UNITED STATES 


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


REGION IX 


75 HAWTHORNE STREET 


SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94105 


In the Matter of: 	 ) 

) Docket No. R9-09-1O 

Merced Power, L.L.c. ) 

El Nido, California ) FINDING AND 

) NOTICE OF VIOLATION 

Proceeding Under Section ) 

113(a), Clean Air Act, ) 

as Amended ) 

--~---------------------------) 

This Finding and Notice of Violation ("NOV") is issued pursuant to section 113(a)(l) of 

the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § § 7401-7671q ("CAA" or the "Act"). This NOV is issued to 

Merced Power, L.L.c. ("Merced Power") for violations of the Act at Merced's power generating 

facility in El Nido, California (the "Facility"). Section 113(a)(I) requires the Administrator of 

the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") to notify any person in violation of 

a state implementation plan ("SIP") of the violations. The authority to issue NOV s has been 

delegated to the Regional Adniinistrator of EPA, Region 9, and redelegated to the Director of the 

Air Division for EPA, Region 9. 

STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITY 

A. 	 Clean Air Act 

1. 	 Pursuant to section 107(d) of the Act, 42 U.S.c. § 7407(d), the Administrator 

promulgated lists of attainment status designations for each air quality control region 

("AQCR") in every state. These lists identify the attainment status of each AQCR for 

each of the criteria pollutants. The attainment status designations for California AQCRs 

are listed at 40 c.F.R. § 81.305. 

2. 	 The city ofEl Nido, California, is part of the San Joaquin Valley Area that has been 

designated as a serious non attainment area for the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards ("NAAQS") and an extreme non attainment area for the I-hour ozone 

NAAQS (40 C.F.R. § 81.305) and is subject to the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley 

Air Pollution Control District ("SJV APCD" or the "District"). 

3. 	 Section 11O(a) of the Act requires that all states adopt SIPs that provide for the 

1 

implementation, maintenance and enforcement of primary and secondary air quality 

standards. 42 U.S.c. § 741O(a). 

4. 	 A person's failure to comply with any approved regulatory provision of a SIP renders the 

person in violation of an applicable implementation plan and subject to enforcement 

under section 113(a)(I) of the Act. 42 U.S.c. § 7413(a)(I). 

5. 	 Under 40 c.F.R. § 52.23, "[fJailure to comply with ... any permit condition ... issued 

pursuant to approved or promulgated regulations for the review of new or modified 

stationary or indirect sources, or with any permit limitation or condition contained within 

an operating permit issued under an EPA-approved program that is incorporated into the 

State implementation plan, shall render the person ... so failing to comply in violation of 

a requirement of an applicable implementation plan and subject to enforcement action 

under section 113 of the Clean Air Act." 

B. 	 SJV APCD Rule 1080: Stack Monitoring 

6. 	 SJV APCD Rule 1080 was approved into and made a part of the federally enforceable SIP 

pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 7410 on June 25,2004.1 

7. 	 SJV APCD Rule 1080 applies to "any owner or operator of a source operation which 

emits or may emit air contaminants." 

8. 	 Section 4.0 of SJVAPCD Rule 1080 provides that "[u]pon the request of the APCO [Air 

Pollution Control Officer] and as directed by him, the owner shall provide, install, and 

operate continuous monitoring equipment on such operations as directed. The owner 

shall maintain, calibrate, and repair the equipment and shall keep the equipment operating 

at design capabilities." 

9. 	 Section 8.0 of SJVAPCD Rule 1080 provides that "[o]wners or operators subject to 

Section 4.0 shall submit a written report for each calendar year to the APCO. The report 

is due by the 30th day following the end of the calendar quarter and shall include ... 

[t]ime intervals, data and magnitude of excess emissions, nature and cause of the excess 

(if known), corrective actions taken and preventive measures adopted." 

