Power & Coal - Operations and Strategy
| DTE fighting with EPA over emissions from coal plants, coking facilities |  | November 03, 2009 4:29 PM ET By Barry Cassell
|  Related Companies |  Related Documents |  Related Articles |  Related Power Plants |
DTE Energy Co. reported in its Oct. 30 Form 10-Q filing that it is having ongoing skirmishes with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over coal facilities on both its regulated Detroit Edison Co. side of the business and its unregulated side. "In July 2009, DTE Energy received a Notice of Violation/Finding of Violation (NOV/FOV) from the EPA alleging, among other things, that five Detroit Edison power plants violated New Source Performance standards, Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements, and Title V operating permit requirements under the Clean Air Act. We believe that the plants identified by the EPA have complied with applicable regulations. Depending upon the outcome of our discussions with the EPA regarding the NOV/FOV, the EPA could bring legal action against Detroit Edison. We could also be required to install additional pollution control equipment at some or all of the power plants in question, engage in Supplemental Environmental Programs, and/or pay fines. We cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this matter, or the timing of its resolution." DTE spokesman John Austerberry said Nov. 3 that the five coal-fired plants for which EPA is seeking information are Belle River, St. Clair, Trenton Channel, River Rouge and Monroe. Austerberry pointed out that EPA is merely gathering information right now and that Detroit Edison is not the only utility that EPA has targeted in recent years in terms of environmental compliance. In the meantime, Detroit Edison is in the middle of a $1.7 billion program to add more emission controls to its coal fleet. For example, unit 4 at the massive Monroe plant has been tied into a new SO2 scrubber, and unit 3 is offline but due back in service soon after it is tied into a scrubber. Scrubber installation is planned for units 1 and 2 at Monroe, as well, but Austerberry said the construction schedule for that project is not firm right now. DTE also faces possible enforcement actions on its unregulated side in connection with a coke battery it owns in Michigan that bakes metallurgical coal into coke for the steel industry. "The Company has completed the installation of new environmental equipment at our coke battery facility in Michigan," DTE reported in the Form 10-Q. "The Michigan coke battery facility received and responded to information requests from the EPA resulting in the issuance of a notice of violation regarding potential maximum achievable control technologies and new source review violations. The EPA is in the process of reviewing the Company's position of demonstrated compliance and has not initiated escalated enforcement. At this time, the Company cannot predict the impact of this issue." DTE added: "Furthermore, the Company is in the process of settling historical air violations at its coke battery facility located in Pennsylvania. At this time, the Company cannot predict the impact of this settlement. The Company has also received and responded to information requests from the EPA with respect to wastewater treatment at the coke battery facility located in Pennsylvania. The Company is investigating wastewater treatment technologies for this facility. This investigation may result in capital expenditures to meet regulatory requirements." The Form 10-Q does not describe the Michigan or Pennsylvania facilities. The DTE Web site said the Michigan facility, known as EES Coke Battery LLC, is 100% owned and located in River Rouge, Mich. The EES Coke Battery plant is a former National Steel Corp. facility. The DTE Web site describes the EES Coke Battery plant as having 85 ovens and producing more than 1 million tons of furnace coke per year. The Pennsylvania facility is the 100% owned DTE Shenango plant at Pittsburgh. The DTE Web site said the plant has 56 ovens and a capacity to produce about 350,000 tons of furnace coke per year. Austerberry noted that both of the coke plants are operating, but at less than their full capacity because of the downturn in the economy. |