Federal Court Orders $100 Million Penalty & Clean Air Overhaul at DTE’s Zug Island Coke Plant

Key Takeaways

• $100 Million Civil Penalty: The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ordered DTE Energy Company and affiliated entities to pay $100 million for Clean Air Act violations tied to sulfur dioxide emissions at the EES Coke facility.
• Emissions Exceeded Permitted Baseline: The facility emitted more than 3,200 tons of sulfur dioxide in 2018, exceeding its permitted baseline of under 2,100 tons per year following 2014 permit changes.
• Corporate Liability Extended Upward: The court found multiple DTE entities liable as operators, citing a “high degree of control” over environmental decision-making and facility operations.
• $70 Million in Avoided Compliance Costs: Evidence showed defendants saved approximately $70 million by failing to install required pollution controls, influencing the size of the penalty.
• Mandatory Pollution Controls and New Permits: The court ordered defendants to seek New Source Review permits within 250 days and propose stringent controls consistent with the lowest achievable emissions rate and best available control technology.

Deep Dive

On a narrow strip of land between River Rouge and Detroit, heavy industry has shaped the skyline for generations. This week, it also shaped a major federal court ruling. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan has ordered DTE Energy Company and three related entities to comply with the Clean Air Act and pay a $100 million civil penalty tied to sulfur dioxide emissions from the EES Coke facility on Zug Island.

The plant, which produces metallurgical coke used in steelmaking, sits in an area that already fails to meet federal standards for sulfur dioxide. The court found that after DTE sought changes to its state air permit in 2014, emissions from the facility increased.

By 2018, the plant emitted more than 3,200 tons of sulfur dioxide, well above its permitted baseline level of under 2,100 tons per year.

That increase formed the backbone of the court’s Clean Air Act finding. In an August 2025 order, the court concluded that the facility violated the statute. A two-week trial in September focused on which DTE-related entities were responsible and what consequences should follow. Tuesday’s decision closed that chapter.

The ruling went beyond tonnage and permit thresholds. The court found that emissions from the facility caused asthma attacks, heart attacks, strokes, increased blood pressure, and increased risk of cancer, asthma, Alzheimer’s disease, and early deaths. In a region already grappling with air quality challenges, the findings drew a direct line between excess sulfur dioxide and measurable health impacts.

Corporate Accountability

Liability did not stop with the operating entity alone.

The court found DTE Energy Company, DTE Energy Resources, and DTE Energy Services liable as operators of the facility, concluding that each entity exhibited “a high degree of control over the Facility, including over environmental decision-making and operations.”

EES Coke Battery had previously been found liable as both owner and operator.

The decision underscores that corporate structure does not shield parent or affiliated entities when courts determine they exercised operational and environmental control.

$70 Million in Avoided Costs

In determining the penalty, the court found that the defendants saved roughly $70 million by failing to comply with Clean Air Act requirements. Those avoided costs, the court concluded, justified a significant civil penalty. It ultimately set that figure at $100 million and determined that the DTE defendants had a “substantial” ability to pay.

But the ruling is not only about a check written to the federal government.

The court ordered the companies to seek New Source Review permits from the Michigan Department of the Environment and Great Lakes within 250 days. Those permit applications must include proposals for stringent pollution controls consistent with the lowest achievable emissions rate and best available control technology, as determined by state regulators.

At trial, desulfurization technology was discussed as a potential control measure. The court noted that the technology described is “mature and well-established in the coking industry.”

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division said the decision sends a broader message.

“This decision demonstrates that the Department of Justice will seek relief against companies that fail to comply with the nation’s environmental laws,” Gustafson said. “This ensures a level playing field for all businesses and advances the Administration’s initiative to Make America Healthy Again.”

For operators in heavily regulated sectors, particularly in nonattainment areas, the ruling is a reminder that permit revisions and emissions increases are not technical footnotes. When they result in excess pollution, they can carry nine-figure consequences and force long-delayed investments in pollution control technology that courts may view as long within reach.

The GRC Report is your premier destination for the latest in governance, risk, and compliance news. As your reliable source for comprehensive coverage, we ensure you stay informed and ready to navigate the dynamic landscape of GRC. Beyond being a news source, the GRC Report represents a thriving community of professionals who, like you, are dedicated to GRC excellence. Explore our insightful articles and breaking news, and actively participate in the conversation to enhance your GRC journey.