Page 1 of 3 * * * PUBLIC NOTICE * * *

SIERRA PACIFIC INDUSTRIES-ANDERSON DIVISION

ANNOUNCEMENT OF FINAL PERMIT DE CISION TO ISSUE A CLEAN AIR ACT

PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION PERMIT

THAT REGULATES THE EMI SSION 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 gr ant conditional approval, in accordance with the Clean Air Act Prevention of Significant Deteri oration (PSD) regulati ons (40 CFR 52.21), to

Sierra Pacific Industries-Anders on 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 cogene ration unit, including a 468 MMBtu/hr stoker boiler, capab le of generating 31 megawatts (MW) of gross electrical output, a 256 horsepower (hp) natural gas-fire d emergency engine, and a three-cell cooling

tower.

The SPI-Anderson facility is located at 19758 Riverside Av enue, 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 facili ty is bordered on the northeast by the Sacramento Ri ver, on the northwest by a priv ate 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 coge neration unit consisting of a 116.4

MMBtu/hr stoker boiler and asso ciated equipment capable of producing 4 MW of gross electrical output, for which the Shasta Count y 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 st oker boiler, at its Anderson facility. The new cogeneration unit w ould be capable of producing 31 MW of grow electrical output. This change to the facility is a PSD majo r modification under the Clean Air Act and EPA’s PSD regulations at 40 CF R 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 (NO x ), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), PM less than 10 microns in diameter (PM 10 ), and PM less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM 2.5 ). 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 explaine d that it would bePage 2 of 3 effective in 30 days unless our action was appeal ed 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 comme nts 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 material s provided thereafter. SPI submitted these application materials due to the uncertainty of issuance of the ma ndate 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 th e carbon dioxide emissions resulting from the combustion of certain biological materials, includ ing 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 sin ce 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 he ld 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 receive d 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 Administrativ e 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 th e 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 rema nd, that final permit decision and the Board’s decision in this case become final agency act ion 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 app eal of a PSD permit decision to the EAB.

Additional Information: Key portions of the Administrative R ecord for this decision (including the final permit, all public comments, EPA’s re sponses to the public comments, and additionalPage 3 of 3 supporting information) are availa ble through a link at our website, www.epa.gov/region09/air/perm it/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 vis it at least 72 hours in advance. Hard copies of the final permit a nd 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