PINEVILLE, W.Va. – Officials with Cliffs Natural Resources said the company no longer has immediate plans to idle the Pinnacle Mine in Wyoming County.

Company officials confirmed to MetroNews Friday that the Pinnacle Mine, near Pineville, will continue to operate at its current capacity — meaning 450 coal miners will keep their jobs beyond the end of August.

In June, Cliffs Natural Resources announced the mine could be idled on Aug. 25 through a WARN, Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification. If that would have happened, only 40 miners would have remained at the site.

Metallurgical coal which is used to make steel is produced at the Pinnacle Mine, a site that Wyoming County officials have called the largest mine in Wyoming County.

The decision to keep the mine site in production follows a management change for Cliffs. Lourenco Goncalves has been named the company’s CEO after Casablanca Capital, a hedge fund with a stake in Cliffs, gained six of the eleven seats on the company’s Board of Directors.

According to national reports, those with Casablanca Capital support splitting up the company to focus on the most profitable iron ore sites.

Cliffs Natural Resources is based in Cleveland, Oh.

bubble graphic

56

bubble graphic

Comments

  • David Brown

    Put a For Sale sign on it

  • Mini Me

    SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

    Don't tell Obama about this....

    (He'll send his EPA or his IRS to STOP THEM!)

  • Jean

    While this is good news for now...The only reason they are keeping this open is they are trying to sell Pinnacle Mining, It looks better if a company you are trying to sell is working and not idle. They have not tried to hide this from anyone, my husband is employed with Cliffs at this mines and the miners all know this is just a short reprieve for now. Who know how long it may last.

  • Dumb Liberals

    While this is good news, they should have kept it quiet. Now the m0r0n's Gestapo will set their sights on them.

  • Raging Moderate

    The X factor that people are not taking into account is hedge funds. That is, corporate policy is no longer determined by private industry nor the state, but by Wall Street profits. So while the coal company may be based in Cleveland, it is owned by money managers who have never stepped foot in WV and don't know squat about coal. So while the profitability of a company used to determine Wall Street investment, now Wall Street investment determines the profitability of a company.

  • Benthere

    West Virginia leaders know nothing will replace the coal economy in southern WV or the state. The geography of West Virginia does not allow large manufacturing complexes to be built. All are trying to finds ways to cover up the years of whistling past the grave yard. It's a crime how the people of this state have been short changed by the people in Charleston since the end of World War II. Even during the economic explosion this country had during the 40's, 50's and 60's WV experienced stagnant growth compared to the rest of the country. The only solution is to understand that there will be less people in most parts of the state and the tax revenues will be dramatically reduced. Which means State, county and city governments will have to be downsized. The process may take 20 years, buts it's the only way out. Most people will move away. But that's WV, our largest export behind coal has always been people. The future tax revenues for this state may only service a million less people. Someone has to have courage to except the hard work, and cold realities that WV has to change. Without a bold approach the state falls into bankruptcy. If you don't think it can happen just look toward Detroit.

  • Jordan

    That's great news right there! That's a great sign for cliffs and hopefully for all coal companies that coal picks back up and booms out the roof

  • richard

    I hope and pray that all of the miners are able to keep their jobs and continue to work mining coal for the sake of all West Virginia. But I hope that the state of WV has an economic plan that will expand into other industries in the event that the coal industry is dying and no political party can stop that from happening.

    • Aaron

      I see the problem. You expect the state to create economic activity.

      • richard

        And I see the problem with you. You believe the "state" has the power to destroy economic activity but not to create economic activity.??? How exactly is that logical?
        Every state has the power to HELP create economic activity. Every state goes out and tries recruit new industry into their state. (tax breaks, infrastructure improvements.....) How do you think Toyota came to WV? Do you think Toyota just woke up one morning and said "lets move to WV and help their unemployment rate"
        No, the state doesn't actually create it themselves.

        • Aaron

          I see you've not read any of my previous comments regarding infrastructure.

          • Aaron

            I realize I don't understand as much as others but I'm curious, why does the state have to replace the economy of a dying industry? I'd be happy if you could explain that.

          • Aaron

            Perhaps you could elaborate to those of is who don't understand.

          • richard

            Not to be rude, but I really don't care. You obviously do not understand the basics and don't see the reality of the downsizing of the coal industry.

