Sierra Pacific Industries October

5, 2012

RECEIVED OCT

1

1 2012 Mr. Omer Shalev (AIR-3)

PenThts

oitice

Ar4 U.S.

EPA Region

9

u.s.

EPA RegIon

9 75 Hawthorne

Street San Francisco,

CA 94105-390

1 Phone:

(415) 972-3538 Re: Request

for Public Comment— PSD Application

SAC

12-0

1 Sierra Pacific Industries,

Anderson

Division Shasta County, California,

Region

IX Dear

Mr. Shalev Sierra Pacific Industries

(SPI) appreciates

the opportunity

to comment

on

the proposed PSD permit

and supporting

Ambient

Air Quality

Impact

Report (AAQIR)

for

the

SPI Anderson

facility.

While

not specifically

addressed

in the PSD

or AAQIR documents,

it is noted

that

the overall

facility permitting

process

for this project

has included

an Environmental

Impact

Report

(EIR)

to fulfill

the requirements

of the California Environmental

Quality

Act (CEQA)

and approval

of

a Special

Use Permit

as required

by Shasta County.

That

EIR similarly addressed

Air Quality (including

reference

to the PSD permit

and process),

Climate

Change,

Soils, Traffic,

Noise,

Water Resources

and other considerations.

A public hearing

was

held

for

the initial scoping meeting,

a second hearing

at the Planning Commission

for

the EIR certification

and

Use Permit approval, and

a third public hearing

on appeal

to the County

Board

of Supervisors

(B OS), which upheld approval

of the EIR

and

Use Permit.

The Notice

of Determination

was

filed following

the BOS approval,

which

was

not contested

by any party within

the 30-day statute

of limitations

period following

its issuance. The comments

below

are first shown relative

to the AAQIR document,

followed

by comments

specific

to the proposed

PSD permit

(and indicated

in earlier comments

of the AAQIR

as applicable).

It

is understood

that

the AAQIR

is the technical

analysis

that

the actual

PSD relies

upon.

