UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 HAWTHORNE STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94105

Inthe 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 ofViolation ("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 ofthe 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 anyperson in violation of a state implementation plan ("SIP") ofthe violations. The authority to issue NOVs has been delegated to the Regional Adniinistrator ofEPA, Region 9, and redelegated tothe Director ofthe Air Division for EPA, Region 9. STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITY A. Clean AirAct 1. Pursuant to section 107(d) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.c. § 7407(d), the Administrator promulgated lists ofattainment status designations for each air quality control region ("AQCR") in every state. These lists identify the attainment status ofeach AQCR for each ofthe criteriapollutants. The attainment status designations for California AQCRs are listed at 40 c.F.R. § 81.305. 2. The city ofEl Nido, California, is part ofthe San Joaquin Valley Area that has been designated as a serious nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards ("NAAQS") and an extreme nonattainment area for the I-hour ozone NAAQS (40 C.F.R. § 81.305) and is subject to thejurisdiction ofthe San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District ("SJVAPCD" or the "District"). 3. Section 11O(a) ofthe Act requires that all states adopt SIPs that provide for the 1implementation, maintenance and enforcement ofprimary and secondary air quality standards. 42 U.S.c. § 741O(a). 4. A person's failure to comply with any approved regulatory provision ofa SIP renders the person in violation ofan applicable implementation plan and subject to enforcement under section 113(a)(I) ofthe 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 ofnew or modified stationary orindirect 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 ofan applicable implementation plan and subject to enforcement action under section 113 ofthe Clean Air Act." B. SJVAPCD Rule 1080: Stack Monitoring 6. SJVAPCD Rule 1080 was approved into and made a part ofthe 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 ofa source operation which emits or may emit air contaminants." 8. Section 4.0 ofSJVAPCD Rule 1080 provides that "[u]pon the request ofthe 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 ofSJVAPCD 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 bythe 30th day following the end ofthe calendar quarter and shall include

... [t]ime intervals, data and magnitude ofexcess emissions, nature and cause ofthe excess (ifknown), corrective actions taken and preventive measures adopted." C. SJVAPCD Rules 2010 and 2201: Permits and New Source Review 10. SJVAPCD Rule 2010 was approved into and made a part ofthe 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). 211. SJVAPCD Rule 2010 requires "anyperson constructing, altering, replacing or operating any source operation which emits, may emit, ormay reduce emissions to obtain an Authority to Construct or a Permit to Operate." 12. Section 3.0 ofSJVAPCD Rule 2010 provides that "[a]nyperson building, altering or replacing any operation, article, machine, equipment, or other contrivance, the use of which may cause the issuance ofair contaminants or the use ofwhich may eliminate or reduce or control the issuance ofair 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 ofSJVAPCD 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, ifnecessary, 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 ofthe 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 ofnew and modified stationary sources ofair pollution, including emission offsets. 16. Section 4.1 ofSJVAPCD 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 ofSJVAPCD Rule 2201 defines BACT as "the most stringent emission limitation or control technique ofthe following: 3.9.1 Achieved in practice for such category and class ofsource; 3.9.2 Contained in any State Implementation Plan approved by

...EPA

... for such category and class ofsource... ; 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 bythe APCO to be cost effective and technologically feasiblefor such class or category ofsources or for a specific source."

