1 

### Technical Support Document (TSD)

**for the Cross** 

**- State Air Pollution**  **Rule for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS** 

Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2015

- 0 5 00



## Status of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs **Proposed Rule TSD** 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air and Radiation

November 201 52 

### Status of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs

This document describes the status of each Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)

state transport implementation plan (SIP) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the eastern states

and the District of Columbia that are the focus of the proposed rule

. This document describes any findings of failure to submit section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs for the 2008 ozone NAAQS made by the EPA for these states, any actions taken by the EPA to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs submitted by these states for the 2008 ozone NAAQS , and any consent decree deadlines applicable to the EPA’s action on these SIP submissi ons

. This

document therefore addresses the District of Columbia and the following states: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Vir ginia and Wisconsin . The facts presented in this TSD support

the EPA’s conclusion that it currently has or may have , upon final action on a SIP submission, a legal obligation and the legal authority to promulgate each of the FIPs promulgated in this rule.



## Status of the Transport SIPs

Alabama On August 20, 2012

, the s tate of Alabama submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i )(I) with respect to the 2008

ozone NAAQS. On April 16, 2013 , the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP submission. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS ( 80 FR 39961 ) for the state of Alabama

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Arkansas On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of A rkansas

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Connecticut On June 15, 2015

, the state of Connecticut submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requ irements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time.3 Delaware On March 29, 2013

, the s tate of Delaware submitted a state implementation plan revision

to address the requirements o f CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time

.

District of Columbia On June 18, 2014, the District of Columbia submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this ti me.

Florida

On October 31, 2011

, the s tate of Florida submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS

. On April 30, 2013 , the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP submission. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Florida

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Georgia On March 6, 2012

, the s tate of Georgia submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On October 3, 2013 , the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP submission. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Georgia

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency

.

Illinois On December 31, 2012

, the s tate of Illinois submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS , the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS and the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS

. On June 11, 2014, the state clarified that its SIP revision was not intended to address good neighbor SIP requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS

. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requi rements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Illinois, and the EPA has not, s ubsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency

.

Indiana On December 12, 2012

, the s tate of Indiana submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time. However, the EPA is obligated

, pursuant to a judgement issued by the Northern District of4 California in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by J une 7

, 2016. 1

Iowa On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Iowa

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Kansas On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Kansas

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and a pproved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Kentucky

On July 17, 2012, the s tate of Kentucky submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i )(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On March 7, 2013, the EPA finalize d disapproval of Kentucky’s SIP submission addressing the good neighbor provis ion requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (78 FR 14681)

.

In the disapproval notice, the EPA explained that the disapproval of the good neighbor portion of the state’s infrastructure SIP submission did not trigger a mandatory duty for the EPA to promulgate a FIP to address these requirements. Citing the D.C. Circuit’s decision

EME Homer City Generation v. EPA , 696 F.3d 7 (2012), the EPA explained that the court concluded states have no obligation to make a SIP submission to address the good neighbor provision for a new or revised NAAQS until the EPA first defines a state’s obligati ons pursuant to that section. Therefore, because a good neighbor SIP addressing the 2008 ozone standard was not at that time required, the EPA indicated that its disapproval action would not trigger an obligation for the EPA to promulgate a FIP to address the interstate transport requirements.

On April 30, 2013, the Sierra Club filed a petition for review of the EPA’s action based on the Agency’s conclusion that the FIP clock was not triggered by the disapproval of Kentucky’s good neighbor SIP. 2 On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a decision reversing and vacating the D.C. Circuit’s decision in EME Homer City

. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.

, 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). Following the Supreme Court decision, the EPA requested and the cour t granted vacatur and remand of the portion of the EPA’s final action that determined that the FIP obligation was not triggered by the disapproval. 3

1 See Judgment, Sierra Club v. McCarthy , Case 4:14

- cv

- 05091

- YGR (N.D. Cal. May 15, 2015).

2 Sierra Club v. EPA , Case No. 13

- 3546 (6th Cir., filed Apr. 30, 2013).

3 Order, Sierra Club v. EPA , Case No. 13

- 3546, Document No. 74

- 1 (Mar. 13, 2015).5 As described in the preamble, the EPA is proposing to correct the portion of the disapproval notice ind icating that the FIP clock would not be triggered by the SIP disapproval. The EPA believes that the EPA’s obligation to develop a FIP was triggered on the date of the judgment issued by the Supreme Court in EPA v. EME Homer City , June 2, 2014, and the EPA is obligated to issue a FIP at any time within two years of that date.

