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

Inthe Matter of: ) ) Docket No. R9-09-16 NAES Corporation ) Issaquah, Washington ) FINDING AND ) NOTICE OF VIOLATION Proceeding Under Section ) 1 13(a), Clean AirAct, ) as Amended ) )

This Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") is issued pursuant to section 113(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § § 7401-7671q ("CAA" orthe "Act"). This NOV is issued to NAES Corporation (''NAES'') for violations ofthe Act at the Ampersand Chowchilla Biomass, L.L.C. ("Ampersand") power generating facility in Chowchilla, California (the "Facility"). Section 113(a)(1) requires the Administrator ofthe United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") to notify anyperson in violation ofa state implementation plan ("SIP") ofthe violations. The authorityto issue NOVs has been delegated to the Regional Administrator of EPA, Region 9, and redelegated to the Director ofthe AirDivision for EPA, Region 

### 9. STATUTORY AND REGULATORY AUTHORITY A. Clean Air Act 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 ofChowchilla, 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 ("SJV APCD" orthe "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 complywith any approved regulatoryprovision ofa SIP renders the person inviolation ofan applicable implementationplan and subject to enforcement under section 113(a)(1) ofthe Act. 42 U.S.C. § 7413(a)(1). 5. Under 40 C.F.R. § 52.23, "[f]ailure to complywith

... anypermit condition

... issued pursuant to approved orpromulgatedregulations for the review ofnew or modified stationary orindirect sources, orwith anypermit limitation or condition contained within an operatingpermit issued under an EPA-approved program that is incorporated into the State implementationplan, shall render the person ... so failing to cc5mply in violation of a requirement ofan applicable implementationplan and subject to enforcement action under section 113 ofthe Clean Air Act." B. SJV APCD Rule 1020: Definitions 6. SJV APCD 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). 7. Section 3.2 ofSJV APCD Rule 1020 defines "aircontaminants" as "anydischarge, release, orotherpropagation into the atmosphere directly orindirectly, causedbyman and includes, butis not limited to, smoke, charred paper, dust, soot, grime, carbon, noxious acids, fumes, gases, odors, orparticulate matter, or any combination thereof." 8. Section 3.30 ofSJV APCD Rule 1020 defines "operation" as "anyphysical action resulting in a change in the location, form, orphysical properties ofa material, or any chemical action resulting in a change inthe chemical composition orthe chemical or physical properties ofa material." 9. Section 3.31 ofSJV APCD Rule 1020 defines "owner" as "anyperson who leases, supervises, or operates equipment, in addition to the normal meaning ofownership." C. SJV APCD Rule 1080: Stack Monitoring 10. SJV APCD Rule 1080 was approved into and made a part ofthe federally enforceable SIP pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7410 onJune 25, 2004. 1 11. SJV APCD Rule 1080 applies to "anyowner or operator ofa source operation which emits ormay emit air contaminants."

169 Fed. Reg. 22441 (April 26, 2004). 212. Section 4.0 ofSJVAPCD Rule 1080 provides that "[u]pon the request ofthe APCO [Air Pollution Control Officer] and as directed byhim, 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." 13. Section 8.0 ofSJV APCD Rule 1080 provides that 

### "[0]wners or operators subject to Section 4.0 shall submit a written report for each calendar quarter to the APCO. The report is duebythe 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." D. SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201: Permits and New Source Review 14. SJV APCD 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 15. SJV APCD Rule 2010 requires "anyperson constructing, altering, replacing or operating any source operation which emits, may emit, ormayreduce emissions to obtain an Authorityto Construct or a Permit to Operate." 16. Section 3.0 ofSJVAPCD Rule 2010 provides that "[a]nypersonbuilding, 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 Authorityto Construct shall remain in effect until the Permit to Operate the source operation for which the application was filed is granted or denied

.... " 17. Section 4.0 ofSJVAPCD Rule 2010 provides that "[b]efore any new ormodified source operation described in Section 3.0, or any existing source operation so described maybe 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 orinstalled 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." 18. SJVAPeD Rule 2201 was approved into and made a part ofthe federally enforceable SIP