369 Fed. Reg. 27837 (May 17, 2004). 3D. SJVAPCD Rule 4101: Visible Emissions 18. SJVAPCD Rule 4101 was approved into and made a part ofthe 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. SJVAPCD Rule 1020 defines "air contaminant" as "any discharge, release, or other propagation into the atmosphere directly or indirectly, caused byman 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 ofSJVAPCD Rule 4101 provides that "[a] person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single source ofemission whatsoever, any air contaminant, other than uncombined water vapor, for a period orperiods 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 publishedbythe United States Bureau ofMines. 5.2 Ofsuch opacity as to obscure an observer's view to a degree equal to or greater than the smoke described in Section 5.1 ofthis rule." E. SJV APCD Rule 4352: SolidFuel Fired Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters 22. SJVAPCD Rule 4352 was approved into and made a part ofthe federally enforceable SIP pursuant to 42 U.S.c. § 7410 on April 12, 1999.6 23. SJVACPD Rule 4352 is intended to limit emissions ofoxides ofnitrogen ("NOx") and carbon monoxide ("CO") from solid fuel fired boilers, steam generators, and process heaters. 24. Section 5.5 ofSJVAPCD Rule 4352 provides that "[t]he owner/operator ofany 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 of40 C.ER. 60.7(c) and 60.13. CEMs must also satisfy the Performance Specifications of40

470 Fed. Reg. 46770 (Aug. 11,2005). 5SJVAPCD Rule 1020 was approved into and made a part ofthe 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). 4c.F.R. 60 Appendix B and the Relative Accuracy Test Audit ofAppendix 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 ofoperational status shall, as a minimum, include completion ofthe manufacturer's written requirements or recommendations for installation, operation, and calibration ofthe device. Under 40 c.F.R. § 60.8, performance testing is due within 180 days ofthe initial operation ofa facility. Thus, any facility using ammonia injection as a NOx control technique in the District must certify the operational status ofCEMS within 180 days ofinitial operation. 26. Section 6.1 ofSJV APCD Rule 4352 provides that "[t]he owner/operator ofany unit subject to the provisions ofthis rule shall submit to APCO an emissions control plan of all actions to be taken to satisfy the requirements ofSection 5.0. Such plan will identify the type ofemission 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 ofthis rule." FINDINGS OF FACT A. The Facility 27. Merced Power owns and/or operates the Facilitylocated at 30West SandyMush Road, El Nido, California. 28. El Nido is within thejurisdiction ofSJV APCD which has been designated as a serious nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and as an extreme nonattainment 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 pulsejet baghouse. 31. The Facility started operations on or about July 5,2008.



### 5B. Permitting History 32. On or about November 28, 2005, SJVAPCD issued its Authority to Constructpermit No. N-4607-8-0 (the "Permit") for the Boiler with one propane-fired auxiliaryburner powering a steam turbine generator, served by a selective non-catalytic reduction system, a limestone injection system, and a pulsejetbaghouse at the Facility. 33. Condition 8 ofthe 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 ofthe Permitrequires 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 ofthe Permit also requires the CEMS to be "operated, maintained, and calibrated pursuant to the requirements of40 c.P.R. 60.7(c) and 40 c.P.R. 60.13." 35. Condition 14 ofthe Permit requires the Facility to conduct quarterly audits ofCEMS, 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 ofthe Permitprovides that NOx emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 14.81blhr or 0.08IbIMMBtu, based on a 24-hour rolling average. 37. Condition 18 ofthe Permit provides that sulfur oxides ("SOx") emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 3.7Ib/hror 0.02 IbIMMBtu, based on a I-hourrolling average. 38. Condition 18 ofthe Permitprovides that CO emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 10.55Ib/hror 72 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.057IbIMMBtu), based on a 24-hour rolling average. 39. Condition 18 ofthe Permitprovides that PMlO emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 7.40 lblhr or 0.041bIMMBtu over a 15­ minute rolling average. 40. Condition 19 ofthe Permit provides that ammonia ("NH3") emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 85 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.041 IbIMMBtu),based on a 24-hour rolling average.

641. Condition 22 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 Facilitypursuant to Section 114,42U.S.c. § 7414, ofthe 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/hror 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 dataprovided in the Merced Power Response, the Boiler emitted SOx at levels exceeding 3.7Ib/hr or 0.02IbIMMBtu, based on a I-hourrolling 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 or72 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-minuterolling 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 of40 c.F.R. § 60.7(c) and 40 c.F.R. § 60.13 until April 28, 2009.