C. 	 SJVAPCD Rules 2010 and 2201: Permits and New Source Review 

10. 	 SJV APCD Rule 2010 was approved into and made a part of the federally enforceable SIP 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7410 on September 21, 1999.2 

169 Fed. Reg. 22441 (April 26, 2004). 

264 Fed. Reg. 39920 (July 23, 1999). 

2 

11. 	 SJVAPCD Rule 2010 requires "any person constructing, altering, replacing or operating 

any source operation which emits, may emit, or may reduce emissions to obtain an 

Authority to Construct or a Permit to Operate." 

12. 	 Section 3.0 of SJVAPCD Rule 2010 provides that "[a]ny person building, altering or 

replacing any operation, article, machine, equipment, or other contrivance, the use of 

which may cause the issuance of air contaminants or the use of which may eliminate or 

reduce or control the issuance of air contaminants, shall first obtain authorization for such 

construction from APCO. An Authority to Construct shall remain in effect until the 

Permit to Operate the source operation for which the application was filed is granted or 

denied...." 

13. 	 Section 4.0 of SJVAPCD Rule 2010 provides that "[b]efore any new or modified source 

operation described in Section 3.0, or any existing source operation so described may be 

operated, a written permit shall be obtained from the APCO. No Permit to Operate shall 

be granted ... for any source operation described in Section 3.0 constructed or installed 

without authorization as required by Section 3.0 until the information required is 

presented to the APCO and such source operation is altered, if necessary, and made to 

conform to the standards set forth in Rule 2070 ... and elsewhere in these rules and 

regulations." 

14. 	 SJV APCD Rule 2201 was approved into and made a part of the federally enforceable SIP 

pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 7410 on June 16,2004.3 

15. 	 SJV APCD Rule 2201 addresses the review and permitting of new and modified 

stationary sources of air pollution, including emission offsets. 

16. 	 Section 4.1 of SJVAPCD Rule 2201 requires best available control technology ("BACT") 

for all new emissions unit with a potential to emit exceeding 2.0 pounds in anyone day. 

17. 	 Section 3.9 of SJVAPCD Rule 2201 defines BACT as "the most stringent emission 

limitation or control technique of the following: 3.9.1 Achieved in practice for such 

category and class of source; 3.9.2 Contained in any State Implementation Plan approved 

by ... EPA ... for such category and class of source... ; or 3.9.3 Contained in an 

applicable federal New Source Performance Standard; or 3.9.4 Any other emission 

limitation or control technique, found by the APCO to be cost effective and 

technologically feasible for such class or category of sources or for a specific source." 

369 Fed. Reg. 27837 (May 17, 2004). 

3 

D. 	 SJVAPCD Rule 4101: Visible Emissions 

18. 	 SJVAPCD Rule 4101 was approved into and made a part of the federally enforceable SIP 

pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 7410 on October 11,2005.4 

19. 	 SJVAPCD Rule 4101 applies to "any source operation which emits or may emit air 

contaminants." 

20. 	 SJV APCD Rule 1020 defines "air contaminant" as "any discharge, release, or other 

propagation into the atmosphere directly or indirectly, caused by man and includes, but is 

not limited to, smoke, charred paper, dust, soot, grime, carbon, noxious acids, fumes, 

gases, odors, or particulate matter, or any combination thereof.,,5 

21. 	 Section 5.0 of SJVAPCD Rule 4101 provides that "[a] person shall not discharge into the 

atmosphere from any single source of emission whatsoever, any air contaminant, other 

than uncombined water vapor, for a period or periods aggregating more than three (3) 

minutes in anyone (1) hour which is: 5.1 As dark or darker in shade as that designated as 

No.1 on the Ringelmann Chart, as published by the United States Bureau of Mines. 5.2 

Of such opacity as to obscure an observer's view to a degree equal to or greater than the 

smoke described in Section 5.1 of this rule." 