  • Billy

    Frank you are a good human being and we appreciate the thanks and thoughts of our families

  • Billy

    Richard we appreciate the fact that you will sit there quietly...that is the end of my comment

  • richard

    OK, all you fine folks out there who like to blame Obama or any other democrat every time a mine job is lost, I guess you will now fill all this space with high praise for Obama and the democrats since these jobs will now be saved for the time being? Right?
    Seriously, you must give them credit if you also want to blame them for every loss.
    I'll sit here quietly and wait for all the praise to come rolling in..........

    • Aaron

      Exactly what has the president done to increase the demand for metallurgical coal?

      • richard

        I didn't say that he had done anything to increase the demand, but I thought that since all you republicans want to blame him every time a mine shuts down in the dying coal industry, then surely you'd give him credit when one isn't now going to close.

        • Hop'sHip

          As one who did and does support the President (maybe the only one who posts here) I rate Bookie's comment mostly false:

          http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/aug/07/shelley-moore-capito/west-virginia-senate-candidate-says-barack-obama-b/

          But then Bookie thinks he knows more about climate than most who considered experts in their field. Thankfully we have a President who respects scientists and actually listens to them.

          • The bookman

            I agree with you on FDR. Great men rise to the occasion when history presents itself. FDR was blessed with those moments to aspire to greatness during his Presidency. Bill Clinton wished for such defining moments. FDR and his policies extended the Depression, and the War saved him. Interestingly enough, he resisted that as well. Not a great leader, just lucky to have been the guy in charge as the American Giant awoke.

          • Aaron

            It is true that Wilkie was not a real threat to FDR but he along with the isolationist movement in America posed enough of a threat that FDR failed held to blatantly lie and mislead the voting public. Hardly the stuff of great Presidents.

          • The bookman

            The isolationist view in the Republican Party in 1940 was not as prevalent then as in the 1930's, and all indications from public polling suggests that the American people were becoming more understanding of a physical intervention in place of just supporting the war effort. Wilkie wasn't an isolationist. He was an internationalist, and his nomination indicated the shifting attitudes within the party. He was not up to the task of matching FDR's political skill and waxed and waned on the issue, and as we all know, eventually succumbed to FDR.

            There are certainly pieces of a puzzle that can be cobbled together to form a conspiracy. But in my view, any theory significantly lacks a motive or payoff in risking the deception. At such an extreme cost, with so many having had to be in on the ruse, the benefit of their action wouldn't have been worth allowing such a devastating blow to our fleet.

          • Aaron

            When Roosevelt and Churchill met in Canada in August, 1941, Churchill told Harry Hopkins, one of the primary policy maker of Lend-Lease legislation that I would rather have a declaration of war now and no supplies for six months than double the supplies you are sending us but no declaration of war."

            When Roosevelt heard from Hopkins he stated that most Americans wanted England to win--but not at the cost of even one American soldier's life.

            His sentiments come from the vicious election of 1940 in which Republicans campaigned on an isolationist policy of staying out of the war.

            Charles Lindbergh summed up the opposion stance in November, 1940, 1 week prior to the election when he said “If we desire peace, we need only stop asking for war. Nobody wishes to attack us, and nobody is in a position to do so.”

            FDR's response was in comments like this in October, 1940 when in response to an add by Wendall Wilkie claiming mothers would have no one to blame but themselves for their sons dying in Europe because they sent FDR back to the White House he said “Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars ... We will not send our Army, Navy, or air forces to fight in foreign lands.”

            A very interesting article in what is normally a fairly liberal publication.

            http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/23/the-revolution-of-1940-america-s-fight-over-entering-world-war-two.html

          • The bookman

            In March, 1941, 70% of Americans were in favor of helping England. After Pearl Harbor, in late December, 1941, more Americans saw Germany as the enemy than the Japanese.

            Americans had already made up their minds by Pearl Harbor. The primary enemy was Germany. They were the threat. Pearl Harbor was the lynch pin that sealed the deal, but for all intents and purposes, we were already at war by 12/7/41. Europe was at war, and we were still a very immigrant country.

          • Aaron

            How long do you believe it would have been happy attack on pearl not occurred before the American public supported entrance into the war and what type of damage would have motivated the American public to support war?

          • The bookman

            Aaron,

            I didn't say he was my favorite, just that I don't think he allowed our naval fleet to be crippled prior to entering a war he knew we were about to engage. It would have been foolhardy to set forward that strategy. We were exceptionally lucky in the Pacific, and to believe that our entry was orchestrated by putting us in such a position is just not probable.