While

these comments

are intended

to correct

minor inaccuracies

and inconsistencies

in the draft documents,

the changes

we have proposed do not affect

the substantive

analysis

and would

not require significant

revisions

to the AAQIR

or the proposed

PSD permit.AAQIRBoilerDesign—Section7.1.1oftheAAQIRindicatestwogeneralboilertechnologydesigns,includingstokerandfluidizedbed.Thestokerexample(topofpage12,furtherdefmesStokertoinclude“vibrating,travelinggrate,etc.”Forpurposesofclarityandrelevancetotheproposedboiler,theterm‘step-grate’shouldbeaddedtothisdescriptionastheproposedboilerutilizesamechanicalstep-grateforfueldistributionandneitheravibratingnortraditionaltravelinggratesystem.Similarly,theboilershouldonlybedefinedas“Stoker”withouttheadditionaldefinitionforthegratetypeinotherportionsofthepermit,includingbutnotlimitedtothefollowing:Page6—Table4-1:ProposedNewEquipment—needtostrikeouttheterm“withvibratinggrate”nexttoStokerBoiler.TheNOxmassemissionlimitshown“Step5—SelectBACT”onpage16is60.8lb/hr(3-hourblockaverage).Thisvalueisbasedonthe0.13lb/MMBtu(12-monthrollingaverage)BACTlimit.Itwouldbemoreappropriatetobasethemassemissionlimitbasedonthe0.15lb/MMBtu(3-hourblockaverage)BACTlimit,inwhichcase,thevaluewouldbe70.2lb/hr(3-hourblockaverage).2.Misreference—ThefirstsentenceofthefirstparagraphinSection6(ApplicabilityofthePreventionofSignificantDeteriorationRegulations)referencesTable4.WebelievethereferenceisactuallytoTable6-1andshouldbecorrectedaccordingly.3.PSDnon-applicability—Table6.1ofSection6(ApplicabilityofthePreventionofSignificantDeteriorationRegulations)indicatesthatSO2,VOCs,H2S04andPb,areeachlessthanthesignificantemissionrate,and,therefore,PSDdoesnotapply.ThisisreiteratedinSection8.4,whichsays“AsshowninTable8.4-1,EPAdoesnotexpectSPI-AndersontoemitPb,VOC,andSO2insignificantamounts.”Ineachofthesedeterminations,thefacilityanditspermitarenotsubjecttoBACT,AirImpactAnalysisrequirements,orconditionsforeachofthesepollutants.AsexplainedaboveandintheERforthisproject,SO2emissionsarenotexpectedtoexceedthePSDsignificantemissionratethreshold,and,therefore,thispollutantisnotsubjecttoPSDregulations.Assuch,theSO2limitinTable7.1-7shouldberemoved.4.TypographicalError—Table6-1andfootnote3donotmatchwithrespecttoC02e.Wedonotcontesteitherquantity,simplythatthefinalpermitshouldhavesimilarvalues.Similarly,theVOCemissionsfromTable6-1(34.9)donotmatchTable8.4-1(34.8).Thestacktemperatureassociatedwithstartup/shutdownoperationshowninTable8.3-1shouldbe250°F,not294°F.5.StartupandShutdownBACTlimits—Section7.1.3providesageneraldescriptionofstartupandshutdownproceduresrelativetotheboileroperationsandotherwiseexcludesactualpollutantconcentrationoperationsduringthisperiod.Section8.4.2includesAnalysisofstartupandshutdownforemissionsandindicatesthat“StartupCOemissionsareexpectedtoexceedthoseexperiencedduringnormaloperatingconditions.”Assuch,startupandshutdownaveragingperiodslongerthannormaloperations(3-hour)arewarranted.ThetechnicalstudiessupportingthePSDpermitconsiders1hourand8hourconcentrationsformodelingpurposes.SPIrespectfullyrequeststhatforstartupandshutdowntheaveraginglimitsmayremainunchangedinTable7.1-7,buttheaveragingtimesshouldbechangedtohourlyconcentrations(8-houraverage)forCOandNOx.6.DeterminationofCompliance—Section7.2;Step5(page24)selectsBACTfortheEmergencyEngine.Anemergencyengineistypicallynotsubjecttoannualsourcetestingtodeterminecompliance.Rather,toavoidtheimpracticalityofsourcetesting,compliancemaybeachievedbyprovidingperformancespecificationsfromthemanufacturertomeetorexceedtheg/kW-hr(ona3-hourmaxrollingaverage)asspecifiedinTable7.2-3.InthefirstsentenceofSection7.2.1(NOx,CO,PM,PM10PM2.5Emissions),Step1—Identifyallcontroltechnologies,“catalyzeddieselparticulatefilter”shouldberemovedfromthelist.Theproposedengineisanaturalgas-fired,spark-ignitionengine,anduseofthatcontrolwouldnotbeappropriate.Similarly,thelastsentenceofthatsameparagraphshouldberemoved.TheNSPSlimitsprovidedinTable7.2-1(NSPSLimitsforEngines)andTable7.2-3arefromSubpart1111,whichcoverscompression-ignitionengines.LimitsfromSupartJJJJ,whichcoversspark-ignitionenginesshouldbeusedinstead.WesuggestthatTable7.2-1andTable7.2-3shouldappearasfollows:Table7.2-1:NSPSLimitsfor191kW,NaturalGas-Fired,Spark-IgnitionEnginesNOxCOPMEngineType(glhp-hr)(g/hp-hr)(g/hp-hr)Non-emergencyengine1.02.00.7Emergencyengine2.04.01.0Table7.2-3:SummaryofBACTfor191kW,NaturalGas-Fired,Spark-IgnitionEmergencyEngineNOxCOPMEngineType(gfhp-hr)(gfhp-hr)(gfhp-hr)Emergencyengine2.04.01.0Similarly,Table7.2-2,whichreflectsthelimitsfromSubpart1111insteadofSubpartJJJJ,shouldappearasfollows:Table7.2-2:SummaryofPTEfor191kW,NaturalGas-Fired,Spark-IgnitionEmergencyEnginePollutantEmergencyEngine(tpy)NO0.056Co0.11PM0.0287.TypographicalError—Section7.3under“WetCooling”(bottomofpage24)shouldindicateathree-cellcoolingtower,notatwo-cellcoolingtower.ThiswasreflectedintheMay30,2012UpdatedAirDispersionAnalysispreparedbyEnvironandidentifiedinthePSDpermit.Tobeconsistent,theNO2annualNAAQSentryinTable8.4-3(SPI-AndersonCompliancewithClassIIPSDIncrementsandNAAQS)shouldread:“100(53ppb).”PreventionofSignificantDeteriorationPermitConditions(PSDPermit)8.Asstatedin#6above,thedescriptionofthecoolingtowerinthesecondparagraphunderProjectDescription,andofIDU2inTable1,shouldbechangedtoread“three-cell,”insteadof“two-cell.”9.Asstatedin#1above,theterm“withVibratingGrate”shouldberemovedfromTable1.10.MalfunctionReporting—SectionIVofthePSDpermitincludesprovisionsforthePermitteetonotifyEPAformalfunctions.ThisisatypicalofsimilaroperatingpermitsandusuallyreporteddirectlytothedesignatedAirDistrictandotherwisecopiedtoEPAaspartofregularreporting.Itmaybedesirabletoaddanitem“D.”tothissectionthatallowsforitemsIV.AthruCtobewaivedifnotificationissubmittedtotheAirDistrict.11.TypographicalError:SectionX—Table3—thevaluesforPM,PM10andPM2.5(eachat41)donotmatchtheAAQIRvalues(eachat42.1respectively).12.AirPollutionControlEquipmentandOperations—SectionX.Bspecifiesforcontrolequipmenttooperatecontinuously,butdoesnotrestrictthistooperationoftheboileritself.Itisimpractical,andwithrespecttotheelectrostaticprecipitator(ESP),canseverelydamagecontrolequipmenttooperatewithouttheboiler.Assuch,thesentenceshouldberephrasedtoindicate“DuringBoileroperations,Permitteeshallcontinuouslyoperate...”