United States v. Louisiana Generating, LLC
929 F. Supp. 2d 591
M.D. La.2012Background
- LaGen moved to exclude expert testimony on cost-benefit analysis (CBA) under Daubert; Plaintiffs opposed, LaGen replied.
- LaGen moved to exclude Sahu and Koppe's Sahu/Koppe emissions methodology under Cinergy and Alabama Power; Plaintiffs opposed, LaGen replied.
- LaGen moved to exclude Bruce Biewald as a rebuttal witness; Plaintiffs opposed, LaGen replied.
- Case concerns BCII, a coal-fired plant, and whether 1998/99 turbine work was a PSD major modification and/or violated Title V and the Louisiana SIP.
- A major modification requires physical change, significant net emissions increase (≥40 tons/year NOx or SO2), and causation; PSD is forward-looking.
- Court denied all three motions, concluding the proposed testimony is reliable and relevant, subject to cross-examination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sahu/Adams CBA testimony is admissible | CBA reflects Cajun’s expectations and increases emissions. | CBAs do not reflect exact projects; testimony unreliable/irrelevant. | Denied; CBAs reliable for expected emissions and admissible. |
| Whether Sahu/Koppe method is admissible under Cinergy/Alabama Power | BCII is baseload; method appropriate for forecasting emissions. | Cinergy requires baseload determination and the method is inappropriate for non-baseload cases. | Denied; BCII units qualify as baseload; method reliable for PSD forecasting. |
| Whether Biewald’s rebuttal testimony is admissible | Rebuttal links availability to emissions; relevant to Chupka. | Rebuttal about modeling is irrelevant/unduly prejudicial. | Denied; testimony probative on weight, not admissibility. |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court 1993) (gatekeeping reliability standard for expert testimony)
- United States v. Cinergy Corp., 623 F.3d 455 (7th Cir. 2010) (defines baseload vs cycling vs peaking and limits method applicability)
- U.S. v. Alabama Power Co., No. 01-00152, Slip Op. (N.D. Ala. 2011) (applies Cinergy-type analysis to determine baseload status)
- Vargas v. Lee, 317 F.3d 498 (5th Cir. 2003) (Rule 702 gatekeeping and admissibility standards)