Technical Support Document (TSD)
for the Transport Rule

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491

Status of CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs
Final Rule TSD

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Radiation
July 2011

1


-------
Status of CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs
Final Rule TSD

This document describes, for each state subject to a Federal implementation plan (FIP) with
respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and/or the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS under
the Transport Rule, the status of each Clean Air Act (CAA) 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) state
implementation plan (SIP) for the relevant NAAQS. It describes, for these states, any findings of
failure to submit 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIPs made by EPA for the relevant NAAQS and any actions
taken by EPA with respect to 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) SIP submissions for the relevant NAAQS
received from these states. The facts presented in this TSD support EPA's conclusion that it has
a legal obligation to promulgate each of the FIPs in this final rule.

Alabama

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved SIP
revisions to correct either deficiency. On March 7, 2007, Alabama submitted a SIP revision to
replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in Alabama. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual
NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the Alabama SIP. As noted in the preamble to the
Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina (North Carolina v. EPA).
531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), modified on rehearing, North Carolina v. EPA. 550 F.3d 1176,
1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008), this CAIR SIP which was approved by EPA on October 1, 2007 (72 FR
55659), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25,
2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its
approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 28, 2011, the Administrator for EPA Region
4 signed a notice disapproving a SIP revision submitted by the state of Alabama to address the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not,
subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP that corrects that deficiency. Based on
these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall
promulgate FIPs for the state of Alabama addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with
respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2 5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2 5 NAAQS.

Arkansas

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
August 10, 2007, Arkansas submitted a SIP revision to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS in Arkansas. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading program for ozone-
season NOx into the Arkansas SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following
the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP which was approved by EPA on
September 26, 2007 (72 FR 54556), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency
identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting
and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. Based on these facts, the provisions of section

2


-------
CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Arkansas
addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

Florida

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
March 16, 2007, Florida submitted a SIP revision to, among other things, replace the CAIR FIP
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS in Florida. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading
program for ozone-season NOx into the Florida SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport
Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, this CAIR SIP which was approved
by EPA on October 12, 2007 (72 FR 58016), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also
is correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. Based on these facts, the
provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for
the state of Florida addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997
ozone NAAQS.

Georgia

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
March 28, 2007, Georgia submitted a SIP revision to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in Georgia. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx
and annual S02 into the Georgia SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following
the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP which was approved by EPA on
October 9, 2007 (72 FR 57202), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies
identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting
and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 28, 2011, the
Administrator for EPA Region 4 signed a notice disapproving a SIP revision submitted by the
state of Georgia to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP that corrects that
deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the
Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Georgia addressing the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.

Illinois

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. On September 14, 2007, Illinois submitted a SIP revision to replace
the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2 5 NAAQS in
Illinois. The SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx, annual SO2,
and ozone-season NOx into the Illinois SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule,
following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP which was approved by

3


-------
EPA on October 16, 2007 (72 FR 58528), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiencies identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA is
correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA
made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with the respect to the 2006 PM2 5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673), and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these
facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate
FIPs for the state of Illinois addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the
1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM25 NAAQS, and 2006 PM25 NAAQS.

Indiana

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2 5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. Indiana submitted a CAIR SIP in parts, including the part submitted
on June 29, 2009, to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and a CAIR FIP for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in Indiana. These SIP revisions incorporated the CAIR trading programs
for annual NOx, annual S02, and ozone-season NOx into the Indiana SIP. As noted in the
preamble to the Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the
abbreviated CAIR SIP submittal approved by EPA on October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59480) and the
CAIR SIP submittal approved by EPA on November 29, 2010 (75 FR 72956), cannot be said to
correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25,2005 finding of failure to
submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its approval of those SIP submittals.
In addition, on June 28, 2011, the Administrator for EPA Region 5 signed a notice disapproving
a SIP revision submitted by the state of Indiana to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and
approved a SIP that corrects that deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA
110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Indiana
addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Iowa

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
August 15, 2006, Iowa submitted a SIP revision to, among other things, replace the CAIR FIP
for the 1997 PM2 5 NAAQS for Iowa. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs
for annual NOx and annual S02 into the Iowa SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport
Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved by EPA on
August 6, 2007 (72 FR 43539), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency
identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting
and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA made a
finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not, subsequent to the
date received and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the
provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for

4


-------
the state of Iowa addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Kansas

On June 28, 2011, the Administrator for EPA Region 7 signed a notice disapproving a SIP
revision submitted by the state of Kansas to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with
respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a
SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on this fact, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1)
establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Kansas addressing the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Kentucky

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. On July 19, 2007, Kentucky submitted a SIP revision to replace the
CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM25 NAAQS in
Kentucky. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx, annual
SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the Kentucky SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport
Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved by EPA on
October 4, 2007 (72 FR 56623), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies
identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting
and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 28, 2011, the
Administrator for EPA Region 4 signed a notice disapproving a SIP revision submitted by the
state of Kentucky to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP that corrects
that deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the
Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Kentucky addressing the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.

