr. McAllister is currently the owner and Broker-in-Charge of Valley Properties, a real estate consulting and brokerage firm. He is also a consultant with the Strategic Development Center of the South Carolina National Guard and Reserve. Mr. McAllister's educational background includes a B.S. in Business Administration from the Citadel and some post-graduate study at the University of North Carolina and the Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government. His past work experience includes serving as the Southeast Power Administrator for the U.S. Department of Energy and as an Engineer Officer in the South Carolina National Guard. Mr. McAllister has been involved in a variety of community and church activities including the Citadel Board of Visitors, County Chairman of the Friends of Scouting, and a member of the Employer Support Committee for the Guard and Reserve.

Ms. O'Neil is currently the account manager for Hilton Head Vacation Rentals and serves on the Board of Directors for the Home Owners Association of Forest Beach Villas in Hilton Head. She graduated from high school in Candor, North Carolina, and attended one year of college at Charlotte College (North Carolina) before accepting a position with Southern Bell. In 1992, Ms. O'Neil retired from BellSouth Communications where she was an administrator of customer sales and service. Ms. O'Neil is a member of the Daybreak Homeowners Association and the Southern Bell Pioneers.

Sidney F. Thomas
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   70/100

Mr. Thomas is currently the President of Sid Thomas and Associates, Inc. which is a city planning management consulting firm. His educational background includes a B.F.A. degree from the University of Georgia and a M.D. in City Planning from Georgia Tech. Mr. Thomas served in the United States Army for two years. His employment background includes working as the Executive Director of the Central Midlands Regional Planning Council (now the Central Midlands Council of Government). Mr. Thomas has received several honors and awards including The Order of the Palmetto by Governor Campbell and the Public Manager of the Year by the S.C. Chapter of the American Society of Public Administration. Mr. Thomas is involved in several community and church activities including the Advisory Board of the Columbia Salvation Army and the Board of Directors of the Columbia YMCA. He is also a member of the American Legion Post 182 and the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Jo Anne C. Wessinger
SCORE ON WRITTEN EVALUATION:   84.5/100

Ms. Wessinger is currently an associate attorney with Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter, Robinson, P.A. in Columbia, South Carolina. Her educational background includes a B.S. in Business Administration from the University of South Carolina and a J.D. from the University of South Carolina School of Law. Her past employment includes working as Staff Counsel and Research Director for the South Carolina House of Representatives Labor, Commerce, and Industry Committee and as Assistant Legal Counsel to Governor and Deputy Director for Division of Ombudsman and Citizen Services. Ms. Wessinger is a member of a

Respectfully submitted,

SENATE MEMBERS:
/s/The Honorable Donald H. Holland, Chairman
/s/The Honorable C. Tyrone Courtney
/s/The Honorable Darrell Jackson

SENATE PUBLIC MEMBERS:
/s/Mr. J. Stephen Bilton
/s/Mr. Richard H. Darby

HOUSE MEMBERS:
/s/The Honorable Timothy C. Wilkes, Vice-Chairman
/s/The Honorable Kenneth Kennedy
The Honorable Richard M. Quinn, Jr.

HOUSE PUBLIC MEMBERS:
/s/The Honorable Dave C. Waldrop
/s/Mr. Henry Swink

COMMISSION MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:

THE HONORABLE DONALD H. HOLLAND, Chairman

THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY C. WILKES

THE HONORABLE C. TYRONE COURTNEY

THE HONORABLE DARRELL JACKSON

J. STEVEN BILTON

RICHARD H. DARBY, SR.

THE HONORABLE KENNETH KENNEDY

HENRY SWINK

THE HONORABLE DAVE C. WALDROP
ALSO PRESENT:

MICHAEL N. COUICK, Attorney to the Committee

DEBRA D. HAMMOND, Administrative Assistant

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: I'm going to call the meeting to order. This is the committee to review candidates for the South Carolina Public Service Commission. This committee screens those candidates who have applied for consideration by the General Assembly in election of the seven commissioners for the Public Service Commission.

Our basic duties are set out by statute. Not only are we to inquire as to the legal qualifications of the candidates, but we are also required to determine their fitness to serve based upon their experience, knowledge of utility regulation, and personal character. Today, we are screening candidates for the Second Public Service Commission District to fill the vacancy that was created by Commissioner Dukes Scott's resignation of June 7, 1999.

This hearing will basically be conducted by the Chief Counsel for the Judiciary Committee, Mike Couick, and later the members of the committee will ask any questions they have of the candidates.

I understand from Mr. Couick that there are certain questions that we must discuss in executive session before we start this meeting; is that right?

MR. COUICK: Yes, sir, there are some questions.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Are you going to bring each candidate individually in here?

MR. COUICK: Yes, sir. What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is have a brief executive session to discuss the candidates that may have concerns that we have been able to identify.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: We'll now go into executive session.
(Public session adjourned.)

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: You're Mr. Jonathan W. Brown?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Mr. Brown, would you raise your right hand.

JONATHAN W. BROWN, being first duly sworn by The Chairman at 10:12 a.m., testified as follows:

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Please have a seat over there if you want to, if that's agreeable with the Committee.

Q.     Mr. Brown, while you are being seated I want to read into the record that your driver's license indicates that you live on St. Helena Island; is that correct?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     It's my understanding that you're a resident of the Second Congressional District?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     And I believe that we have consulted with the Election Commission and they have confirmed that your address is within the Second Congressional District. What is your current employment, Mr. Brown?
A.     I am assistant supervisor at the Naval Hospital in Beaufort.
Q.     And how long have you been in that position?
A.     Just over three years.
Q.     What are your responsibilities in that position?
A.     I maintain all the housekeeping equipment and order all the roll in stock as well as assist the supervisor or fill in when they are not present.
Q.     And I believe you have a military background as well; is that right, Mr. Brown?
A.     Yes. I have a 20-year military career.
Q.     Briefly tell the Committee what your history is in the military and where you are now with that.
A.     I was drafted in 1970. However, I never entered the military until 1973 because I was still in high school. From there I went to California and departed thereafter to Vietnam, returning back to the States after a nine-month deployment.   Then from there I spent three years in the California area and then moved to Virginia where I then went over into the European *theater and back and forth in the European theater with various shore commands in-between along the Eastern seaboard. And retired from the Naval station at Charleston in 1993.
Q.     Thank you. Mr. Brown, we have reviewed your SLED report for criminal convictions of a recent nature, civil judgments. We've also reviewed a credit report. I would like to enter on the record now that we found no negative entries, nothing that would weigh against your candidacy.   You've been given a copy of your personal data questionnaire summary today. Have you had an opportunity to review it?
A.     Yes, I have.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Committee to have the personal data questionnaire summary made a part of the record of these proceedings.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: No objection.

Q.     Mr. Brown, what are the reasons that you would like to serve on the Public Service Commission?
A.     Well, after retiring from the military my challenging goals have been limited. I think this would be a very challenging process for me because I like a challenge. I feel that I can serve as a commissioner because either, one, I believe in following rules, regulations, and I have a very strict, disciplinary lifestyle. As a commissioner I think I would be able to fulfill that job in the best of my ability, which I know I could learn in a very short manner.
Q.     Okay. Do you have -- have you taken any public position on the issue of electric deregulation, for or against it, Mr. Brown?
A.     No, sir.
Q.     Are you currently a member of or have you ever been a member of any organization that was politically active on the question of electric deregulation?
A.     No, sir.
Q.     Have you been approached or contacted by any organization that advocates the deregulation of electric power or the continued regulation of electric power for your support if you would be elected to the Public Service Commission?
A.     No, sir.
Q.     No utilities have contacted --
A.     None.
Q.     Do you have any financial relationship or have you had a discussion of any potential financial relationship with any lobbyist or lobbyist principals?
A.     No, sir.
Q.     Do you own any utility stock?
A.     No, sir.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions for Mr. Brown at this time.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Any questions by any members of the Committee for Mr. Brown? Thank you so much, Mr. Brown. We appreciate you coming by.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

1.     Mr. Jonathan W. Brown

Home Address:           Business Address:

27 Ernest Drive           Naval Hospital - Beaufort

St. Helena Island, SC       1 Pinkney Blvd.

29920                   Beaufort, SC 29902

2.     He was born April 19, 1955, in Beaufort, South Carolina.

4.     He married Jeannette Lue Brown on May 22, 1976, and has two

children: Jonathan Brown, Jr., age 20; and Jermaine Brown, age

14.

5.     He served in the United States Navy from 1973 - 1993, retiring

with an honorable discharge.

6.     He graduated from Park College in June 1999, with a degree in

Management/Health Care.

26.   He is a member of the following professional organizations:

(BIG) Black In Government

NAACP

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

King Solomon Lodge #10, Beaufort, SC

Multicultural Association, Beaufort, SC

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Jay Boulware

Navy Federal Credit Union

1 Pinkney Blvd.

Beaufort, SC 29902

2)     Mayola Jenkins

Beaufort County School District

P.O. Drawer 309

Beaufort, SC 29902

3)     Herbert Simmons

Simmons Tile Co.

P.O. Box 1264

St. Helena Island, SC 29920

4)     James Aikens

154 Warsaw Rd.

St. Helena Island, SC 29920

5)     LCDR(sel) Gloria Russell

6 Beau Circle

Beaufort, SC 29902

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     12/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The telephone system, Rail Road industries, electric industries, water industries, gas, cargo carriers, mast communications. These industries are regulated for the safety of the people. The telephone system so that they would not charge what ever they wish. The Rail Road industries so that they provide for the need of all people, and there safety. The water industries, because of the area in which we live require us to have quality water to drink. That the water companies don't charge balloon rates for non-quality service. The gas companies won't be able to hike their rates when they wish. Carrier of good on the state highways can't just buy a truck and go, they must be approved by the commission. The Television and radio industries would have to have guidelines as to what to broadcast, and where. All other that fall under this Commission would be required to meet all standards set by the state and the Commission.

The South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S. C. Public Service Commission are; that no Commissioner should except any favors/gift from any company seeking the approval within the state of South Carolina. That no Commissioner should be affiliated with any company that is seeking approval form the Commission.

6.     Briefly describe the circumstances in which the Public Service Commission can disallow costs in setting rates for utilities. Are there Constitutional or other legal limits on such disallowances?

The Public Service Commission can disallow costs in setting rates for utilities, when that utilities of it's own and it fall within a reasonable, but safe compliance with the Public Service Commission. No! I don't think that they should be disallowed to do anything if it effects the public without some kind of regulation. We all have guidelines to follow.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Mr. Sidney F. Thomas?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Hold up your right hand, please, sir.

SIDNEY F. THOMAS, being first duly sworn by The Chairman at 10:20 a.m., testified as follows:

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: You might want to sit there, Mr. Thomas, and that would be a little bit more comfortable for you. Mr. Couick is going to ask you some questions.

Q.     Mr. Thomas, we have your driver's license indicates that you reside on Longbrook Road here in Columbia; is that correct?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     It's my understanding that this residence is within the Second Congressional District and the Election Commission has confirmed that to us?
A.     That is correct.
Q.     You have been able to vote in the past in the Second Congressional District?

MR. COUICK: All right. Mr. Chairman, we have reviewed SLED reports from Mr. Thomas. They indicate there are no criminal convictions, no civil judgments. His credit report is clean. There were no negative entries.

Q.     Could you outline for the Committee your employment experience, Mr. Thomas?
A.     Okay. Just in South Carolina or historically?
Q.     Just whatever you think is relevant to the task today.
A.     Well, following my graduation from Georgia Tech in 1956 I worked in upper east Tennessee in Johnson City, Tennessee for a little over two years. I worked with a consulting firm back in Atlanta for a couple of years. Went to Rome, Georgia and worked there from '58 to '66, I believe. I came to South Carolina -- in Georgia I was the director of the first Multi-County Area Planning and Development Organization in the state of Georgia. When I left there in '66 I came to Columbia and worked as the executive director of the Richland and Lexington Counties Joint Planning Commission and as director of planning for the City of Columbia. In 1969 the Central Midlands Regional Planning Council was created. That's now known as the Central Midlands Council of Governments. I was the executive director of that organization from its inception until I retired in 1987.
Q.     And since that time you've done some consulting work; is that correct?
A.     When I retired in June of 1987 I established a city planning management consulting firm, which I have operated since that time.
Q.     Mr. Thomas, you have a daughter that, I believe, works with Alltel; is that correct?
A.     That is correct.
Q.     Could you tell us where she's employed and what her responsibilities are?
A.     She lives in Goshen, New York. She was working in Little Rock, Arkansas, but she's married to a Presbyterian minister. And he took a church in Goshen, New York. They've moved up there. And the company has her working out of her home. Now, when I was filling out this form I had to call her to find out what she did. She is an instructional designer, I believe, is the title. She has some sort of an unintelligible graduate degree that trains her to provide -- to develop training programs for various and sundry folks. That's about all I know about what she does.

Q.     Mr. Thomas, what is the reason or reasons you would like to serve on the Public Service Commission?
A.     Well, I've spent most of my life in public service. I still believe that I have some contribution to make. I think the Public Service Commission is a rather important operation in South Carolina. I believe that the challenges that are going to be faced by the Public Service Commission in the future, the deregulation of the telecommunications with the deregulation of electric service, is going to present a challenge. I believe I have -- folks that know me seem to think that I can discern the wheat from the chaff fairly easily and get to the heart of an issue. And I think that the principal prerequisite, in my judgment, for a Public Service Commission is judgment and being able to separate out the real from the imagined and deal with the facts accordingly.
Q.     Mr. Thomas, have you taken a public position on the issue of electric deregulation, either for or against it?
A.     No.
Q.     Are you currently a member of any organization, whether it be charitable or otherwise, that has been politically active on the question of electric deregulation?
A.     Not that I know of, no.
Q.     Have you ever been approached or contacted by any organization that either advocates the deregulation of electric power or the continued regulation of electric power?
A.     No, I have not.
Q.     Have you had a financial relationship with any lobbyist or lobbyist principal that has included a discussion of your future relationship with them?

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Any questions by any member of the Committee for Mr. Thomas? Thank you so much, Mr. Thomas, for coming by.

THE WITNESS: Thank you. Thank you very much.