E. 	 SJV APCD Rule 4352: Solid Fuel Fired Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters 

22. 	 SJV APCD Rule 4352 was approved into and made a part of the federally enforceable SIP 

pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 7410 on April 12, 1999.6 

23. 	 SJV ACPD Rule 4352 is intended to limit emissions of oxides of nitrogen ("NOx") and 

carbon monoxide ("CO") from solid fuel fired boilers, steam generators, and process 

heaters. 

24. 	 Section 5.5 of SJVAPCD Rule 4352 provides that "[t]he owner/operator of any unit using 

ammonia injection as a NOx control technique, shall operate a Continuous Emissions 

Monitoring system (CEM) to monitor and record NOx concentrations, CO2 or O2 

concentrations, as well as the NOx emission rate. Continuous Emission Monitoring 

system shall be operated, maintained, and calibrated pursuant to the requirements of 40 

C.ER. 60.7(c) and 60.13. CEMs must also satisfy the Performance Specifications of 40 

470 Fed. Reg. 46770 (Aug. 11,2005). 

5SJVAPCD Rule 1020 was approved into and made a part of the federally enforceable 

SIP pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 7410 on April 3, 2000. 65 Fed. Reg. 5262 (February 3,2000). 

664 Fed. Reg. 6803 (Feb. 11, 1999). 

4 

c.F.R. 60 Appendix B and the Relative Accuracy Test Audit of Appendix F." 

25. 	 Under 40 C.F.R. § 60.13(b), CEMS must be installed and operational prior to conducting 

performance tests under 40 c.F.R. § 60.8. Verification of operational status shall, as a 

minimum, include completion of the manufacturer's written requirements or 

recommendations for installation, operation, and calibration of the device. Under 40 

c.F.R. § 60.8, performance testing is due within 180 days of the initial operation of a 

facility. Thus, any facility using ammonia injection as a NOx control technique in the 

District must certify the operational status of CEMS within 180 days of initial operation. 

26. 	 Section 6.1 of SJV APCD Rule 4352 provides that "[t]he owner/operator of any unit 

subject to the provisions of this rule shall submit to APCO an emissions control plan of 

all actions to be taken to satisfy the requirements of Section 5.0. Such plan will identify 

the type of emission controls to be applied to each unit and a construction schedule, or 

shall provide source tests ... sufficient to demonstrate that the unit is currently in 

compliance with the emission limits of this rule." 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

A. 	 The Facility 

27. 	 Merced Power owns and/or operates the Facility located at 30 West Sandy Mush Road, El 

Nido, California. 

28. 	 El Nido is within the jurisdiction of SJV APCD which has been designated as a serious 

non attainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and as an extreme non attainment area 

for the I-hour ozone NAAQS under the Act. 

29. 	 The Facility is a 12.5 megawatt power plant that burns wood to generate electricity. The 

wood is either from an urban waste source (i.e., construction or demolition projects) or 

from agricultural waste (orchard removals). The wood is burned in a fluidized bubbling 

bed combustor (the "Boiler") to produce steam which then turns an electric generator to 

generate electricity. 

30. 	 In 2007-2008, Merced Power constructed t~ Facility, including the Boiler with one 

propane-fired auxiliary burner powering a steam turbine generator that is served by a 

selective non-catalytic reduction system, a limestone injection system, and a pulse jet 

baghouse. 

31. 	 The Facility started operations on or about July 5,2008. 

5 

B. 	 Permitting History 

32. 	 On or about November 28, 2005, SJV APCD issued its Authority to Construct permit No. 

N-4607-8-0 (the "Permit") for the Boiler with one propane-fired auxiliary burner 

powering a steam turbine generator, served by a selective non-catalytic reduction system, 

a limestone injection system, and a pulse jet baghouse at the Facility. 

33. 	 Condition 8 of the Permit requires the Facility to "install and maintain an operational 

ammonia volume flow-rate indicator for the selective non-catalytic reduction ("SNCR") 

ammonia injection system." 