264 Fed. Reg. 39920 (July 23, 1999). 3pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410 onJune 16, 2004. 3 19. SJV APCD Rule 2201 addresses thereview and permitting ofnew and modified stationary sources ofair pollution, including emission offsets. 20. Section 4.1 ofSJV APCD 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. 21. Section 3.9 ofSJVAPCD Rille 2201 defines BACT as ''the most stringent emission limitation or control technique ofthe following: 3.9.1 Achieved inpractice 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 feasible for such class or category ofsources orfor a specific source." E. SJV APCD Rule 4101: Visible Emissions 22. 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 23. SJV APCD Rule 4101 applies to "any source operation which emits ormay emit air contaminants." 24. 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 Ringe1mann 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." F. SJV APCD Rule 4352: Solid Fuel Fired Boilers. Steam Generators. and Process Heaters 25. SJVAPCD Rule 4352 was approved into and made a part ofthe federally enforceable SIP pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7410 on April 12, 1999.5

369 Fed. Reg. 27837 (May 17,2004). 470 Fed. Reg. 46770 (Aug. 11,2005). 564 Fed. Reg. 6803 (Feb. 11, 1999). 

### 426. SJV ACPD Rule 4352 is intended to limit emissions ofoxides ofnitrogen ("NOx") and carbon monoxide ("CO") from solid fuel fired boilers, steam generators, and process heaters. 27. 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.F.R. 60.7(c) and 60.13. CEMs must also satisfythe Performance Specifications of40 C.F.R. 60 Appendix B and the Relative Accuracy Test Audit ofAppendix F." 28. Under40 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 inthe Districtmust certify the operational status ofCEMS within 180 days ofinitial operation. 29. Section 6.1 ofSJV APCD Rule 4352 provides that "[t]he owner/operator ofanyunit subject to the provisions ofthis rule shall submit to APCO an emissions control plan of all actions to betaken 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 30. At all times relevant to this NOV, Ampersand owned the Facilitylocated at 16457 Avenue 24 

### 'is, Chowchilla, California. 31. At all times relevant to this NOV, NAES operated the Facilityunder a contract with Ampersand. 32. Chowchillais 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. 33. The Facilityis a 12.5 megawatt powerplant that burns wood to generate electricity. The wood is either from an urban waste source (i.e., construction or demolition projects) or



### 5from 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. 34. In 2007-2008, Ampersand constructed the Facility, including the Boilerwith one propane-fired auxiliaryburnerpowering a steam turbine generator that is served by a selective non-catalytic reduction system, a limestone injection system, a multiclone, and a pulsejetbaghouse. 35. The Facility started operations on or about April 24, 2008. 

### B. Permitting History 36. On or about April 19, 2007, SJV APCD issued its Authorityto Construct permitNo. C6923-3-0 (the "Permit") for the Boiler with onepropane-fired auxiliaryburnerpowering a steam turbine generator, served by a selective non-catalytic reduction system, a limestone injection system, a multiclone, and a pulsejetbaghouse at the Facility. 37. Condition 7 ofthePermitprovides that "[n]o air contaminant shall be discharged into the atmosphere for a period orperiods aggregating more than three minutes in anyonehour which is as dark as, or darker than, Ringelmann 1 or20% opacity

...." 38. Condition 18 ofthe Permit requires the Facilityto "install and maintain an operational ammonia volume flow-rate indicator for the selective non-catalytic reduction ("SNCR") ammonia injection system." 39. Condition 19 ofthe 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 "meetthe performance specificationrequirements in 40 C.F.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.F.R. 60.7(c) and 40 C.F.R. 60.13." 40. Condition 24 ofthePermitrequires the Facilityto 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. 41. Condition 28 ofthe Permitprovides that NOx emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 14.8 lblhr or 0.08 Ib/MMBtu, based on a 24-hourrolling average. 42. Condition 28 ofthe Permit provides that sulfur oxides ("SOx") emissions from the



### 6Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 7.4 Ib/hr or 0.04 Ib/MMBtu, based on a I-hourrolling average. 43. Condition 28 ofthePermit provides that CO emissions from the Boiler, except during periods ofstartup and shutdown, shall not exceed 10.55 Ib/hr or 72 ppmv 