1.     Mr. Sidney F. Thomas, Jr.

Home and Business Address:

4012 Longbrook Road

Columbia, South Carolina 29206

2.     He was born on August 16, 1931, in Clarke County, Georgia.

4.   He married Jean Elizabeth Cathcart Thomas on July 31, 1954. He

has three children:

Mary Elizabeth Thomas Markell Kingsley, 41, Instructional

Designer

Carol Cathcart Thomas Meadows, 39, Business Representative

Dr. Sidney Franklin Thomas, III, 34, Optometrist

5.     He served in the United States Army and received an honorable

discharge in 1954.

6.     He graduated from:

Winterville High School, 1948, Winterville,Georgia

University of Georgia, 1952, BFA Degree

Georgia Institute of Technology, 1956, Masters of City Planning

Degree

Director of Planning-City of Columbia and Richland and

Lexington Counties Joint Planning Commission, 1966-1968

Executive Director, Central Midlands Regional Planning Council

(now Central Midlands Council of Governments) 1969-1987

8.     He was an unsuccessful candidate for Richland District Two

School Board in 1990.

9.     He has worked as:

City Planning Consultant, 1987-1999

President, Sid Thomas and Associates, Inc., 1987 to present

26.   He is a member of the following professional organizations:

American Planning Association

S. C. Chapter, American Planning Association

South Carolina City-County Management Association-Life

Member

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Advisory Board, Columbia Salvation Army

Columbia YMCA Board of Directors

American Legion Post 182

Veterans of Foreign Wars

Forest Lake Presbyterian Church

Wildewood Country Club

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Lori J. Roberts

Carolina First Bank

P.O. Box 12249, Columbia, SC 29211

4875 Forest Drive

2)     Dr. James I. St. John

Forest Lake Presbyterian Church

6500 North Trenholm Road

Columbia, SC 29206

3)     Mr. Dennis E. Daye

232 Northlake Road

Columbia, SC 29223

4)     Mr. Harold S. Wrenn

6669 North Trenholm Road

Columbia, SC 29206

5)     Mr. G. C. Robinette, Jr.

3644 Deerfield Drive

Columbia, SC 29204

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     16/20

DISCUSSION:
1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The Public Service Commission regulates investor owned utilities, i.e. Electric, Gas, Water, Sewer, Gas Transmission Line Safety of publicly owned gas systems, propane serving ten or more customers, railroad safety, the elements of the telecommunications industry not pre-empted by federal law, and transportation provided for people and goods in South Carolina.

These industries are regulated because they started out as monopolies. The Public Service Commission is responsible for protecting the public interest from the excesses of a monopoly. The Public Service Commission is responsible for implementing the functions assigned by the laws and policies enacted by the General Assembly.

The Public Service Commission is responsible for making the judgement, on behalf of the public, for a fair rate of return which will keep the utilities viable to generate capital at reasonable costs. This return should be comparable to other industries facing similar risks.

2.     Select one federal agency which regulates one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission and specifically describe its oversight and how that oversight overlaps or pre-empts the Public Service Commission oversight and regulation.

The prospect of electric deregulation will be a major factor to be worked through by the Public Service Commission in the future. This will be a tedious process that will require attention by the Public Service Commission.

5.     Briefly describe South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S.C. Public Service Commission.

The Public Service Commission is covered by the S.C. Ethics law. All actions of the members of the Commission must be in accord with all the provisions and requirements of the law. During my many years of public service I was guided by the principle that my actions should not only be right, they must look right as well.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: You're Mr. James Blake Atkins?

THE WITNESS: I am, sir.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Hold up your right hand.

JAMES BLAKE ATKINS, being first duly sworn by The Chairman at 10:30 a.m., testified as follows:

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Have a seat over there.

Q.     Mr. Atkins, I would like to run through some basic questions with you. And then the Committee will have a chance to ask you questions as well. Our review of your records, including your driver's license and your voter registration record, indicate that you live in the Second Congressional District. Is that your understanding?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     That fact has been confirmed by the Election Commission. You're a resident of Columbia; is that correct?

MR. COUICK: Well, let's do the summary first and, Mr. Chairman, unless there's an objection, have that entered on this record.

Q.     If you would like to then tell us about the correction to your financial statement?
A.     It is in regards to stock. My wife kind of summarily failed to tell me that she owned 100 shares of Alltel Communications. So being a regulated stock, certainly if I were elected to the Commission, we would have to go ahead and dispose of that and sell it, but I did not find that out until last week when she received her statement and I just happened to be looking over her shoulder. So that's something that needs to be added.
Q.     What would be your plans in terms of if you were to be elected for divesting yourself of that stock, Mr. Atkins?
A.     I think, you know, she would probably go ahead -- at first indication that I might potentially be elected I think she would go ahead and sell that stock. Certainly not replace with it with any other --
Q.     Would you keep it for any duration, any period of time, if you were to serve on the Commission?
A.     No.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Did she have it before you were married?

THE WITNESS: No, sir. As part of her retirement plan when she was in private practice up until last year she had kind of an investment portfolio with Smith Barney. And it was bought and she bought it as part of that investment and just failed to tell me.

Q.     Mr. Atkins, you've given money to two members of the South Carolina Senate and to the South Carolina Democratic Caucus within the last several months. I believe you indicated that you gave $100 to the Senator from Aiken, Senator Moore, and $100 to the Senator from

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Any questions from any members of the committee? Representative Wilkes.

MR. WILKES: Dr. Atkins, good morning.

THE WITNESS: Good morning.

MR. WILKES: Congratulations on having completed your Ph.D. since we last met with you.

THE WITNESS: Thank you. About a year and a half ago I finally was able to do it.

MR. WILKES: Back to the political contributions. Would it be fair to say that they probably could be classified more as an admission fee to get into these functions rather than as a contribution to the candidate themselves?

THE WITNESS: I think so. You know, obviously if I'm going to be out and about, you've got a lot of these things that are free that are put on. And I go and I normally drink a Coca-Cola, but don't imbibe in the benefits of the food and those kind of things. But on some of these things where there are a lot of folks gathered, the regulative committee, other people who you want to have an opportunity to talk to, that's about the only way you can do it. And I think by the end of the session last time -- certainly by virtue of my father-in-law being in the Senate I kind of get admission to some of those things, but I kind of feel like I ought to kind of pay my way a little bit and be able to have some of that -- I hate to use the word access because that sounds kind of bad, but I would say that would be a true statement.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Atkins.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

1.     James Blake Atkins, Ph.D.

Home Address:           Business Address:

2 New Grant Court         Earth Sciences & Resources Institute

Columbia, SC 29209       Sumter St., Rm 401 Byrnes Center

USC, Columbia, SC 29208

2.     He was born on July 5, 1954, in Rock Hill, South Carolina.

4.     He married Holly Saleeby Atkins on   October 7, 1989, and has one child, James Caleb Atkins, age 16.

6.     He graduated from:

University of South Carolina, 1976, B.S. (Marine Science)

Clemson University, 1981, M.S. (Environmental Systems

Engineering)

University of South Carolina, 1998, Ph.D. (Marine Science)

Commission, At-Large Seat, in 1998.

9.     He has worked with:

Earth Sciences & Resources Institute, University of South

Carolina, Sept. 1996 - present

Lower Richland High School, October 1999 - December, 1999

SCDHEC, Bureau of Drinking Water Protection, July 1995 -

August 1996

SCDHEC, Bureau of Water Pollution Control, July 1994 - July

1996

SC Water Resources Commission, April 1985 - June 1994

NC Dept. of Natural Resources & Community Development, May

1984 - March 1985

NC State University, July 1981 - April 1984

Clemson University, August 1979 - June 1981

US Geological Survey, SC District, October 1977 - August 1979

SCDHEC, Central Midland Health District, March 1977 - Sept.

1977

22.   He has spent $81 for postage and $21 for office supplies in

seeking office.

23.   He has made the following contributions since his announcement

to seek election:

Senator Tom Moore, $100

Senator John Matthews, $100

SC Senate Democratic Caucus, $250

26.   He is a member of the following professional organizations:

American Water Works Association

Technical Educational Council of the American Water Works

Association

Vice Chair, Surface Water Committee, Water Resources Division

Member, Source Water Protection Committee, Water Resources

Division

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

American Water Resources Association, President of SC Section

(1994)

Member, University of South Carolina Student Judicial Council

Member, SC Wildlife Federation

Member, Dreher High School PTO Board (1997-98)

Member, Shandon United Methodist Church

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Dr. Donald Englehardt, Research Professor

Earth Sciences & Resources Institute

University of South Carolina

901 Sumter St., Rm 401, Byrnes Center

Columbia, SC 29208

2)     Mr. Brian J. McCrodden, P.E., Vice President

Water Resources Management, Inc.

811 Mordecai Drive, Suite 200

Raleigh, NC 27604

3)     Dr. Benjamin Dysart

Dysart and Associates, Inc

224 Broadland St., N.W.

Atlanta, GA 30342

4)     Mr. Robert L. Tapp

8 New Grant Court

Columbia, SC 29209

5)     Ms. Sharon Golden (SC 3288)

Wachovia Bank

1426 Main St.

Columbia, SC 29226

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     18/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The rates, charges, services, practices, facilities and accounting of investor-owned electric utilities; This includes administration of the Territorial Assignment Act and the Utility Siting and Environmental Protection Act. Certain municipal electric extensions are also regulated.

The rates, charges, services, practices, facilities and accounting of investor owned water and wastewater utilities, gas utilities and street railway; Regarding gas, the PSC is also responsible for administration of the Gas Safety Act for the Office of Pipeline Safety regarding all gas utilities, both investor-owned and public.

Radio Common Carriers, except those regulated by the FCC.

The rates, charges, services, practices of For Hire Motor Carriers for passengers, household goods and hazardous waste.

The services and facilities of railroad and railway companies; As a practical matter, this now focuses mostly on safety issues.

As these utilities were first created during the 1800's and early 1900's, adequate capital and resources were not available to insure a competitive market. Therefore, these utilities evolved as natural monopolies. The PSC was created by the General Assembly to regulate these monopolies to insure adequacy of service and consumer protection. This regulatory structure was promoted to avoid duplication of expensive capital facilities and services. In turn, the utilities were required to provide service to all customers within their respective territories. Despite efforts to de-regulate various markets, the PSC regulatory framework of rate of return remains mostly intact, with the exception of some alternative forms of regulation allowed under the 1996 Federal Telecommunications Act.

2.     Select one federal agency which regulates one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission and specifically describe its oversight and how that oversight overlaps or pre-empts the Public Service Commission oversight and regulation.

The FERC also permits and licenses hydroelectric facilities which are owned and operated by investor-owned electric utilities in SC regulated by the PSC. Hydroelectric generation, for most utilities, is the principle method to generate peak power. Peak power is the most valuable to the utility and the most expensive component to the consumer. Under Integrated Resource Plans, which investor-owned utilities are required to submit to the PSC, least-cost generation scenarios must be considered. Hydropower production, within the utilities generational mix, is a critical cost and capacity consideration in the rate base calculation to evaluate a utilities rate of return. However, the PSC has no direct jurisdiction over or input into hydroelectric relicensing by the FERC. As has occurred in numerous cases, operating rules and FERC license requirements have resulted in significant losses in peak power production, and in some cases, peak power capacity for the utility. To insure adequacy of supply and reliability within the current vertical, regulated market, losses to peak hydropower production will eventually have to be replaced. Replacement of hydropower with gas/internal combustion turbines is an expensive proposition both in terms of capital and significantly higher fuel costs compared with water (a renewable resource). Therefore, the FERC actions may result in increased rates to SC consumers since increased operating/capital costs can be passed on to consumers following PSC approval.

6.     Briefly describe the circumstances in which the Public Service Commission can disallow costs in setting rates for utilities. Are there Constitutional or other legal limits on such disallowances?

The fundamental rules regarding cost recovery are that such costs must be justified, are considered reasonable, and that prudent measures have been utilized regarding the incurement of costs. Within the rate base

Because of changing technologies, the net or marginal benefit of various capital and operations (management) alternatives are now considered positive. As a result, what may not have been considered feasible or prudent in the past, may now be considered "state of the practice". For example, in Hamm v. PSC, an investor-owned utility conducted maintenance at one of its nuclear plants. Although the PSC allowed these costs to be passed on to the consumer, the court agreed with Hamm and disallowed these costs because the utility failed to follow standard practices which would have minimized the total time of the plant outage, thereby reducing the ultimate cost.

Clearly, allowances for costs associated with operations and maintenance can lend themselves to much interpretation, as well as professional (technical) and legal disagreement. What should the "state of the practice be" is a constant question for regulators of highly technical utilities. In contrast to Hamm v. PSC case, the court supported the PSC position in another case (cite unknown) when the PSC allowed a utility to pass along higher costs associated with a plant. In this case, the normal maintenance outage was extended to enable other plant work to be conducted simultaneously with the planned maintenance---clearly, consistent with good and standard engineering practice.

In another case (in believe regarding Seabrook Utilities), the idea of the test year regarding the rate base calculation was modified. Instead of the previous 12 month period, as is normally used, the court found that some "historical year" was to be used. Because of the significant annual (temporal) variability in water use, and therefore resultant cost of service and revenues, the court's decision allowing a change in the test year further prescribed the allowance of cost recovery within the investor-owned water utilities.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: You're Mr. Michael Bell?

THE WITNESS: I most certainly am. Good morning.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Let me swear you, please. You're Mr. Michael L. Bell?

THE WITNESS: Yes, I am.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Hold up your right hand.