          • Aaron

            There's much information besides the McCollum memo that points to previous knowledge of Japanese intentions by numerous sources in government. It's no secret that FDR did everything in his power to gain entrance into the war including meetings with Churchhill in 1940 and 41 in which expressly stated intent to enter the war.. The problem I have is that he campaigned in 1939 and 1940 on a platform of keeping America out of the war. He clearly lied about intent to the American public. There is nothing speculative are arguable about those facts.

            From his days as the assistant Secretary of Navy to speculation about voters fraud to gain the governorship of New York to his womanizing and views on communism and socialism, FDR was a flawed individual who clearly manipulated the public to win the presidency. The fact that he hid his polio for so long is just one demonstration of his true character.

          • The bookman

            I'm with Jason on this one. The FDR Conspiracy regarding Pearl Harbor is speculative, and is based on circumstantial evidence and conjecture. I would agree that our entry into the conflict brought about the golden age of the 1950's, and improved the legacy of FDR, but I don't think it was a secret that we were being dragged into the conflict.

            I have an interesting set of books that has in the final volume an essay written by the editor that chronicles the reasons why the US would enter WWII. Copyright 1940. The questions circulating in the country wasn't if, but when. Not why, but when. It was inevitable for the US to enter the war, confront Germany and Japan, and take its place as the leader of the free world. There was no reason to for conspiracy or secrecy.

          • Jason412

            Aaron,

            Comparing Bush and the War in Iraq/Afghanistan, or should I say "War on Terror", to FDR and World War II is one of the most laughable things I've ever heard you say.

            For someone who thinks Reagan accepted full responsibility an had no meaningful part in the Iran-Contra affair, I guess you buy right into the theory that FDR not only intentionally provoked Japan into attacking the US, but knew of the coming attack as well. I know of the McCollum memo, and I've read the book "Day of Deceit", I also knows it's been proven to be based on mostly false information.

            Since you believe that, have you heard that it was actually members of the Bush administration who carried out 9/11 to manipulate the public into supporting the finishing of his father's war?

            It's undeniable FDR "provoked" the Japanese with several actions, such as aiding China, the Destroyer's for Bases agreement, Lend-Lease policy, and other things, but to act as if it was part of some greater plan to purposely have Japan attack America to change public opinion thus leading us to the war is nothing more than a conspiracy theory.

          • Aaron

            For someone who has bemoaned George Bush's actions Jason, I suggest you research the manipulation FDR undertook to lead America into World War II.

          • Jason412

            "the biggest one being that he would not lead the United States in to World War II while manipulating relations with the Japanese to ensure our entry into World War II."

            You mean over 8 years after he was first elected? A politician today can't keep a campaign promise for 6 months, certainly not through two full Presidential terms.

          • The bookman

            HH:

            Specifically, what is false?

            As to the climate? It isn't settled science that the Globe is warming. It's settled politics. You may not have noticed, but time is not on your side in this argument. Try truly reading and researching the subject for a change. Not just the information and doom and gloom stories that support your politics, but fully research the issue.

            Where is the heat that should be here given the "historic CO2 concentrations" in the atmosphere? In the oceans? How would that be, when the air is dramatically less dense than water. Warming would therefore show up in the atmosphere first because it would rise faster than the water. Not happening. No warming in the last 17 years, 10 months. None. Climate scientists agree. Yet we have had the hottest May on record, and June on record, ever. According to who, and by what measure. The most accurate method of taking the global temperature is by satellite. And it is available to all scientists, so manipulation of the data sets cannot be hidden from view. There are 5 data sets available. They all show that there is a zero slope in temperature variance over the last nearly 18 years. Statistical analysis that has been peer reviewed. No temperature change.

            Many scientists actually take issue with the term pause, as it implies a future direction. They prefer plateau, as they believe the solar cycles explain the cyclical heating and cooling that is observed across decades. Imagine that. The sun, and the level of activity we can observe on its surface, actually is an indicator of heating and cooling of our planet. There is an enormous amount of science occurring, and I am fascinated by it. Open your mind to the fact that Al Gore may actually have been wrong.