34. 	 Condition 9 of the Permit requires the Facility to "install, maintain, and operate a 

continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) to measure stack gas NOx, SOx, CO, 

and O2 concentration" and "meet the performance specification requirements in 40 

c.P.R., Part 60, Appendix B ...." Condition 9 of the Permit also requires the CEMS to 

be "operated, maintained, and calibrated pursuant to the requirements of 40 c.P.R. 

60.7(c) and 40 c.P.R. 60.13." 

35. 	 Condition 14 of the Permit requires the Facility to conduct quarterly audits of CEMS, 

except during quarters in which relative accuracy and compliance source testing are both 

performed, in accordance with EPA guidelines and submit quarterly audit reports along 

with quarterly compliance reports to the District. 

36. 	 Condition 18 of the Permit provides that NOx emissions from the Boiler, except during 

periods of startup and shutdown, shall not exceed 14.81blhr or 0.08IbIMMBtu, based on 

a 24-hour rolling average. 

37. 	 Condition 18 of the Permit provides that sulfur oxides ("SOx") emissions from the 

Boiler, except during periods of startup and shutdown, shall not exceed 3.7Ib/hr or 0.02 

IbIMMBtu, based on a I-hour rolling average. 

38. 	 Condition 18 of the Permit provides that CO emissions from the Boiler, except during 

periods of startup and shutdown, shall not exceed 10.55Ib/hr or 72 ppmv @ 3% O2 

(equivalent to 0.057IbIMMBtu), based on a 24-hour rolling average. 

39. 	 Condition 18 of the Permit provides that PMlO emissions from the Boiler, except during 

periods of startup and shutdown, shall not exceed 7.40 lblhr or 0.041bIMMBtu over a 15­

minute rolling average. 

40. 	 Condition 19 of the Permit provides that ammonia ("NH3") emissions from the Boiler, 

except during periods of startup and shutdown, shall not exceed 85 ppmv @ 3% O2 

(equivalent to 0.041 IbIMMBtu) , based on a 24-hour rolling average. 

6 

41. 	 Condition 22 of the Permit requires source testing to measure the NOx, SOx, PMlO, CO, 

volatile organic compound ("VOC"), and NH3 emission rates within 120 days after initial 

operation of the Facility and at least once every twelve months thereafter. 

C. 	 Compliance Status 

42. 	 On or about March 25,2009, EPA issued an information request to the Facility pursuant 

to Section 114,42 U.S.c. § 7414, of the Act. 

43. 	 The Facility submitted its response (the "Merced Power Response") to the March 25, 

2009 EPA information request on or about May 7, 2009. 

44. 	 On or about February 18 and May 28,2009, the Facility conducted source testing (the 

"Source Tests") to measure the NOx, SOx, PM1o, CO, VOC, and NH3 emission rates 

from the Boiler. 

45. 	 According to the CEMS data provided in the Merced Power Response, the Boiler emitted 

NOx at levels exceeding 14.8Ib/hr or 0.08IbIMMBtu, based on 24-hour tolling average, 

on numerous occasions from or about September 1,2008 to April 24, 2009. 

46. 	 According to the CEMS data provided in the Merced Power Response, the Boiler emitted 

SOx at levels exceeding 3.7Ib/hr or 0.02IbIMMBtu, based on a I-hour rolling average, 

on numerous occasions from or about September 1,2008 to April 25, 2009 and on or 

about May 28,2009. 

47. 	 According to the CEMS data provided in the Merced Power Response, the Boiler emitted 

CO at levels exceeding 1O.55Ib/hr or 72 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.057 

IbIMMBtu), based on a 24-hour rolling average, on numerous occasions from or about 

September 5,2008 to January 3,2009. 

48. 	 According to the Source Tests, the Boiler emitted ammonia at levels exceeding 85 ppmv 

@ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.041IbIMMBtu) over a 24 hour rolling average on or about 

May 28, 2009. 

49. 	 According to the Source Tests, the Boiler emitted PMlO at levels exceeding 7.40 lblhr or 

0.041b1MMBtu over a 15-minute rolling average on or about May 28,2009. 

