Connecticut Department of 

ENERGY & 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

PROTECTION 

Mr. George Czerniak, Acting Air Director 

US EPA Region 5 - Great Lakes 

77 West Jackson Boulevard 

Chicago, IL 60604-3507 

Dear Mr. Czerniak, 

March 7, 2012 

The Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection appreciates the opportunity 

to offer comments on the Indiana Infrastructure Under Clean Air Act Sections 11 O(a)(l) and 

(a)(2) State Implementation Plan Submittal (Infrastructure SIP), submitted by the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management (IDEM). These comments recognize our mutually 

shared goal of improving air quality to benefit and protect public health and enhance the quality 

of life of the citizens in our respective states. The "good neighbor" provisions of the federal 

Clean Air Act (CAA) are established to ensure that air pollution from one state does not 

unreasonably interfere with the efforts of downwind states to meet their CAA responsibilities. 

As such, IDEM is required to propose, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) to approve, a revision to the Indiana Infrastructure SIP only if it fully complies with the 

"good neighbor" provisions set forth in§ 110(a)(2)(D) ofthe CAA. 

The "good neighbor" provisions ofthe CAA preclude any source or other type of emissions 

activity within a state that contributes significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance by, any other state with respect to the NAAQS. In reviewing Indiana's 

Infrastructure SIP, we find no evidence that Indiana completed an analysis demonstrating that 

emissions originating from within Indiana do not contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or 

interfere with maintenance by, any other state with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS in any 

downwind state, including Connecticut. 

Connecticut's ozone problem is predominantly caused by sources located in states upwind from 

Connecticut. EPA's modeling indicates that Connecticut can be subject to upwind transport that 

makes up more than 90% oftotal projected ozone impacts in the 2012 base case.

1 EPA's 

analysis shows that emissions from Indiana consistently contribute levels of 1.5 ppb ozone to 

Connecticut. EPA defines "significant contribution" as modeled contributions of 1% or greater of 

1 See EPA's Technical Information Webpage for the Transport Rule at 

www.epa.gov/airquality/transport/tech.html. 

79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 061 06-51 27 

www.ct.gov /deep 

Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer 
Mr. George Czerniak 

March 7, 2012 

Page 2 

a NAAQS level to any downwind state with nonattainment or maintenance issues. Until such 

time that Connecticut achieves and can permanently maintain air quality at or below the level set 

forth in the 2008 ozone NAAQS (or subsequent revisions thereto), Indiana exceeds lawful levels 

of interstate air pollution. 

It is incumbent upon Indiana to identify and implement necessary and appropriate control 

measures in order to comply with CAA § 11 O(a)(2)(D). As such, EPA is legally precluded from 

approving IDEM's proposed SIP revision unless it enumerates how Indiana will reduce its 

impact to below 1% of the 2008 ozone NAAQS within Connecticut and every other downwind 

state impacted at that level by emissions originating from within Indiana. Furthermore, Indiana 

cannot rely on emission reductions in the Infrastructure SIP for the 2008 NAAQS attributable to 

either the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) or the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). 

CSAPR is being challenged in federal court by a number of states and implementation of this 

rule is currently stayed. CAIR and CSAPR were adopted to address interstate transport related to 

the 1997 ozone standard, set at 84 parts per billion (ppb ); these rules were not designed, and 

resultantly are inadequate, to address interstate air pollutant transport under the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS standard of75 ppb. 

Connecticut is penalized by geography and meteorology, thus we rely on timely reductions of 

transported air pollution to receive the health benefits provided by the CAA. Upwind activities 

preclude Connecticut from attaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS, despite Connecticut's best efforts 

to reduce in-state ozone precursor emissions from many sources to levels beyond federal 

requirements. The costs for implementing these programs far exceed EPA's cost estimates for 

both CAIR and CSAPR for electric generating unit controls. Connecticut has waited far too long 

for this inequity to be addressed, and is requesting that Indiana, a state contributing to our air 

quality transport problems, take action to institute control measures that will result in clean air 

for the citizens of Indiana, Connecticut, and others. Thank you for the opportunity to present 

Connecticut's views on IDEM' s Infrastructure SIP. 

Sincerely, 

~ /;Jh·_ 

Anne Gobin 

Chief 

Bureau of Air Management 

cc: Keith Baugues, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Air Quality, IDEM 

David Conroy, Region 1 Air Program Manager, EPA Region 1