MICHAEL L. BELL, being first duly sworn by The Chairman at 10:40 a.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Good morning, Mr. Bell. I'll ask you most of the questions. We have your driver's license indicates that you live in Bluffton, South Carolina; is that correct?
A.     That is correct.
Q.     And a resident of the Second Congressional District as confirmed by the Election Commission?
A.     Yes.
Q.     We have reviewed your SLED report for criminal convictions and civil judgments. No entries that have not been previously dealt with by this Committee. On your credit report, Mr. Bell, there was one entry for Romac Financial Services for $123 for an unpaid Alltel bill. Have you had an opportunity to resolve that?
A.     Yes, I have. Per our conversation I have certainly taken care of that.
Q.     Thank you very much. You were given a copy of your personal data questionnaire summary today. Have you had an opportunity to review that?
A.     I was just handed that and I'm going through it now. So it looks correct thus far. Yes, it's fine.
Q.     Would you have any objection to that being made a part of these proceedings?
A.     No, not at all.
Q.     Thank you very much. Could you briefly describe your work experience, employment experience, to the Committee, Mr. Bell?
A.     Most certainly. Thank you for the opportunity. My experience -- or at least I will start with my undergraduate education. I attended Albany State College, which is now Albany State University in Albany, Georgia. My undergraduate degree is in sociology. I have a dual minor, gerontology and criminal justice. From that I basically began to work in the arena of planning. Basically you know them in South Carolina as local councils of government. I worked in Georgia in what is now called Rural Development Commissions. My experience there was working as county planner for several counties and with city officials. Since then I have -- I moved to Metter, Georgia where I

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Vice-Chairman.

MR. WILKES: Do any members of this Committee have any questions for Mr. Bell? If not, thank you so much, Mr. Bell. And you may be excused.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

1.     Mr. Michael L. Bell

Home Address:           Business Address:

19 Willow Run           Del Webb Communities

Bluffton, SC 29910       Sun City Hilton Head

P.O. Box 1869

Bluffton, SC 29910

2.     He was born on August 18, 1957, in Baxley, Georgia.

4.     On September 27, 1981, he married Gail R. (Williams) Bell. He

has two children: Justin William Bell, age 15; and Bryson Lee

Bell, age 5.

6.     He graduated from Appling County Comprehensive High School,

Baxley, Georgia, in 1975; received a BA degree from Albany

State College in 1979; and attended Webster University's MBA

program, leaving before graduation.

7.     He was appointed to the Beaufort Jasper Water Sewer Authority,

serving from 1992-1998; and reappointed to serve January 1999 -

December 2005.

8.     He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Public Service

Commission in 1997, for District Seat #2.

9.     He has worked with:

November 1997 to Present - Sun City Hilton Head - Del Webb

Communities, Bluffton, SC

July 1996 to November 1997 - BCS, Inc., Bluffton, SC

Nov. 1994 to July 1996 - Town of Hilton Head Island, SC

Oct. 1982 to Oct. 1984 - St. Mary Human Development Center,

Ridgeland, SC

July 1981 to Oct. 1982 - Genesis Housing & Community

Development Corp., Metter, GA

13.   He was arrested in 1994 on assault charges. All records have been

expunged.

The lien was satisfied in 1995.

22.   He has spent $11.00 for postage since seeking office of Public

Service Commissioner.

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Central Oak Grove Baptist Church, Hilton Head Island SC

Leadership Hilton Head, Board of Directors

Strategic Planning Committee, Beaufort County Schools

Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Xi Gamma Lambda Chapter

Habitat for Humanity, Board of Directors, Hilton Head Island, SC

Michael C. Riley Elementary, School Improvement Council,

Bluffton SC

Hilton Head Island Recreation Center Board of Directors

Michael C. Riley Elementary School, Bluffton, SC

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Mr. Jim Carlen

Carlen Investments

P.O. Box 7154

Hilton Head Island, SC 29938

2)     Mr. Gerald H. Guyer

39 Lake Somerset Circle

Bluffton, SC 29910

3)     Mr. Benjamin M. Racusin

300 Woodhaven Dr

Hilton Head Island, SC 29928

4)     Mrs. Carol K. Maroska

First Union - South Carolina

Greenville, SC 29601

5)     Mrs. Charlotte Marsala

87 Port Royal Drive

Hilton Head Island, SC 29928

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     14/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The industries regulated by the PSC are Utilities (water, sewer, electric, telephone, gas) and Transportation (rail, public transportation carriers, intrastate transportation carriers.) The PSC was merged in 1934 for the specific purpose of setting rates and providing for the regulation of these activities through the imposition of penalties. These industries are regulated for the expressed purpose of ensuring fair and equitable treatment of consumers in the areas of rates and service.

2.     Select one federal agency which regulates one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission and specifically describe its oversight and how that oversight overlaps or pre-empts the Public Service Commission oversight and regulation.

One federal agency, which also regulates one or more of the PSC regulated industries, is the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). This federal agency has the role of setting national safety standards for highway transportation carriers as well as for rail passenger carriers. The specific oversight dictates the nationally required safety features that should are considered minimum standards for the industry. An example of such standards is the requirement of specific features on common carriers such as lighting, seat belts, loading and etc. The PSC can of course, impose more stringent requirements over and above these minimums however the federal requirements must be met.

A second example is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which deals with regulating the safety of nuclear power plants while the PSC governs the establishing of rates for the cost of the power. This commission also sets the rates for wholesale power in cases of interstate sales.

The South Carolina statutory provisions prohibit PSC officials from dual office holding or from having interest in any business or activity through which they might benefit financially. It also prohibits the acceptance of gifts or other 'favors' from any regulated agency or from anyone whom is knowingly employed or affiliated with a regulated agency. Each commissioner is required to submit statements of economic interest annually as well as disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

MR. WILKES: Good morning, Mr. Avin. Mr. Couick, counsel for the Committee, will swear you in and we'll have some questions for you.

MR. COUICK: If you'll raise your right hand.

LYNWOOD A. AVIN, being first duly sworn at 10:46 a.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Mr. Avin, you have supplied to us your driver's license and your voter registration card. Both indicate you are a resident of the Second Congressional District; is that right?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     You have property in other parts of the state, but you reside here in Columbia, South Carolina; is that right?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     Your property is located where, Mr. Avin?
A.     My home is at 2008 Dalloz Road, Columbia. And I have property in Kershaw County, sort of an outing place, 40 acres and a lake. And we used to go up there quite often, but the kids are all grown now and I'm not much of a fisherman.
Q.     So your residence is in Richland County now?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     You have had an opportunity, I believe, to review your personal data questionnaire summary this morning?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     Is it correct, Mr. Avin?

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, with that correction I would like to enter that into the record of these proceedings.

Q.     We have reviewed the SLED report for criminal convictions and civil judgments. And one matter has come up to the Committee's attention. We'll discuss that in one moment. We've also reviewed your credit report. And any matters that came up we've resolved, including surprisingly there was a very small financial matter that you were not even aware of that you agreed to resolve. The one matter that remains is the matter of David J. Cooper versus Lynwood Avin and Columbia Collection Agency and Gordon S. Avery and Microprice Incorporated.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, this is in your notebook under Tab 8. It appears right after Mr. Avin's personal data questionnaire summary. You'll see there a fairly long letter from Mr. Avin to a Ms. Patricia M. Warrick (phonetically), who is Mr. Avin's attorney.

Q.     Is that correct, Mr. Avin?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     And attached to that you'll find a cover sheet for the complaint and then the summons and complaint from John Hardaway on behalf of David J. Cooper, Jr., suing Gordon Avery and Microprice, which is a computer company; is that correct?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     And Mr. Avin and Columbia Collection Agency. If I could attempt to summarize this, perhaps, Mr. Avin. It's my understanding that you had purchased certain things from Microprice and had a business relationship with them. They then turned to you and asked you to represent them in collections, which you do for a living. One of the collections they wanted you to handle was David J. Cooper, Jr.; is that correct?
A.     Yes, sir.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions.

MR. WILKES: Thank you, Mr. Couick. Any members of the Committee have any questions for Mr. Avin?

SENATOR COURTNEY: In your collection business have you ever done business for any utilities or any companies regulated by the Public Service Commission?

THE WITNESS: No, sir, we don't. We put in a bid about a year ago with SCANA, but we were not successful.

SENATOR COURTNEY: And in the collection business have you done collection business for anybody who is a lobbyist principal before the General Assembly or who hires lobbyists?

THE WITNESS: No, sir.

SENATOR COURTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. WILKES: Anyone else have any questions for Mr. Avin? If not, thank you, sir.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.

1.     Mr. Lynwood A. Avin

Home Address:             Business Address:

2008 Dalloz Road   2311     Gervais Street

Columbia, SC 29204         Columbia, SC 29204

2.     He was born May 26, 1931, in Sumter County, South Carolina.

4.     He married Lelia Marie Avin on February 7, 1953. He has three

children:

Douglas L. Avin, 42 - Computer Clean Room Engineer

Griffin L. Avin, 34 - Mechanical Engineer

Linda Marie Avin, 30 - Student

5.     He received an honorable discharge from the United States Army

in 1953.

6.     He graduated from Edmunds High School in 1948; received his

GED from the University of North Carolina in 1953; attended the

University of Miami in 1954 and left the University to accept an

employment opportunity as Vice President of six national banks.
7.     He ran as an unsuccessful candidate for the Florida Legislature in

1963.

9.     He has served in/worked with:

U.S. Army, Discharged 1953

Midland Finance Company, 1953 - 1954

Peoples American Bank, Senior Vice-President, 1954 -1964

Greensboro Redevelopment Authority, 1964 - 1968

U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD), 1968

- 1987

Columbia Collection Agency, 1987 - Present

1987.

16.   He is a co-defendant in Civil Case 375.00.

(No details provided)

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Past Master of Richland Masonic Lodge # 39

32 Degree Scottish Rite Mason

Shriner - Jamil Shrine Temple as Public Relations Chairman

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Ms. Gayle Rabon

Bank of American

Devine at Millwood Avenue

Columbia, SC 29205

2)     Mr. R. J. Kobylak, Attorney

P.O. Box 4497,

West Columbia, SC 29171

3)     Mr. C. C. Fogle

1711 Risley Street

Columbia, SC 29223

4)     Mr. Michael Fields, State Director of NFIB

1122 Lady Street

Columbia, SC 29201

5)     Ms. Patricia M. Wark, Attorney

167 Broken Arrow Trail

West Columbia, SC 29170

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     14/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

5.     Briefly describe South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S.C. Public Service Commission.

PSC commissioners are not permitted to engage in any activity that would compromise a commissioners ability to make those decisions that are in the best interest of our South Carolina consumers . Regulations to that effect have been passed by our General Assembly.

6.     Briefly describe the circumstances in which the Public Service Commission can disallow costs in setting rates for utilities. Are there Constitutional or other legal limits on such disallowances?

All cost that are not directly related to the expense of producing the product for the consumer can be dissallowed. There are no limits that our PSC must adhere to in this regard.

MR. WILKES: Good morning, Mr. Boyd. How are you?

THE WITNESS: Good morning. Thank you. Very well. And you?

MR. WILKES: Fine. Thank you, sir. This is Mr. Couick. He is the counsel to the Committee and will swear you in and then will have a few questions to ask you.

MR. COUICK: Good morning, Mr. Boyd. If you will raise your right hand, please.

DARRELL BOYD, being first duly sworn at 11:10 a.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Mr. Boyd, you supplied the Committee staff with a copy of your driver's license and voter registration, both of which indicate that you reside in the Second Congressional District. Is that true?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     And the Election Commission has confirmed that. We have reviewed your SLED report for criminal convictions and civil judgments and found there to be no entries. You have no negative entries on your credit report. I believe you've been given a copy of your personal data questionnaire summary this morning. Have you had an opportunity to review it?
A.     Yes, I just looked at it.
Q.     All right. Are there any corrections that need to be made prior to it being included in this record?
A.     On Item 9 where it says 1977 to 1999, I actually retired in December 1998. So I don't know if the '99 should become '98.
Q.     All right. Anything else?
A.     Nothing on this. On the personal data questionnaire, I guess, the detailed one?
Q.     Right.
A.     You have the other entry that I mailed to you?
Q.     Yes, sir. And I'll get into that in just one second.
A.     Okay.
Q.     So there are no other corrections that need to be made prior to this being made a part of the record?
A.     Not on this sheet.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, with no objection I'd like to have that made a part of the record of these proceedings.

Q.     Mr. Boyd was just indicating that within the last several weeks on his way -- I believe you were visiting a relative; is that right?
A.     Yeah. It was my mother's 85th birthday.
Q.     And traveling through -- is that Lowdon or London, Kentucky?
A.     London.
Q.     Was stopped by their police and charged $131.15 for a speeding ticket. That is in excess of our dollar limit that has to be reported by, I believe, about $6. So he has reported that to this Commission. The charge there was simply speeding; is that correct?
A.     Yes, that's correct.
Q.     Okay. Could you please tell the Commission a little bit about your work and education experience?

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

MR. WILKES: Do any members of this Committee have any questions for Mr. Boyd? If not, Mr. Boyd, thank you for your time. And you can be excused.

1.     Mr. Darrell W. Boyd

Home Address:

8 Surf Scoter

Hilton Head, SC 29928

2.     He was born August 2, 1948, in Rose Bud, Arkansas.

4.     He married Sandra Earlene Boyd on March 5, 1980. He has two

children: Derek J. Boyd, age 17; and Jason R. Boyd, age 15.

6.     He graduated from:

Kokomo High School; Kokomo, Indiana, 1966

Indiana University, Kokomo, IN, 1969, AAS Elect. Eng. Tech.

Purdue University at Indianapolis, IN, 1972, BS Electrical

Technology

9.     He has worked with:

1977-1998 - Saudi Aramco - Retired December, 1998.

1972-1977 - Public Service Company of Indiana

26.   He is a senior member of the Institute of Electrical & Electronic

Engineers.

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Saudi Arabia:   Past President of Ain Nakhl Golf Club

Manager Little League

Board Member Saudi Aramco Employees

Association

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Eric Magnin

Manager Bank of America

Pope Avenue, Hilton Head, SC 29928

2)     Michael Kaup

6 Kinglet Lagoon

Hilton Head, SC 29926

3)     Mark Hershinger

6 Old Fort Lane

Hilton Head, SC 29926

4)     Rick Murray

29 Baynard Cove Road

Hilton Head, SC 29926

5)     Joseph Tobin

96-B Main Street

Hilton Head, SC 29926

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     13/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The industries regulated by the PSC are the privately (investor) owned electric, gas, water and wastewater companies, the telecommunications companies, for hire private motor vehicles that move household goods, hazardous products, and taxis which operate outside of the cities. The railroad industry (mainly safety) and assigning territory for the cooperatives and electric uti.ities. They also regulate the safety aspects of the gas industry.