752. According to the Merced Power Response, the Facility did not submit quarterly audit reports ofCEMS and quarterly compliance reports for the Facilityfor the third and fourth quarters of2008. 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 SJVAPCD Rule 4352 and that identifies the type ofemission 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, PM lO, CO, VOC, and NH3 emission rates from the Boiler within applicable deadlines in violation of Condition 22 ofthe 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 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD 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 of3.7 lb/hr or 0.021b1MMBtu over a 24-hour rolling average in violation ofCondition 18 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD 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 ofCondition 18 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 58. On or about May 28,2009, Merced Power emitted ammonia in excess of85 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.041IbIMMBtu) over a 24-hourrolling average at the Facility in violation ofCondition 19 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 59. On or about May 28,2009, Merced Power emitted PMlO in excess of7.40 lb/hr or 0.04 IblMMBtu over a 15-minute rolling average in violation ofCondition 19 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and2201. 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 Facilityin violation ofCondition 8 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201.

861. From or about January 2 to April 28, 2009, Merced Power failed to certify CEMS for the Boiler in violation ofCondition 9 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD Rules 2010 and 2021. 62. To date, Merced Power has failed to submit quarterly audit reports ofCEMS and quarterly compliance reports for the Facility for the third and fourth quarters of2008 in violation ofCondition 14 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD 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 SJVAPCD Rule 4352 and that identifies the type ofemission 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 ofSection 6.1 of SJVAPCD Rule 4352. NOTICE OF VIOLATION Notice is given to Merced Powerthat the Administrator ofthe EPA, by authority duly delegated to the undersigned, finds that Merced Power violated section 110 ofthe Act and the California State Implementation Plan, as set forth in the Finding and Notice ofViolation. ENFORCEMENT Section 113(a)(I) ofthe Act provides that when any person has violated any requirement or prohibition ofan applicable implementation plan orpermit, EPA may: issue an orderrequiring compliance with the requirements orprohibition ofsuch implementation plan orpermit, or issue an administrative penalty order pursuant to section 113(d) for civil administrative penalties ofup to $37,500 per day ofviolation, or bring a civil action pursuant to section 113(b) for injunctive reliefand/or civil penalties ofnot more than $37,500 per day for each violation. 42 U.S.c. § 7413(a)(I); 40 c.F.R. Part 19. Furthermore, ifa person knowingly violates any requirements ofan applicable implementationplan more than 30 days after the date ofissuance ofthis NOV, section 113(c) provides for criminal penalties or imprisonment, orboth. Under section 306(a) ofthe 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

9the Act mayresult in the facility being declared ineligible for participation in any federal contract, grant, or loan. PENALTY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Section I 13(e)(l) ofthe Act states that the Administrator or the court, as appropriate, shall, in determining the amount ofanypenaltyto be assessed, take into consideration (in addition to such other factors asjustice mayrequire) the size ofthe business, the economic impact ofthe penalty on the business, the violator's full compliance history and good faith efforts to comply, the duration ofthe violation as established by any credible evidence (including evidence other than the applicable test method), paymentby the violator ofpenalties previously assessed for the same violation, the economic benefit ofnoncompliance, and the seriousness ofthe violation. Section 113(e)(2) ofthe Act allows the Administrator or the court to assess a penalty for each day ofviolation. Forthe purposes ofdetermining the number ofdays ofviolation, where the EPA makes a prima facie showing that the conduct or events giving rise to this violation are likely to have continued orrecurred past the date ofthis NOV, the days ofviolation shall be presumed to include the date ofthis 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 bythe preponderance ofthe 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 Powerto present evidence bearing on the finding ofviolation, on the nature ofthe violations, and on any efforts it mayhave taken orproposes to take to achieve compliance. Merced Power has the right to berepresented bycounsel. A request for a conference with EPA must be made within ten (10) working days ofreceipt ofthis NOV, and the request for a conference or otherinquiries concerning the NOV shouldbe made in writing to: David Kim Office ofRegional Counsel (ORC-3) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, California 94105 (415) 972-3882

10Dated: 

