United States v. Ampersand Chowchilla Biomass, LLC, No. 1:11-cv-00242 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2011). A settling CAA defendant responsible for violations at its biomass electric-generating facilities in Madera, California, must pay a $343,000 civil penalty to the United States and the San Joaquin Valley unified air pollution control district, must install additional emissions monitoring equipment, and must comply with permit conditions over a two-year period or face stipulated penalties.

United States v. Merced Power LLC, No. 1:11-cv-00241 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2011). A settling CAA defendant responsible for violations at its biomass electric-generating facilities in Merced, California, must pay a $492,000 civil penalty to the United States and the San Joaquin Valley unified air pollution control district, must install additional emissions monitoring equipment, and must comply with permit conditions over a two-year period or face stipulated penalties

United States v. CEMEX, Inc., No. 3:11-cv-00037 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 10, 2011). Settling CAA defendants responsible for violations at a Portland cement manufacturing plant in Greene County, Ohio, must pay a $1,400,000 civil penalty to the United States and Ohio and must install and operate appropriate emission controls at their kiln.

United States v. CEMEX, Inc., No. 3:11-cv-00037 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 10, 2011). Settling CAA defendants responsible for violations at a Portland cement manufacturing plant in Greene County, Ohio, must pay a $1,400,000 civil penalty to the United States and Ohio and must install and operate appropriate emission controls at their kiln.

United States v. Rutherford Oil Corp., No. 3:08-cv-231 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 2, 2011). Settling CWA defendants that discharged pollutants into waters of the United States without a permit must pay a civil penalty and must conduct a restoration project.

SIP Proposal: Ohio (VOC rule).

United States v. Orval Kent Food Co., Inc., No. 2:11-cv-02057-JAR-JPO (D. Kan. Jan. 31, 2011). A settling CWA defendant responsible for discharges into a POTW in Baxter Springs, Kansas, must pay a $390,000 civil penalty, must increase monitoring of its discharges and install additional treatment, if necessary, and must undertake a fish restocking project at a cost of $32,500.

United States v. Lyon, No. 1:07-CV-00491-LJO-MJS (E.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2011). Settling CERCLA defendants responsible for violations at the Modesto Groundwater Contamination Superfund site in Modesto, California, must pay $2,175,000 in U.S. response costs incurred at the site.

SIP Proposal: Nebraska (PSD program and GHG construction permit regulations).

United States v. United Illuminating Co., No. 11-cv-121 (D. Conn. Jan. 24, 2011). Settling CERCLA defendants responsible for violations at the East Main Street Disposal Area site in New Haven County, Connecticut, must pay $464,000 in U.S. response costs incurred at the site.