Re: WHAT IS GOING ON AT REGION 9?

hswriter@frontiernet.net to: Stacy Angel, docket@epa.gov, Art Diem, Susan Wickwire, Jeffrey Robinson, 11/17/2013 01:43 PM

Cc: David Sternberg, Sherry Maddox, Dawn Harris-Young, Phillippa Cannon, Francisco Arcaute, Peter Cassell, Joshua Singer, r5hotline, "kfc@adem.state.al.us", "camille.stephans@alaska.gov",

From: "hswriter@frontiernet.net" <hswriter@frontiernet.net>

To: Stacy Angel/DC/USEPA/US@MSO365, "docket@epa.gov" <docket@epa.gov>, Art Diem/DC/USEPA/US@MSO365, Susan Wickwire/DC/USEPA/US@MSO365, Jeffrey Robinson/R6/USEPA/US@MSO365, "bainter.stephan@epa.gov" <bainter.stephan@epa.gov>,

Cc: David Sternberg/R3/USEPA/US@MSO365, Sherry Maddox/R4/USEPA/US@MSO365, Dawn Harris-Young/R4/USEPA/US@MSO365, Phillippa Cannon/R5/USEPA/US@MSO365, Francisco Arcaute/R5/USEPA/US@MSO365, Peter Cassell/R5/USEPA/US@MSO365, Joshua Please respond to "hswriter@frontiernet.net" <hswriter@frontiernet.net>

History: This message has been forwarded.

From: "hswriter@frontiernet.net" <hswriter@frontiernet.net> To: "angel.stacy@epa.gov" <angel. stacy@epa.gov>; "docket@epa.gov" <docket@epa.gov>; "diem.art@epa .gov" <diem.art@epa.gov>; "wickwire.susan@epa.gov" <wickwire.susan@epa.gov>;

"robinson. j effrey@epa.gov" <robinson. j effrey@epa.gov>; "bainter.stephan@epa.gov" < bainter.stephan@epa.gov>; "r1web.mail@epa.gov" <r 1web.mail@epa.gov>; "r2-web-inquiry@epamail.epa.gov" <r 2-web-inquiry@epamail.epa.gov>; "basile.michael@epa.gov" < basile.michael@epa.gov>;
"Wsloan@mofo.com" <Wsloan@mofo. com>; "r9.info@epa.gov" <r9.info@epa.gov>; "r9airpermits@ epa.gov" <r9airpermits@epa.gov>; "rodriguez.elias@epa.gov" <rodriguez.elias@epa.gov>; "r3public@epa.gov" <r3public@ epa.gov>; "r3r@epa.gov" <r3r@epa.gov>; "white.terri-a@epa .gov" <white.terri-a@epa.gov>; "heron.donna@epa.gov" <heron.donna@epa.gov>; "senaca.roy@epa.gov" <senaca.roy@epa.gov>; "smith.bonnie@epa.gov" <smith.bonnie@epa.gov> Cc: "sternberg.david@epa.gov" <sternberg.david@epa.gov>; "maddox.sherry@epa.gov" <maddox.sherry@epa.gov>; "harris-young@epa.gov" <harris-young@epa.gov>; "cannon.phillippa@epa.gov" <cannon.phillippa@epa.gov>; "arcaute.francisco@epa.gov" <arcaute.francisco@epa.gov>; "cassell.peter@epa.gov" <cassell.peter@epa.gov>; "singer. j oshua@epa.gov" <singer. j oshua@epa.gov>; "r5hotline@epa.gov" <r5hotline@epa. gov>; "kfc@adem.state.al.us" <kfc@adem.state.al.us>; "camille.stephans@alaska.gov" <camille.stephans@alaska.gov>; "v5551@yahoo.com" <v5551@yahoo.com>; "mark.howard@azdema.gov" <mark.howard@azdema.gov>; "inman. j eanine@azdeq.gov"

<inman. j eanine@azdeq.gov> Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2013 1:41 PM Subject: WHAT IS GOING ON AT REGION 9?new region 9 not doing it's job letter .odtNovember 14th , 2013

Gina McCarthy, EPA Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460 (202) 501-1450 (fax)

RE: Request for an investigation of EPA Region 9 Air Director Deborah Jordon's failure to enforce regulations in regards to Sie rra Pacific Industries, the larg est land holder in California.

Dear Administrator Gina McCarthy;

Congratulations on your new position!

In August, 2013, We won our case in part before the Environmental Appeals Board regarding Region 9 Air Director Deborah Jordan issuing Sierra Paci fic Industries a “modified” permit for Sierra Pacific Industries, Anderson facility.

Deborah Jordon has decided not to address any of the concerns we raised in our petition to the EAB. Instead, she has scheduled the ordere d hearing with every intention of issuing the 'modified' permit without addressing the concerns we raised in our petitions and as if no objection existed. This disregard for the public good has been a pattern and practice of the ag ency she oversees as we shall

demonstrate below:

PSD permits by facility:

ANDERSON,CA biomass/sawmill.