.Thelastsentenceinthisparagraphissimilarlyconcerningandindicates“Permitteeshallalsoperformanynecessaryoperationstominimizeemissionssothatemissionsareatorbelowtheemissionlimitsspecificinthispermit.”Thisimpliesthatifconditionswarrant,thatthePermitteeisrequiredtominimizeemissionspotentiallylessthanpermitted.Thiscreatessubjectivitytotheterm“emissionlimits”andreducestheabilitytoforthePermitteetoperformadjustmentstofine-tune,utilizeapprovedfuels,orsimilarmeasureswouldotherwisebeallowedatorbelowemissionlimits.Asemissionlimitsarealreadydefined,thissentenceisunnecessaryandshouldbedeletedinitsentirety.13.NaturalGasUsage—Asstatedin#3above,SO2emissionsfromtheproposedprojectarenotsubjecttoPSDreview.SectionX.D.lofthePSD(page7of17)indicatesrequirementsforPUC-qualitypipelinenaturalgasandlimitsof0.20grainsper100drystandardcubicfeet(dscf)ona12-monthrollingaveragebasisandnottoexceed1.0grainsper100dscfatanytime.ThisrequirementisnotwarrantedbythisPSDpermitforSO2andshouldbedeleted.Ifnotdeleted,therequirementshouldbelimitedtoprovidingPUC-qualitynaturalgasandnorequirementsforsulfurcontent.SPIhasspokenwithPGEonavailablenaturalgas.WhileitisPUCgrade,thesulfurcontentappearstoperiodicallyexceedthe0.20grains/dscfthroughoutmostofthestate,includingtheShastaCountyarea.Thecurrentwordingwouldpotentiallyprohibitthefacilityfromoperatingandasindicatedaboveshouldnotberestrictedorlimitedbythispermit.WhilewerecognizethatSulfurinnaturalgascancontributetoPMemissions,theBACTdeterminationincludingtheESPdoesnotrelyuponthisforitsdeterminationandwerespectfullyrequestthechangeincorporatedabove.14.PSDNon-ApplicabilityandStartupAveragingPeriods—Asstatedin#3and#5above,SO2,VOC,andPbemissionsfromtheproposedprojectarenotsubjecttoPSDreview.Therefore,thePSDpermitshouldnotincludeemissionlimitsorpermitconditionsassociatedwiththesepollutantsasinTable5,itemD.8,andSectionH.AllconditionsassociatedwithVOC,SO2andPbshouldbedeletedfromthepermit.AveragingperiodsinTable5shouldbechangedasindicatedin#3above.15.AuxiliaryEquipmentEmissionsLimitations—InTable6ofSectionX.E.l,thePM/PM10emissionlimitonU2(thecoolingtower)shouldbe0.272lb/hr(hourlyaverage),insteadof0.26lb/hr.AlsoinItem1,Table6,theNOx,CO,andPM/PM10emissionlimitsshownforU3(theemergencyboilerrecirculationpumpengine)aretakenfromNSPSSubpart1111forcompressionignitionengines,wheretheyshouldhavebeentakenfromNSPSSubpartJJJJ,asindicatedin#6above.InSectionX.E.2,thereferencetofiresafetytestingshouldberemoved,asU2isnotusedforfiresafety.16.OperatingConditionsandWorkPractices—SectionF.Item7referstowoodwasteandstoragebinsandtherequirementthattheseremainenclosed.The(wood)fuelshed,isbydesign,anopensidewallsystemandisnotpartofanypressurizedortemporarybin.Thephrase“notincludingthefuelshed”willclarifyhowthisitemisinterpretedforcompliancepurposes.Item14indicates“Allleaks,spillsandupsetsofanykindshallbecorrectedorcleanedwith4hours.”ItisassumedandneedsclarificationthatthisdoesnotincludeanyupsetthatmayoccurrelatedtoUi,U2,orU3andthat“with”wasintendedtobe“within”4hours.Certainupsetconditionsmayrequiretimeframeslongerthan4hours,daylighthours,businesshours,orotherconditionsthatwouldotherwiseprohibitcompliancewiththisitem.Pleaseclarifytheintentofthisrequirementandaddtheterms“aspracticable”.Item16and17—VOCswereindicatedbelowSERsforthispermitandconditionsforVOCsshouldnotapply.17.FuelRestrictions—SectionF.2specifiesfuelsdifferentthanthoseappliedforinthePSDapplicationbythePermitee,whichincluded:(fromthePSDApplication,Section2.2FuelSupply“FuelforthecogenerationunitwillcomefromtheexistingSPIfacilitiesinCaliforniaatArcata,Anderson,ShastaLake,andRedBluff,aswellasin-forestmaterialsfromSPI-ownedorcontrolledtimberlands,andvarioussourcesofagriculturalandurbanwoodwastes”.ThisdescriptionhasremainunchangedduringthePSDprocesswithEPAandwouldrequestthatiteitherremainforthePSDpermit,orbemodifiedtoreflectthewordingbelow,asapprovedbytheERandSpecialUsePermit.ThiswordingisslightlymorerestrictivealthoughtnotsubstantivelydifferentthanoriginallyproposedtoEPAinthePSDapplicationandissupportedbythemodelingandtechnicalanalysisfortheproposedPSD.ThefueldescriptioninthedraftPSDisnotconsistentwiththePSDapplicationorthetechnicalanalysisandmodelingsupportingthisprojectandwouldbeinconsistentwiththeproposedoperationofthefacility.