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.jeffrey@epa.gov" <robinson.jeffrey@epa.gov>; 

"bainter.stephan@epa.gov" <bainter.stephan@epa.gov>; 

"r1web.mail@epa.gov" <r1web.mail@epa.gov>; 

"r2-web-inquiry@epamail.epa.gov" <r2-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.joshua@epa.gov" <singer.joshua@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.jeanine@azdeq.gov" 

<inman.jeanine@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 .odt
November 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 Sierra Pacific Industries, the largest 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 Pacific 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 ordered 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 agency she oversees as we shall 

demonstrate below: 

 

PSD permits by facility: 

ANDERSON,CA biomass/sawmill. 

The Anderson, California facility has been in “significant non-compliance” of their 4 MW PSD 

permit for the entire 5 years it was in existence. 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 permitting 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 Director Deborah Jordan, a significantly out of 

compliance facility has been operating 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 the 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 environmental review process under the Clean Air Act. 

The new 31 MW biomass facility that Shasta County refers to was successfully appealed to the 

Environmental Appeals Board (EAB). Deborah Jordan, as Region 9 Air Director, had decided that the 

citizens of Shasta County (a recognized Environmental 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 appeal was Region 9's attempt to “modify” the expired 

and out of compliance 4 MW facility's permit. Not only do they plan to issue a significantly out-of 

compliance 4MW facility a new 5 year permit without 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 District (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 pollution from stationary sources, 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 local, state, and federal air quality regulations. (emphasis added) 

Erin Squire, Special Projects Coordinator for the 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 April 1st, 1998 it states the facility 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 document 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 Operate” 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 boiler in 1998, that this facility 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 and 
Expiration – 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 compliance 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 oversight agency of the NCUAQMD. EPA Region 9 

Air Director, Deborah Jordan appears to have failed 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 Pollution Control District, and the 

California Attorney General reached a nearly $13 million civil settlement of a jointly prosecuted air pollution enforcement 

case against Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI), a timber operations company and California’s largest private landowner. SPI, 

headquartered in Anderson, agreed to settle a civil complaint 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 control 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 alleged 

in the complaints do not occur in the future. 

 Page 3 

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

Why wasn't EPA Region 9 a plaintiff in this case? What 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 County Air Pollution Control District. 

Notice of Violation #3096 (for violations committed between 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 seven 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 the 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 for 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 opacity 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. The 
repetitive 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, died at the Quincy facility. His clothing caught 

in a conveyor belt he was cleaning. This is the second fatality in recent years at a Sierra Pacific 

facility. 

SONORA 

The Sonora permit is of particular interest. 

Our organization submitted numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)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 denying and ignoring our repeated FOIA Requests. 

Citizens for Clean Air was finally able to acquire 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 Region 9. (2nd paragraph) it states: 

Attached you will find the title V Permit Application. This application 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 October 9, 2012. The facility then received another 

interim permit issued on February 15, 2013, expiring on July 31, 2013. Renewed?

The Sonora facility was closed from 2009, then retooled 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 welcome your fresh view of the EPA and what it should stand for. 

Please keep us informed of the results of your investigation. 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