1

Kelly, Shaheerah

From: hswriter@frontiernet.net

Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013 7:05 PM

To: Kelly, Shaheerah

Subject: Re: Sierra Pacific Biomass factory Dec. 10 public hearing clarification request.

Dear Shaheerah, 

 If the PSD permit process is not part of CEQA or NEPA, is it part of the Clean Air Act? 

Sincerely, 

Heidi Strand 

From: "Kelly, Shaheerah" <Kelly.Shaheerah@epa.gov> 

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

Cc: R9AirPermits <R9AirPermits@epa.gov>; "Kelly, Shaheerah" <Kelly.Shaheerah@epa.gov> 

Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 2:07 PM 

Subject: RE: Sierra Pacific Biomass factory Dec. 10 public hearing clarification request.

Dear Ms. Strand, 

 

Thank you again for your comments. As mentioned previously, we will include them and respond when we 

provide our response to comments document. 

 

You asked “will this new equipment be placed in a new building?” The new equipment will be installed in a 

new building within the existing property of the Sierra Pacific Industries facility. 

 

The PSD permit is not part of the NEPA or CEQA processes. Therefore, the regulations governing the NEPA 

and CEQA processes do not apply to the PSD permit. EPA’s regulations governing the PSD permitting process 

are at 40 CFR 52.21, and EPA’s public participation regulations for the PSD permit are at 40 CFR part 124. 

These regulations require EPA to provide at least 30 days for public comment period, and require EPA to 

provide notice of a public hearing at least 30 days prior to the hearing. As mentioned in the previous e-mail 

message, EPA did this. Additionally, we recently announced that we are extending the public comment period 

to January 10, 2014. 

 

In accordance with our regulations, EPA will be accepting oral and written comments during the public hearing 

scheduled for December 10. 

 

Sincerely, 

************************************ 

Shaheerah Kelly

Permits Office, Air Division (AIR-3)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Phone: 415-947-4156 

Fax: 415-947-3579 

Email: kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov

From: hswriter@frontiernet.net [mailto:hswriter@frontiernet.net] 

Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2013 7:09 PM 
2

To: Kelly, Shaheerah 

Cc: Jordan, Deborah; kbundy@biologicaldiversity.org; Marily Woodhouse; Wsloan@mofo.com; rob@wildcalifornia.org; 

rob@redwoodrob.com; R9FOIA; rramalin@arb.ca.gov; darthur@redding.com; dluo@arb.ca.gov 

Subject: Re: Sierra Pacific Biomass factory Dec. 10 public hearing clarification request.

 

December 7, 2013 

Dear Shaheerah, 

Thank you for your quick response. 

In answer to my question is this new construction or a modification, you responded:

"This statement means that if EPA issues a final permit, SPI can begin the process of constructing 

and installing the new equipment authorized by the permit, including a new biomass-fired boiler, a 

new emergency engine and a new cooling tower." 

Will this new equipment be placed in a new building? 

According to the following document, there is a 90 day recirculation process. 

NEPA and CEQA: Integrating State and Federal Environmental 

Reviews 

Draft for Public Review and Comment 

March 2013

Finally, a Record of Decision (ROD)may only be issued 30 days after 

the Notice of Availability of a Final EIS and 90 days after the Notice of Availability for a Draft EIS have been 

published(40 CFR §1506.10(b)(1)-(2)). 

 ~ Office of the President and the Governor's office of Planning and Research (State of 

California) 

Please explain why this does not apply. 

Sincerely, 

Heidi Strand, Co-chair 

Citizens for Clean Air 
3

er EPA guidelines, a public hearing is to gather comments from the public during the scoping/beginning of the permitting 

process.If Region 9 skips this process, and does not recirculate the revised/draft permit then the 

purpose of a public hearing is defeated. The intent of the Environmental Appeals Board ruling has 

not been respected. The Region's December 10th public hearing on the permit is only valid as a 

scoping meeting before recirculating the draft permit for review. 

While EPA regulations require a 45 day minimum for recirculating a draft permit, I feel due to the 

complexity and controversy, a 90 day recirculation is appropriate. 