### @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.057 IbIMMBtu),based on a 24-hourrolling average. 44. Condition 29 ofthe Permitprovides that ammonia ("NH3") emissions from the Boiler shall not exceed 85 ppmv 

### @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.0411bIMMBtu), based on a 24-hour rolling average. 45. Condition 34 ofthe Permitrequires source testing to measure the NOx, SOx, PM 10' CO, volatile organic compound ("VOC"), and NH3 emission rates within 120 days after initial operation ofthe Facility and at least once everytwelve months thereafter. C. Compliance Status 46. Onor about November 3, 2008, Ampersand filed a petition with SJV APCD for a variance from SJV APCD Rules 2010, 2201, 4101, 4352, and 4801. 47. On or about December 17, 2008, SJV APCD issued a regular variance (the "Variance") from SJV APCD Rules 2010, 2201, 4101, 4352, and 4801 from December 17,2008 to April 30, 2009. The Variance allowed Ampersand to operate the Facility with excess NOx, ammonia, and visible emissions until April 30, 2009. 48. On or about April 15, 2009, Ampersand filed a petition with SJV APCD for a variance that would allow it to operate the Facilitywith excess NOx, ammonia, and visible emissions beyond the April 30, 2009 expiration date for the Variance to December 16, 2009. 49. On or about March 25,2009, EPA issued an information request to the Facilitypursuant to Section 114,42 U.S.C. 

### § 7414, ofthe Act. 50. The Facility submitted its response (the "Ampersand Response") to the EPA Information Request on or about May 7, 2009. 51. On or about August 19,2008, the Facility conducted source testing (the "August 19, 2008 Source Test") to measure the NOx, SOx, PM 10' CO, VOC, and NH3 emission rates from the Boiler. 52. The August 19,2008 Source Test showed that the Boiler emitted NOx at)evels exceeding 14.8 Ib/hr or 0.08 IbIMMBtu, based on a 24-hourrolling average, and ammonia at levels exceeding 85 ppmv 

### @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.0411bIMMBtu), based on a 24-hourrolling

7average. 53. According to the CEMS data provided in the Ampersand Response and the August 19, 2008 Source Test, the Boiler emitted NOx at levels exceeding 14.81blhr or 0.08 Ib/MMBtu, based on a 24-hourrolling average, from or about June 5, 2008 to April 29, 2009. 54. According to the CEMS data provided in the Ampersand Response, the Boiler emitted SOx at levels exceeding 7.41blhr or 0.041b/MMBtu, based on a I-hourrolling average, from or about May 31, 2008 to April 29, 2009. 55. According to the CEMS data provided in the Ampersand Response, the Boiler emitted CO at levels exceeding 1O.551blhr or72 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.057 Ib/MMBtu), based on a 24-hourrolling average, from or about June 5, 2008 to March 26, 2009. 56. On or about August 26, 2008, an inspector from SJV APCD performed opacitytesting (the "August 26, 2008 Opacity Test") ofemissions from the Facility. 57. According to the Ampersand Response and the August 26, 2008 OpacityTest, the Boiler emitted 

### air contaminants for a period orperiods aggregating more than three (3) minutes in anyone (1) hour which exceeded 20% opacity on or about August 26,2008 and from or about December 2008 to April 2009. 58. According to the Ampersand Response and the August 19,2008 Source Test, the Boiler emitted ammonia over 85 ppmv 

### @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.0411b/MMBtu) over a 24-

. hourrolling**~verage** on or about August 19,2008 and from or about December 2008 to April 2009. 59. According to the Ampersand Response, the Facility did not install ormaintain an operational ammonia volume flow-rate indicator for the SNCR ammonia injection system from or about April 24, 2008 to August 24,2008. 60. According to the Ampersand Response, the Facility did not certify CEMS for the Boiler pursuant to the requirements of40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.7(c) and 40 C.F.R. 

### § 60.13 until December 10,2008. 61. According to the Ampersand Response, the Facility did not submit an emissions control plan to SJV APCD that specifies all actions to betaken to satisfy the requirements SJV APCD Rule 4352 and that identifies the type ofemission controls to be applied to eachunit and a construction schedule, or shall provide source tests sufficient to demonstrate that the unit is currently in compliance with the applicable emission limits.