The Anderson, California facility has been in “s ignificant non-compliance” of their 4 MW PSD permit for the entire 5 years it was in exis tence. Sierra Pacific,Anderson no longer has any permission to operate, as their permit extension expired last January yet they continue to operate unhindered.

Sierra Pacific's Anderson PSD permit expired on September 20th, 2011. That permit was extended until January 19th, 2013. That extension expired on January 19, 2013 and has not been renewed.

According to the Shasta County Department of Resource Management (page 10, Draft Evaluation Report regarding proposed issuance of a renewed Title V operating permit):

RENEWAL PROCESS The Title V Operating permit renewal application was deemed administratively complete on July 19, 2011. According to District Rule 5, the District must issue a renewed permit no later than 18 months after an application is Page 1 deemed complete. Therefore, the renewal deadline becomes January 19 , 2013. The District had initially planned to renew this Title V Operating permit in conjunction with the permit ting process of a new, proposed cogeneration facility at the same location. The permitting process for the new cogeneration plant has not been completed by the EPA. As a result the Title V permitting action has been slowed and will not be complete by the January 19, 2013 deadline. Therefore, the current Title V Permit will remain in force until this renewal process becomes complete. [?]Under the stewardship of EPA Region 9 Air Dire ctor Deborah Jordan, a significantly out of compliance facility has been ope rating without a valid permit for almost a year and counting. EPA Region 9, the overseeing agency, has not only failed to act in its capacity as the oversight agency, it has been instrumental in attempting to force th e building of a new 31 MW biomass facility as a "modification" of the existing 4 MW facility. Deborah Jordan has chosen to ignore the pleas of Shasta County residents for an authentic environmen tal review process under the Clean Air Act.

The new 31 MW biomass facility that Shasta Coun ty refers to was successfully appealed to the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB). Deborah Jorda n, as Region 9 Air Director , had decided that the citizens of Shasta County (a recognized Environm ental Justice Community) were not entitled to a public hearing by the permitting agency (EPA Region 9).

One of the major concerns raised in this EAB app eal was Region 9's attempt to “modify” the expired and out of compliance 4 MW facility's permit. Not only do they plan to issu e a significantly out-of compliance 4MW facility a new 5 year permit wi thout coming into compliance, they want to 'modify' that expired permit to also allow Sierra Pacific to build a new 31 megawatt biomass facility next door.

We feel this is a mockery of the intent of the PSD permitting process and the Clean Air Act itself.

We hope this is not the EPA you wish to represent as Administrator.



### ARCATA,CA sawmill:

About Us: The North Coast Unified Air Quality Management Distri ct (District) is a regional environmental regulatory agency which has jurisdiction over Humboldt, Del Norte, and Trinity counties in Northern California.

The District's primary responsibility is controlling air po llution from stationary sour ces, and we are committed to achieving and maintaining healthful air quality throughout our tri-county jurisdiction. The District is one of thirty-five

local air districts in California and enforces lo cal, state, and federal air quality regulations. (emphasis added)

Erin Squire, Special Projects Coordinator for th e North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District (NCUAQMD) Informed us that the Sierra Pacific sawmill in Arcata does not require a Title V Permit. In looking at the Permit to Operate issued by the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District issued on Ap ril 1st, 1998 it states the facil ity has “two wood fired boilers.”

Page

2 The NCUAQMD website states that the NCUAQMD is a California Air District and that they enforce federal air quality regulations.

The EPA website states a PSD permit “is a legal docu ment that limits the amount of air pollution that may be released by a source (i.e., a plant or facility ). A PSD permit is required before a 'major' new source constructs...The permit may be issued by EPA or the designated permitting authority.”

The Arcata sawmill was issued a “Permit to Operat e” on April 1, 1998. In the permit it states there is

an old and new wood fire boiler.

How is it possible, with the addition of the 2nd bo iler in 1998, that this fa cility did not emit enough toxins to require a PSD permit?

According to Erin Squire, Sierra Pacific never has to renew the permit . The Permit to Operate issued by the NCUAQMD seems to confirm this. On page 9 of the permit it states “Permit Renewal andExpiration – This permit is valid provided the annual renewal fee is paid.”

If this PSD permit was issued by the NCUAQMD as an EPA designated permitting authority, then it is a PSD permit. If the facility was issued a PSD permit, the facility should have received a renewal/Title V permit every five years.

The facility should have been reviewed for comp liance and necessary improvements each five years. If they were in compliance, then they should have received a new permit on April 1st, 2003, April 1st, 2008 and April 1st, 2013. EPA Region 9 is the over sight agency of the NCUAQMD. EPA Region 9 Air Director, Deborah Jordan appears to have fail ed to protect the public from unregulated toxic industry.