50. 	 According to the Merced Power Response, the Facility did not install or operate the 

SNCR ammonia injection system from or about July 2008 to January 2009. 

51. 	 According to the Merced Power Response, the Facility did not certify the CEMS for the 

Boiler pursuant to the requirements of 40 c.F.R. § 60.7(c) and 40 c.F.R. § 60.13 until 

April 28, 2009. 

7 

52. 	 According to the Merced Power Response, the Facility did not submit quarterly audit 

reports of CEMS and quarterly compliance reports for the Facility for the third and fourth 

quarters of 2008. 

53. 	 According to the Merced Power Response, the Facility did not submit an emissions 

control plan to SJV APCD that specifies all actions to be taken to satisfy the requirements 

SJV APCD Rule 4352 and that identifies the type of emission controls to be applied to 

each unit and a construction schedule, or shall provide source tests ... sufficient to 

demonstrate that the unit is currently in compliance with the applicable emission limits. 

FlNDlNGS OF VIOLATION 

54. 	 Merced Power failed to perform source testing to measure the NOx, SOx, PMlO, CO, 

VOC, and NH3 emission rates from the Boiler within applicable deadlines in violation of 

Condition 22 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 4352. 

55. 	 From or about September 1, 2008 to April 24, 2009, Merced Power emitted NOx in 

excess of 14.8 lb/hr or 0.08 IbIMMBtu over a 24-hour rolling average in violation of 

Condition 18 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 

56. 	 From or about September 1,2008 to April 25, 2009 and on or about May 28,2009, . 

Merced Power emitted SOx in excess of 3.7 lb/hr or 0.021b1MMBtu over a 24-hour 

rolling average in violation of Condition 18 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 

2201. 

57. 	 From or about September 5,2008 to January 3,2009, Merced Power emitted CO in 

excess of 1O.55lb/hr or 72 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.057IbIMMBtu) over a 24­

hour rolling average in violation of Condition 18 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 

2010 and 2201. 

58. 	 On or about May 28,2009, Merced Power emitted ammonia in excess of 85 ppmv @ 3% 

O2 (equivalent to 0.041IbIMMBtu) over a 24-hour rolling average at the Facility in 

violation of Condition 19 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 

59. 	 On or about May 28,2009, Merced Power emitted PMlO in excess of 7.40 lb/hr or 0.04 

IblMMBtu over a 15-minute rolling average in violation of Condition 19 of the Permit 

and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 

60. 	 From or about July 2008 to January 2009, Merced Power failed to install and maintain an 

operational ammonia volume flow-rate indicator for the SNCR ammonia injection system 

at the Facility in violation of Condition 8 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 

2201. 

8 

61. 	 From or about January 2 to April 28, 2009, Merced Power failed to certify CEMS for the 

Boiler in violation of Condition 9 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2021. 

62. 	 To date, Merced Power has failed to submit quarterly audit reports of CEMS and 

quarterly compliance reports for the Facility for the third and fourth quarters of 2008 in 

violation of Condition 14 of the Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 

63. 	 To date, Merced Power has failed to submit an emissions control plan to SJVAPCD that 

specifies all actions to be taken to satisfy the requirements SJV APCD Rule 4352 and that 

identifies the type of emission controls to be applied to each unit and a construction 

schedule, or shall provide source tests ... sufficient to demonstrate that the unit is 

currently in compliance with the applicable emission limits in violation of Section 6.1 of 

SJV APCD Rule 4352. 

NOTICE OF VIOLATION 

Notice is given to Merced Power that the Administrator of the EPA, by authority duly 

delegated to the undersigned, finds that Merced Power violated section 110 of the Act and the 

California State Implementation Plan, as set forth in the Finding and Notice of Violation. 