Thank you, 

Heidi Strand 

Kelly, Shaheerah" <Kelly.Shaheerah@epa.gov>

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

Cc: R9AirPermits <R9AirPermits@epa.gov> 

Sent: Friday, December 6, 2013 3:36 PM 

Subject: RE: Sierra Pacific Biomass factory Dec. 10 public hearing clarification request.

 

Dear Ms. Strand, 

 

Thank you for your comments. We will include them and respond when we provide our response to comments 

document. Please be aware that the public comment period ends on January 10, 2014. 

 

Regarding your question about what is meant by “construction of the modification,” we assume you are 

referencing our public notice, which states, “If EPA issues a final decision granting the PSD permit 

modification, and there is no appeal, construction of the modification may commence, subject to the conditions 

of the PSD permit and other applicable permit and legal requirements.” This statement means that if EPA 

issues a final permit, SPI can begin the process of constructing and installing the new equipment authorized by 

the permit, including a new biomass-fired boiler, a new emergency engine and a new cooling tower. 

 

We would like to note that your reference to a 90-day recirculation process is unclear. On November 8, 2013, 

we announced a 30-day public comment period, which is required by EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 124.10. We 

recently announced that we are extending the public comment period to January 10, 2014. Since we announced 

the public comment period, the draft permit has been available on our website at 

http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/permit/r9-permits-issued.html. It will help us to better respond to your question 

if you clarify why you believe there is a 90-day recirculation process. 

 
4

On Tuesday, December 10th, we will hold a public information meeting prior to the public hearing to provide 

the public with an opportunity to ask clarifying questions. More information about the public information 

meeting and public hearing can be found in the attached public notice. 

 

Sincerely, 

************************************ 

Shaheerah Kelly

Permits Office, Air Division (AIR-3)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

Phone: 415-947-4156 

Fax: 415-947-3579 

Email: kelly.shaheerah@epa.gov

----- Forwarded by Shaheerah Kelly/R9/USEPA/US on 12/06/2013 07:33 AM -----

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

To: R9AirPermits@EPA, 

Cc: Deborah Jordan/R9/USEPA/US@MSO365, "kbundy@biologicaldiversity.org" <kbundy@biologicaldiversity.org>, "darthur@redding.com" <darthur@redding.com>, Kara 

Christenson/R9/USEPA/US@MSO365, "epatton@arb.ca.gov" <epatton@arb.ca.gov>, "evirgin@arb.ca.gov" <evirgin@arb.ca.gov>, "ewong@arb.ca.gov" <ewong@arb.ca.gov>, 

Larry Gottesman/DC/USEPA/US@MSO365, "info@eastvalleytimes.com" <info@eastvalleytimes.com>, Ivry Johnson/R9/USEPA/US@MSO365, "jlindber@arb.ca.gov" 

<jlindber@arb.ca.gov>, "kscott@arb.ca.gov" <kscott@arb.ca.gov>, "mgabor@arb.ca.gov" <mgabor@arb.ca.gov>, "news@khsltv.com" <news@khsltv.com>, 

"noconnor@arb.ca.gov" <noconnor@arb.ca.gov>, Omer Shalev/R9/USEPA/US@MSO365, Marily Woodhouse <marily-lobo@hotmail.com>, "Wsloan@mofo.com" 

<Wsloan@mofo.com>, "bwalker@co.shasta.ca.us" <bwalker@co.shasta.ca.us>

Date: 12/05/2013 08:15 PM

Subject: Sierra Pacific Biomass factory Dec. 10 public hearing clarification request.

Attn: EPA R9 Air Director Deborah Jordan 

December 5th, 2013

To: Environmental Engineer Shaheerah Kelly.

Dear Shaheerah Kelly, 

Per your Public Notice published on November 8th, it states 

 "...construction of the modification may commence."

Could you define what 'Construction of a modification' means? 

Per your public notice of the extension of public comment period on 

Permit Application No. SAC 12-01:

The public notice states "On November 8th, 2013, we announced a new 

version of the permit..." Does this not trigger a 90 day recirculation 

process as required for all new draft permits ? 
5

It is our understanding that the public hearing follows this 90 day 

recirculation process. Will Region 9 be holding a public hearing after the 

90 day recirculation of the draft permit? 

Sincerely,

Heidi Strand 

Co-chair Citizens for Clean Air