# Table I. Category-1 -- States that do not have an approved PSD SIP, and therefore appl y EPA regulations directly.

State Name Delegated?

American Samoa

Arizona - Maricopa County yes

Arizona - Pima yes

California - Amador County APCD

California - Antelope Valley AQMD

California - Bay Area AQMD yes

California - Butte County AQMD

California - Calaveras County APCD

California - Colusa County APCD

California - Eastern Kern APCD

California - El Dorado County AQMD

California - Feather River AQMD

California - Glenn County APCD

California - Great Basin Unified APCD

California - Imperial County APCD

California - Lake County AQMD

California - Lassen County APCD

California - Mariposa County APCD

California - Modoc County APCD

California - Mojave Desert AQMD

California - Northern Sierra AQMD

California - Placer County APCD

California - San Diego County APCD

California - San Joaquin Valley APCD

California - San Luis Obispo County APCD

California - Santa Barbara County APCD

California - Shasta County AQMD

California - Siskiyou County APCD

California - South Coast AQMD yes

California - Tehama County APCD

California - Tuolumne County APCD

California - Ventura County APCD

California - Yolo-Solano AQMD

District of Columbia

Guam

Hawaii yes

Illinois yes

Massachusetts

Michigan - Class I areas yes

Minnesota yes

Nevada - Rest of the St ate (NDEP) (Except Clark

and Washoe Counties, and Indian Country) yes

Nevada - Washoe County yes

New Jersey yes

Pennsylvania - Allegheny County yes

Puerto Rico

Virgin Islands

Washington partialTable II. Category 2-States with an approved PSD SIP that, whenthe Tailoring Rule issued, did not allow for 1/2/11 regulationof GHGs.State NameWhat is theprojecteddeadline for SIPsubmittal?What is the actualor expected date ofsubmission of SIPrevisionincorporating TRthresholds to EPAfor approval?What is theactual orexpected dateof final EPAaction on SIPrevision?What is theexpected date ofpromulgation ofFIP?CommentsExpected status ofFederal or State law by1/2/11Alaska Dec. 1, 2011before Dec. 1,2010 By Jan 2, 2011 N/AState expects to submit a SIPrevision prior to EPA's issuance ofa final SIP call on Dec. 1, 2010. Inthat case, the state would not beincluded in the SIP call and EPAexpects to parallel process therevision, and to approve the SIPrevision by Jan. 2, 2011. If theState fails to submit before Dec. 1,2010, it will receive a Dec. 1, 2011deadline for SIP submittal. Approved SIP in place.Arizona - PinalCounty Dec. 22, 2010Dec. 23, 2010State intends to seek delegation ofthe FIP.Promulgated FIP inplace.Arizona - Rest ofState (excludingMaricopaCounty, PimaCounty, andIndian County) Dec. 22, 2010Dec. 23, 2010State intends to seek delegation ofthe FIP.Promulgated FIP inplace.Arkansas Dec. 22, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010State is considering seekingdelegation of the FIP.Promulgated FIP inplace.California -SacramentoMetropolitanAQMD Jan. 31, 2011Feb. 1, 2011No permitting authoritywill be in place as ofJan. 2. PromulgatedFIP in place by Feb. 1,2011. No permitapplications areexpected to besubmitted or affectedduring this 1-monthperiod.State NameWhat is theprojecteddeadline for SIPsubmittal?What is the actualor expected date ofsubmission of SIPrevisionincorporating TRthresholds to EPAfor approval?What is theactual orexpected dateof final EPAaction on SIPrevision?What is theexpected date ofpromulgation ofFIP?CommentsExpected status ofFederal or State law by1/2/11Connecticut March 1, 2011 March 2, 2011EPA is parallel processing SIPsubmission.No permitting authoritywill be in place as ofJan. 2. The stateexpects that either a FIPwill be in place on March2, 2011, or a revisedSIP will be in placeeither before or shortlyafter March 2, 2011.Florida Dec. 22, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010Promulgated FIP inplace.Idaho Dec. 22, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010State intends to seek delegation ofthe FIP.Promulgated FIP inplace.Kansas Dec. 22, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010State is submitting a SIP revisionand EPA plans to parallel process.State intends to seek delegation ofthe FIP.Promulgated FIP inplace. SIP is expectedto be approved by Jan.15, 2011.Kentucky -Louisville MetroAPCD (JeffersonCounty) Jan. 1, 2011EPA estimates byDec. 1, 2010during Dec.2010N/ACounty expects to submit a SIPrevision prior to EPA's issuance ofa final SIP call on Dec. 1, 2010, inwhich case it would not beincluded in the SIP call. EPAwould then rule on the submissionby Jan. 2, 2011. However, if thecounty fails to submit before Dec.1, 2010, it would accept a Jan. 1,2011 deadline for SIP submittal.Approved SIP will be inplace.Kentucky - Restof State March 31, 2011 Dec.14, 2010 by Jan. 2, 2011 N/AEPA is parallel processing the SIPrevision.Approved SIP will be inplace.Nebraska March 1, 2011 Feb. 1, 2011 N/AState is submitting a SIP revisionand EPA plans to parallel process.No permitting authoritywill be in place as ofJan. 2. Approved SIPwill be signed by Feb. 1,2011.State NameWhat is theprojecteddeadline for SIPsubmittal?What is the actualor expected date ofsubmission of SIPrevisionincorporating TRthresholds to EPAfor approval?What is theactual orexpected dateof final EPAaction on SIPrevision?What is theexpected date ofpromulgation ofFIP?CommentsExpected status ofFederal or State law by1/2/11Nevada - ClarkCountyJuly 1, 2011before Dec. 1,2010by July 1, 2011 N/ACounty expects to submit a SIPrevision prior to EPA's issuance ofa final SIP call on Dec. 1, 2010, inwhich case it would not beincluded in the SIP call. EPAwould then rule on the submissionby July 1, 2011. However, if thecounty fails to submit before Dec.1, 2010, it would accept a July 1,2011 deadline for SIP submittal.No permitting authoritywill be in place as ofJan. 