1

Technical Support Document (TSD)

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

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0500

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

Proposed Rule TSD

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air and Radiation

November 2015
2

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 submissions. 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 Virginia 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 state 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 Arkansas, 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 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.
3

Delaware

On March 29, 2013, the state of Delaware 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.

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 time.

Florida

On October 31, 2011, the state 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 state 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 state 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 NO2 NAAQS and the 2010 SO2 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 requirements 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, subsequent to that date, received and approved a complete good neighbor SIP 

revision to correct the deficiency.

Indiana

On December 12, 2012, the state 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 of 
4

California in Sierra Club v. McCarthy, to take final action on the good neighbor SIP by June 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 approved a complete good neighbor SIP revision to correct the 

deficiency.

Kentucky

On July 17, 2012, the state 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 finalized disapproval of Kentucky’s SIP submission

addressing the good neighbor provision 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 obligations 

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 court 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 indicating 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 respect 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 state 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 June 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 approved 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 Minnesota, 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 state 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, 2013 the state 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, the 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 state of New 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, 2013, the state 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, 2012, the state 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, the EPA responded to North Carolina’s June 26th 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 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 

North Carolina, and the 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, 2013, the state 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 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, 2016.7

Ohio

On December 27, 2012, the state 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 June 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 Certification 

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 Carolina

On October 24, 2011, the state 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 the state of South 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 21, 2013 the state 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 state 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 EPA has not, subsequent to 

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

deficiency.

Texas

On December 13, 2012 the state 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, the 
9

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 June 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 the 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 2008 

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, 2013, the state 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).