DTE Energy 2014 Annual Report Download - page 91



In July 2009, DTE Energy received a NOV/FOV from the EPA alleging, among other things, that five DTE Electric power plants violated New Source
Performance standards, Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements, and operating permit requirements under the Clean Air Act. In June 2010, the
EPA issued a NOV/FOV making similar allegations related to a project and outage at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant. In March 2013, DTE Energy received
a supplemental NOV from the EPA relating to the July 2009 NOV/FOV. The supplemental NOV alleged additional violations relating to the New Source
Review provisions under the Clean Air Act, among other things.
In August 2010, the U.S. Department of Justice, at the request of the EPA, brought a civil suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Michigan against DTE Energy and DTE Electric, related to the June 2010 NOV/FOV and the outage work performed at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant, but
not relating to the July 2009 NOV/FOV. Among other relief, the EPA requested the court to require DTE Electric to install and operate the best available
control technology at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant. Further, the EPA requested the court to issue a preliminary injunction to require DTE Electric to (i)
begin the process of obtaining the necessary permits for the Monroe Unit 2 modification and (ii) offset the pollution from Monroe Unit 2 through emissions
reductions from DTE Electric's fleet of coal-fired power plants until the new control equipment is operating. In August 2011, the U.S. District Court judge
granted DTE Energy's motion for summary judgment in the civil case, dismissing the case and entering judgment in favor of DTE Energy and DTE Electric.
In October 2011, the EPA caused to be filed a Notice of Appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In March 2013, the Court of Appeals
remanded the case to the U.S. District Court for review of the procedural component of the New Source Review notification requirements. In September 2013,
the EPA caused to be filed a motion seeking leave to amend their complaint regarding the June 2010 NOV/FOV adding additional claims related to outage
work performed at the Trenton Channel and Belle River power plants as well as additional claims related to work performed at the Monroe Power Plant. In
addition, the Sierra Club caused to be filed a motion to add a claim regarding the River Rouge Power Plant. In March 2014, the U.S. District Court judge
granted again DTE Energy's motion for summary judgment dismissing the civil case related to Monroe Unit 2. In April 2014, the U.S. District Court judge
granted motions filed by the EPA and the Sierra Club to amend their New Source Review complaint adding additional claims for Monroe Units 1, 2 and 3,
Belle River Units 1 and 2, Trenton Channel Unit 9 and denied the claims related to River Rouge that were brought by the Sierra Club. In June 2014, the EPA
filed a motion requesting certification for appeal of the March 2014 summary judgment decision. In October 2014, the EPA and the U.S. Department of
Justice filed the anticipated notice of appeal of the U.S. District Court judge's dismissal of the Monroe Unit 2 case. This will officially start the appellate
process. The amended New Source Review claims are all stayed until the appeal is resolved by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
DTE Energy and DTE Electric believe that the plants and generating units identified by the EPA and the Sierra Club have complied with all applicable
federal environmental regulations. Depending upon the outcome of discussions with the EPA regarding the two NOVs/FOVs, DTE Electric could be required
to install additional pollution control equipment at some or all of the power plants in question, implement early retirement of facilities where control
equipment is not economical, engage in supplemental environmental programs, and/or pay fines. The Company cannot predict the financial impact or
outcome of this matter, or the timing of its resolution.
Water — In response to an EPA regulation, DTE Electric would be required to examine alternatives for reducing the environmental impacts of the
cooling water intake structures at several of its facilities. Based on the results of completed studies and expected future studies, DTE Electric may be required
to install technologies to reduce the impacts of the water intake structures. A final rule was issued in May 2014. The final rule specifies a time period
exceeding three years to complete studies to determine the type of technology needed to reduce impacts to fish. Final compliance for the installation of the
required technology will be determined by each state on a case by case basis. We are currently evaluating the compliance options and working with the State
of Michigan on evaluating whether any controls are needed. These evaluations/studies may require modifications to some existing intake structures. It is not
possible to quantify the impact of this rulemaking at this time.
In April 2013, the EPA proposed revised steam electric effluent guidelines regulating wastewater streams from coal-fired power plants including
multiple possible options for compliance. The rules are expected to be finalized by September 2015. It is not possible at this time to quantify the impacts of
these developing requirements.
88