2. Approved SIPrevisions in place byJuly 1, 2011. No permitapplications areexpected to besubmitted or affectedduring this 6-monthperiod.Oregon Dec. 22, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010State intends to seek delegation ofthe FIP.Promulgated FIP inplace.Texas Dec. 1, 2011 Dec. 2, 2011State did not address a SIP calldeadline, so will receive a deadline1 year from date of promulgation ofthe SIP call. There is no indicationthat Texas will pursue rulemakingactivities until the pending litigationis resolved.No permitting authoritywill be in place as ofJan. 2, 2011. FIPcannot be promulgateduntil December 2, 2011at the earliest.Wyoming Dec. 22, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010Promulgated FIP inplace.Note: The dates for state law actions included in these tablesare reasonably expected based onstatements by state officialsto EPA regional officials, in writtencommunications and in meetings and teleconferences. In some cases, the state officials have cautioned that because the dates are dependent upon stateadministrative and/or legislative processes,certain events could occur – such asnegative comments received during rulemakingor legislative delays – that couldlead to delays in some of the state law actions. By the same token, some of the state law actions may take less time than estimated. Even so, as stated above,each of the various state law actions is reasonably expected to occur on the indicated date.Table III: Category 3---States with an approved PSD SIP that, when the Tailoring Rule issued,allowed Jan. 2, 2011 regulation of GHGs, but at the lower statutory threshold.StateDoes stateinterpret SIPprovisions toincorporate TRthresholds withoutrequiring furtheraction?For states thatrevised or will revisetheir state law toincorporate TRthreshold, what datewill those changesbe effective?Does EPA currentlyintend to include statein rule rescindingapproval of the part ofthe PSD programapplying to smallGHG sources by1/2/11?CommentsExpected status of Federal andState law by 1/2/11Alabama no Jan. 18, 2011 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected by Jan. 2011.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementreflect TR thresholds on January18, 2011.California -MendocinoCountynobefore or during Jan.2011 yesAdoption is planned for no later thanJan. 2011, maybe sooner.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. Districtrequirements do not yet reflectTR thresholds, but are expectedto do so by not later than Jan.31, 2011.California -Monterey Bay yes noFederal and districtrequirements reflect TRthresholds.California -North CoastUnified nobefore or during Jan.2011yesAdoption is planned for no later thanJan. 2011, maybe sooner.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. Districtrequirements do not yet reflectTR thresholds, but are expectedto do so by not later than Jan.31, 2011.California -NorthernSonomaCounty No Dec. 14, 2010 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholds.Colorado no Nov. 20, 2010 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholds.StateDoes stateinterpret SIPprovisions toincorporate TRthresholds withoutrequiring furtheraction?For states thatrevised or will revisetheir state law toincorporate TRthreshold, what datewill those changesbe effective?Does EPA currentlyintend to include statein rule rescindingapproval of the part ofthe PSD programapplying to smallGHG sources by1/2/11?CommentsExpected status of Federal andState law by 1/2/11Delaware yes noInterprets "subjectto regulation" toincorporate GHG Tailoring Rulethresholds, but also plans to explicitlyadd the higher thresholds byamending its regulations. Anticipatefinalizing regulatory changes by Jan.2.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsGeorgia no Dec. 29, 2010 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected by Jan. 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsIndiana noEmergency ruleeffective Jan. 2,2011. Permanentrule effective Marchor April 2011. yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsIowa no Dec. 22, 2010 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsLouisiana no by Jan. 2, 2011 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsMaine no Feb. 2, 2011 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected in May 2011.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementswill reflect TR thresholds in Feb.2011.Maryland no before Jan. 2, 2011 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected by March 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsMichigan yes noFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsMississippi no by Dec. 2, 2010 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected by Jan. 