TCEQ Contested Hearing Instructions
INSTRUCTIONS — READ BEFORE YOU START (do not copy this section)
Deadline: Out of caution, please file this comment by October 18, 2026.
The following instructions apply to the template under the line down below.
Step 1: Fill in the blanks.
· Replace everything in [BRACKETS] with your own information, and delete the brackets and any words within them.
· Where you see choices separated by a slash (for example, “own / reside at”), keep the one that fits you and delete the others.
· Give an actual distance (for example, “650 yards”), not “within 2 miles.”
· Measure from your house to the facility site using Google Maps:
1. First, copy and paste the following coordinates into the search bar on Google Maps: 32.251924, -97.082255. A red paddle should appear showing the location of the power plant.
2. Second, right click on the side of your property that is closest to the data center site (where the red paddle is), and then select “Measure distance.”
3. Third, right click where the red paddle is and select “Distance to here.” A line should appear showing how far your property is from the power plant. It will show the distance in miles in the second place you click.
· Be specific about your family, animals, crops, water well, and any health conditions. Specific facts are what count.
· Do not change or delete any of the other wording unless it is necessary for factual accuracy.
Step 2: File online.
1. Go to www.tceq.texas.gov/goto/comment.
2. Enter permit number 183570 and click Search. Select the NRG Prairie Energy Center LLC application (it might select NRG Prairie Energy Center LLC automatically).
3. Fill in your name, mailing address, phone, email, and other information.
4. Copy everything below the line and paste it into the comment box once it is filled out.
5. Submit, and save or screenshot the confirmation page.
6. Repeat steps 1–6 inserting permit number PSDTX1706 in the same place you inserted the first permit number.
Step 3: Each adult files separately for each permit.
No computer? Print and sign your completed comment and mail it to: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Office of the Chief Clerk, MC 105, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Mail it early so it arrives before the deadline.
Please note: Everything you submit, including your name, address, phone number, and any health information, becomes public record.
Questions? Contact Kelly O’Donnell, at kokogrizzly@icloud.com or (817) 992-5832.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This form is provided only as a general courtesy to the public. Any attorneys involved in the preparation of these materials do not represent you, and using, completing, or filing this form does not create an attorney-client relationship. This form is not legal advice about your situation. You alone are responsible for deciding whether to file, what to include, and for filing correctly and on time. If you want legal advice, please reach out to a qualified attorney.
COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE:
Applicant: NRG Prairie Energy Center LLC State Air Quality Permit No. 183570 / PSD Air Quality Permit No. PSDTX1706 / GHG PSD Air Quality Permit No. GHGPSDTX272
I request a contested case hearing on State Air Quality Permit No. 183570 and PSD Air Quality Permit No. PSDTX1706. I also request and support the public meeting described in the Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision. I ask that it be held in the Grandview area at a time residents can attend, and that the comment period stay open through the close of the meeting. Please also treat this submission as my timely written public comment on all three permits, as well as my hearing and public meeting request. Please add me to the mailing list for this application.
I [own / reside at / own and reside at] [PROPERTY ADDRESS], which is approximately [DISTANCE, e.g., 800 yards / 0.5 miles] from the proposed facility and lies [DIRECTION, e.g., north / northeast] of the facility site. I measured this distance using [METHOD, e.g., Google Maps / county appraisal map]. My property is approximately [NUMBER] acres, and I have [owned / lived at] it since [YEAR]. I use this property as [my primary residence / my family’s home] and for [DESCRIBE USES, e.g., raising cattle and horses, growing hay, a private water well, a garden, children’s outdoor play, hunting, outdoor work]. My household includes [DESCRIBE, e.g., two young children and a parent with asthma].
Because of my property’s proximity to the facility and the amount of time my family, animals, and crops spend outdoors there, I will be exposed to air contaminants from the facility in a way not common to the general public. These include carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter (including PM10 and PM2.5), sulfur dioxide, sulfuric acid mist, ammonia, and hazardous air pollutants, including the higher emissions during turbine startup and shutdown. These emissions may harm the health and welfare of my household, my animals, my vegetation, and my property. They may also interfere with my normal use and enjoyment of my property, contrary to 30 Texas Administrative Code § 101.4. [OPTIONAL: ADD ANY SPECIFIC CONCERNS, e.g., prevailing south winds carry emissions toward my home; family members have respiratory conditions.]
I dispute the following issues of fact and mixed questions of fact and law, each of which is relevant and material to the Commission’s decision on the application:
1. Whether the 24-hour averaging time for the 2 ppmvd NOx limit in Special Condition 6 represents BACT, or whether a 1-hour (or at most 3-hour) averaging time, consistent with the CO and ammonia limits, is required.
