LANSING – The news that the aging and troubled Palisades nuclear power plant in Van Buren County would close in 2018 provided the latest twist to the ongoing energy debate in the Michigan House, where backers of legislation overhauling key regulations are down to three session days remaining to get a bill out of the Legislature.

Those working the issue on both sides described the lobbying effort as furious by legislators on either side of the issue and interested groups.

The pinch-points toward assembling the votes for passage remain the same. Backers of SB 437, the main bill that would set new procedures for building new plants, place new requirements on alternative electric suppliers to guarantee power supply for their customers and increase the percentage of electricity utilities must generate from renewable sources from 10 to 15 percent, continue to stump for more Republican votes.

There remains a strong well of support for customer choice in the House Republican caucus. The big question is what block of members are unalterably opposed to changing their vote and which ones could flip.

Meanwhile, work remains to solidify Democratic votes, largely to address their concerns – shared by many Republicans – about the net metering bill (SB 438) that would set a new charge on those who generate their own power.

Energy Chairman and CEO Leo Denault said in a statement that shutting the plant down October 1, 2018, “is prudent when comparing the transaction to the business risks of continued operation.”

Palisades, sold in 2007 by Consumers Energy, has experienced several problems in recent years, such as finding employees there that “willfully violated” federal rules in May 2011 on a water leak into the control room, Michigan Radio reported.

A timeline published in 2013 by the Kalamazoo Gazette highlighted several other issues like a Nuclear Regulatory Commission safety assessment in 2008 showing the plaint failed to recognize and assess the impact of radiological hazards in the workplace; five workers getting trapped in a high-temperature area for 90 minutes when a hatch malfunctioned; and a special NRC inspection in 2011 after the failure of a coupling holding pipes together.

In 2012, the NRC downgraded the plant to among the four-worst performing reactors in the nation, the Gazette reported. There were several shut-downs in subsequent years as a result of problems.

As part of the closure, the contract Consumers Energy has to purchase 800 megawatts of power annually from the plant will be terminated, though that move would need approval from the Michigan Public Service Commission.

Consumers Energy spokesperson Dan Bishop said the closure of Palisades, combined with the closure of coal-fired plants located throughout the Midcontinent Independent System Operator territory, underscores the need for the energy legislation.

“Entergy’s announcement really puts an exclamation point on it, that the surplus power is going away,” he said. “The alternate suppliers, they have no plan. They’re selling power they don’t have and surplus is going away. The legislation that’s pending in the House addresses those issues.”

But backers of greater customer choice denounced the Palisades announcement as a stunt designed to whip up fear that would prompt the House to pass the legislation.

“By their desperate acts, I think it’s showing they’re still having trouble,” said Pete Lund, a former member of the House who now heads Americans for Prosperity-Michigan. “As a person who’s got some political background, I just found it amazingly interesting.”

Bishop denied the allegation.

“The timing of the announcement had nothing to do with the timing of the energy policy vote,” he said in a statement. “In fact, it would have been disingenuous to withhold the announcement until the Legislature had adjourned – and it would have been unfair to the affected employees at Entergy’s Palisades Power Plant. The decision to close the plant was entirely Entergy’s decision.

“Consumers Energy and Entergy’s agreement to terminate the power purchase agreement had been in negotiations for many months, and once finalized, SEC rules required public disclosure of this information,” he said.

Rep. Aric Nesbitt (R-Lawton), shepherding the energy issue in the House and who has Palisades in his district, called for the PSC to reject termination of the contract between Entergy and Consumers.

“This is not just a horrible decision for our local families, it also is the wrong decision for Michigan’s energy future,” Mr. Nesbitt said in a statement. “It is imperative we retain this stable and important source of electricity.”

Consumers will pay a $172 million early termination fee under the contract to Entergy, but Mr. Bishop said the development also will save their customers $172 million that would have been paid during the contract. He said those numbers being the same is coincidental.

This story was published by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on www.gongwer.com