These entities are regulated by the PSC so as to protect the private consumer from the possibities of price gouging and to ensure that each and every customer who desires service can receive this service at a fair price. The Commission is to also ensure that these monopolies provide adequate, safe and reliable services to its consumers.

5.     Briefly describe South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S.C. Public Service Commission.

These would be Title 8 and Title 13 and various sections thereof. These provisions basically state that a Public Service Commissioner cannot receive any items of value, be it monetary, gifts or free memberships in clubs or other organizations which have fees.

They must not own any South Carolina utility stock or any funds that have possible conflicts of interest with their work.

The Commissioners must not receive any items from Primary Lobbyists or individuals representing companies that the Commissioner may ultimately have to make a decision on a pending or future case.

They may, however, receive honorary degrees from universities or colleges and /or plaques that do not exceed a value of $150.00.

6.     Briefly describe the circumstances in which the Public Service Commission can disallow costs in setting rates for utilities. Are there Constitutional or other legal limits on such disallowances?

Using the electric industry as an example, the Commission may disallow costs which are not directly associated with the generation and transmission of power. They may also disallow the costs of subsidiaries that are not directly associated with the generation and transmission of power.

The legal limits on the industry may only occur when there is a dispute over what lost costs or unrecoverable costs can be allowed in the rate. All associated costs for capital, maintenance and operations must be reasonable based on historical data provided by the companies.

Each and every regulated Company must have a rate which allows a reasonable rate of return.

MR. WILKES: Ms. Wessinger, do you know Mr. Couick, counsel for the Committee?

THE WITNESS: Yes, I do. Good to see you, Mike.

MR. WILKES: He's going to swear you in and ask you a few questions.

MR. COUICK: Raise your right hand, if you will.

CECILIA JO ANNE WESSINGER, being first duly sworn at 11:20 a.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Ms. Wessinger, you supplied the Committee staff with a copy of your driver's license and your voter registration certificate, both of which indicate that you live in Columbia and particularly live in the Second Congressional District; is that right?
A.     Yes, sir.
Q.     We have received information from the Election Commission that confirms you're a resident in the Second Congressional District as well. You've been given a copy of your personal data questionnaire summary today. Have you had an opportunity to review it?
A.     I have.
Q.     Are there any corrections or changes you would like made at this time?
A.     None.

MR. COUICK: Without objection, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have that summary entered as a part of the record of these proceedings.

Q.     Ms. Wessinger, briefly go over your work and education experience for the Committee, if you would. Briefly describe your education and work experience.
A.     Okay. I'll start from most recent and work my way down. How about that? I am a May 1990 graduate of University of South Carolina School of Law. Also attended the University of South Carolina for an undergraduate degree in business administration, majoring in finance and economics, and I received that in May of 1987. And if you would like me to go into my high school, I am a high school graduate here locally in the Columbia area, Columbia High School graduate of 1983.
Q.     How about your work experience that would be relevant to the position you applied for?
A.     Currently I have been employed as an associate with the law firm in Columbia, South Carolina known as Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter and Robinson since July of 1998. Prior to that I was -- well, I'll explain to you a little bit what I do there. As an associate I practice in the areas of Workers' Comp defense, regulatory law, administrative law, legislative law, and some appellate law. Primarily our base is dealing with business clients, although it does vary to -- depending on who it is, it can be individual clients, being primarily a defense firm. Prior to that I was the staff counsel or research director for the South Carolina House of Representatives, Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee. And I did that from January 2, 1995, to December 5, 1997. In that capacity that's where I'm more familiar with most of the

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions of Ms. Wessinger.

MR. WILKES: Thank you, Ms. Wessinger. Do any members of the Committee have a question for Ms. Wessinger?

SENATOR COURTNEY: Ms. Wessinger, you did say that your law firm has represented companies that were regulated?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

SENATOR COURTNEY: I think you said maybe present and past. Are there present clients that your team is representing at this time that are regulated by the PSC? I really don't need to know who they are, but what would be your position as a member of the PSC should one of those that are presently active that you are presently working on that came before you? Would you feel the need to recuse yourself of the decision-making?

THE WITNESS: Currently the projects I'm working on in my team I'm not aware of any that we're currently doing. Clients, as you're aware of, coming up get -- you're hired on a project basis sometimes, but if something like that would come up, I would recuse myself so as not to give the impression of any impropriety whatsoever.

SENATOR COURTNEY: Are there any insurance companies that your firm represents that insure any entities regulated by the PSC?

THE WITNESS: Not that I'm aware of. The Voyager Life Insurance Company and Voyager Property & Casualty, those insurance companies that I'm most intimately familiar with, they regulate or only sell credit insurance products, credit life, and mostly in the consumer finance side of it. I'm not aware of any current insurance company that would have any impact.

SENATOR COURTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Ms. Wessinger, let me ask you this question. In your capacity as an employee with the South Carolina House of Representatives did you at any time in your capacity have any dealings with the legislation that has been drawn up for deregulation?

THE WITNESS: The current legislation that's pending in the General Assembly that was introduced, I believe, early this year was not something that I have dealt with as a staff member. Now, the legislation that was pending in 1997 that was introduced by Representative Doug Smith I had some dealings with, but it's to my best knowledge -- and I have not sat down to compare the 1997-'98 bills versus the 1999-2000 bills to see what their similarities or differences are, but it's my knowledge that they are different legislation. And to your question, no, sir, I have not.

MR. KENNEDY: So to follow up on that questioning, tell me in what capacity did you work on that legislation, the first one that I think that you were saying that you had some dealings with, and at what capacity or what level did you deal with that legislation?

THE WITNESS: The 1997 legislation was introduced by Representative Doug Smith. And I believe that was the only legislation, to my recollection, that dealt with deregulation other than maybe one or two other bills, but the ones that were primarily debated or discussed. As the staff counsel for the House L.C.I. Committee part of my duties was to staff the subcommittees of that committee. And one of the subcommittees was the House Public Utilities Subcommittee. And I was the primary and chief staff person responsible for the research needs and legal needs of that particular subcommittee. And the things that I would do -- that bill was pretty much studied. There was -- and debated. I, of course, did do some help and assist in the gathering of information. I did attend all subcommittees and public hearings on the bill while I was staff up until November of 1997, which was the last meeting that I can recall that was on that particular bill before I tendered my resignation and left. So I was there and did hear all the input. And on that one I do not believe

MR. KENNEDY: And in that capacity you didn't draw any?

THE WITNESS: No, sir. As a staff member there is a rule and, I believe, House Rule 3.19 or 3.17 which prohibits any staff member of the House to take any position of any manner pending before the General Assembly. So, no, sir, I never took a position on any piece of legislation.

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you.

MR. WILKES: Thank you, Representative Kennedy. Anyone else have a question? If not, thank you very much.

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

1.     Miss Cecilia Jo Anne Wessinger

Home Address:                 Business Address:

1125 Gladden Street             1600 Marion Street

Columbia, SC 29205             Post Office Drawer 7788

Columbia, SC 29202

2.     She was born on August 9, 1965, in Columbia, South Carolina.

4.     She is single.

6.     She graduated from:

Columbia High School, 1983

University of South Carolina, College of Business Administration,

1987

University of South Carolina School of Law, 1990, Juris Doctor

Degree

8.     She was an unsuccessful candidate for the Public Service

Commission At-Large Seat in 1998.

9.     She has worked with:

July 1998 - Present, Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter, and

Robinson, P.A.

January 1995 - December 1997, SC House of Representatives,

Labor, Commerce, and Industry Committee

June 1998 - August 1998; June 1997 - November 1997; Talbot's

Store

February 1994 - January 1995, Division of Ombudsman and

Citizen Services, Office of the Governor of South Carolina

January 1991 - February 1994, SC House of Representatives,

Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee

July 1993 - January 1994, Dillard's Department Store

August 1989 - April/May 1990; November 1990 - December

1990; Rothwell Law Firm

May 1989 - September 1989, Coleman Karesh Law Library, USC

Law Center

May 1988 - August 1988, McCants and Green Law Firm

18.   She has been employed as a Lobbyist as follows:

January 1999 to present: currently registered as a lobbyist for four

legislative clients for the law firm of Richardson, Plowden,

Carpenter, and Robinson, P.A., with whom she is employed: (1)

S.C. Association of Auto Insurance Agents, Inc.; (2)&(3) Voyager

Property & Casualty Insurance Company and Voyager Life

Insurance Company; and (4) S.C. Pawnbrokers Association.

26.   She is a member of the following professional organizations:

South Carolina Bar Association

Young Lawyers Division

S.C. Women Lawyers Association

Richland County Bar Association

Executive Women's Golf Association, Columbia Chapter

27.   She has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Mt. Horeb Lutheran Church, Chapin, SC

University of South Carolina Alumni Association

Zonta International -- Zonta Club of Columbia, SC

University of South Carolina Semester Program Internship

Candidate Review Board

Member, Governor Beasely's Committee on Health (Care)

Staff Member, Legislative Committee to Review the Consumer

Finance Industry

Member: Ad Hoc Plan of Operation Editorial Board for SC

Associated Auto Insurers Plan

Delta Sigma Pi Business Fraternity

Tau Beta Sigma Social and Service Sorority

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Mr. David Barry "Buddy" Nidiffer, Sr.

4441 Reamer Avenue

Columbia, SC 29206

2)     Mr. Ellis R. Lesemann, Esquire

P. O. Box 10888

Greenville, SC 29603

3)     Miss Amye L. Rushing, Esquire

3412 Blossom Street

Columbia, SC 29205

4)     Ms. Susan B. Hoag, Senior Vice President

South Trust Bank

201 W. McBee Avenue

Greenville, SC

5)     Ms. Katie M. Bolden

Customer Representative/Personal Banker

Wachovia Bank, N.A.

Post Office Box 750

Columbia, SC 29226

30.   She is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     17/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The State Public Service Commission ("PSC") is granted via the General Assembly with the regulatory authority as follows, bearing in mind that these functions of the PSC must comply within the authority allowed by state utility agencies from the federal government via its administrative regulatory agencies (i.e, FERC, FCC, ICC, NERC, etc).

The PSC has the duty to regulate to the rates, practices, assets, accounting, services, territories, policies, and functions of investor-owned utilities or investor-owned business in the areas of electricity, water, waste water disposal (sewage), gas, telephone, radio common carriers, transportation of household goods (movers) and hazardous waste, rail and railroads, except as limited below. Such investor-owned utilities do not include entities deemed to be public utilities such as Santee Cooper, and municipally-owned utilities (i.e., most water and waster water (sewage) utilities are owned and operated by municipalities). Nor can the PSC regulate the rates and such of electric cooperatives operating in South Carolina except in the matters concerning territorial assignment, authorization to operate in the state, and any arbitration of certain contractual agreements between an electric cooperative and other electric utility.

(1)   investor-owned electrical utilities are those utilities which are publicly held or owned by investors and that may be owned through such forms of preferred or common stock. Currently, there are four (4) investor-owned electrical utilities owned and operating in the State of South Carolina. The PSC does not have the authority to set wholesale rates.

(2)   water and waster water (sewage) investor-owned utilities are regulated by the PSC through the setting of rates, practices, accounting, services, and the like. However, very few water related utilities are investor-owned utilities. The majority of them are publicly or municipally owned and governed by city's or county's (municipality's)

(3)   investor-owned gas utilities may be regulated by the PSC within the limitations of FERC or federal laws (no rate, service, accounting, or practices regulation by the State Public Service Commission). The PSC does have the authority to enforce compliance with the Gas Safety Act (or pipeline safety) to all providers and sellers of natural gas or gases regardless whether investor-owned, municipally-owned, publicly-owned or otherwise.

(4)   rails and railroads are primarily regulated through federal regulatory agencies and the PSC is limited its ability of regulation to that of compliance with safety measures and requirements as provided by state and federal laws. For example, the PSC must inspect rails and railroads for safety compliance; however, the PSC does have the authority to set, establish, or regulate the rates, procedures, services, accounting or practices of this industry except as may be provided by federal regulatory agencies.

(5)   radio common carriers and transporters of people, household goods and hazardous waste: This area was deregulated on the federal level and the jurisdiction of the PSC as to rates and the like has changed. The PSC is restricted by the ICC and federal acts from regulating or setting rates, practices, and procedures of such entities. However, the PSC still continues to have the ability to regulate (set, or establish) the rates, practices, accounting, and procedures by carriers who transport people, household goods, and hazardous waste. Any certificate of need and necessity for a carrier operating (or wishing to operate) in this area must be issued by the PSC. Licensing is a function maintained by the PSC.

2.     Select one federal agency which regulates one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission and specifically describe its oversight and how that oversight overlaps or pre-empts the Public Service Commission oversight and regulation.

One federal agency which regulates one or more the industries regulated by the PSC is the FCC (Federal Communication

The PSC must enforce compliance with any FCC orders regulating inter-state connecting agreements between carriers and the other guidelines or regulations or charges collected by incumbent LECs. Such fees can be interconnection fees between LECs, PTAS agreements, as well as tariffs. Often, the PSC serves as an enforcement arm working with the FCC. Generally, the PSC maintains its power to regulate the practices, rates, services, and policies of the publicly-owned telecommunications industry in the interests, safety and welfare of South Carolinians. There are more areas in telecommunications area upon which the FCC may over-lap or pre-empt the PSC. However, the two regulatory entities work together.

5.     Briefly describe South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S.C. Public Service Commission.

Under Title 8 of Chapter 13, there are specific statutory provisions enacted by the General Assembly prohibiting certain inappropriate conduct that is deemed unethical or inappropriate. A Public Service Commissioner cannot own any portion of any corporation or business entity regulated by the Commission. It could be commonly known as a no personal interest or personal gain rule. For example, the Public Service Commission (PSC) cannot own stock of Duke Power (a/k/a Duke Energy), which is an investor-owned utility having its rates, practices, accounting, and assets related by the PSC.

There are other ethical conduct rules which could or would apply. For example, candidates for the PSC cannot directly seek the pledge or commitment of any member of the General Assembly until the candidate has been screened and the screening report issued (and disclosed). Generally, the screening report provides the beginning or start time upon which such commitments can be sought from the members of the General Assembly. Furthermore, there may be professional rules of ethical conduct which may apply to the PSC Commission in general. For example, any commissioner who is a current licensed attorney.

