Friday’s D.C. Circuit hearing will test whether the DOE exceeded its emergency powers by repeatedly ordering the J.H. Campbell coal plant in Michigan to stay available beyond its planned May 2025 retirement.
More than $200 million in costs have already accumulated across five coal plants kept open under rolling 90-day orders, with utilities expected to seek recovery from customers through electricity rates.
Consumers Energy alone says Campbell posted a $180 million net loss over 10 months, while analysts estimate its compliance costs have reached $233 million; TransAlta is seeking $20 million for Centralia’s first 90-day order.
Plant usage has been uneven: Campbell and some MISO units ran during winter demand, but Centralia has not generated power in 2026 and Craig supplied the grid for only 16 days in April.
The case could set a precedent for similar challenges to other DOE orders, with opponents arguing the agency is overriding state and grid-planning decisions meant to manage coal retirements.
Why are consumers paying millions for coal plants that failed to deliver power during critical winter storms?
As AI drives record power demand, are aging coal plants a real solution or a costly roadblock to innovation?
D.C. Circuit Case on DOE Coal Mandates: Billions at Stake for Ratepayers, States, and Clean Energy Transition
Overview
The ongoing legal battle in the D.C. Circuit Court centers on the Department of Energy’s emergency orders that require coal plants, like Michigan’s J.H. Campbell facility, to keep running. This dispute highlights the DOE’s use of Federal Power Act section 202(c) orders, which the Organization of MISO States argues lack a clear demonstration of need. Without strong justification, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is pressured to approve cost allocation for unclear benefits, leading to significant financial and environmental impacts for millions of ratepayers and utilities. The outcome will shape who bears these costs and influence future energy policy.