The Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) has announced a public comment forum regarding DTE’s application for approval of two special contracts to supply electricity to a proposed 1.4-gigawatt data center in Saline. The forum is scheduled for December 3 and will be held virtually via Microsoft Teams, lasting two hours. A formal MPSC meeting is set for December 5, the same day DTE has requested approval of the contracts.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel criticized the MPSC’s approach, stating: “Despite this announcement, the MPSC is still not allowing for meaningful intervention and review on these DTE data center contracts. Without formal hearings and a contested case declaration, this alone would amount to little more than performative listening rather than thorough public scrutiny. I am concerned that the MPSC has yet to respond to my request to intervene and hold true hearings, and I am fearful that today’s announcement signals they have no intention to hold the formal hearings our residents and ratepayers deserve. To protect Michiganders in this crucial moment we must demand a full, formal contested case, where parties can issue demands for discovery, submit informed expert testimony, and create a record of evidence upon which the MPSC, and everyone across the State, can fairly evaluate these contracts.”
DTE has asked that its application be approved without traditional oversight or formal hearings. Attorney General Nessel has called for proceedings that would allow consumer protection groups to intervene and experts to scrutinize the application through an evidentiary process.
Nessel further stated: “The MPSC is under immense political and industry pressure to fast-track these contracts; contracts that have the power to shape our energy landscape for decades. The contracts remain public only under significant redactions, and promises made by DTE to hold ratepayers harmless remain flimsy and unsupported in the public record. I continue to encourage all Michigan residents to file comments with the Commission, and would urge anyone participating in this forum, to urge the MPSC to hold formal hearings and open a contested case on this matter. Our energy future is far too important to leave to the rushed and secret negotiations of the companies standing to profit most from our ratepaying utility customers and the decisions of the MPSC.”
According to prior determinations by the Commission—including its July 10 order in Case No. U-21638—public comments are not considered evidence on which it can base decisions but may inform parties or contribute informally during policymaking processes (see pages 26-28 of the order). Formal contested case hearings would permit discovery procedures as well as expert testimony from intervenors such as Nessel’s office.
Nessel continues her call for full hearings so protections promised by DTE can be verified before any decision is made.