MR. WILKES: Good morning. You know Mr. Couick, Mr. McAllister. He will swear you in and ask you some questions.

MR. COUICK: If you will, raise your right hand.

JOHN ANDREW MCALLISTER, JR., being first duly sworn at 11:35 a.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Have a seat.
A.     Thank you.
Q.     You might want to introduce who is with you today before you have a seat.
A.     Yes. I have with me my wife, Judge Carolyn Matthews.
Q.     Mr. McAllister, you supplied Committee staff with a copy of your driver's license and your voter registration card. Both indicated that you live here in Columbia; is that correct?

MR. COUICK: Without objection, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the Committee enter that into the record of these proceedings today.

Q.     Could you briefly tell the Commission about your educational and work experience?
A.     Yes, I would be delighted to. I grew up in Mount Carmel, South Carolina in McCormick County. From there I graduated from Cambridge Academy in Greenwood, South Carolina. Went on to The Citadel where I received a degree in business administration. Was Commissioned into the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and continued to serve in a military capacity through the South Carolina Army National Guard. In 1989 I had the opportunity to develop and assist in the promotion of Savannah Lakes Village, a recreational retirement village in McCormick County, South Carolina. While I was working on that particular project I was appointed the federal power administrator for the Southeast. I served as the federal power administrator from 1989 to 1995. I was the chief executive officer of that organization. My principal responsibilities were to develop policy and to repay the over $1.4 billion in assets that the federal government has in 22 hydroelectric power projects throughout the Southeast. I had over 293 customers. They were from southern Virginia over to Illinois, Mississippi, back into Florida. In 1995 my tour of duty ended with the Southeastern Power Administration. I opened my own real estate brokerage and consulting business, Valley Properties, and I am the broker in charge.
Q.     Okay. And you continue with that business today; is that correct?
A.     That is correct.
Q.     Would you envision having any continuing employment outside your role as a Public Service Commissioner if you were to be elected, Mr. McAllister?

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

MR. WILKES: Thank you, Mr. Couick. Is there a question for Mr. McAllister from the Committee?

MR. KENNEDY: Mr. McAllister, let me ask you this. Maybe you read it during your presentation. The Army Corps of Engineers, which you are a member or was a member or are a member, which one?

THE WITNESS: I am a commissioned officer in the South Carolina National Guard. And my branch of service, my military skill is that of Army engineer.

MR. KENNEDY: Can you give me a brief overview of what do you do as an Army Corps of Engineers member? What is your --

THE WITNESS: My branch specialty includes that of anything that would relate to civil engineering. While in the Army Reserve I was the power systems operator, operations officer for the only combat electric generation battalion in the world. And so being an Army engineer there are many facets of that. My present duty assignment with the South Carolina National Guard, I am a consultant with the Strategic Development Center. And our objective is to help the effectiveness of organizations throughout the military department of South Carolina, which include the Army Guard, the Air Guard, and the Emergency Preparedness Division of the state of South Carolina. Did that answer your question?

MR. KENNEDY: Sort of, yeah.

MR. COUICK: Mr. McAllister, you have no relationship with what's publicly known as the Army Corps of Engineers as they work with Santee Cooper rediversion, any of those things; is that right?

THE WITNESS: That is correct.

MR. COUICK: So what's more commonly known as the Corps of Engineers you're not affiliated with?

THE WITNESS: I am branched in the United States Army Corps of Engineers. If you are referring to the civil side of the Army Corps of Engineers, no, I am not involved with that particular entity.

MR. WILKES: Any other questions from the Committee for Mr. McAllister? If not, thank you very much, Mr. McAllister.

THE WITNESS: Thank you, Mr. Wilkes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members of the Committee.

1.     Mr. John Andrew McAllister, Jr.

Home Address:   `               Business Address:

420 Aiken Hunt Circle           100 Main Street

Columbia, SC 29223             P. O. Box 168

Mount Carmel, SC 29840

2.     He was born on July 8, 1958, in Abbeville, South Carolina.

4.     He divorced in 1998, and married Carolyn Cason Matthews on

July 3, 1999. He has three children: Martha Austin Adams,

full-time student, age 20; Anne Leigh McAllister, age 9; and Sarah

Elizabeth McAllister, age 4.

5.     He is a Major in the South Carolina Air National Guard, serving

since 1980.

6.     He graduated from/attended:

Cambridge Academy, 1976, High School Diploma

The Citadel, 1980, Bachelor of Science in Business

Administration

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Kenan Flagler School

of Business, 1991 Certificate

Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government, 1992

Certificate

7.     He served as Southeastern Power Administrator from 1989-1995,

appointed by the United States Secretary of Energy. He served as

a member of the Citadel Board of Visitors from 1988-1999.

8.     He withdrew his candidacy for reelection to the Citadel Board of

Visitors.

9.     He has worked with:

1980-1983: Blue Branch Farms, General Manager

1983-1988: The Robinson-Humphrey Company, Inc., Vice-

President of Investments

1988-1989: Cooper Communities, Inc., Home Site Consultant

1989-1995: U. S. Department of Energy, Southeastern Power

Administrator

1995-present: Valley Properties, Broker in Charge

11.   He manages the following business:

Owner and Broker of Valley Properties; a real estate brokerage

and consulting firm.

16.   He has been sued in his official capacity as the Southeastern

Power Administrator   and as a member of The Citadel Board of

Visitors.

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Elder, Abbeville Associated Reformed Presbyterian Church

Friends of Scouting, County Chairman

Executive Committee, Blue Ridge Council

Abbeville County Historic Preservation Commission

Employer Support Committee for the Guard and Reserve

The Citadel Board of Visitors

The Citadel Alumni Association

29.   Five letters of reference.

1)     Rev. Randall T. Ruble

P. O. Box 171

Due West, SC 29639

2)     Walter H. Deierlein

Republic Contracting Corporation

869 Pepper Street

Columbia, SC 29209

3)     Andy Timmerman

First Citizens Bank

201 N. Main Street

Abbeville, SC 29620

4)     William Cliff Moore, III, Esquire

P. O. Box 2285

Columbia, SC 29202

5)     Colonel Frank H. Chapman

5446 Sunset Boulevard

Lexington, SC 29072

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     15/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

The industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission are the electric utilities (investor owned or private) the

There are several reasons these industries are regulated. Eary policy maker thought it was more efficent for utilities to operate in a monopoly enviornment. They belived that under this arrangement costly duplication of plant and equipment would be avoided. The Public Service Commission was formed to act as competion and avoid the abuses of monopoly enterprises.

The state belived that the health and safety of its citizens was paramount. The responsibility of monitoring the safety of dangerous venturs such as rail roads, railways, gas pipe lines, hazerdious waste hauling was vested with the Commission. The Commission in recent years has settled territorial disputes between various electrical utilities, cooperatives and municipalities.

2.     Select one federal agency which regulates one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission and specifically describe its oversight and how that oversight overlaps or pre-empts the Public Service Commission oversight and regulation.

There are many Federal agencies which regulate one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission. A good example would be the Federal Rail Road Commission (FRC). The SC PUC acts as an agent for the F.R.C. in safety matters concerning the railroad and railways. The SCPSC has employees charged with safety resposibilities. The SCPSC does not have regulatory authority over the rates of competitive issues involving the railway industry. The SCPSC relinquished much of it's responsibility through earlier Federal legislation.

The Commission as a result of the modified final judgement by Judge Green ordering the dissilution of the Bell operating companies and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 major change has taken place in local intra-lata toll, and interlata toll telephone competition. Serious local competion has not materalized for the local exchange carriers. This is the most labor and equipment intensive part of the business and therefore less profitable. The S.C.P.S.C. is commited to insuring universal service for all South Carolinians especially those in rural areas. A fund has been set up by the PSC to offset the costs incured by the LEC's to offset the cost differential. Intra-lata toll service is now very competitive along with the extremely competative inter-lata toll companies. Several hundred companies have received certificates of convenience and necessity to enter the toll markets in South Carolina. As competition continues to increase the PSC will continue to regulate and monitor all three aspects of the telephone industry in South Carolina.

MR. WILKES: Good morning, Mr. Gibson. This is Mr. Couick, who is counsel for the Committee. And he will swear you in and then follow with some questions.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Gibson, if you would raise your right hand.

DAVID N. GIBSON, being first duly sworn by at 11:50 a.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Mr. Gibson, you have supplied the Committee with a copy of your driver's license and your voter registration certificate, both of which indicated that you live on Hilton Head Island; is that correct?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     And that you reside in the Second Congressional District?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     Thank you very much.

MR. COUICK: We've also confirmed his residence in the Second Congressional District with the Election Commission, Mr. Chairman.

Q.     You have had an opportunity, I hope, this morning to review your personal data questionnaire summary?
A.     Yes, I have.
Q.     Are there any corrections that need to be made to it, Mr. Gibson?
A.     No, it's fine.

MR. COUICK: Mr. Chairman, without objection, I would like to have that entered as part of these proceedings at this time in the record of these proceedings.

Q.     Mr. Gibson, during the course of your interview with staff we went over certain financial information. And you've been most helpful in following up on that. In particular there was one charge-off of bad debt for a fairly small amount of money from a company called Val-Pak. Could you describe for the Commission or Committee your relationship with Val-Pak?
A.     Val-Pak is a corporation that prepares coupons that are sent in the mail. You probably receive them at your home. And I had contracted with Val-Pak to do some coupon mailing for me. Now, it's my understanding after talking to my attorney in California that the Val-Pak debt was discharged as part of the overall bankruptcy proceeding last year. And I faxed the appropriate information to your office to show that.
Q.     In fact, you did send that you had -- it was listed as one of the unsecured creditors. What was the date of your bankruptcy, do you recollect?
A.     The bankruptcy was discharged October 28, 1998.
Q.     Do you recall the ratio of what was charged off as to what was paid at that point? What cents on the dollar were you prepared to pay, do you remember?
A.     I don't recall. I would have to calculate that for you. A lot of debt was paid off before I actually filed.
Q.     I'm looking at a Schedule F, creditors holding unsecured non-priority claims. That indicates there's a total of $136,889 of those types of claims. Do you recall what money was available for distribution under Chapter 7?
A.     There was -- I recall about $20, 000 to $25, 000 that was available.
Q.     Your son works for a telecommunications company in New Hampshire; is that correct?
A.     Yes, he does.

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

MR. WILKES: Thank you, Mr. Couick. Mr. Gibson, it's obvious from your test scores that you have a good knowledge of what the

MR. WILKES: Was your service as CEO of Fast Trak Development Corporation, was that related in any way to this franchise that you had?

THE WITNESS: Yeah. The Fast Trak is a franchising company. And what it did is sell franchises.

MR. WILKES: So, in other words, you bought a franchise in the company you were --

THE WITNESS: I believed in the company and I believed very strongly that as CEO I could turn the company around and package it, position it such that it could provide products and services to all franchisees, including myself.

MR. WILKES: Did the company survive, Fast Trak?

THE WITNESS: No.

MR. WILKES: So both your franchise and the company are no longer?

THE WITNESS: The corporate entity no longer exists. Now, there are still individual franchisees in five states doing business. They are all struggling because they are all basically in the same position I was. They were depending on services provided by the corporation. What made my situation even more difficult is that in all the other stores one or more of the owners of the franchise had positions elsewhere where they were generating income and that income was used to subsidize the cafes. In my case I didn't have an outside income and neither did my wife. So, you know, the fast food business is very, very difficult under the best of circumstances. And a new business very, very seldom, no matter how well run it is, turns a profit or generates much in the first couple of years. So I think I had a double whammy in that services weren't being provided to me. Plus I didn't have an opportunity to go outside the business, work generating a separate income that would be used to subsidize and support the business.

MR. WILKES: And this new business that you and your wife are contemplating is a spin-off you said from what you were doing?

THE WITNESS: It's a spin-off, yes.

MR. WILKES: Was the business in California a pet restaurant or a --

THE WITNESS: It's not a restaurant. I was in the bagel business in California. And what I've decided and, as I say, I've been in research and development for the last year and a half, is I've discovered that there is an enormous market for bagels for pets, dogs, birds, and cats. So for the last year and a half I've been refining that concept, attending trade shows, doing a lot of market research, getting customers lined up. I have in Europe, Japan, and throughout this country. And at the 11th

MR. WILKES: Any other questions for Mr. Gibson from any of the Committee members?

MR. KENNEDY: One more question. Mr. Gibson, I see where you lived in California and in a number of other states. Any of those states have electrical deregulation are you familiar with?

THE WITNESS: I know that -- I suspect that all of them are basically faced with the same sort of issues, electric deregulation issues that South Carolina faces. I know that in California they are very deep into actually implementing the restructuring process in the state and they've had a couple false starts, but they are well along the way of allowing customers to decide for themselves where their electricity was going to be supplied from.

MR. KENNEDY: And that's out in California?

THE WITNESS: Sorry?

MR. KENNEDY: You said that's in California?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

MR. KENNEDY: Thank you, sir.

MR. WILKES: Mr. Gibson, I wasn't being facetious. I have a Taco Bell franchise myself so I know how difficult the fast food business is. And we have a Chihuahua that eats chalupas.

THE WITNESS: So you can relate.

MR. WILKES: I was just trying to draw some kind of connection there with the bagel business. Southern people, you know, are just really being introduced to bagels now. And I don't know whether the southern pets have developed that taste or not, but it's an interesting concept.

THE WITNESS: I learned a lot agonizing as to how I was going to make my business profitable. And you know based on your own experience being in the food industry that you have a lot of competition. I was able to sort of reflect the creativity that I've interjected in my utility regulatory background to be the first ever to create a totally new use for a product that has been around for years. And what I found in market research is that people's propensity to spend on their pets is substantially different than what they would spend on themselves. And I give you an example of just a plain ordinary bagel would be sold in my store for 60 cents. And a

MR. WILKES: Thank you. Any other questions?

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: How long have you been living in South Carolina?

THE WITNESS: We moved here mid-March of this year.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: Are you registered to vote?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

MR. WILKES: Any other questions for Mr. Gibson from the Committee? If not, thank you, Mr. Gibson. Very interesting conversation.