            Consider the trillions of dollars economies around the world have invested to fight this falsity. Is it any wonder the Hansen's of the world refuse to accept the fact that their warming models as it relates to CO2 were wrong? What are they to say? I'm sorry? Wake up, HH. The earth isn't warming, at least not in an abnormal way. Man caused Climate Change isn't settled science. Many intelligent scientists study the climate without political goals. I'm not one of them. Many intelligent people read their side of the story. I'm one of them. I don't claim to know more than they do. I am just informed.

        • The bookman

          The president is against burning coal to generate electricity when more expensive, unproven, impractical, and less stable options exist. He has specifically stated that he intends to bankrupt anyone who attempts to build a coal fired power plant.

          He has made no such comments either positive or negative regarding metallurgical coal.

          I give him credit for the stands he takes, and expect him and his supporters to accept responsibility for the policies he projects upon us through his executive action. Killing the Eastern Thermal Coal Industry is on him, and any who have supported his Presidency. You know who you are.

          • The bookman

            Jason,

            Compassionate conservatism is a political label. Being conservative requires actions, not politics. Smaller government and more personal responsibility are key to conservative principles. Bush was not a smaller government guy.

          • The bookman

            Richard,

            If we had a President who had not initiated policy through the EPA, an executive agency, that resulted in the closure of the available market for thermal coal, we wouldn't be having thus discussion. He has made his mark. There are, as there always are, other pressures on the industry. That's business. But what is different here is that there is also the limiting factor of government, in this case the President, who specifically has signaled to investors that more stringent regulation will make coal generation of power less profitable and other forms preferred, all based on pleasing the Global Warming Alarmists. That action has tipped the scale between market balance and Appalachian Coal's free fall. Thanks for your time.

          • The bookman

            HH:

            Sorry for the delay in responding. Busy day. Anyway, you haven't answered the question of how my post was false. You add another classic quote from the President regarding zero emission coal burns, which only further validates my initial statement. By what proven method can we achieve zero GHG emissions utilizing coal as a fuel source? CCS is very experimental and site specific. Expensive, unproven, and impractical.

          • Aaron

            Your comment in stating that you want a president who won't say one thing to get elected and do something else and then mentioning FDR brought a smile to my face given the lies FDR told, the biggest one being that he would not lead the United States in to World War II while manipulating relations with the Japanese to ensure our entry into World War II.

          • richard

            Bookman, please understand that I am not a great defender of the president, didn't vote for him either time. I voted for McCain the first time, and the second, I didn't vote for either because there was no way I was voting for Romney. I'm also not anti coal. I worked in the coal industry for several years. But the facts are facts. The coal industry has been in a basic decline for years while, yes, it has had its ups and downs. It will still be in demand for several years to come because there is simply nothing yet to full take its place. But as the technology improves, the coal industry will continue to decline. And no matter what Capito and the republican party tells you, it won't make a bit of difference who is in the white house.

          • Jason412

            HopsHip,

            "But no one can work with someone who finds no benefit with working with you."

            I agree with that, but Obama did have his 2 years of majority with the 111th Congress. Although they passed a large amount of Legislation, it's done little.

            I do recognize the current Congress is terrible, and shares much of the blame for the fact nothing can get done.

          • Hop'sHip

            Well that surprised me. I thought you were a libertarian and would give me Calvin Coolidge. I think Obama could be accused of naïveté. I think he was unprepared for the degree of opposition he would face. I believe he is conciliatory by nature, although not a back slapper like Clinton. But no one can work with someone who finds no benefit with working with you. FDR dealt with Congresses made up mostly of those from his own party.

          • Jason412

            Hop'sHip,

            Great question. What would a great President be doing now if we had one? A great President would be delivering the "Change" Obama campaigned on, not the more of the same Obama actually delivered.

            A great President would be able to work with both parties and not have to use executive action to get things done, a great President would ensure we are devoting money to the things that made this country great (i.e. infrastructure), a great President puts a stop to NSA mass-surveillance, a great President fires the US Military as the World Police, a great President doesn't pledge to end both wars while dragging them both on and increasing intensity and death tolls in one of those wars,

            but most of all...

            a great President wouldn't say one thing to get elected then do the complete opposite once in office (twice)

            Who do I think was a great modern President? FDR

          • Hop'sHip

            Jason: What would a "great" President be doing now if we had one? Who do you think was a great President? (Not a movie or television series character, but a real, great modern President.)

