Public Citizen Comments Regarding Petra Nova’s Federal Operating Permit
Public Citizen Comments Regarding Petra Nova's Federal Operating Permit
Office of the Chief Clerk, MC 105
TCEQ
PO Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087
Via online comment portal and by hand delivery
October 23, 2025
Re: Public Citizen Comments on Draft Permit No.: O3611
Public Citizen appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss our recommendations further. Please contact Haley Schulz at hschulz@citizen.org, 512-477-1155.
The Draft Permit should not be issued.
Petra Nova’s Draft Permit should not be issued as it does not comply with Title V’s minimum requirements for reasons including the following:
- The failure to include an adequate statement of basis;
- The failure to include adequate monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping; and
- The failure to ensure compliance with all applicable requirements.
The Draft Permit fails to adequately incorporate applicable requirements and lacks an adequate Statement of Basis
The Draft Permit’s Statement of Basis (“SOB”) does not meet the minimum standards for a Title V Statement of Basis. The SOB does not adequately describe the rationale for determining that the monitoring is sufficient to ensure compliance with applicable requirements.
The SOB includes very limited explanation of or rationale for the Draft Permit’s inclusion of additional periodic monitoring requirements for certain emissions units and not others. The SOB lacks any discussion evaluating the adequacy of the monitoring for many applicable requirements. The compliance assurance monitoring (CAM) or periodic monitoring methods described mention monitoring NOx, CO, PM (2.5 or 10), VOCs, and opacity emissions, but the monitoring frequency varies. For example, opacity is to be monitored from COOLTWR8, CTHRSG8STK, and GRP-VEREQ, but the monitoring frequency changes between once per quarter, annually, or any time an alternate fuel is used. While the emission sources are different, the monitoring frequency should remain consistent with the pollutant type.
The Draft Permit states the claim that the Executive Director of the TCEQ “has determined that the permit contains sufficient monitoring, testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that assure compliance with the applicable requirements.”1 However, the SOB does not include essential information needed to evaluate the basis for these terms and conditions, including emission-related information, underlying calculation methods, and existing emissions control requirements, all of which are required to be included within the SOB.
Further, the Determination of Applicable Requirements chart included in the SOB is largely indecipherable to the public. The TCEQ has cited the underlying applicable requirements in a shorthand that is difficult for a layperson to evaluate and understand. The statements under the Basis of Determination column do not present information in a manner that is meaningful to the public. For example, there is no explanation of the actual substance of the underlying applicable requirement and how the information in the Basis of Determination Column is related to that requirement.
The Draft Permit fails to ensure compliance with applicable requirements and fails to include adequate monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping.
The Draft Permit fails to ensure compliance with all applicable requirements and to include required monitoring for reasons including those detailed below.2
- The Draft Permit fails to specify monitoring, testing and recordkeeping conditions necessary to assure compliance with applicable PBR requirements.
Each Title V permit must contain monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting conditions that assure compliance with all applicable requirements.3 Emission limits in federal operating permits, including PBRs, incorporated by reference into the Draft Permit are applicable requirements.4 The Draft Permit is deficient, because it fails to establish monitoring, testing, and recordkeeping requirements that assure compliance.
Without access to technical review documentation, the public is unable to verify how facility emissions will comply with the emissions limits set by Texas law. For this Draft Permit to be sufficient, a special condition to the Draft Permit must be added detailing more comprehensive monitoring and compliance assurance.
Acquiring access to publicly available documents is impeded by several factors. In the TCEQ Records database, locating emission records is challenging due to NRG Energy wholly selling their 50% stake in the facility’s ownership to JX Nippon in 2021. When reviewing the TCEQ Central Registry, the Petra Nova facility shows the Applicant’s Name under “Petra Nova Parish Holdings LLC, CN604280792,” while the Regulated Entity Name remains “WA Parish Electric Generating Station, RN100888312.” However, when we use these IDs to search the TCEQ Records database, no documentation returns. Instead, when searching for general terms, like “Petra Nova,” this does pull limited documentation. Finding records under the correct Central Registry RN or CN IDs is extremely cumbersome, especially with inconsistencies in “Regulated Entity Name.”
Furthermore, after locating the appropriate identifiers to find associated documentation in the TCEQ Records database, no applicable emission records are available. This constrains one’s ability to properly review all appropriate documentation and assure compliance.
Without investigative reporting available to the public, we are unable to verify CEMS compliance. Because the Petra Nova facility was offline from May 2020 until September 2023, there will be gaps in review. However, the fact the public is unable to review compliance documentation since the facility’s restart is troubling and makes it impossible to accurately determine compliance, which requires either continuous emissions monitoring or alternative methods “that provide sufficiently reliable and timely information for determining compliance” according to § 7661c(b) of the U.S.C title 42, Chapter 85, Subchapter V.5 The TCEQ must comply with these requirements in administering its Title V permit program and all other environmental programs.
Conclusion
Again, we appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If you wish to discuss the issues raised, please contact Haley Schulz at hschulz@citizen.org, 512-477-1155.
Respectfully,
Haley Schulz
Houston Organizer, Public Citizen