THE WITNESS: Well, thank you. And I'd like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the Committee for giving me the opportunity to be here. I appreciate it.

1.     Mr. David N. Gibson

Home and Business Address:

5 Fallen Arrow Court

Hilton Head Island, SC 29926-2526

2.     He was born on July 25, 1942, in San Francisco, California.

4.     He has had two divorces (1979 and 1990) and married Karen Lee-

Gibson on December 21, 1991. He has three children: David H.

Gibson, age 26, Director of New Business Development, Bayring

Communication Company; Kiley L. Gibson, age 17; and Lauren

L. Gibson, age 13.

6.     He graduated from/attended:

San Jose State University, BA, 1964

Washington State University, MA, 1968

Washington State University, Post Graduate Studies, 1970

The California Coalition for Trucking Deregulation, San

Francisco, California - December 1988 to June 1993

Fast Trak Development Corporation, Pasadena, California -

March 1994 to December 1997

New York State Department of Transportation, Albany/New York

City, NY - June 1970 to December 1977

Illinois Commerce Commission (Public Utilities Commission) -

January 1978 to June 1987

Currently relocating privately held business from Southern

California to South Carolina. Product line is scheduled to be

launched by January, 2000. To date, no operating income to

report.

15.   He owned a bakery/café operated in California and filed for

bankruptcy in 1998. All debts were discharged by the bankruptcy

court October 28, 1998.

Back federal employment taxes, and California sales taxes are

currently being repaid under a payback plan. These taxes were

reported elsewhere in the Confidential Financial Statement.

16.   He was sued by the contractor who built his bakery/café for cost

overages. All amounts due (nearly $24,000) have been paid in

full.

26.   He is a member of the following professional organizations:

National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

National Regulatory Research Institute

Mid-America Regulatory Commissioners

Mid-Atlantic Conference of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

Southeastern Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

Western Conference of Public Service Commissioners

National Conference of State Transportation Specialists

Association of American Railroads

Public Utility Security Analysts of New York City

National Association of Manufacturers

American Bar Association

National Governors' Association

American Trucking Associations

American Bus Association

American Economics Association

American Management Association

International Brotherhood of Teamsters

New York, Illinois, and California Teamsters' unions

Consumer Federation of New York

Governor's Office for Consumer Affairs (Illinois)

U.S. Department of Transportation

Interstate Commerce Commission

27.   He has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Young Men's Christian Association

InterHigh School Student Advisor

Santa Barbara Chamber of Commerce

Downtown Association

Blackhawk Association

American Heart Association

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Ms. Michelle Erwin (Banker)

Wachovia Bank

75 Mathews Drive

Hilton Head Island, SC 29926

2)     Mr. Joe Matalone

316 Southhampton Drive

Geneva, IL 60134

3)     Dr. Ira Klain

Blackhawk Galaries

Blackhawk Plaza

Danville, CA 94506

4)     Mr. Rod Ernst

70 Dartmouth Drive

Rancho Mirage, CA 92220

5)     Ms. Susanne Hand

1600 Vancil Street

Fortuna, CA 95540

30.   He is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     16/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

Industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission (PSC) include: Investor-owned telephone, electric, gas, intrastate motor carriers of people, intrastate motor carriers of household goods, railways, railroads (safety only), movement of water/wastewater, radio common carriers (those not exempted by federal law), gas pipeline/propane safety, gas safety, hazardous waste transport.

Fundamentally, all of the above industries have been subject to regulation (economic and/or safety) because either the company needed protection from other carriers (as was the case, for example for regulation of the for-hire trucking industry in the 1930's), or to protect coonsumers from the actual or potential from "natural" monopolies or oligopolies.

Generally speaking, a public interest finding has been made by the legislative branch stating that certain industries are so essential to the economic well-being of a state as to justify state regulatory oversight. With respect to economic regulation (ie., regulation of rates), the regulatory objective is to produce prices for services that roughly would approximate prices charged if the market for such services were competitive.

Over time, due largely to federal deregulation and state preemption, state regulatory jurisdiction has shifted from control of rates to control of safety only. Regulation of railroads provides an example. An example of total preemption of state jurisdiction by federal preemption is found in the for-hire trucking industry.

In summary, our historical experience with respect to regulatory policy
(federal and state) is that public policy, and the forms of regulation needed to protect and promote the public interest is dynamic, constantly changing.

2.     Select one federal agency which regulates one or more of the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission and specifically describe its oversight and how that oversight overlaps or pre-empts the Public Service Commission oversight and regulation.

Until recently, the SCPSC had broad authority to regulate the operations of truckers and railroads operated within South Carolina. State control, as stated earlier was based on depression-era policy of stabilyzing fierce competition between the truck and rail industries. Railrorad were considered more or less. Natural monopolies providing critically important transport services. The infant trucking industry, with very low start-up costs, was able to offer head-to-head competition - usually in the form of cheap rates. The resulting competion between the two, caused instability. The remedy to "level the playing field" was regulate the trucking isdustry.

In addition to a rather tight form of rate regulation, these two modes were also subject to a comprehensive form of safety regulation (roadway, track, equipment, etc. for railroads, and equipement inspection for truckers), and more recently public oversight of employees as to fitness to operate transportation equipment.

State control over truckers and railroads remained pretty much the same til the late 1980's and early 1990's. The support for state regulation of these two naturally competitive industries came into question, and eventually resulted in the passage of federal rail and truck regulatory reform.

The key federal transportation regulatory agency was the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). New federal laws had the objective of replacing rate regulatory control with competitive market-drivenrates. To achieve the objective, federal control over interstate trucking rates was esentially removed, and to prevent the states (including the

With respect to railroad regulation, federal economic regulatory controls were largely removed, as was that of the state commissions. The result: active and dynamic market competition, producing adequate and cost-based prices to the benefit of shippers and eventually to consumers nationwide.

SCPSC truck jurisdiction is currently confined to the intrastate for-hire transportation of people, and the intrstate, for-hire of transportation of household goods. Safety regulation of South Carolina's trucking industry rests, to a large degree, with the public safety/transportation departments.

The SCPSC still retains jurisdiction over the safety of railroad operations within the state. Track inspection, including right-of-way, grade crossing inspection, equipment inspection are at the heart of SCPSC's rail regulatory program.

In addition to preempting state economic regulatory jurisdiction over railroads and trucking, new federal laws consolidated federal oversight of these two industries by eliminating the ICC, and transferring remaining federal programs to a newly-created Surface Transportation Board within the U.S. Department of Transportation.

5.     Briefly describe South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S.C. Public Service Commission.

Statutes, rules and regulations, policies, programs and procedures concerning to ethical conduct of Public Service Commission employees (including commissioners) exists fundamentally for the purpose of protecting, and promoting public confidence in the workings of public institutions. Public confidence is particularly important for the Public Service Commission. This is so because the PSC, unlike most government agencies, have the combined legislative branch powers (by promulgating rules and regulations), executive branch powers (by administering programs, and enforcing, if necessary), and judical branch powers (by hearing PSC decisions on appeal, rehearing, etc.).

Rules also exist regarding ex parte communications, and restrictions over access to decision-makers. All regulatory actions, decisions, etc., must take place in open, with no party or person having undue infleunce. Rules of practice are designed, then, to further define and establish procedures that constitute proper practice.

In summary, rules regarding what constitutes ethical behavior and conduct are absolutely critical if the PSC is to successfully regulate in a manner that will protect and promote the public interest. When the public loses "faith" in the objectivity of the regulatory process, including the unbiased nature of regulatory decisions, then no regulatory program, however well-crafted and implmented will fulfill its legislative imperative to regulate in such manner to protect and promote the "people's business."

MR. WILKES: Ms. O'Neil, this is Mr. Couick. He is the staff counsel and attorney for this Committee. And he will swear you in and then we'll have some questions for you.

MR. COUICK: Good morning. If you will raise your right hand.

KAYE H. O'NEIL, being first duly sworn at 12:30 p.m., testified as follows:

Q.     Ms. O'Neil, while you're being seated, you supplied the Committee staff with a copy of your driver's license and also with your voter registration card indicating that you live on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina; is that correct?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     And that you are a voter in the Second Congressional District. Is that correct as well?
A.     That's correct.
Q.     And the Election Commission does confirm that. You, I believe, read this morning your summary of your personal data questionnaire?

MR. COUICK: Without objection, Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter that summary as a part of the record of these proceedings before the Committee.

Q.     Could you please briefly review for the Committee your educational and work experience backgrounds, Ms. O'Neil?
A.     Yes. I started to work with BellSouth right out of high school. And I worked full-time and went to school part-time in what was then Charlotte College. And because of some opportunities I had to advance with Bell I stopped my college education and continued my career with Bell for 30 years. And throughout those 30 years I worked at various departments. Actually I feel I've worked at public service all my life basically, but I retired from Bell in '92. So I have been away from the telephone industry for seven years. And because of that I've tried some other ventures. I worked at a bank in Hilton Head. I've also worked a little bit in real estate. And right now I'm working for a property management company.
Q.     What is your job at the property management company? What do you do?
A.     What I do now is I don't do the accounting work for the company itself. What I do is managing records. We manage for about approximately 180 properties. I do the accounting work by keeping up with the rentals, the expenses that it cost us to maintain these properties. I cut checks for the owners every month and send them statements, that type of thing.
Q.     Do you have any relationships with any regulated utilities at this point aside from being a retired employee of BellSouth and AT&T?
A.     No, sir, I do not, but I do maintain a social contact with BellSouth people in that they have a retired club. It's called the Pioneer Club. I wanted to especially point that out because I still am a member of that club, but it's mostly for personal and social reasons, to keep up with former workers and things like that. I've had my membership moved to Charleston. And because of the distance and their night meetings many times I don't really participate. I don't get an opportunity to.
Q.     Are there any financial benefits that flow to you from being a member of that organization that flow from BellSouth or AT&T?
A.     No.
Q.     Do you own any utility stock?

MR. COUICK: I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

MR. WILKES: Thank you, Mr. Couick. Do any members of the Committee have any questions of Ms. O'Neil? Hearing none, thank you so much for your time?

THE WITNESS: Thank you.

1.     Kaye Harris O'Neil

Home Address:

323 Forest Beach Villas

Hilton Head Island, SC 29928

2.     She was born on November 15, 1942, in Montgomery County,

N.C.

4.     She is widowed with one child, Brian Ray O'Neil, age 32,

Assembly Foreman, Bosch Corporation, Charleston, SC.

6.     She graduated from Candor High School, Candor, NC, in 1961.

She attended Charlotte College, Charlotte, NC, from 1962-1963,

and left to accept a full time position with Southern Bell.

9.     She has worked with:

1961-1992 - AT&T Corp, Bell South Communications, Charlotte,

NC (retired 1992)

1994-1996 - Atlantic Bank-Customer Service Representative

1996-1997 - Prudential - Hilton Head Properties

1997-1999 - Hilton Head Vacation Rentals

11.   She served on the Board of Directors for the Home Owners

Association, Forest Beach Villas, Hilton Head, S.C.

27.   She has served on the following civic, charitable, etc.,

organizations:

Daybreak Homeowners Assoc., Tega Cay, SC

Forest Beach Villas Homeowners Assoc., Hilton Head, SC

Southern Bell Pioneers, Charleston, SC

29.   Five letters of reference:

1)     Ms. Cynthia Sprouse

Wachovia

PO Box 5069

Hilton Head Island, SC 29938

2)     Mrs. Connie Lemmond

Behavioral Health Center

501 Billingsley Road

Charlotte, NC 28211

3)     James K. Carlin

Mayor Pro-Tem

Councilman Ward 3

34 Gloucester Road

Hilton Head Island, SC 29928

4)     Mrs. George Efthymiou

Coastal Cleaning and Maintenance

PO Box 7006

Hilton Head, SC 29938

5)     Mr. Pat Varney

Associated Services, Inc,

7 Pope Avenue Mall

Hilton Head Island, SC 29928

30.   She is seeking the position of Public Service Commissioner for the

Second Congressional District.

MULTIPLE CHOICE RAW SCORE:     14/20

DISCUSSION:

1.     What are the industries regulated by the South Carolina Public Service Commission? Why are these industries regulated?

Water and Sewage

Telephone Companies

Trucking Industry

Gas and gas pipe lines

Electric Utilities

Railroads

All of the above companies, provide services to the citizens of S. C. The Public Service Commission regulates and monitors this service to

5.     Briefly describe South Carolina statutory provisions governing the ethical conduct of the S.C. Public Service Commission.

The conduct of a Public Service Commissioner is closely monitored. Because they set rates for utilities, etc. they are not allowed to invest, hold stock or any position with these companies. Any holdings would be considered a conflict of interest.

6.     Briefly describe the circumstances in which the Public Service Commission can disallow costs in setting rates for utilities. Are there Constitutional or other legal limits on such disallowances?

The Public Service Commission in setting rates may disallow expense incurred by an unregulated area of a utility. The regulated entity of the company may not support the unregulated.

CHAIRMAN HOLLAND: The meeting is adjourned.
(Public session ended 12:40 p.m., November 15, 1999.)

On motion of Senator HOLLAND, with unanimous consent, the Report was ordered printed in the Journal.

Date Draft Report Issued:   10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 11, 2000
Date and Time
Final Report Issued:   10:00 a.m. on Thursday, January 13, 2000
Judicial candidates are not free to seek or accept commitments until 10:00 a.m. Thursday, January 13, 2000

The Judicial Merit Selection Commission is charged by law to consider the qualifications of candidates for the judiciary. This report details the reasons for the Commission's findings, as well as each candidate's qualifications as they relate to the Commission's evaluative

The Judicial Merit Selection Commission is composed of ten members, four of whom are non-legislators. The Commission has continued the more in-depth screening format started previously. The Commission has asked candidates their views on issues peculiar to service on the court to which they seek election. These questions were posed in an effort to provide the members of the General Assembly more information about candidates and their thought processes on issues relevant to their candidacies. The Commission has also engaged in a more probing inquiry into the depth of a candidate's experience in areas of practice that are germane to the office he or she is seeking. The Commission feels that candidates should have familiarity with the subject matter of the courts for which they offer, and feels that candidates' responses should indicate their familiarity with most major areas of the law with which they will be confronted.

