Monday, May 23 2022 Sign In   |    Register
 

News Quick Search


 

News


Front Page
Power News
Today's News
Yesterday's News
Week of May 23
Week of May 16
Week of May 09
Week of May 02
Week of Apr 25
By Topic
By News Partner
Gas News
News Customization
Feedback

 

Pro Plus(+)


Add on products to your professional subscription.
  • Energy Archive News
  •  



    Home > News > Power News > News Article

    Share by Email E-mail Printer Friendly Print

    Minnesota Power must repay customers $4.5 million for steam pipe rupture at coal-fired plant


    January 17, 2022 - Jimmy Lovrien, Duluth News Tribune, Minn.

     

      Jan. 14—DULUTH — State regulators ordered Minnesota Power to repay customers the $4.5 million it incurred during a 2019 steam pipe rupture and seven-week outage at one of its coal-fired units in Cohasset.

      On Thursday, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission adopted recommendations made by an administrative law judge who said the company should repay customers for the outage costs plus interest because the steam pipes at Boswell Energy Center's Unit 4 were only inspected every 10 years instead of every five years, which is the industry standard.

      Judge Barbara Case wrote

      in her August report

      that Minnesota Power "was inconsistent with good utility practice," echoing

      an earlier Department of Commerce report

      that found the company "failed to follow 'good utility practice' in maintaining and repairing its coal fired power plant."

      On Feb. 6, 2019, a seam weld on a hot reheat line failed in Unit 4, leaving a 2-foot-long crack "resulting in high-pressure steam release, which necessitated immediate action to begin shutting down Boswell Unit No. 4," Case wrote.

      The unit remained shut down until March 27, 2019, as Minnesota Power found and repaired six other areas and replaced three sections of pipe, Case wrote.

      The company's 10-year inspection schedule should have been shortened to five years, which is industry standard, Case wrote.

      "Minnesota Power should have inspected the hot reheat line more frequently based on the line's age and potential for catastrophic failure," Case said.

      The company had defended its 10-year inspection program because the area was considered a "low-stress area." The last inspection prior to the rupture was in 2010, nine years before the incident, and "no actionable defects were discovered at that time," Case wrote.

      "Minnesota Power asserts that it is rare, cost-prohibitive and time consuming to perform a complete inspection of the entire (High Energy Piping) HEP system during a single planned outage," Case wrote.

      Minnesota Power attorney David Moeller defended the company's inspection schedule during Thursday's meeting.

      "Good utility practice should encompass a range of reasonable behaviors," Moeller said. "Compliance is not dictated by following only the strictest industry standards."

      But commissioner John Tuma said he didn't buy the arguments made by the company.

      "Clearly there was a violation here and you should have known better, and you should have done something with the weld," Tuma said. "And I think that was well-established and well-proved."

      In a statement to the News Tribune, Minnesota spokesperson Amy Rutledge said the company tries to prevent outages and will continue to look at industry practices to improve its operations.

      "Minnesota Power has a strong history of consistently following good utility practices. The disagreement here is more about how the definition of good utility practices applies to (Minnesota Power's) practices, other utilities and consulting with industry experts," Rutledge said. "The safety of our employees and the reliability of assets is at the core of our mission of providing safe, reliable and affordable power to our customers. And maintaining our operations to prevent outages is a critical component of that."

      A timing on the refund is not yet known, but Rutledge said the average residential customer using 750 kilowatts would see a $4-$5 one-time credit on a monthly bill.

      ___

      (c)2022 the Duluth News Tribune (Duluth, Minn.)

      Visit the Duluth News Tribune (Duluth, Minn.) at www.duluthnewstribune.com

      Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

    TOP

    Other Articles - Generation


    TOP

       Home  -  Feedback  -  Contact Us  -  Safe Sender  -  About Energy Central   
    Copyright © 1996-2022 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Energy Central® and Energy Central Professional® are registered trademarks of CyberTech, Incorporated. Data and information is provided for informational purposes only, and is not intended for trading purposes. CyberTech does not warrant that the information or services of Energy Central will meet any specific requirements; nor will it be error free or uninterrupted; nor shall CyberTech be liable for any indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including lost data, information or profits) sustained or incurred in connection with the use of, operation of, or inability to use Energy Central. Other terms of use may apply. Membership information is confidential and subject to our privacy agreement.