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsStateDoes stateinterpret SIPprovisions toincorporate TRthresholds withoutrequiring furtheraction?For states thatrevised or will revisetheir state law toincorporate TRthreshold, what datewill those changesbe effective?Does EPA currentlyintend to include statein rule rescindingapproval of the part ofthe PSD programapplying to smallGHG sources by1/2/11?CommentsExpected status of Federal andState law by 1/2/11Missouri noEmergency ruleeffective Jan, 3,2011. Permanentrule effective July 30,2011.yesFederal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementsreflect TR thresholds on Jan. 3,2011 through an emergency ruleeffective for 180 days.Permanent rule effective by July30, 2011.Montana yes noFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholds.NewHampshire no Jan. 2, 2011 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected in April 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsNew Mexico -Albuquerque no by Jan. 8, 2011 yesFederal requirements reflect TRthresholds. Albuquerquerequirements will reflect TRthresholds by January 8th.New Mexico -Rest of Stateno by Jan. 2, 2011 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsNew York unknown* by Aug. 2011 noEPA expects to approve a PSD SIPfor state in Oct. 2010. This approvalwill be narrowed to only approvepermitting of GHG emissions at orabove the TR threshold. NY is stilldetermining whether it can interpret itsstate law to incorporate the TRthresholds, or whether state lawrevisions are required.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. Whether state lawcurrently allows the state toimpose TR thresholds isunclear. State expects to reviselaw to clarify that it reflects TRthresholds by August 2011.North Carolina no Jan. 2, 2011 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected by Jan. 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsNorth Dakota yes noState also expects to adopt the TRthresholds by state rule revision byApril 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsStateDoes stateinterpret SIPprovisions toincorporate TRthresholds withoutrequiring furtheraction?For states thatrevised or will revisetheir state law toincorporate TRthreshold, what datewill those changesbe effective?Does EPA currentlyintend to include statein rule rescindingapproval of the part ofthe PSD programapplying to smallGHG sources by1/2/11?CommentsExpected status of Federal andState law by 1/2/11Ohio no Jan. 2, 2011 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsOklahoma noEmergency ruleeffective by January2, 2011. Permanentrule effective noearlier than July2011, latest is July2012. yesFederal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementsreflect TR thresholds, as a resultof emergency state rulemaking.Permanent rules changing staterequirements will beincorporated before theemergency rules expire.Pennsylvania -Philadelphiayes noFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsPennsylvania -Rest of Stateyes noFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsRhode Island no Jan. 15, 2011 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected in Feb. 2011.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementswill reflect TR thresholds Jan.15, 2011.South Carolina no June 11, 2010 yesState legislature passed anemergency resolution on June 11,2010 to incorporate the TR thresholdsthat is already in effect. State plans toalso pursue regulatory changes.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsSouth Dakota no by Jan. 10, 2011 yesFederal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementswill not reflect TR thresholds,but are expected to do so byJan. 10, 2011.StateDoes stateinterpret SIPprovisions toincorporate TRthresholds withoutrequiring furtheraction?For states thatrevised or will revisetheir state law toincorporate TRthreshold, what datewill those changesbe effective?Does EPA currentlyintend to include statein rule rescindingapproval of the part ofthe PSD programapplying to smallGHG sources by1/2/11?CommentsExpected status of Federal andState law by 1/2/11Tennessee no Feb. 15, 2011 yesTennessee has a mandatory 90 dayeffective period that cannot be waivedexcept for emergency situations.Changes were supposed to beadopted Oct. 13, 2010. Region willcheck with state on this. Final EPAaction on SIP revision expected to beeffective on Feb. 15, 2011.Federal requirements reflect TRthresholds. State requirementswill reflect TR thresholdsFebruary 15, 2011.Utah no Dec. 2010 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsVermont no end of 2010 yesFinal EPA action on SIP revisionexpected in April 2011.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsVirginia no before Jan. 2, 2011 yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsWest Virginia yes noWill provisionally apply Tailoring Ruleinterpretation of "subject to regulation",while also pursuing rulemaking.Federal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsWisconsin noEmergency ruleeffective by Jan. 2,2011. Permanentrule effective insummer or fall 2011.yesFederal and state requirementsreflect TR thresholdsNote: The dates for state law actions included in these tablesare reasonably expected based onstatements by state officialsto EPA regional officials, in writtencommunications and in meetings and teleconferences. In some cases, the state officials have cautioned that because the dates are dependent upon stateadministrative and/or legislative processes,certain events could occur – such asnegative comments received during rulemakingor legislative delays – that couldlead to delays in some of the state law actions. By the same token, some of the state law actions may take less time than estimated. Even so, as stated above,each of the various state law actions is reasonably expected to occur on the indicated date.