ENFORCEMENT 

Section 113(a)(I) of the Act provides that when any person has violated any requirement or 

prohibition of an applicable implementation plan or permit, EPA may: 

issue an order requiring compliance with the requirements or prohibition of such 

implementation plan or permit, or 

issue an administrative penalty order pursuant to section 113(d) for civil 

administrative penalties of up to $37,500 per day of violation, or 

bring a civil action pursuant to section 113(b) for injunctive relief and/or civil 

penalties of not more than $37,500 per day for each violation. 

42 U.S.c. § 7413(a)(I); 40 c.F.R. Part 19. 

Furthermore, if a person knowingly violates any requirements of an applicable 

implementation plan more than 30 days after the date of issuance of this NOV, section 113(c) 

provides for criminal penalties or imprisonment, or both. 

Under section 306( a) of the Act, the regulations promulgated thereunder (40 c.F.R. Part 

15), and Executive Order 11738, facilities to be used in federal contracts, grants, and loans must 

be in full compliance with the Act and all regulations promulgated pursuant to it. Violations of 

9 

the Act may result in the facility being declared ineligible for participation in any federal 

contract, grant, or loan. 

PENALTY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 

Section I 13(e)(l) of the Act states that the Administrator or the court, as appropriate, shall, 

in determining the amount of any penalty to be assessed, take into consideration (in addition to 

such other factors as justice may require) the size of the business, the economic impact of the 

penalty on the business, the violator's full compliance history and good faith efforts to comply, 

the duration of the violation as established by any credible evidence (including evidence other 

than the applicable test method), payment by the violator of penalties previously assessed for the 

same violation, the economic benefit of noncompliance, and the seriousness of the violation. 

Section 113(e)(2) of the Act allows the Administrator or the court to assess a penalty for 

each day of violation. For the purposes of determining the number of days of violation, where the 

EPA makes a prima facie showing that the conduct or events giving rise to this violation are 

likely to have continued or recurred past the date of this NOV, the days of violation shall be 

presumed to include the date of this NOV and each and every day thereafter until the violator 

establishes that continuous compliance has been achieved, except to the extent that the violator 

can prove by the preponderance of the evidence that there were intervening days during which no 

violation occurred or that the violation was not continuing in nature. 

OPPORTUNITY FOR CONFERENCE 

Merced Power may, upon request, confer with EPA. The conference will enable Merced 

Power to present evidence bearing on the finding of violation, on the nature of the violations, and 

on any efforts it may have taken or proposes to take to achieve compliance. Merced Power has 

the right to be represented by counsel. A request for a conference with EPA must be made within 

ten (10) working days of receipt ofthis NOV, and the request for a conference or other inquiries 

concerning the NOV should be made in writing to: 

David Kim 


Office of Regional Counsel (ORC-3) 


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 


75 Hawthorne Street 


San Francisco, California 94105 


(415) 972-3882 


10 

Dated: 1-;)3 ~Ot 

Deborah Jordan 

Director, Air Division 

11 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


REGION IX 


75 Hawthorne Street 


San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 


July 23,2009 

CERTIFIED MAIL # 7006 2150 000014941 2208 

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 

IN REPLY: AIR-5 

REFER TO: Docket No. R9-09-10 

Mr. Eric Shumway 

Chief Operating Officer 

Merced Power, L.L.C. 

717 Atlantic Avenue, Suite lA 

Boston, MA 02111 

Re: Merced Power, L.L.C. Finding and Notice ofViolation 

Dear Mr. Shumway: 

Enclosed is a copy of a Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") issued pursuant 

to section 113(a)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q (the "Act"), notifying 

you that the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region IX, finds 

that Merced Power, L.L.C. ("Merced Power") has violated certain provisions ofthe 

California State Implementation Plan at its biomass-fired electric generating facility 

located in El Nido, California (the "Facility"). 

You should be aware that section 113(a)(1) ofthe Act authorizes EPA to issue an 

order requiring compliance with the requirements ofthe Act, issue an administrative 

penalty order, or commence a civil action seeking an injunction andlor a civil penalty. 

