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/approvaI-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
eart/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@EPADate: 10/20/2010 05:53 PM

Subject: TIME SENSITIVE — Review information for R5 states’ PSD SIP status by Friday

Hi all,

This email follows up on the recent conversations we’ve had with your region about the status of each of your states’ efforts to implement GHG PSD permitting requirements, including the Tailoring Rule thresholds. One purpose of those conversations was to gather information for purposes of responding to the motions to stay the various GHG-related rules that have been filed in the GHG litigation.

OGC has developed the attached table for use in an affidavit to be signed by Gina McCarthy, in support of EPA’s opposition to the stay motions. However, we’d like to review the table’s entries for your region’s states for the following purposes:

1) Correctness: Are the contents of the table accurate? Is any of the information incorrect, speculative or unconfirmed?

2) Public Knowledge: Are all statements in the table information

that should be represented publicly? Please let us know if there

is information in here that is for internal use only. 3) Documented: For information that is based on state

representations, was all of this information received from the

state in written form? Please let us know if the table includes

information that was received from the states only in oral form,

or that is EPA speculation. If information was received from the

states in oral form, please send to Howard and me a brief memostating that information and how EPA learned the information. (If

you have already sent such a memo, thank you and there is no needto send another). Note: EPA may represent its own actions (such

as when it expects to approve a SIP) without such documentation.

Note that not all of the information you provided during the phone call or as follow up is included in this table. This version of the table will be filed with the declaration and as a result, we have simplified it. Thus, there is no need to fill in blank spaces in the table, or to add additional information to any table cell unless it is needed to make the content clear or more accurate. We will retain for internal use the more complete version of the tables that you have seen earlier.

2