LANSING – A twice-sunken Lake Michigan barge that raised environmental concerns has now been relocated to a legal location, announced Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel. The barge’s owner, Donald Lewis Balcom, 90, of Traverse City, pled guilty last April in the 13th Circuit Court in Leelanau County to one count of Water Resources Protection Violation for Discharge of Injurious Substances to Waters of the State, a two-year felony. The charge stemmed from a November of 2020 incident, when the barge sank and released oil into Lake Michigan.

Under a deferred sentencing agreement, Balcom was given until June 27, 2025, to relocate the barge to a legal location, which would convert his felony conviction to one count of Watercraft Pollution – Littering from Vessel, a 92-day misdemeanor. On Monday, June 23, 2025, the barge was moved to a legal location in West Grand Traverse Bay. Over the past week, the barge has been partially dismantled and is no longer on state-owned Lake Michigan bottomlands.

“After years of environmental concerns and legal proceedings, I am pleased the barge has finally been moved and to announce the resolution of this case,” Nessel said. “We have made it abundantly clear that the bay cannot be treated as a personal junkyard.  My department remains committed to working with the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy to protect the Great Lakes whenever they come under threat.”

In 2023, the Attorney General issued seven criminal charges against Balcom following years of efforts by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy to work with Balcom toward a resolution of the issue of the sunken industrial barge and contamination of Grand Traverse Bay on the northwestern coast of Michigan’s Lower Peninsula. The barge was moved to a legal location, entitling Balcom to the reduced sentence. The Court has yet to issue an amended judgment of sentence.

LANSING – Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a decision (PDF) affirming the constitutionality of Michigan’s lifesaving Newborn Screening Program and the BioTrust for Health, announced Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel. The decision reversed a lower court’s ruling that had found the programs violated the Constitutional rights of the children and their parents to direct their children’s medical care.

The Newborn Screening Program, operated by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), collects blood samples from newborn babies and screens them for diseases, which helps save infant lives through early detection. Newborn screening looks for more than 50 disorders that can affect blood cells, brain development, how the body breaks down nutrients from food, lungs and breathing, hormones and how the body fights infection. This includes congenital hyperthyroidism, sickle cell disease and cystic fibrosis. The BioTrust for Health facilitates third-party health research using de-identified data or blood spots collected by the Newborn Screening Program.

“The Newborn Screening Program saves lives,” Nessel said. “I want to thank the Court for its decision and the dedicated attorneys in my office who litigated this case for years to ensure Michigan can continue early detection of serious diseases while also advancing medical research through privacy-protected de-identified data.”

“With this ruling, MDHHS can continue to fulfill its commitment to protect the health and well-being of Michigan families, particularly its youngest and most vulnerable residents,” said Elizabeth Hertel, MDHHS director. “Michigan’s newborn screening program is designed to quickly diagnose babies who may look healthy but have rare and often serious disorders that require early treatment. Since 1965, this program has ensured thousands of families were quickly provided information about their baby’s condition, allowing for early interventions and healthier outcomes.”

The Sixth Circuit reaffirmed that the programs’ post-screening practices, including analyzing de-identified blood spots for quality improvement and making them available to vetted health researchers, does not violate constitutional protections. The decision also vacated a lower court’s injunction that had ordered the destruction of stored blood spots and associated data.

“Michigan must be in the fight to maintain self-determination in where our power comes from,” said Nessel. “The closure of this coal-powered electric plant has been planned for years, the utility made all due preparations to maintain our energy load without it, and the closure has been agreed to and cited in settlements affecting customer costs.

“In particular, if this arbitrary and unlawful order is allowed to stand, the only effect Michiganders will feel will be the pinch in their pockets. The costs of maintaining production at the plant, long since prepared for closure, could be an enormous burden on the rate-paying customers of Consumers Energy. And that’s before taking into account the environmental and public health costs of continuing to fuel a coal-powered plant.”

The retirement of the Campbell Plant, originally built in the 1960s, has been the matter of extensive planning and analysis by state regulators and the broader inter-state power grid. This has included the procurement of replacement power resources, and the planning for future resources, to more than account for the removal of the Campbell Plant. In fact, the retirement was initially sought by Consumers Energy in its June 30, 2021 integrated resource plan application.  Parties in that case, including the Attorney General, signed a settlement that included the retirement of the Campbell Plant and the settlement was approved by the Michigan Public Service Commission in June of 2022. The retirement of the Campbell Plant and its replacement with more cost-effective resources were elements of a carefully considered plan that was expected to save Michigan ratepayers nearly $600 million.

“This unprecedented Order of the Department of Energy declares an emergency without evidence, completely ignores state and federal regulators that approved the plants retirement, and will potentially put enormous costs onto utility customers who receive no real benefit,” Nessel continued. “As I have done throughout my years in office, today we’re fighting for affordable utility bills and the rights of Michiganders to clean up their energy production.”

The Department of Energy’s May 23, 2025, Order to cancel the Campbell retirement disregards all prior planning and regulatory approvals, in yet another example of the Trump administration arbitrarily declaring a false emergency as a pretext for advancing its policy agenda by means outside its normal authority.  The Order states that the plant will continue to run through August, though it is possible the DOE could issue another order at that point extending again the plant’s producing lifetime.  Never before has the DOE delayed the retirement of a power plant absent a request from the operating utility or local governmental body, and only ever in response to concrete, particularized emergencies, and subject to limitations to ensure that the order extends no further than necessary to address the emergency at hand.

The Attorney General’s request for rehearing challenges the DOE’s Order on its inability to show an actual emergency, as well as for several other violations of the DOE’s authority under the Federal Power Act, which grants the DOE’s emergency powers. The Attorney General’s challenges include that the Order as issued exceeds the authority granted to the DOE, and that the DOE failed to take required steps to limit the amount of operation to only when necessary and to minimize environmental impacts.

Under the Federal Power Act, the Department of Energy has 30 days to respond to the Attorney General’s request.