Louisiana On June 7, 2013 , the state of Louisiana submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time.

Maine On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respec t to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Maine

, and the EPA, subsequent to that date,

received on October 26, 2015 , a good neighbor SIP from the state of Maine

. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time.

Maryland On December 31, 2012 the s tate of Maryland submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time. However, the EPA is obligated

, pursuant to a judgement issued by the Northern District of

California in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by J une 7

, 2016. 4

Massachusetts On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Massachusetts

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and a pproved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Michigan On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Michigan

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Minnesota On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008

4 Id.6 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Mi nnesota

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Mississippi

On November 10, 2011, the s tate of Mississippi submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i )(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On October 11, 2012 , the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP

submission. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110 (a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Mississippi

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Missouri On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Missouri

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Nebraska

On February 11 , 201 3 the s tate of Nebraska submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i )(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On November 2 , 2015, t he EPA signed a notice proposing approval of

the SIP submission

. In addition, the EPA is obligated

, pursuant to a judgement issued by the

Northern District of California in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by January 29, 2016. 5

New Hampshire On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of New Hampshire

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

New Jersey

On October 17, 2014

, the s t ate of Ne w Jersey submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time.

5 Id.7 New York

On April 4 , 201 3

, the s tate of New York submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time

.

North Carolina

On November 2 , 201 2

, the s tate of North Carolina submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On September 3, 2014 , the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP

submission. On June 26, 2015, North Carolina submitted a letter indicating that it wished to

“rescind” its September 3, 2014 withdrawal of its good neighbor SIP to address the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On June 30, 2015, t he EPA responded to North Carolina’s June 26 th letter explaining that North Carolina’s letter constituted a new SIP submission that was determined to be incomplete. 6 On that same date, the EPA also issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neig hbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of

North Carolina , and t he EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency

.

North Dakota

On March 7 , 201 3

, the s tate of North Dakota submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On November 10, 2015, the EPA signed a no tice proposing approval of

the SIP submission. In addition, the EPA is obligated

, pursuant to a judgement issued by the

Northern District of California in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP b y January 29, 2016. 7

Ohio

On December 27 , 201 2

, the s tate of Ohio submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time

. However, the EPA is obligated

, pursuant to a judgement issued by the Northern District of California in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by J une 7 , 2016. 8

Oklahoma On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Oklahoma

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to

6 See Letter from Beverly H. Banister, USEPA Region 4, to Sheila Holman, NCDENR, “Response to North Carolina’s June 26, 2015 Letter Seeking to Rescind the September 3, 2014 Withdrawal of the 2008 Ozone Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Certificatio n Regarding Interstate Transport” (June 30, 2015).

7 See Judgment, Sierra Club v. McCarthy , Case 4:14

- cv

- 05091

- YGR (N.D. Cal. May 15, 2015).

8 Id

.8 that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Pennsylvania On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Pennsylvania

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Rhode Island On June 23, 2015

, the state of Rhode Island submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time.

South Caro lina

On October 24 , 201 1

, the s tate of South Carolina submitted a state implementation plan

revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On April 16, 2013

, the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP submission. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for th e state of S outh Carolina

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency

.

South Dakota

On May 2 1 , 201 3 the s tate of South Dakota submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On November 10, 2015, the EPA signed a notice proposing approval of the

SIP submission.

Tennessee

On October 19, 2009

, the s tate of Tennessee submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On July 3, 2012 , the state withdrew its good neighbor SIP submission. On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Tennessee

, and the EP A has not, subsequent to that date, received and complete approved a good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency

.

Texas

On December 13 , 201 2 the s tate of Texas submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time

. However, the9 EPA is obligated

, pursuant to a judgement issued by the Northern District of California in

Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by J une 7 , 2016. 9

Vermont On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to th e 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of Vermont

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Virginia On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the Commonwealth of Virginia

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

West Virginia On June 30, 2015, the EPA issued a finding of failure to submit a complete good neighbor SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I) with respect to the 200 8 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 39961) for the state of West Virginia

, and the EPA has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the deficiency.

Wisconsin

On June 20 , 201 3

, the s tate of Wisconsin submitted a state implementation plan revision to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA has not taken any action on that SIP submission at this time

.

9 See Judgment, Sierra Club v. McCarthy , Case 4:14

- cv

- 05091

- YGR (N.D. Cal. May 15, 2015).