LINCOLN, QUINCY, LOYALTON AND SUSANVILLE, CA

SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES (SPI) CASE SETTLEMENT FOR $13 MILLION

In late June, 2007, the California Air Resources Board, the Placer County Air Pollutio n Control District, and the California Attorney General reach ed a nearly $13 million civil settlement of a jointly prosecuted air pollution en forcement case against Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI), a timber operatio ns company and California’s larg est private landowner. SPI, headquartered in Anderson, agreed to settle a civil complain t brought in 2004 alleging numerous violations of air pollution regulations. The complaints alleged that SPI operated sawmills and wood-fired boilers at their Lincoln, Quincy, Loyalton, and Susanville (now closed) facilities in violation of their air pollution control permits. Among the alleged air quality violations in the civil complaint were: falsification of emission reports as a result of operator tampering with monitoring equipment; failure to report emission exceedences and exceeding permit emission limits on a multitude of occasions over several years; failure to operate and maintain air pollution contro l equipment; and discharging soot from the Lincoln facility that caused nuisances to nearby residences. The settlement includes approximately $8.5 million in penalties and public agency costs and fees. SPI will also spend $4.5 million for projects to enhance future compliance of their operations in California or to benefit air quality. As part of the settlement, SPI will ensure that all conditions allege d in the complaints do not occur in the future. Page 3

Where was EPA Air Director Deborah Jordan's oversig ht during the years these violations persisted?

Why wasn't EPA Region 9 a plaintiff in this case? Wh at actions is Region 9 taking now to correct the problems at these facilities ?



### LINCOLN,CA

Between June 4, 2009 and March 26, 2013, the Lincoln facility has received at least 6 notices of

violations from the Placer Count y Air Pollution Control District.



### Notice of Violation #3096 (fo r violations committed betw een November 9 - December 14, 2009) Notice dated January 20th, 2010 states:

The McBurney boiler exceeded the Nox emission limit of 37.6 lb/hr (District permit to Operate SPAC-06-01 Condition #66.b) on a 3 hour rolling average basis, for a period of se ven hundred twenty five (725) separate one hour periods, on thirty five (35) separate days between November 9 and December 14, 2009. These exceedences resulted in total excess Nox emissions of 3,572 pounds. A list of th e time (day and hour) and emission level of each exceedence is included in an attachment to this letter. Page 3 Settlement offer: ...fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000), in recognition of the extent and severity of the violations.

Violation # 3097 dated January 20, 2010 fo r violations from August to Dec., 2009
The McBurney boiler opacity transmissometer had breakdowns on at least eleven(11) separate occasions between August 8 and September 30, 2009. Reported op acity at the start of the breakdown periods exceeded the permit limit, and subsequent removal of the monitor from service to maintenance mode made subsequent monitoring not possible. Therepetitive breakdowns were the likely result of the same cause , which was not identified and corrected on a timely basis.

The McBurney boiler exceeded the CO emission limit (SPAC- 06-01 Condition#66a) on 12 /15/09. The exceedence was the result of a boiler trip caused by “low water”, the reason for which was not explained. CO emissions are expected to be sufficiently controlled to permit limits through the use of auxiliary natural gas burners and air adjustments. Additionally, the incident was not reported on a timely basis , as the operator was not aware of the elevated CO condition.

Settlement offer: S1,000. [emphasis added]

Page 4



### QUINCY

On November 6th, 2013, Kevin Michael Stephens, 24, di ed at the Quincy facil ity. His clothing caught in a conveyor belt he was cleaning. This is the s econd fatality in recent ye ars at a Sierra Pacific facility.



### SONORA

The Sonora permit is of particular interest.

Our organization submitted numerous F reedom of Information Act (F OIA)Requests to EPA Region 9 asking for copies of Sierra Pacific's PSD permits for their California facilities. It is no exaggeration to say that Region 9 created a new art form in de nying and ignoring our repeated FOIA Requests.

Citizens for Clean Air was finally able to acqui re the Sonora documents through Tuolumne County

Air Pollution Control Board.

In a letter dated February 23, 2012 from Bill Sandman, Deputy Air Pollution control Officer to Geraldo Rios, Chief, Operating Permits Section, U.S. EPA Regi on 9. (2nd paragraph) it states:

Attached you will find the title V Permit Application. This a pplication represents a permit application renewal; however, the District will be issuing SPI Sonora its first (initial) Title V Operating Permit, for this facility. The original Title V application was submitted to the District on or around May 30th, 1996. (underline added)

Records indicate that this facility was purchased by Sierra Pacific in 1995. The Sonora facility received its first permit (an interim permit) on Oc tober 9, 2012. The facility then received another interim permit issued on Februa ry 15, 2013, expiring on July 31, 2013. Renewed?

The Sonora facility was closed from 2009, then re tooled and reopened in September of 2011. This does not excuse Sierra Pacific for not having a permit since 1995.

Do you feel Air Director Deborah Jordan has acted in the best interest of the people of California?

Administrator Gina McCarthy, we we lcome your fresh view of the EP A and what it should stand for. Please keep us informed of the results of your i nvestigation. We would be pleased to assist, if requested. We have extensive records available.

Sincerely,Arnie Erickson, Co-chair, Citizens for Clean Air Heidi Strand, Co-chair, Citizens for Clean Air Celeste Draisner, Friends of the Delta Watershed P.O. Box 172,Whitmore,CA 96096 (530) 472-1355

hswriter@frontiernet.net

Page 5