Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 SEPTEMBER 2012

PA Wins An NSR Case: "Routine" Pretty Much Means Routine For The Unit

Last week, in United States v. Louisiana Generating, EPA won a ruling regarding what type of projects fall within the routine maintenance, repair or replacement exception from the rule that facility modifications are subject to PSD/NSR requirements.

United StatesEnvironment

Last week, in United States v. Louisiana Generating, EPA won a ruling regarding what type of projects fall within the routine maintenance, repair or replacement exception from the rule that facility modifications are subject to PSD/NSR requirements. The decision is thorough in that it carefully reviews the so-called "WEPCO Factors" – the nature, extent, purpose, frequency, and cost of the work, and applied them to the work at issue in this case, i.e., reheater replacements at the Big Cajun II power plant. 

Notwithstanding the thoroughness of the court's analysis, I don't find it completely convincing. As the court acknowledged, while all of the WEPCO factors are relevant, the crux of the issue is whether, in order to qualify for the exception, maintenance work must be routine for the units at issue, or only routine in the industry. In other words, should the question be whether all similar generating units at some point in their life undergo reheater replacement,

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from