Subject:

FW: TIME SENSITIVE—Review information for R5 states’ PSD SIP status by Friday From: Richard Angelbeck/R5/USE PA/US To: Sara Froikin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Howard Hoffman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,

Beth Valenziano/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Charmagne Ackerman/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Constantine Blathras/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Danny Marcus/R5/USEPA/US@EPA,

Eric Cohen/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Genevieve Damico/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Jay Bortzer/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Jennifer Darrow/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Kaushal Gupta/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Pamela Blakley/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Rachel Rineheart/R5/USEPA/US@EPA,

Sam Portanova/R5/USEPA/US@EPA,
Susan Kraj/R5/USEPA/US@
EPA Date: 10/21/2010 02:40 PM Subject: Re: TIME SENSITIVE—Review information for R5 states’ PSD SIP status by Friday Sara, Here are the responses for the review of the table: 1) Correctness: The contents of the table is accurate except for Indiana; please change the last part of the entry in cell D-14 to say “Permanent rule effective March or April 2011’. 2) Public Knowledge:
All the statements, except for the Ml Class

I areas, are represented publicly via the 60-day letters. MI’s Class

I area information

is represented publicly via the federal register (see links below). 3) Documented:
All the information, except for the Mt Class

I areas, was received
in written form via the 60-day letters. The MI Class

I area information

is documented via the SIP and federal register. Here is the additional information for the delegated PSD program for Michigan Class

I areas: http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/09/27/2010-23987/a

pprova I-and-promulgation-of-air-quality implementation-plans-michigan-psd-regulations http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2008/09/16/E8-21620/approva I-and-promulgation-of-air-quality implementation-plans-michigan-psd-regulations Even though they are both delegated states, Illinois and Minnesota have said that their rules will not be changed until after 1/2/2011. We remain concerned that IN, OH, and WI are listed as part of the “Narrowing Rule” and will be scheduling

a call with you (November 2nd at 1:00pm central time) to discuss the legal ramifications
of this action, and whether this rule is necessary for Region

5 states considering the minimal SIP gaps in Region
5. Thanks, Rich

1,i. c4 From: Sara Froikin/DC/USEPA/US To: Beth Valenzia no/R5/USEPA/US@ EPA, Charmagne Ackerman/R5/USEPA/US@
EPA, Constantine Blathras/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Danny Marcus/R5/USEPA/US@
EPA, Eric Cohen/R5/USEPA/US@
EPA, Genevieve Damico/R5/USEPA/US@
EPA, Jay Bortzer/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Jennifer Darrow/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Kaushal Gupta/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Pamela Blakley/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Rachel Rineheart/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Richard Angelbeck/R5/USEPA/US@EPA,

Sam Portanova/R5/USEPA/US@EPA, Susan Kraj/R5/USEPA/US@EPA Cc: Howard Hoffman/DC/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 10/20/2010 05:53 PM Subject: TIME SENSITIVE—Review information for R5 states’ PSD SIP status by Friday Hi all, This email follows uponthe recent conversations we’ve had with your region about the statusof each of yourstates’ efforts to implement GHG PSD permitting requirements, including the Tailoring Rule thresholds. One purposeof those conversations wasto gather information for purposesof responding
tothe motions to staythe various GHG-related rules that have been filed in the GHG litigation. OGC has developed the attached table for usein anaffidavit tobe signed by Gina McCarthy,

in supportof EPA’s opposition
tothe staymotions. However, we’d like toreview the table’s entries for your region’s statesfor the following purposes: 1) Correctness: Are the contentsof the table accurate?

Is anyof the information incorrect, speculative
orunconfirmed? 2) Public Knowledge: Are all statements

in the table information that should be represented publicly? Please let usknow if there is information

in here that is for internal use only. 3) Documented: For information that is based onstate representations, wasall of this information received from the statein written form? Please let usknow if the table includes information that wasreceived from the states only in oral form, orthat is EPA speculation.

If information wasreceived from the statesin oral form, please send toHoward and meabrief memo stating that information and how EPA learned the information.
(If youhave already sentsuch
amemo,thank youand there
is noneed tosend another). Note: EPA may represent its ownactions (such aswhen
it expectsto approve

aSIP) without such documentation. Note that notall of the information you provided during the phone call orasfollow upis included
in this table. This version of the table will be filed with the declaration and asaresult, wehave simplified
it. Thus, there is noneed tofill in blank spacesin the table, ortoadd additional information
to anytable cell unless
it is needed tomake the content clear ormoreaccurate.We will retain for internal usethe more complete version of the tables that youhave seen earlier.

2