(fromtheapprovedEIRandSpecialUsePermit,ShastaCounty—UsePermit07-021,Condition91respectively)Fuelsburnedinthecogenerationboilershallbelimitedtothefollowing:a.Wastepallets,crates,dunnage,manufacturingandconstructionwoodwastes,treetrimmings,millresidues,andrangelandmaintenanceresides;b.Allagriculturalcropsorwaste;c.Woodandwoodwastesidentifiedtofollowallofthefollowingpractices;a.HarvestedpursuanttoanapprovedtimbermanagementplanpreparedinaccordancewiththeZ’berg-NejedlyForestpracticeActof1973orotherlocallyornationallyapprovedplan;andb.Harvestedforthepurposeofforestfirefuelreductionorforeststandimprovement.18.PerformanceTests—Asindicatedearlierinitem14above,noperformancetestingiswarrantedbythisPSDpermitforitemsH.i.e(Pbemissions),H.1.b(SOxemissions),andItem2.a(bothforSO2andPbemissions)andtheseshouldberespectfullyremovedfromtheproposedPSDpermit.Similarlyitem2.cdoesnotprovideanyflexibilityfromthefacility’smaximumsteamproductionrateforPMtesting.Inpracticalapplication,apercentageofthemaximumsteamrateisappliedtoallowoperationalflexibilitywhilemaintainingpermitlimits.Tothisextent,werequestthatthePSDpermitallowfora90%ofthemaximumsteamrateforperformancetesting.ItemH.3.d(coolingtower)requiresestablishmentofprocedurestoensureTDSlimitsarenotexceeded.Witha0.0005%driftrate,TDSisnotmeasurableinpracticeandunnecessaryatthatperformancestandard.Thisitemshouldbedeletedinitsentiretyinconsiderationofthedriftrateimposed.ItemH.6forsulfurgascontent—similartoitem13above.Thisitemisunnecessaryandnotwarrantedasaconditionforthispermitandappearsunachievablebasedonreviewofavailablenaturalgassupplies(PGE).Similarly,PGEperformstestingonentireserviceareas,notspecificdistributionstofacilities.Assuch,therequirementforthePermitteetoensurethatthefueltestedisrepresentativeofthefueldeliveredtothesiteisimpracticaltoachieve.Instead,werequestthatthePSDpermitrequestthatthepermitteeprovidesulfurcontentreports(fromthePUCQualityNaturalGasdistributor—PGEinthisinstance)withnonumericallydefinedrequirementonthesulfurcontent.19.RecordkeepingandReporting—Item1.9ofthePSDpermitindicates“forUi,dailyrecordsoffuelreceivedotherthannaturalgasshallbemaintained.Theserecordsshallincludeadetaileddescriptionoffuelsupplier,fueltypeandtonsreceived.”Uireceivesfuelsfromthefacilityitselfthataredirectlyconveyedtothefueldeliveryandhandlingsystem.Thefacilitysimilarlyreceivesfuelsfromoutsidesourcesthatareweighedandtracked—forpurposesofthiscomment,thesearefacilityreceivedorinboundfuels.Item1.9shouldclarifythaton-sitederivedfuelsareexemptfromrecordkeepingregardingtonnage.Forpurposesofdeterminingcompliance,estimatesoffuelsmaybederivedfromtheboilerrating,steamflow,andheatvalueofthefuel(onsiteoroffsite)todetermineanoverallusage.SPIrespectfullyrequeststhatthesecorrectionsandclarificationsbeincorporatedintothefmalAAQIRandPSDpermitfortheAndersoncogenerationfacility.Pleaseletusknowifyouhaveanyquestionsaboutthesecomments.Sincerely, ;)DavidC.Brown,PEEnvironmentalAffairsandComplianceManager.