Talkline with Hoppy Kercheval  Watch |  Listen

Companies say they didn’t volunteer to take over power plant, but they’re willing to take a deep look

Power companies that are considering whether acquiring the Pleasants Power Station makes sense financially also made clear this morning that they are making the assessment not because they volunteered but because they were asked to.

“The companies were not the ones to promote this; they have done what they have asked,” said Christopher Callas, a power company attorney speaking at a Public Service Commission hearing.

Instead, the PSC ordered the power companies to examine taking over Pleasants Power Station, which is set for closure June 1. The Legislature also passed a resolution asking for the assessment.

Representatives of Monongahela Power and Potomac Edison did say that taking over Pleasants Power Station could wind up being beneficial, but they need more time to study the matter. And they underscored that many financial and regulatory questions are still ahead.

“There is more to be done. It is a complex process,” Callas said.

The companies say they could require months make a full examination. In the mean time, they’re asking for a surcharge on ratepayers to keep it operational until they fully assess whether the deal makes sense.

The proposal is for at least a$3 million monthly surcharge over 12 months, a total of $36 million, to assure the plant remains operational. That amount could be more if there are additional costs identified.

Members of the Public Service Commission have been asked to make a decision on the surcharge by Tuesday.

Critics have said ratepayers should not be on the hook for the surcharge.

“The companies have said ‘We want to tread water for an entire year while the ratepayers bear the expense and the plant sits idle,” said Robert Williams, director of the PSC’s Consumer Advocate Division.

Callas said the companies’ shareholders should not be on the hook.

“We believe that the question of whether Pleasants is appropriate to acquire is really a public policy question. It really is — I don’t want to belittle it, but it’s effectively a political question,” Callas said.

He later added, “We do not believe it is appropriate for shareholders to bear the burden of that evaluation when it is not a business decision that they themselves have undertaken on their own.”

Pleasants is a 1300 megawatt two-unit coal power plant located on the Ohio River near Belmont, Pleasants County. About 150 people work at the plant, which began operations in 1979.

Its corporate owner, Energy Harbor, has been bought by another company, Vistra Vision, which wants its nuclear plants but not its coal plants like Pleasants. Right now, the Pleasants property is being shifted to Energy Transition and Environmental Management for possible shutdown and demolition.

The power companies want to be sure that the plant doesn’t degrade and that employees remain available in case they decide to run it. But they do not explicitly intend to run the plant during the analysis period. It would be on pause.

One of the question for the power companies, which are subsidiaries of FirstEnergy, is the benefit of adding Pleasants Power Station to its current fleet, which also includes Fort Martin in Monongalia County and Harrison Power Station near Haywood.

Power company officials have described Pleasants as better equipped for environmental requirements than Fort Martin. And the power companies were clear in saying they would be very unlikely to operate three plants.

“It is a comparison, effectively, between the acquisition of Pleasants and the decommissioning of another coal-fired power plant in Fort Martin that has different capabilities in complying with environmental regulations,” Callas said. “So it’s a question of one or the other.”

Additional questions include whether the power companies can reach agreement with the remediation company now in possession of the property, whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would provide a go-ahead and what entity would have authority to provide power to the PJM grid.

Despite all the uncertainty, Callas hoped the power companies would be able to return to the commission relatively soon to say “we’ve done the research and we believe, all in all, all things considered we believe this is the best for customers.”

Or, he acknowledged the final answer could be, “this is a situation where the train has already left the station and we are effectively trying to bring it back.”

Supporters of keeping the power plant open say it’s important to preserve the jobs, sustain the local tax base and continue providing a source of reliable energy.

Jacob Altmire, an attorney representing the West Virginia Coal Association, warned against the effects of prematurely retiring baseload power sources.

“This is the last chance to intervene on behalf of the Pleasants plant,” Altmire said. “Pleasants is an option that must be maintained.”





More News

News
MetroNews This Morning 3-29-24
Summary of West Virginia news, sports, and weather for Friday, March 29, 2024
March 29, 2024 - 6:24 am
News
Dunlow Volunteer Fire Department closes
The Dunlow VFD did not have a valid workers compensation insurance policy.
March 29, 2024 - 1:23 am
News
As Yeager Airport's Wildlife Patrol Dog turns 7, a new dog comes in to learn from him
The new Border Collie is getting acclimated and receiving training for his soon-to-be role.
March 28, 2024 - 6:30 pm
News
PEIA examines financial effects of new law meant to ensure local pharmacies get fair reimbursements
Gov. Jim Justice signed Senate Bill 453 into law this week.
March 28, 2024 - 4:11 pm