IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT 

COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, ) 

et al., ) 

 Petitioners, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) No. 09-1322 (and 

 ) consolidated cases) 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL ) 

PROTECTION AGENCY, ) 

 Respondent. ) 

_____________________________________________ ) 

 

COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, ) 

INC., et al., ) 

 Petitioners, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) No. 10-1073 (and 

 ) consolidated cases) 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL ) 

PROTECTION AGENCY, ) 

 Respondent. ) 

_____________________________________________ ) 

 ) 

COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, ) 

et al., ) 

 Petitioners, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) No. 10-1092 (and 

 ) consolidated cases) 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL ) 

PROTECTION AGENCY, ) 

 Respondent. ) 
_____________________________________________ 

 ) 

SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION, ) 

INC., et al., ) 

 Petitioners, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) No. 10-1131 (and 

 ) consolidated cases) 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL ) 

PROTECTION AGENCY, ) 

 Respondent. ) 
ADDENDUM TO DECLARATION OF REGINA MCCARTHY 

FILED ON OCT. 28, 2010.

1. In my declaration dated October 28, 2010, which EPA attached to EPA’s “Response 

to Motions to Stay” (October 28, 2010), I discussed the status of state efforts to incorporate 

Tailoring Rule thresholds into state law. Exhibit 13, “Declaration of Regina McCarthy” 

(“McCarthy Decl.”); Attachment 1 to McCarthy Decl. The dates for state law actions provided 

in the declaration and in Attachment 1 were “reasonably expected based on statements by state 

officials to EPA regional officials, in written communications and in meetings and 

teleconferences.” Attachment 1 to McCarthy Decl.; see also McCarthy Decl., ¶ 55. EPA 

anticipated that events could cause state law actions to take more or less time than estimated. 

Attachment 1 to McCarthy Decl. Since that time, EPA has received updated information from 

three states, as discussed below: 

2. The McCarthy Decl. and Table 3 in Attachment 1 indicate that EPA expected that 

South Dakota would complete state law amendments to incorporate Tailoring Rule thresholds 

into its state law by January 10, 2011. EPA now expects that South Dakota will complete state 

law amendments, and those amendments will become effective, in March 2011 at the earliest. 

3. The McCarthy Decl. and Table 3 in Attachment 1 indicate that EPA expected that 

Maine would complete state law amendments to incorporate Tailoring Rule thresholds into its 

state law on Feb. 2, 2011. EPA now expects that Maine will complete state law amendments by 

Jan. 20, 2011. 

4. The McCarthy Decl. and Table 3 in Attachment 1 indicate that EPA expected that 

Vermont would complete state law amendments to incorporate Tailoring Rule thresholds into its 

state law by the end of 2010. EPA now expects that Vermont will complete state law 

amendments by the end of 2010 or shortly thereafter. 

I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing, as well as those contained in my Declaration of 

October 28, 2010, to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 

Executed this 4th of November, 2010 

/s/ 

Regina McCarthy 

Assistant Administrator 

Office of Air and Radiation 

United States EPA