In assessing each candidate's performance on the practice and procedure questions, the Commission had the option of placing candidates in either the "failed to meet expectations" or "met expectations" category. The Commission feels that these categories accurately reflect the candidate's performance on the practice and procedure questions.

As in previous years, the Commission considered judicial temperament in its evaluation of each candidate. An estimated 510,000 cases are tried each year in South Carolina, with over 276,000 jurors summoned to serve in State Court. The judiciary interacts with a great number of our state's citizens and it is important that each candidate demonstrates the ability and willingness to properly address the concerns of the large volume of people who come into contact with the Court each year.

The Commission has also used the Citizens Committees on Judicial Qualifications as an adjunct of the Commission. The Commission was

The Commission conducts a thorough investigation of each candidate's professional, personal, and financial affairs, and holds public hearings during which each candidate is questioned on a wide variety of issues. The Commission's investigation focuses on the following evaluative criteria: constitutional qualifications; ethical fitness; professional and academic ability; character; reputation; physical health; mental health; and judicial temperament. The Commission's investigation includes the following:
(1)   survey of the bench and bar;
(2)   SLED and FBI investigation;
(3)   credit investigation;
(4)   grievance investigation;
(5)   study of application materials;
(6)   verification of ethics compliance;
(7)   search of newspaper articles;
(8)   conflict of interest investigation;
(9)   court schedule study;
(10)   study of appellate record;
(11)   court observation; and
(12)   investigation of complaints.

While the law provides that the Commission must make findings as to qualifications, the Commission views its role as also including an

The Commission expects each candidate to possess a basic level of legal knowledge and ability, to have experience that would be applicable to the office sought, and to exhibit a strong adherence to codes of ethical behavior. These expectations are all important, and excellence in one category does not make up for deficiencies in another.

This report is the culmination of weeks of investigatory work and public hearings. The Commission takes its responsibilities seriously as it believes that the quality of justice delivered in South Carolina's courtrooms is directly affected by the thoroughness of its screening process. Please carefully consider the contents of this report as we believe it will help you make a more informed decision. If you would like to review portions of the screening transcript, which includes the personal data questionnaires, or other public information about a candidate before it is printed in the Journal, please contact Mike Couick at 212-6610.

This report conveys the Commission's findings as to the qualifications of all candidates currently offering for election to the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Circuit Court, Family Court, and the Administrative Law Judge Division.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Ms. Ballenger meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Ms. Ballenger was born on July 15, 1957. She is 42 years old and a resident of West Union, South Carolina. Ms. Ballenger provided in her application that she has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1987.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Ms. Ballenger.
Ms. Ballenger demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Ms. Ballenger reported that she has made $56.10 in campaign expenditures on letters and postage.
Ms. Ballenger testified she has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Ms. Ballenger testified that she is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Ms. Ballenger to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Ms. Ballenger described her continuing legal or judicial education during the past five years as follows:
(a)   Domestic Practice: Hot Tips from the Experts, S.C. Bar, 1993;

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Baxley meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Mr. Baxley was born on August 24, 1956. He is 43 years old and a resident of Hartsville, South Carolina. Mr. Baxley provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1982.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Baxley.
Mr. Baxley demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Baxley reported that his campaign expenditures have consisted solely of costs incurred by preparing and posting his letter of intent to the Commission.
Mr. Baxley testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Beatty meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Beatty was born on April 29, 1952. He is 48 years old and a resident of Spartanburg, South Carolina. Judge Beatty provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1979.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Beatty.
Judge Beatty demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Beatty reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Beatty testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Beatty testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED, NOT NOMINATED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Buchan meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a judge on the Court of Appeals.
Judge Buchan was born on September 9, 1952. She is 47 years old and a resident of Marion, South Carolina. Judge Buchan provided in her application that she has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1980.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Buchan.
Judge Buchan demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Buchan reported that she has incurred minimal campaign expenditures for postage, telephone, and resumé printing costs.
Judge Buchan testified she has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Buchan testified that she is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Buchan to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Buchan described her continuing legal or judicial education during the past five years as attending various seminars through the South Carolina Bar and other approved providers. Judge Buchan reported that she also engages in independent reading.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Buckner meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Mr. Buckner was born on May 9, 1949. He is 50 years old and a resident of Walterboro, South Carolina. Mr. Buckner provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1975.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Buckner.
Mr. Buckner demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Buckner reported that he has made less than $100 in campaign expenditures on postage and stationery.
Mr. Buckner testified he has not:

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Justice Burnett meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a justice on the Supreme Court.
Justice Burnett was born on January 26, 1942. He is 57 years old and a resident of Pauline, South Carolina. Justice Burnett provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1969.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
Since Justice Burnett's previous screening in 1995, the Commission's investigation did not reveal any incidents of unethical conduct by Justice Burnett.
Justice Burnett demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to Justices, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Justice Burnett reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Justice Burnett testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Justice Burnett testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Justice Burnett to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Cain meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Mr. Cain was born on January 16, 1961. He is 49 years old and a resident of Walhalla, South Carolina. Mr. Cain provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1986.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Cain.
Mr. Cain demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Cain reported that he has made approximately $288 in campaign expenditures for postage, paper and envelopes for correspondence announcing his candidacy.
Mr. Cain testified he has not:

Mr. Cain reported that he has taught the following law-related courses:
The Case of the Silent Alarm- A Study in Professionalism. Further, Mr. Cain reported that he assisted in the presentation of an Ethics Program for the Oconee Bar. The program was based on a seminar approved by the State of Georgia and involved a videotaped presentation and panel/participant discussion. Mr. Cain was one of the moderators for this program and provided proof of compliance to the S.C. Commission on Continuing Legal Education and Specialization on behalf of the Bar. The program was attended by 21 Bar members.
Mr. Cain reported that he has not published any books and/or articles.
(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Mr. Cain did not reveal evidence of any founded grievances or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Mr. Cain did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Mr. Cain has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Mr. Cain was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
(5)   Reputation:
Mr. Cain reported that his Martindale-Hubbell rating is "BV."

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Clary meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Justice on the Supreme Court.
Judge Clary was born on January 5, 1948. He is 52 years old and a resident of Gaffney, South Carolina. Judge Clary provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1975.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Clary.
Judge Clary demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Clary reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Clary testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Cureton meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a justice on the Supreme Court.
Judge Cureton was born on April 26, 1938. He is 61 years old and a resident of Columbia, South Carolina. Judge Cureton provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Cureton to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Cureton stated, "I believe I have attended all judicial continuing legal education seminars offered during the last five years. Additionally, I have attended several lawyer continuing legal education seminars during the same period."
Judge Cureton reported that he has taught the following law-related courses:
(a)   Lecturer, Fourth Annual Ethics CLE, Richland County Bar, October 23, 1998;
(b)   Lecturer, "Error Preservation," S.C. Defense Trial Attorneys Association, July 8, 1998;
(c)   Lecturer, S.C. Family Court Bench/Bar Update, S.C. Bar CLE. Div., December 5, 1997;
(d)   Lecturer, S.C. Family Law Update, S.C. Bar CLE. Div., May 30, 1997;

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Ms. DeWitt meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as Circuit Court judge.
Ms. DeWitt was born on August 25, 1955. She is 44 years old and a resident of Beaufort, South Carolina. Ms. DeWitt provided in her application that she has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1983.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Ms. DeWitt.
Ms. DeWitt demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Ms. DeWitt reported that she has made $104.78 in campaign expenditures on printing and postage.
Ms. DeWitt testified she has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.

Solo & Small Firm Practitioners Business Valuation Seminar
11-07-98   Ethics for Family Law Practitioners
11-06-98   Family Court Bench/Bar
10-23-98   Persuasion & Communication in the Ctroom
10-02-98   Traffic/DUI: Confused About the Changes
08-28-98   Domestic Practice: Hot Tips
07-10-98   Child Protective Services Act
03-21-97   Hidden Issues in Cases Involving Children
12-06-96   1996 Family Court Bench/Bar Update
11-08-96   Auto Insurance Update
04-12-96   Understanding the New S.C. Criminal Rules
01-12-96   Worker's Compensation Practice in S.C.
11-17-95   Marital Litigation Update
08-24-95   The Proposed New S.C. Rules of Evidence
01-07-95   Civility in the Profession
03-18-94   DUI Defense
Ms. DeWitt reported that she has taught the following law-related courses:
"(a)   "Hot Tips" Domestic Relations, S.C. Bar CLE, Columbia, Corroborating the Client's Story, Sept. 24, 1999. Discussion of Rule 11, ethical requirements and practice tips for obtaining corroborating evidence;
(b)   Beaufort Police Department Reserve Officer Training, Beaufort, Jun. 1999. Four 4-hour classes on constitutional law, law of arrest, search and seizure, and ethics;

KZ v. Singleton. Represented Plaintiff in auto accident. Knee injury that required surgery. Liability clear. Hit from behind by driver charged with DUI. Case settled without filing suit.
Smith v. Singleton. Represented Plaintiff in auto accident. Reinjured knee. Liability clear. Hit from behind by driver charged with DUI. Settled without filing suit.
Butler v. Appleby. Represented Plaintiff in auto accident. Minor personal injuries. Liability clear. Settled without filing suit.
Hunt v. Schwartz. Represented Plaintiff in auto accident. Relatively minor neck and back injuries. Liability clear. Settled without filing suit.
Griffin v. Port Royal Seafood. Represented Plaintiff in auto accident. Liability clear. Settled without filing suit.
Rivers v. Port Royal Seafood. Represented Plaintiff in auto accident. Liability clear. Settled without filing suit.
Reising v. Casper. Defense of Rule to Show Cause in Magistrate Court that alleged violation of restraining order issued pursuant to harassment statute. Bench trial, conflicting testimony.
BCSD v. Pruitt. Forfeiture. Represented Defendant. Filed Answer and Counterclaim. Settled by consent order.
BCSD v. Dudley. Forfeiture. Represented Defendant. Filed Answer and Counterclaim. Settled by consent order.
Ward v. Garrett. Represent Plaintiff in automobile accident. Significant injury to shoulder requiring surgery. Other driver's liability clear.
Moreland v. City of Beaufort, Durangos and others. Client assaulted in nightclub restroom by two women, all women ordered off premises where assault continued, police arrested client and others for disorderly conduct. During assault or arrest client's wrist broken requiring several surgeries. Preparing Complaint. Excessive use of

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Ms. Elder meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Ms. Elder was born on October 5, 1966. She is 33 years old. Ms. Elder provided in her application and during her testimony that she is a resident of Union, South Carolina, and has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years. Further, she provided that she has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1991.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Ms. Elder.
Ms. Elder demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Ms. Elder reported that she has not made any campaign expenditures.
Ms. Elder testified she has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Ms. Elder testified that she is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Ms. Elder to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Ms. Elder described her continuing legal or judicial education during the past five years as follows: She has attended numerous CLE training programs focusing primarily on the area of Family Law, Ethics

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Few meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Mr. Few was born on April 9, 1963. He is 36 years old and a resident of Greenville, South Carolina. Mr. Few provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the

"I have no experience in criminal matters as a practicing lawyer. As law clerk to Judge Anderson, I watched him preside over criminal trials and did considerable research on matters of criminal procedure and substantive criminal law. I also wrote jury charges for criminal trials. During my practice, my sole involvement with criminal law has been in reading the opinions of our State appellate courts. Since most evidentiary rulings that apply to civil cases come out of criminal cases,

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Geathers meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as an Administrative Law judge.
Judge Geathers was born on April 10, 1961. He is 38 years old and a resident of Columbia, South Carolina. Judge Geathers provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1986.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Geathers.
Judge Geathers demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Geathers reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Geathers testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Geathers testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Geathers to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Geathers reported that during the past five years he has satisfied all of the CLE requirements and has also attended a seminar at the National Judicial College.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Guess meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Mr. Guess was born on June 14, 1948. He is 51 years old and a resident of Union, South Carolina. Mr. Guess provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1974.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Guess.
Mr. Guess demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Guess reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Harwell meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Harwell was born on February 27, 1933. He is 66 years old and a resident of Florence, South Carolina. Judge Harwell provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1961.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Harwell.
Judge Harwell demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Harwell reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Huff meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a judge of the Court of Appeals.
Judge Huff was born on June 5, 1949. He is 50 years old and a resident of North Augusta, South Carolina. Judge Huff provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1976.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Huff.
Judge Huff demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Huff reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Huff testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Huff testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Huff to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Huff described his continuing legal or judicial education during the past five years as follows: "I have attended numerous CLE and JCLE programs offered by the South Carolina Bar, South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association and Defense Lawyers. I delivered a review of judicial opinions in the area of workers' compensation at the 1997

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Jenkins meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Jenkins was born on August 8, 1947. He is 52 years old and a resident of Travelers Rest, South Carolina. Judge Jenkins provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1976.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Jenkins.
Judge Jenkins demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Jenkins reported that he has made $40 in campaign expenditures for stationery and postage for sending letters announcing his candidacy.
Judge Jenkins testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Jenkins testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Johnson meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Johnson was born on August 16, 1951. He is 48 years old and a resident of Clinton, South Carolina. Judge Johnson provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1976.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Keesley meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Keesley was born on May 10, 1953. He is 46 years old and a resident of Edgefield, South Carolina. Judge Keesley provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the

two meetings of the S.C. Solicitors' Association;

two meetings of the S.C. Association of Circuit Judges;

the Medical College of S.C., Charleston, seminar on addiction;

Greenville Technical College;

a meeting of the Pre-Trial Intervention group;

training sessions of Leadership Columbia;

S.C. Drug and Other Abuse Services (DAODAS) training;

S.C. Association of Drug Court Professionals annual meeting;