          • Hop'sHip

            Your link took me to "page not found." But I did find that quote where Obama did say that while also saying this: "This notion of no coal, I think, is an illusion, because the fact of the matter is that right now, we are getting a lot of our energy from coal, and China is building a coal-fired plant once a week. So what we have to do then is we have to figure out how can we use coal without emitting greenhouse gases and carbon. And how can we sequester that carbon and capture it? If we can't, then we're going to still be working on alternatives."

          • The bookman

            HH:

            “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them,” Obama said, responding to a question about his cap-and-trade plan. He later added, “Under my plan … electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

            That's what he said. How is it a mischaracterization?

            http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/74892.html

          • Jason412

            Bookman,

            "GWB was not a conservative. "

            Didn't Bush campaign on being a "compassionate conservative"? I agree history will place Obama at the bottom, but Bush will be right beside him. As I've said before, future generations will be able to look back and easily pinpoint the 16 years between 2000-2016 as the beginning of the downfall.

            The chances of a great President in my life time get slimmer by the day.

          • Hop'sHip

            You made the same accusation against Obama and all those who support him that Representative Capito did, so I linked to the Politifact analysis debunking her. You remind me of communists who argue that efforts in their name failed in the past because it wasn't true communism. How would a true conservative.conduct economic policy?

          • The bookman

            Still waiting for the specifics of falsehood in my post. GWB was not a conservative. This is the middle of Obama's second term. He owns the political, social, economic, and international problems of his administration. The Federal Government has spent more money on his watch than under any of his predecessors, and for that we are still attempting to manufacture a recovery. Blame who you wish, but I believe history will place his two terms appropriately at the bottom in terms of performance.

          • Hop'sHip

            Bookie: Or they might remember where that ship was taking them before Obama assumed office. Essentially conservatives are offering more of the same, only this time with more deprivation for the losers.

          • The bookman

            Jason,

            Lots of countries are trying to find markets for their commodity, and many end up selling at a loss. The importation of coal represents less than 2% of our consumption, and are not competitive to the headwinds produced by this administration. Yes, two more years. But the damage is done, and there are no assurances that the American people will wake up and right the ship in 2016. Hopefully, a conservative will appear on the scene and give them a real choice.

          • Jason412

            US imports of thermal coal are at an all-time high, a fact I was just reminded of after seeing someone else reference the New England plant buying 40k metic tons of thermal coal from Russia. The fact that could happen in the face of the current US-Russia relations really says something.

            My bet is the global market is going to finish off Appalachian thermal coal, probably met coal too, before Obama get's a chance. Obama plays a role, but is far slower and loses power in a couple years.

          • The bookman

            Richard,

            Mechanization and technological advancement, as well as a change in operational strategies has reduced the number of miners necessary to extract the coal over the last 65 years. That is a fact shared in industry in general, not just coal. Employment numbers are not indicative of industrial direction. WV Coal production is down over 30% since 2008, from 165M short tons to 110M in 2013.

            In 1950, your golden year of production, WV produced 145M short tons. Production fluctuates, and coal production has certainly moved up and down over the years, but never before has a President of the US been so steadfastly determined to damage the coal industry, and in so doing, bring unnecessary harm to our national economy and security by tampering with the chief energy fuel source that powers this country. If you can't see that, then you have had your head in the sand.

            We need Met Coal for steel. When this story first broke, those of us who are frustrated and angered by the President's policies didn't blame the President for the WARN notice involving Pinnacle. There is consistency in this message against the President's policy, and there is no consistency in your comments. You can't have it both ways. It's not a partisan issue between Republicans and Democrats. But it is an issue of who supports the President's agenda, and what ability we have to counter that agenda. It's about what is accurate and what is inaccurate. And to use one of the President's favorite statements, it's just not smart!

          • richard

            FYI, I didn't vote for the man one time. He's not my favorite president either, and I have no problem with burning coal (as long as it is done as clean as possible) but blaming Obama for the downfall of coal is foolish. Coal has been on a downward slide for years - under Democrats and Republicans. Don't believe me? Go back and check the employment number for folks in the coal industry since the 1950 til now. And, it will continue to decline no matter who is elected president in the future.

        • Aaron

          I'm not a Republican.

  • Frank G Tsutras

    I pray that Pinnacle and other mines in West Virginia will continue their operations so our coal miners will remain employed and their Families can live without pressures.
    Best wishes and thank you.
    Frank G Tsutras, Williamsburg, VA