Furthermore, section 113(c) ofthe Act provides for criminal penalties in certain cases. 

In addition, section 306 ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7606, the regulations promulgated 

thereunder (2 C.F .R. Part 180), and Executive Order 11738 provide that facilities to be 

utilized in federal contracts, grants, and loans must be in full compliance with the Act and 

all regulations promulgated pursuant to it. A violation ofthe Act may result in the 

Merced Power Facility being declared ineligible for participation in any federal contract, 

grant, or loan. 

If you wish to discuss the enclosed NOV, you may request a conference with EPA 

within ten (10) working days ofreceipt ofthis NOV. The conference will afford Merced 

Power an opportunity to present information bearing on the finding ofviolation, the 

nature ofthe violations, and any efforts it mayhave taken or proposes to take to achieve 

compliance. 

Printed on Recycled Paper 
If you have any questions pertaining to this NOV, please contact Mark Sims of 

the Air Enforcement Office at (415) 972-3965, or have your attorney contact David Kim, 

Office ofRegional Counsel, at (415) 972-3882. 

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. 

Sincerely, 

~an~ Director, Air Division 

Enclosure 

cc: 	 Mr. Seyed Sadredin (SJV APCD) 

Mr. Jim Ryden (CARB) 

Ms. S. Jodi Smith (Paul Hastings) 

2 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


REGION IX 


75 Hawthorne Street 


San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 


JUL 2 S 2009 

IN REPLY: AIR-5 

REFER TO: Docket No. R9-09-09 

Mr. Seyed Sadredin 

Executive Officer/Air Pollution Control Officer 

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 

1990 East Gettysburg Avenue 

Fresno,~ C~726-0244 

J)ear~edin: 

Enclosed for your information is a copy of a Finding and Notice ofViolation 

("NOV") that the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region IX, 

issued to Merced Power, L.L.C. ("Merced Power") for violations ofthe Clean Air Act 

("Act") at its biomass-fired electric generating facility located in EI Nido, California. 

The purpose ofthe NOV is to notify Merced Power that EPA finds that it has 

violated certain provisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan. The violations 

are set forth more specifically in the enclosed NOV. The NOV has been issued pursuant 

to section 113(a)(1) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q. 

The Act also provides that after 30 days from the issuance of an NOV, EPA may 

determine if any further action will be taken pursuant to section 113 ofthe Act. 

If you have any questions concerning this NOV, please contact Mark Sims, Air 

Enforcement Office, at (415) 972-3965, or sims.mark@eps.gov. 

Sincerely, 

~~ Director, Air Division 

Enclosure 

Printed on Recycled Paper 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 


REGION IX 


75 Hawthorne Street 


San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 


JUL 2 3 2009 

IN REPLY: AIR-5 

REFER TO: Docket No. R9-09-09 

Mr. Jim Ryden 

Chief, Enforcement Division 

California Air Resources Board 

P.O. Box 2815 

Sacramento, CA 95812 

Dear Mr. Ryden: 

Enclosed for your information is a copy of a Finding and Notice ofViolation 

("NOV") that the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region IX, 

issued to Merced Power, L.L.C. ("Merced Power") for violations ofthe Clean Air Act 

("Act") at its biomass-fired electric generating facility located in EI Nido, California. 

The purpose ofthe NOV is to notify Merced Power that EPA finds that it has 

violated certain provisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan. The violations 

are set forth more specifically in the enclosed NOV. The NOV has been issued pursuant 

to section I 13(a)(I) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q. 

The Act also provides that after 30 days from the issuance of an NOV, EPA may 

determine if any further action will be taken pursuant to section 113 ofthe Act. 

If you have any questions concerning this NOV, please contact Mark Sims, Air 

Enforcement Office, at (415) 972-3965, or sims.mark@eps.gov. 

Sincerely, 

!!::!:::r 

Director, Air Division 

Enclosure 

Printed on Recycled Paper