## 1-;)3**~Ot** Deborah Jordan Director, Air Division

11UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 July23,2009 CERTIFIED MAIL # 7006 2150 000014941 2208 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED IN REPLY: AIR-5 REFERTO: Docket No. R9-09-10 Mr. Eric Shumway ChiefOperating Officer Merced Power, L.L.C. 717 Atlantic Avenue, Suite lA Boston, MA 02111 Re: Merced Power, L.L.C. Finding and Notice ofViolation DearMr. Shumway: Enclosed is a copy ofa Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") issuedpursuant 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 ImplementationPlan at its biomass-fired electric generating facility located inEl Nido, California (the "Facility"). You shouldbe aware that section 113(a)(1) ofthe Act authorizes EPAto issue an orderrequiring compliance with the requirements ofthe Act, issue an administrative penalty order, orcommence a civil action seeking an injunction andlor a civil penalty. Furthermore, section 113(c) ofthe Actprovides 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 providethat facilities to be utilized in federal contracts, grants, and loans mustbeinfull compliance withthe Act and all regulations promulgatedpursuantto it. A violation ofthe Actmayresult inthe Merced PowerFacilitybeing declared ineligible for participationin anyfederal contract, grant, orloan. Ifyou wishto discuss the enclosed NOV, you mayrequest a conference with EPA withinten (10) working days ofreceipt ofthis NOV. The conference will afford Merced Power an opportunityto present informationbearing onthe finding ofviolation, the nature oftheviolations, and any efforts itmayhave taken orproposes to take to achieve compliance.

Printed on Recycled PaperIfyou have any questions pertaining to this NOV, please contact Mark Sims of the AirEnforcement Office at (415) 972-3965, orhave your attorney contactDavid Kim, Office ofRegional Counsel, at (415) 972-3882. Thankyou for your cooperationinthis matter. Sincerely,

# ~an~ Director, Air Division Enclosure

cc: Mr. Seyed Sadredin (SJV APCD) Mr. Jim Ryden (CARB) Ms. S. Jodi Smith (Paul Hastings)



### 2UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 

### JUL 2 S 2009 IN REPLY: AIR-5 REFER TO: DocketNo. R9-09-09 Mr. Seyed Sadredin Executive Officer/AirPollution Control Officer SanJoaquin ValleyAirPollution Control District 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue**Fresno,~ C~726-0244** 

# J)ear~edin: Enclosed for your information is a copy ofa Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") that the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region IX, issuedto Merced Power, L.L.C. ("Merced Power") for violations ofthe Clean Air Act ("Act") at its biomass-fired electric generating facility located inEI Nido, California. Thepurpose ofthe NOV is to notifyMerced Powerthat EPA finds that ithas violated certainprovisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan. Theviolations are set forth more specificallyinthe enclosedNOV. TheNOVhasbeenissuedpursuant to section 113(a)(1) oftheAct, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q. TheAct also provides that after 30 days from the issuance ofan NOV, EPAmay determine ifany further action will betakenpursuant to section 113 ofthe Act. Ifyouhave 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 PaperUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 

### JUL 2 3 

### 2009 IN REPLY: AIR-5 REFER TO: DocketNo. R9-09-09 Mr. Jim Ryden Chief, Enforcement Division CaliforniaAirResources Board P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 DearMr. Ryden: Enclosed for yourinformation is a copy ofa Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") that the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency ("EPA"), Region IX, issued to Merced Power, L.L.C. ("Merced Power") for violations ofthe CleanAir Act ("Act") at its biomass-fired electric generating facility located inEI Nido, California. Thepurpose oftheNOV is to notifyMerced Powerthat EPA finds that ithas violated certainprovisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan. The violations are set forth more specificallyinthe enclosedNOV. TheNOVhas beenissuedpursuant to section I 13(a)(I) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q. The Act also provides that after 30days from the issuance ofan NOV, EPAmay determine ifany further action will betaken pursuantto section 113 ofthe Act. Ifyouhave 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