Page 1 of 3 

* * * PUBLIC NOTICE * * * 

SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES-ANDERSON DIVISION 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF FINAL PERMIT DECISION TO ISSUE A CLEAN AIR ACT 

PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION PERMIT 

THAT REGULATES THE EMISSION OF AIR POLLUTANTS 

PERMIT APPLICATION NO. SAC 12-01 

Agency Action and Project Description: The United States Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) Region 9 issued its final decision to grant conditional approval, in accordance with the 

Clean Air Act Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations (40 CFR 52.21), to 

Sierra Pacific Industries-Anderson Division (SPI or SPI-Anderson) to construct and operate a 

new cogeneration unit and ancillary equipment at its existing lumber manufacturing facility in 

Anderson, California. The project consists of a new biomass-fired cogeneration unit, including a 

468 MMBtu/hr stoker boiler, capable of generating 31 megawatts (MW) of gross electrical 

output, a 256 horsepower (hp) natural gas-fired emergency engine, and a three-cell cooling 

tower. 

The SPI-Anderson facility is located at 19758 Riverside Avenue, Anderson, California 96007 

(Assessor’s Parcel No. 050-110-025). The site is approximately 0.5 mile west of Interstate 5, 

and approximately 2 miles north of the City of Anderson. The facility is bordered on the 

northeast by the Sacramento River, on the northwest by a private parcel, on the southwest by 

Union Pacific Railroad tracks and State Route (SR) 273 and on the southeast by private parcels. 

The mailing address for SPI-Anderson is P.O. Box 496028, Redding, CA 96049-6028. 

Equipment currently located at this location includes a cogeneration unit consisting of a 116.4 

MMBtu/hr stoker boiler and associated equipment capable of producing 4 MW of gross 

electrical output, for which the Shasta County Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 

issued a PSD permit (Permit No. 94-PO-18) on June 15, 1995. 

Background Information: On March 3, 2003, EPA withdrew the PSD delegation from several 

permitting authorities in Region 9, including SCAMQD, making EPA the PSD permitting 

authority for Shasta County. See 68 FR 19371. 

In March 2010, SPI submitted a PSD application to EPA for an approval to construct and operate 

a new cogeneration unit and ancillary equipment, including a 468 MMBtu/hr stoker boiler, at its 

Anderson facility. The new cogeneration unit would be capable of producing 31 MW of grow 

electrical output. This change to the facility is a PSD major modification under the Clean Air 

Act and EPA’s PSD regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. On September 13, 2012, EPA Region 9 

proposed to issue a PSD permit modification for the new cogeneration unit and ancillary 

equipment for nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), PM less 

than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), and PM less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5). We 

accepted comments on the PSD permit proposal from September 13, 2012 through October 17, 

2012. On February 19, 2013, after consideration of the public comments received, EPA Region 

9 issued the final PSD permit in accordance with 40 CFR 124.19 and explained that it would be 
Page 2 of 3 

effective in 30 days unless our action was appealed to the EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board 

(EAB). Within that 30 day time frame, various parties filed appeals with the EAB, which 

suspended the permit’s effective date. 

On July 18, 2013, the EAB remanded the permit to EPA Region 9 in part. The EAB directed 

EPA Region 9 to reopen the permit proceedings to hold a public hearing, issue a final permit 

decision and respond to any new comments received during the hearing. See In re Sierra Pacific 

Industries (Anderson Processing Facility), PSD Appeal Nos. 13-01 to 13-04, slip op. at 67 (EAB 

July 18, 2013). 

Following these events, we have revised the PSD permit by including GHG emission limits and 

related requirements, as requested in a PSD application provided by SPI to EPA Region 9 in 

August 2013, and subsequent supplemental materials provided thereafter. SPI submitted these 

application materials due to the uncertainty of issuance of the mandate for the Court of Appeals 

for the Circuit for the District of Columbia decision issued on July 12, 2013 vacating EPA’s 

regulation deferring from the PSD requirements the carbon dioxide emissions resulting from the 

combustion of certain biological materials, including materials such as wood, wood waste, forest 

residue, and agricultural material. See, Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. EPA, 722 F.3d 401 (D.C. 

Cir. 2013). We have also taken this opportunity to revise certain other conditions (primarily 

related to monitoring, performance testing, and recordkeeping) in the PSD permit to address 

minor technical issues we identified since February 2013. We provided notice of public 

comment of the proposed PSD permit and a public hearing per 40 CFR 124 on November 8, 

2013. In response to the EAB remand, we held a public hearing on December 10, 2013. We 

accepted public comments on the proposed PSD permit from November 8, 2013 until January 

10, 2014. 

During the public comment period, EPA received written and oral comments regarding the 

proposed PSD permitting action for the project. EPA has carefully reviewed each of the 

comments submitted and, after consideration of the expressed views of all commenters, the 

pertinent Federal statutes and regulations, and additional material relevant to the application and 

contained in our Administrative Record, EPA has made a decision in accordance with 40 CFR 

52.21 to issue a final PSD permit to SPI. 

EPA’s final permit decision will become effective 30 days after the service of notice of the 

decision unless our decision is appealed to the EAB pursuant to 40 CFR 124.19. Please note that 

the EAB’s July 18, 2013 decision stated that once Region 9 issues a final permit decision 

following the public hearing required by the remand, that final permit decision and the Board’s 

decision in this case become final agency action subject to judicial review per 40 CFR 124.19(l). 

The EAB’s decision further stated, “The Board is not requiring, and will not accept, an appeal to 

the Board on the final permit decision following remand in this case.” See, In re Sierra Pacific 

Industries (Anderson Processing Facility), PSD Appeal Nos. 13-01 to 13-04, slip op. at 67 (EAB 

July 18, 2013). Please see 40 CFR 124.19 and visit http://www.epa.gov/eab/ for more 

information regarding the procedures for appeal of a PSD permit decision to the EAB. 

Additional Information: Key portions of the Administrative Record for this decision (including 

the final permit, all public comments, EPA’s responses to the public comments, and additional 
Page 3 of 3 

supporting information) are available through a link at our website, 

www.epa.gov/region09/air/permit/r9-permits-issued.html#psd, or at www.regulations.gov 

(Docket ID # EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0634). 

Hard copies of the final permit and EPA’s responses to the public comments, and the 

Administrative Record for this action, may also be viewed in person, Monday through Friday 

from 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM, at the EPA Region 9 address below. Due to building security 

procedures, please call Shaheerah Kelly at (415) 947-4156 to arrange a visit at least 72 hours in 

advance. Hard copies of the final permit and EPA’s responses to the public comments are 

available upon request at the following: 

E-mail: R9airpermits@epa.gov

U.S. Mail: Shaheerah Kelly (AIR-3) 

U.S. EPA Region 9 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 

Phone: (415) 947-4156 

The contact information above may also be used to request copies of other portions of the 

administrative record for this action. 

Please bring the foregoing notice to the attention of all persons who would be interested in this 

matter. 

*** END OF ANNOUNCEMENT *** 

Issued April 25, 2014