2. Whether the 7 ppmvd ammonia limit in Special Condition 6 represents BACT, given that ammonia slip catalysts can achieve 2 ppmvd.
3. Whether the definition of startup in Special Condition 6.A is enforceable or instead allows excess emissions during startup.
4. Whether Special Condition 6.D is enforceable as written.
5. Whether the work practice requirements in Special Condition 8 are specific enough to be enforceable.
6. Whether the hourly 1 ppm sulfur limit for natural gas in Special Condition 14 is enforceable when Special Condition 15 requires sampling only every six months.
7. Whether the visible emissions requirements in Special Condition 17 are adequate to ensure compliance.
8. Whether Special Condition 21 should require instrument-based leak monitoring instead of audio, olfactory, and visual (AVO) checks.
9. Whether the stack testing in Special Conditions 22(B)(1) and 22(D), conducted at maximum firing rates, captures worst-case emissions of CO, VOC, and formaldehyde, which are higher at lower loads.
10. Whether Special Condition 24 should require an ammonia CEMS instead of allowing alternative methods.
11. Whether the Preliminary Determination Summary accounts for, and the modeling includes, the higher VOC and hazardous air pollutant emissions that occur at lower loads and during startup, when the oxidation catalyst is not operating.
12. Whether the emission calculations are adequately supported, particularly for PM10 and NO2, given that Table 1 of the Preliminary Determination Summary shows modeled maximum ground-level concentrations relatively close to the de minimis levels for SO2 (1-hour), PM10 (24-hour), and NO2 (annual), and whether, because PM10 (unlike NO2) has no CEMS, actual PM10 emissions higher than estimated will go undetected.
13. Whether the facility should be required to conduct photochemical modeling for ozone, rather than relying on the MERP screening tool using the Parker County source, given that Table 2 of the Preliminary Determination Summary shows a maximum ozone ground-level concentration of 0.83 ppb, very close to the 1 ppb de minimis value.
14. Whether the Kaufman County (PM2.5 and NOx) and Ellis County (ozone) monitors used for background concentrations are representative of the site.
15. Whether the facility will cause or contribute to an exceedance of the annual PM2.5 standard, given the modeled concentration of 8.22 against the 9 micrograms per cubic meter standard and the inadequately supported PM2.5 emission calculations.
16. Whether the 1-hour formaldehyde results in Table 7 of the Preliminary Determination Summary are incorrect because the maximum 1-hour formaldehyde emissions will occur not at the assumed maximum load but at lower loads, where they will be much greater than assumed, and whether, as a result, the formaldehyde Effects Screening Level will be exceeded.
17. Whether the Table 7 assumed diesel particulate matter emission rate is reliable, given that modeled impacts are very close to the Effects Screening Level.
18. Whether data from distant monitors (Kaufman County, about 80 km away, and Italy, Texas, about 22 km away) can substitute for the preconstruction monitoring required under PSD where significant monitoring concentrations are exceeded for PM2.5 and ozone.
19. Whether a Tier 2 ozone analysis should be required, given background ozone at or near the 70 ppb standard (70 ppb in 2023; 67 ppb three-year average) and a project impact of 0.8 ppb against the 1.0 ppb MERP critical threshold.
20. Whether the modeling understates impacts from emergency engines and other intermittent sources by spreading their emissions over all 8,760 hours of the year.
21. Whether the startup and shutdown emission rates are supported by verifiable turbine manufacturer or control-equipment vendor data.
22. Whether the modeling and application takes into account prior air permits issued and/or the alligator snapping turtles habitat, in each case at or near the site.
23. Whether the growth analysis accounts for the associated data center.
24. Whether a full toxicology review should be required for formaldehyde and the other hazardous air pollutants the facility will emit.
25. Whether the 2 ppmvd NOx limit represents BACT, given that TCEQ has approved 1.5 ppmvd for a comparable combined cycle facility.
26. Whether the 2 ppmvd NOx limit is adequately supported, given the absence of any SCR design information or vendor guarantees.
I request that each of these disputed issues be referred for a contested case hearing before any final action on Permit Nos. 183570 and PSDTX1706, and I request to be granted party status in such hearing. I oppose this application and request that all three permits be denied. The TCEQ’s Notice of Application and Preliminary Decision contains filing deadlines that are in contravention of the TCEQ’s own rules and regulations. I file this submission out of an abundance of caution, and I reserve the right to amend and supplement this filing. If I have previously submitted any comments, hearing requests, or other filings on this application, this filing supplements those prior filings.
I reserve the right to supplement these comments, to request reconsideration, and to seek any further review available by law.
Name: [FULL NAME] Mailing Address: [MAILING ADDRESS] Daytime Telephone: [PHONE NUMBER] Email: [EMAIL]