Ohio’s Select Committee on Energy Policy and Oversight on Thursday heard testimonies for and against HB 798, one of the state’s final hopes of keeping utility increases associated with an allegedly corrupt nuclear bailout law from hitting ratepayer accounts in January.
Unlike most other HB6-related bills pending in the state legislature, HB 798 wouldn’t necessarily repeal HB6, a scandal-wracked nuclear bailout law that’s received stark criticism from lawmakers, regulators and ratepayers alike. It would instead put the law’s implementation of bailout subsidies on hold for a year while former FirstEnergy subsidiary Energy Harbor, the owner of the two plants that would receive the funds, undergoes a third-party audit organized by the state’s public utility regulator.
Rep. Jim Hoops’ (R), who chairs the select committee, introduced his bill Tuesday. The measure got two committee hearings this week: one on Wednesday and one on Thursday, each of which was webcast. In the first, Hoops said that although HB6 may be flawed, it’s not “all bad” and could save two of the state’s nuclear plants, which he said are an important source of clean energy in the state.
State Rep. Mark Romanchuk (R), author of the competing bill HB 772 that would wipe out HB6’s $0.85 rate increase before they hit ratepayers in January, wasn’t swayed by Hoops argument. On Thursday, Romanchuk asked a witness from the Ohio Consumers Council whether the closure of the bailed-out plants would cause lights across the state to go out.
Jeff Jacobson, a representative of the council testifying against the bill, said no.
“Other than jobs, which are very important, [and] a tax base, extremely important — why should we be providing any kind of subsidy or any kind of cash flow to these plants if they’re not going to make a difference with regard to our grid operation and making sure that these lights come on every time we want to?” Romanchuk asked rhetorically during Thursday’s hearing.
One witness from a conservative interest group agreed with Romanchuk.
“I’m opposed to House Bill 798, because rather than putting the bill on timeout by delaying the effective date of the subsidies enacted in HB6, Ohio ratepayers should be free from the grip of a bill has such a close association to a corruption scandal,” said Tyler Duvelius, executive director of the Ohio Conservative Energy Forum, who urged the legislature to pass another HB6 repeal instead.
There are five live bills related to HB6 in the Ohio legislature. Three aim to fully repeal HB 6: HB 738, HB 746 and SB 346. However, none of these three is “emergency” legislation, meaning they can’t be passed in the special session and wouldn’t derail HB6’s rate increase by January, when it will otherwise take effect.
Both HB 738 and HB 746 have been heard four times, but haven’t been touched since September. SB 346 had its fifth hearing on Tuesday.
Romanchuk’s HB 772 would declare an emergency, like Hoops’ HB 798, but has only been heard once, on Nov. 19. In Ohio, emergency bills need a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers of the state legislature to become law.
The Ohio legislative session ends Dec. 22 in the Senate and Dec. 17 in the House.
The controversial HB6, passed in 2016, would bail out two financially struggling nuclear plants owned by Energy Harbor, a former FirstEnergy Corp. subsidiary. Passed in 2019, HB6 is at the center of a corruption scheme that’s involved the criminal indictment of former Ohio House Speaker Lary Householder (R), the resignation of the head of Ohio’s public utility regulator and the firing of FirstEnergy’s CEO and other executives. Multiple federal and state investigations have been launched into FirstEnergy Corp. by the FBI, Securities and Exchange Commission and the Ohio Attorney General.
FirstEnergy still had a financial stake in the plants at the time when Householder and GOP allies seeking election to the Ohio House allegedly took campaign contributions from dark-money funds, with the understanding that once elected, they would draft and pass HB6.
Along with auditing nuclear power plant operators to see if they really need a bailout, HB 798 would terminate any decoupling measures outlined in the law, which Hoops said existed largely to benefit only FirstEnergy. Decoupling is an energy policy that aims to remove incentives for companies to sell more energy.
Ohio Rep. David Leland (D) was skeptical of how effective Hoops’ proposed audit would be.
“Given everything that we’ve been through, the fact that we have this committee in the first place — how is anyone better able to trust any of those kinds of figures?” Leland asked rhetorically. “It reminds me of a quote by Mark Twain, when he said that figures don’t lie, the liars figure,” said Leland.
HB 798 Reactions Split
Some lawmakers and witnesses expressed support for HB 798 on Wednesday and Thursday, claiming it could be a good way to save jobs and keep nuclear power in the state. Others said the bill was merely dragging out the inevitable: the power plants, which have been losing money for many years, will eventually shut down, and the bill would needlessly prolong ratepayer pocket-drain.
The Ohio Consumers Council, the Environmental Law and Policy Center, the Ohio Conservative Energy Forum, the Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund and others spoke against the bill.
“Going through with the new subsidies and keeping [them] in law, albeit delayed by one year and having this extra step in review, sends a terrible message to Ohioans that the penalty for getting implicated in the criminal enterprise to pass a law, even if those are just allegations at this time, [requires only] a one year timeout and more paperwork,” said Trish Demeter, Chief of Staff for the Ohio Environmental Council Action Fund, a political action fund centered around environmental causes in the state.
On the other hand, Lisa McAlister, general counsel for regulatory affairs at American Municipal Power, Inc. spoke in favor of it. The Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) also submitted testimony in favor of the bill.
“EPSA supports HB 798 as a stopgap measure but encourages the General Assembly to act expeditiously continuing repealing the remaining provisions of House Bill 6 in their entirety,” said The Electric Power Supply Association in a written testimony.