Louisiana

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
August 20, 2007 Louisiana submitted an abbreviated CAIR SIP which, among other things,
modified the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The abbreviated CAIR SIP modified
provisions to the CAIR FIPs found in the ozone-season NOx CAIR trading program. As noted
in the preamble to the Transport Rule, the abbreviated SIPs approved by EPA modified but did
not replace the CAIR FIPs promulgated by EPA. Following approval of the abbreviated CAIR
SIP, the CAIR FIP remained the legal vehicle for implementation of the CAIR ozone-season
requirements in Louisiana. The CAIR FIPs were found unlawful and remanded to EPA to be
replaced by rules consistent with the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina. EPA's approval of
an abbreviated CAIR SIP thus has no impact on EPA's authority and obligation to promulgate a
FIP to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure
to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal.

5


-------
Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator
shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Louisiana addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS.

Maryland

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. Maryland submitted a SIP revision on October 24, 2007 and then
submitted a revised submittal on June 30, 2008 to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in Maryland. This SIP revision
incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx
into the Maryland SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following the D.C.

Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved by EPA on October 30, 2009 (74 FR
56117), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25,
2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its
approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA made a finding of failure to
submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with
respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not, subsequent to that date received
and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section
CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Maryland
addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Michigan

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On July
16, 2007, Michigan submitted an abbreviated CAIR SIP revision which, among other things,
modified the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS; then, on June 10, 2009, Michigan submitted
a revised abbreviated SIP revision. EPA approved these abbreviated SIP revisions on December
20, 2007 (72 FR 72256) and August 18, 2009 (74 FR 41637). As noted in the preamble to the
Transport Rule, the abbreviated SIPs approved by EPA modified but did not replace the CAIR
FIPs promulgated by EPA. Following approval of the abbreviated CAIR SIP, the CAIR FIP
remained the legal vehicle for implementation of the CAIR ozone-season and annual
requirements in Michigan. The CAIR FIPs were found unlawful and remanded to EPA to be
replaced by rules consistent with the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina. EPA's approval of
an abbreviated CAIR SIP thus has no impact on EPA's authority and obligation to promulgate a
FIP to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure
to submit. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address
the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP that
corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish
that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Michigan addressing the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.

6


-------
Minnesota

On June 9, 2010, EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673)
and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency.
Based on this fact, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall
promulgate a FIP for the state of Minnesota addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Mississippi

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
January 16, 2007, Mississippi submitted a SIP revision to, among other things, replace the CAIR
FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for Mississippi. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR
trading program for ozone-season NOx into the Mississippi SIP. As noted in the preamble to the
Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved
by EPA on October 3, 2007 (72 FR 56268), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also
is correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. Based on this fact, the provisions
of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of
Mississippi addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.

Missouri

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP revision to correct either deficiency. On
May 18, 2007, Missouri submitted a SIP revision to, among other things, replace the CAIR FIP
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for Missouri. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading
programs for annual NOx and annual SO2 into the Missouri SIP. As noted in the preamble to the
Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved
by EPA on December 14, 2007 (72 FR 71073), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also
is correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 28, 2011, the
Administrator for EPA Region 7 signed a notice disapproving a SIP revision submitted by the
state of Missouri to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a SIP that corrects that
deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the
Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Missouri addressing the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 PM2 5 NAAQS and 2006 PM2 5 NAAQS.

Nebraska

On June 9, 2010, EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR
32673) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP that corrects the
deficiency. Based on this fact, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the

7


-------
Administrator shall promulgate a FIP for the state of Nebraska addressing the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

New Jersey

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On
February 6, 2007, New Jersey submitted an abbreviated CAIR SIP revision, and then on July 9,
2007, submitted a revised submittal to, among other things, modify the CAIR FIP for the 1997
ozone NAAQS for New Jersey. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, the abbreviated
SIPs approved by EPA on October 1, 2007 (72 FR 55666), modified but did not replace the
CAIR FIPs promulgated by EPA. Following approval of the abbreviated CAIR SIP, the CAIR
FIP remained the legal vehicle for implementation of the CAIR ozone-season requirements in
New Jersey. The CAIR FIPs were found unlawful and remanded to EPA to be replaced by rules
consistent with the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina. EPA's approval of an abbreviated
CAIR SIP thus has no impact on EPA's authority and obligation to promulgate a FIP to correct
the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In
addition, on June 1, 2011 the Administrator for EPA Region 2 signed a notice disapproving a SIP
revision submitted by the state of New Jersey to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and
approved a SIP that corrects that deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA
110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of New Jersey
addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

New York

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. On September 17, 2007, New York submitted a SIP revision to
replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in New York. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual
NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the New York SIP. As noted in the preamble to
the Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP
approved by EPA on January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4109), cannot be said to correct the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In
this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition,
on June 1, 2011 the Administrator for EPA Region 2 signed a notice disapproving a SIP revision
submitted by the state of New York to address the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with
respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date, received and approved a
SIP that corrects that deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1)
establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of New York addressing the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS,
and 2006 PM2 5 NAAQS.