8FINDINGS OF VIOLATION 62. From or about June 5, 2008 to April 29, 2009, the Facility emitted NOx in excess of 14.8 lb/hr or 0.08 lblMMBtu over a 24-hourrolling average in violation ofCondition 28 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 63. From or about May 31,2008 to April 29, 2009, the Facility emitted SOx in excess of7.4 lb/hr or 0.04 lblMMBtu over a I-hourrolling average in violation ofCondition 28 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 64. From or about June 5, 2008 to March 26, 2009, the Facility emitted CO in excess of 10.55 lb/hr or 72 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.057lbIMMBtu) over a 24-hourrolling average inviolation ofCondition 28 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 65. On or about August 26,2008 and from or about December 2008 to April 2009, the Facilityviolated the opacity limits ofCondition 7 ofthe Permit and Section 5 of SJV APCD Rule 4101. 66. On or about August 19,2008, and from or about December 2008 to April 2009, the Facility emitted ammonia in excess of85 ppmv @ 3% O2 (equivalent to 0.041 lblMMBtu) over a 24-hourrolling average in violation ofCondition 29 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 67. From or about April 24, 2008 to August 24, 2008, the Facility failed to install and maintain an operational ammonia volume flow-rate indicator for the SNCR ammonia injection system in violation ofCondition 18 ofthe Permit and SJV APCD Rules 2010 and 2201. 68. From or about October 22, 2008 to December 10, 2008, the Facilityfailed to certify CEMS for the Boiler and associated equipment at the Facilityinviolation ofCondition 9 ofthe Permit and SJVAPCD Rules 2010 and 2021. 69. To date, the Facilityhas failed to submit an emissions control planto SJV APCD that specifies all actions to betaken to satisfy the requirements SJV APCD 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 SJV APCD Rule 4352. NOTICE OF VIOLATION Notice is given to NAES that the Administrator ofthe EPA, by authority duly delegated to the undersigned, finds that NAES has operated the Facility inviolation ofsection 110 ofthe Act

9and the California State Implementation Plan, as set forth inthe Finding and Notice ofViolation. ENFORCEMENT Section I 13(a)(I) oftheActprovides that when anypersonhas violated anyrequirement or prohibition ofan applicable implementationplan orpermit, EPA may: issue an orderrequiring compliance with the requirements orprohibition ofsuch implementation plan orpermit, or issue an administrative penalty orderpursuant to section I13( 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 perday for each violation. 42 U.S.C. 

### § 7413(a)(1); 40 C.F.R. Part 19. Furthermore, ifa person knowinglyviolates anyrequirements ofan applicable implementation planmore than 30 days after the date ofissuance ofthis NOV, section I 13(c) provides for criminal penalties orimprisonment, orboth. Under section 306(a) ofthe Act, the regulations promulgated thereunder (40 C.F.R. Part 15), and Executive Order 11738, facilities to beused in federal contracts, grants, and loans must be in full compliance with the Act and all regulations promulgated pursuant to it. Violations of the Act may result inthe facility being declared ineligible for participation in any federal contract, grant, orloan. PENALTY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Section 113(e)(1) 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 asjusticemayrequire) the size ofthe business, the economic impact ofthe penalty onthe business, the violator's full compliance history and good faith efforts to comply, the duration oftheviolation as establishedby any credible evidence (including evidence other than the applicable test method), paymentbythe violator ofpenalties previously assessed for the same violation, the economicbenefit ofnoncompliance, and the seriousness ofthe violation. Section 113(e)(2) ofthe Act allows the Administrator orthe court to assess a penalty for each day ofviolation. For thepurposes ofdetermining the number ofdays ofviolation, where the EPA makes a prima facie showingthat the conduct or events givingrise to this violation are likelyto have continued orrecurred past the date ofthis NOV, the days ofviolation shall be presumed to include the date ofthisNOV and each and every day thereafter until the violator establishes that continuous compliance has been achieved, except to the extent that the violator

10can provebythe preponderance ofthe evidence that there were intervening days during which no violation occurred orthat the violation was not continuing innature. OPPORTUNITY FOR CONFERENCE NAES may, uponrequest, confer with EPA. The conference will enable NAES to present evidencebearing onthe finding ofviolation, onthe nature ofthe violations, and on any efforts it mayhave taken orproposes to take to achieve compliance. NAES has the right to berepresented by counsel. A request for a conference with EPA mustbemade within ten (10) working days of receipt ofthisNOV, and the request for a conference or other inquiries concerningthe NOV should bemade 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

