Opinion ID: 1810700
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Liquid Radwaste System and the Cooling Towers are Real Property

Text: In the first issue on which leave to appeal was granted, we asked the parties in this case to address the question of whether the Palisades plant's liquid radwaste system and cooling towers are real property. In its brief, Consumers Power argued that these facilities are not real property for purpose of exemption under the act because the act contemplated a definition of personal property that included these facilities. We have decided this argument against Consumers. Next, Consumers contended that if common-law principles or the General Property Tax Act are determined to be material to a definition of real and personal property for purposes of this suit, then this matter should be remanded to the State Tax Commission for the development of a record as to the nature of these facilities. While we acknowledge that the commission's decision below appeared to render it unnecessary to decide whether these facilities were real or personal property for purpose of eligibility for exemption under the act, we find there is adequate evidence in the record for determining that these facilities are real property. Further, because this Court specifically invited the parties to address this issue, Consumers had the opportunity to refute the evidence we find in the record to support this conclusion, yet failed to do so. The most compelling evidence we find in the record to support the conclusion that these facilities are real property is found in Consumers Power's admitted failure to report any portion of these facilities on its personal property tax statements for 1974 and 1975. The personal property statement which Consumers properly filed, pursuant to MCL 211.18; MSA 7.18, specifically requests the reporting of the following information on page 2: 3. AIR POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITIES AND WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITIES certified exempt by the Michigan State Tax Commission. Use cost installed. Attach rider giving certificate number, year of acquisition and cost by year of acquisition. At the hearing before the commission, counsel for Consumers stipulated that Consumers reported nothing in this provision in either its 1974 or 1975 personal property statement. In addition to this failure of Consumers to report any part of the water pollution control facilities as exempt personal property, the following unchallenged testimony of the Covert Township assessor (Mr. Sarno) supports the conclusion that these facilities are real property.  Q. Mr. Sarno, in 1973, did Consumers Power Company furnish you the estimated cost of the partial construction of the liquid radwaste system and cooling towers?  A. They did.  Q. What was the amount furnished you by Consumers Power?  A. $10,880,258.  Q. Was that represented to you to be real property?  A. It was included in the real [property] report.  Q. Furnished to you by Consumers Power?  A. That is correct.