National Association of Drug Court Professionals;
(b)   He spoke about sentencing guidelines at training sessions of the S.C. Department of Corrections;
(c)   He presented a seminar session on the S.C. Rules of Evidence at the U.S.C. School of Law.
Judge Keesley reported that he has published an article on Drug Courts published in the July/August 1998 issue of South Carolina Lawyer.
(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Judge Keesley did not reveal evidence of any founded grievances or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Keesley did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Keesley has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Judge Keesley was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.
(5)   Reputation:
Judge Keesley reported that he is not rated by Martindale-Hubbell.
Judge Keesley was a member of the House of Representatives, District 82, from November 1988 - August 12, 1991.
(6)   Physical Health:
Judge Keesley appears to be physically capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.
(7)   Mental Stability:
Judge Keesley appears to be mentally capable of performing the duties of the office he seeks.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge King meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge King was born on April 13, 1939. He is 60 years old and a resident of Sumter, South Carolina. Judge King provided in his

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Macaulay meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Macaulay was born on January 18, 1942. He is 58 years old and a resident of West Union, South Carolina. Judge Macaulay provided in his application that he has been a resident of South

The following is Judge Macaulay's account of his most significant orders or opinions:

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Manning meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Matthews meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as an Administrative Law judge.
Judge Matthews was born on November 8, 1950. She is 49 years old and a resident of Columbia, South Carolina. Judge Matthews provided in her application that she has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1978.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Matthews.
Judge Matthews demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Matthews reported that she has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Matthews testified she has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Matthews testified that she is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Matthews to be intelligent and knowledgeable. Her performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Miller meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Mr. Miller was born on September 24, 1952. He is 47 years old and a resident of Greenville, South Carolina. Mr. Miller provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1978.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. Miller.
Mr. Miller demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. Miller reported that he has made $125.28 in campaign expenditures for resumé printing costs.
Mr. Miller testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. Miller testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Mr. Miller to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Miller described his continuing legal or judicial education during the past five years as follows:
1998   S.C. Public Defender Conference;
1997   Advanced Federal Sentencing Guidelines, S.C. Public Defender Conference;

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Pieper meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Pieper was born on October 8, 1961. He is 38 years old and a resident of North Charleston, South Carolina. Judge Pieper provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1985.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Pieper.
Judge Pieper demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Pieper reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Pieper testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Pieper testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Pieper to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Pieper stated that he keeps current on the law. Generally, each year he goes to the Judicial Conference, the Circuit Judges Association meetings, the S.C. Bar Convention, the Annual Criminal Law Update Seminar, and either or both of the Trial Lawyers

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Pleicones meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Justice on the Supreme Court.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. Shine meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a judge on the Court of Appeals.
Mr. Shine was born on December 15, 1949. He is 50 years old and a resident of Columbia, South Carolina. Mr. Shine provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1974.

(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Mr. Shine to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. Shine reported that he has met all continuing legal education requirements during the past five years. He has taken continuing legal education seminars focusing on trial and appellate advocacy, administrative law, and employment law.
(a)   02/07/98 - 10/23/98   Total of 55.50 hours including 10.00 ethics;
(b)   01/24/97 - 10/03/97   Total of 43.75 hours including 8.00 ethics;
(c)   03/11/96 - 11/08/96   Total of 27.75 hours including 3.00 ethics;
(d)   03/03/95 - 08/24/95   Total of 36.00 hours including 7.50 ethics;
(e)   02/14/94 - 10/28/94   Total of 26.75 hours including 2.00 ethics.
Mr. Shine reported that he has taught the following law-related courses:
Mr. Shine has been a moderator at several government law section seminars of the S.C. Bar. He has also conducted agency-wide training

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Shuler meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a judge of the Court of Appeals.
Judge Shuler was born on May 9, 1948. He is 51 years old and a resident of Kingstree, South Carolina. Judge Shuler provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1973.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Shuler.
Judge Shuler demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Shuler reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Judge Shuler testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Shuler testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Judge Shuler to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Judge Shuler described his continuing legal or judicial education during the past five years as having attended all mandatory seminars for Circuit Court judges.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Sprouse meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Judge Sprouse was born on July 5, 1964. He is 35 years old and a resident of West Union, South Carolina. Judge Sprouse provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1990.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Sprouse.
Judge Sprouse demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Judge Sprouse reported that he has made minimal campaign expenditures for gasoline and meals.
Judge Sprouse testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Judge Sprouse testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report.

ATLA Annual Convention;

SCTLA Auto Torts XVII;
1995   S.C. Bar-The Proposed Criminal Rules of Evidence;

SCTLA Auto Torts XVIII;
1996   S.C. Court Administration Orientation School;

SCLTLA Auto Torts XIX;
1997   Oconee Bar, The Case of the Silent Alarm;

SCTLA Auto Torts XX;

S.C. Bar Criminal Procedure (video-Tri County Tech);

S.C. Bar Masters in Trial;
1998   Circuit Court Arbitration Training (Judge Sprouse was certified as a Circuit Court arbitrator and has renewed his certification for 1999);

S.C. Bar, Masters in Trial;

S.C. Bar, Professionalism in Practice;

SCTLA Auto Torts XXI.
Judge Sprouse reported that he has not taught or lectured at any bar association conferences, educational institutions, or continuing legal or judicial education programs.
Judge Sprouse reported that he has not published any books and/or articles.
(4)   Character:
The Commission's investigation of Judge Sprouse did not reveal evidence of any founded grievances or criminal allegations made against him. The Commission's investigation of Judge Sprouse did not indicate any evidence of a troubled financial status. Judge Sprouse has handled his financial affairs responsibly.
The Commission also noted that Judge Sprouse was punctual and attentive in his dealings with the Commission, and the Commission's investigation did not reveal any problems with his diligence and industry.

Judge Sprouse provided the following description of his experience in Family Court matters:

"I began handling domestic cases almost immediately after starting my practice in Oconee County in the Spring of 1990. I began by handling cases involving litigants with limited resources, but my practice grew. My domestic practice now compiles approximately fifty percent (50%) of my practice.
Divorce and equitable division of property: I have numerous cases on both contested and uncontested matters. I have represented clients ranging from negative marital equity to approximately one million dollars' worth of assets. I have tried many of these cases, the longest of these trials lasting almost three days.
Child Custody: I have been involved in numerous custody cases and have tried many of them. A significant portion of the divorce/separate maintenance actions that I have filed have involved a custody issue, at least initially. I have also served on many occasions as Guardian ad Litem in contested custody cases. In dealing with children's issues, I have dealt with many different facets of these types of cases, involving psychologists, law enforcement, teachers and doctors.
Adoption: Until 1995, I did not handle many adoptions, as another lawyer in our firm did them for several years. I have done several since she left the firm, although it does not compile a large part of my domestic practice.
Abuse & Neglect: I have represented Defendants in contested abuse and neglect cases. These have been situations where the Defendant was charged criminally in General Sessions Court and I undertook simultaneous representation. I have tried a sexual abuse case. I have also represented the Guardian ad Litem Program, although in a substitute role since 1992. I still represent the Guardian ad Litem Program as needed and did so as recently as August 1999 in three hearings. I have never represented the Department of Social Services.
Juvenile Justice: My experience in cases in the Department of Juvenile Justice cases has been limited, as I have never tried a juvenile case. The matters that I have handled were settled out of Court.

The nature of my domestic practice has prepared me well for a role as a Family Court Judge. My domestic practice has been well rounded, giving me insight on many levels. My civil court practice has

0 - 3 cases on Common Pleas trial roster (high of 7)

1 - 4 cases on General Sessions list (5 during the last term).
Judge Sprouse reported that the percentage of his practice involving civil, criminal, and domestic matters during the last five years as follows:
(a)   Civil:     10%
(b)   Criminal:   25%
(c)   Domestic:   50%
Judge Sprouse reported the percentage of his practice in trial court during the last five years as follows:
(a)   Jury:     15%
(b)   Non-jury:   85%
Judge Sprouse provided that he most often served as sole counsel.
The following is Judge Sprouse's account of his five most significant litigated matters:
"(a)   Steven Ray Hammond v. Ruia Boggs & Garland Brewer, d/b/a B & B Mobile Home Park. 93-CP-37-61. I represented the Plaintiff in an action for personal injuries brought under the South Carolina Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. My client's leg was amputated as a result of the injuries that he sustained. I was able to settle this case for $600,000 after mediation by Retired Justice Bruce Littlejohn;
(b)   Vicki W. Miller v. Mark S. Miller. 96-DR-37-136. I represented the Plaintiff in a divorce action. The assets, depending on valuation approached one million dollars. After extensive discovery and negotiations, I was able to settle this case prior to trial;
(c)   Jackie L. Hunt v. Alfred Hunt. 97-DR-37-708. I represented the Plaintiff initially in a separate maintenance action and the

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Stevens meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a judge on the Court of Appeals.
Judge Stevens was born on October 7, 1949. He is 50 years old and a resident of Irmo, South Carolina. Judge Stevens provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1978.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Judge Stevens.
Judge Stevens demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges,

General corporate practice with emphasis on taxation
1979-80   U.S. Internal Revenue Service;

Federal estate and gift tax return examiner
1980-95   S.C. Attorney General;

Chief Dep. Atty Gen and Dir. of Tax Division; issued Atty. Gen. Opinions and responsible for all tax litigation as well as defense of State at all levels from adm. hearings to trials in the state and federal courts.
1995-present-Adm. Law Judge Division;

Judge presiding over contested cases, appeals and regulation reviews."
Judge Stevens reported the frequency of his court appearances during the last five years of his practice as follows:
(a)   Federal:   Federal District Court twice and U.S. Supreme Court 3 times - once on brief in chief, twice on brief in Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari;
(b)   State:     Trial Court 21 times; 10 appearances with case settled before trial, and 11 appearances conducting trial as lead counsel; S.C. Court of Appeals 3 times; one as lead counsel having written

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Judge Westbrook meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Circuit Court judge.
Judge Westbrook was born on October 3, 1946. He is 53 years old and a resident of West Columbia, South Carolina. Judge Westbrook provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1973.

Commission's Findings:   QUALIFIED
(1)   Constitutional Qualifications:
Based on the Commission's investigation, Mr. White meets the qualifications prescribed by law for judicial service as a Family Court judge.
Mr. White was born on June 16, 1957. He is 42 years old and a resident of Union, South Carolina. Mr. White provided in his application that he has been a resident of South Carolina for at least the immediate past five years and has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina since 1983.
(2)   Ethical Fitness:
The Commission's investigation did not reveal any evidence of unethical conduct by Mr. White.
Mr. White demonstrated an understanding of the Canons of Judicial Conduct and other ethical considerations important to judges, particularly in the areas of ex parte communications, acceptance of gifts and ordinary hospitality, and recusal.
Mr. White reported that he has not made any campaign expenditures.
Mr. White testified he has not:
(a)   sought or received the pledge of any legislator prior to screening;
(b)   sought or been offered a conditional pledge of support by a legislator;
(c)   asked third persons to contact members of the General Assembly prior to screening.
Mr. White testified that he is aware of the Commission's 48-hour rule regarding the formal and informal release of the Screening Report
(3)   Professional and Academic Ability:
The Commission found Mr. White to be intelligent and knowledgeable. His performance on the Commission's practice and procedure questions met expectations.
Mr. White described his continuing legal or judicial education during the last five years by stating he has attended numerous continuing legal education seminars sanctioned by the S.C. Bar Association. He believes that he has exceeded the minimum requirements for continuing legal education in the last five years.

The following persons were found qualified:
Judge Gary E. Clary         Associate Justice, Supreme Court, Seat 2
Judge Jasper M. Cureton     Associate Justice, Supreme Court, Seat 2
Judge Costa M. Pleicones     Associate Justice, Supreme Court, Seat 2
Judge E.C. Burnett, III       Associate Justice, Supreme Court, Seat 5
Judge Mary E. Buchan       Judge, Court of Appeals, Seat 3
Joseph D. Shine             Judge, Court of Appeals, Seat 3
Judge M. Duane Shuler       Judge, Court of Appeals, Seat 3
Judge Ray N. Stevens         Judge, Court of Appeals, Seat 3
Judge Thomas E. Huff       Judge, Court of Appeals, Seat 8
Judge Howard P. King       Circuit Court for the Third Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
J. Michael Baxley           Circuit Court for the Fourth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge L. Casey Manning     Circuit Court for the Fifth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge Donald W. Beatty     Circuit Court for the Seventh Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge James W. Johnson, Jr. .Circuit Court for the Eighth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge Daniel F. Pieper.       Circuit Court for the Ninth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge Alexander S. Macaulay   Circuit Court for the Tenth Judicial

Circuit Seat 2
Judge William Paul Keesley   Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial

Circuit, Seat 1
Judge Marc H. Westbrook     Circuit Court for the Eleventh Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2

Circuit, Seat 1
John C. Few               Circuit Court for the Thirteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge Robert N. Jenkins, Sr.   Circuit Court for the Thirteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Edward W. "Ned" Miller     Circuit Court for the Thirteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Perry M. Buckner           Circuit Court for the Fourteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 1
Diane M. DeWitt           Circuit Court for the Fourteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 1
Karen F. Ballenger           Family Court for the Tenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Timothy M. Cain           Family Court for the Tenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Judge R. Scott Sprouse       Family Court for the Tenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 2
Donna Earls Elder           Family Court for the Sixteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 1
Robert E. Guess             Family Court for the Sixteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 1
Thomas H. White, IV         Family Court for the Sixteenth Judicial

Circuit, Seat 1
Judge Carolyn C. Matthews   Admin. Law Judge Division, Seat                         3
Judge John D. Geathers       Admin. Law Judge Division, Seat 4

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Senator Glenn F. McConnell       /s/ Rep. F. G. Delleney, Jr.
/s/ Senator Edward E. Saleeby       /s/ Rep. Wm. Douglas Smith
/s/ Senator Thomas L. Moore         /s/ Rep. Ralph W. Canty
/s/ Harry M. Lightsey, Jr.           /s/ Judge Curtis G. Shaw
/s/ Amy Johnson McLester         /s/ Richard S. Fisher

On motion of Senators COURSON and WILSON, with unanimous consent, the Senate stood adjourned out of respect to the memory of former Senator Heyward Elliott McDonald of Columbia, S.C., friend, colleague, and dedicated public servant.

At 11:20 A.M., on motion of Senator COURSON, the Senate adjourned to meet next Tuesday, January 18, 2000, at 12:00 Noon.

This web page was last updated on Friday, June 26, 2009 at 9:35 A.M.