Dated: 

# J

# b-~/07 f.:lf.Deborah 

### J r an Directo , Air Division

11UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901 August 26, 2009 CERTIFIED MAIL 

### # 7006 2150 000149412246 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED IN REPLY: AIR-5 REFER TO: Docket No. R9-09-16 Mr. Tom Denova President NAES Corporation 1180 NW Maple Street, Suite 200 Issaquah, W A 98027 Re: NAES Corporation Finding and Notice ofViolation Dear Mr. Denova: Enclosed is a copy ofa Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") issued pursuant to section I 13(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 NAES Corporation ("NAES") has violated certain provisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan at the biomass-fired electric generating facility the company operates in Chowchilla, California (the "Facility"). You should be aware that section 113(a)(1) ofthe Act authorizes EPA to issue an orderrequiring compliance with the requirements ofthe Act, issue an administrative penalty order, or commence a civil action seeking an injunction and/or 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 mustbe in full compliance with the Act and all regulations promulgated pursuant to it. A violation ofthe Actmayresult in NAES being declared ineligible for participation in any federal contract, grant, or loan. Ifyou wish to discuss the enclosed NOV, you mayrequest a conference with EPA within ten (10) working days ofreceipt ofthis NOV. The conference will afford NAES an opportunity to present informationbearing on the finding ofviolation, the nature of the violations, 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 Air Enforcement Office at (415) 972-3965, orhave your attorney contact David Kim, Office ofRegional Counsel, at (415) 972-3882. Thank you for your cooperation inthis matter. Sincerely,

# ~J~**~eb~J~~** . Director, Air Division Enclosure

cc: Mr. Seyed Sadredin (SJV APCD) Mr. Jim Ryden (CARB)



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

## AUG 2 6 2009 IN REPLY: AIR-5 REFER TO: Docket No. R9-09-16 Mr. Jim Ryden Chief, Enforcement Division California Air Resources Board P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 DearMr. Ryden: Enclosed for your infonnation is a copy ofa Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") that the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region IX, issued to NAES Corporation ("NAES") for violations ofthe Clean Air Act ("Act") at the biomass-fired electric generating facility the company operates in Chowchilla, California. Thepurpose ofthe NOV is to notifyNAES that EPA finds that ithas violated certain provisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan. The violations are set forth more specifically inthe 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 ofan NOV, EPA may detennine ifany further action will be taken pursuant to section 113 ofthe Act. Ifyou have any questions concerning this NOV, please contact Mark Sims, Air Enforcement Office, at (415) 972-3965, or sims.mark@eps.gov

. Sincerely,

# ~/JJ~ f**oC'Debor~ordan** Director, Air Division Enclosure

Printed on Recycled PaperUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901**~** 

### 262009 IN REPLY: AIR-5 REFER TO: Docket No. R9-09-16 Mr. Seyed Sadredin Executive Officer/Air Pollution Control Officer SanJoaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 Dear Mr. Sadredin: Enclosed for your information is a copy ofa Finding and Notice ofViolation ("NOV") that the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), Region IX, issued to NAES Corporation ("NAES") for violations ofthe Clean Air Act ("Act") at the biomass-fired electric generating facility the**co~pany** operates in Chowchilla, California. Thepurpose ofthe NOV is to notify NAES that EPA finds that ithas violated certain provisions ofthe California State Implementation Plan. The violations are set forth more specificallyin the enclosed NOV. The NOV has been issued pursuant to section 113(a)(l) ofthe Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q. The Act also provides that after 30 days from the issuance ofan NOV, EPA may determine ifany further action will betaken pursuant to section 113 ofthe Act. Ifyou have any questions concerning this NOV, please contact Mark Sims, Air Enforcement Office, at (415) 972-3965, or sims.mark@eps.gov. Sincerely, 

# /fZ. 

# 12 

# JJL PJ(:;·;or'lJo!in

. Director, Air Division Enclosure

Printed on Recycled Paper