8


-------
North Carolina

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. North Carolina submitted a CAIR SIP in parts, including the part
submitted on June 20, 2008, to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR
FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in North Carolina. These SIP revisions incorporated the CAIR
trading programs for annual NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the North Carolina
SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in
North Carolina, the abbreviated CAIR SIP submittal approved by EPA on October 5, 2007 (72
FR 56914) and the CAIR SIP submittal approved on November 30, 2009 (74 FR 62496), cannot
be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of
failure to submit. In this action, EPA is correcting and narrowing its approval of those SIP
submittals. In addition, on June 28, 2011, the Administrator for Region 4 signed a notice
disapproving a SIP revision submitted by the state of North Carolina to address the requirements
of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date,
received and approved a SIP that corrects that deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of
section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of
North Carolina addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Ohio

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. Ohio submitted a CAIR SIP in parts, including the parts submitted
on July 16, 2009 and August 13, 2009, to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and
the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in Ohio. These SIP revisions incorporated the CAIR
trading programs for the annual NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx in the Ohio SIP. As
noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North
Carolina, the abbreviated CAIR SIP submittal approved by EPA on February 1, 2008 (73 FR
6034) and the CAIR SIP submittal approved by EPA on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48857, ),
cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25, 2005
finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its approval of
those SIP submittals. In addition, on June 28, 2011, the Administrator for EPA Region 5 signed
a notice disapproving a SIP revision submitted by the state of Ohio to address the requirements
of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and has not, subsequent to that date,
received and approved a SIP that corrects that deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of
section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of
Ohio addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Pennsylvania

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions

9


-------
to correct either deficiency. On May 23, 2008, Pennsylvania submitted a SIP revision to replace
the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2 5 NAAQS in
Pennsylvania. This SIP revision incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx,
annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the Pennsylvania SIP. As noted in the preamble to the
Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved
by EPA on December 10, 2009 (74 FR 65446), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiencies identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also
is correcting and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA
made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these
facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate
FIPs for the state of Pennsylvania addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect
to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2 5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2 5 NAAQS.

South Carolina

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. South Carolina submitted a CAIR SIP in parts, including the part
submitted on December 4, 2008 to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the
CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in South Carolina. These SIP revisions incorporated the
CAIR trading programs for annual NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the South
Carolina SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following the D.C. Circuit
decision in North Carolina, the abbreviated CAIR SIP submittal approved by EPA on October 9,
2007 (72 FR 57209) and the CAIR SIP submittal approved on October 16, 2009 (74 FR 53167),
cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the April 25, 2005
finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting and narrowing its approvals of
those SIP submittals. Based on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish
that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of South Carolina addressing the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS.

Tennessee

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 Fr 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. On September 8, 2006, Tennessee submitted an abbreviated CAIR
SIP to modify the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Tennessee subsequently submitted a revision to the abbreviated SIP containing technical
corrections. EPA approved these abbreviated SIP submissions on August 20, 2007 (72 FR
46388) and November 25, 2009 (74 FR 61535). As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule,
the abbreviated SIPs approved by EPA modified but did not replace the CAIR FIPs promulgated
by EPA. Following approval of the abbreviated CAIR SIP, the CAIR FIP remained the legal
vehicle for implementation of the CAIR ozone-season and annual requirements in Tennessee.
The CAIR FIPs were found unlawful and remanded to EPA to be replaced by rules consistent

10


-------
with the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina. EPA's approval of an abbreviated CAIR SIP
thus has no impact on EPA's authority and obligation to promulgate a FIP to correct the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In
addition, on July 1, 2011, the EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation signed a
finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and has not, subsequent to that date received
and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section
CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Tennessee
addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Texas

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. On August 4, 2006, Texas submitted an abbreviated CAIR SIP
modifying the provisions of the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for Texas. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, the abbreviated
SIPs approved by EPA on July 30, 2007 (72 FR 41453), modified but did not replace the CAIR
FIPs promulgated by EPA. Following approval of the abbreviated CAIR SIP, the CAIR FIP
remained the legal vehicle for implementation of the CAIR annual requirements in Texas. The
CAIR FIPs were found unlawful and remanded to EPA to be replaced by rules consistent with
the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina. EPA's approval of an abbreviated CAIR SIP thus
has no impact on EPA's authority and obligation to promulgate a FIP to correct the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. Based
on these facts, the provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall
promulgate FIPs for the state of Texas addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with
respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Virginia

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions to correct the deficiency. On March
30, 2007, Virginia submitted a CAIR SIP, then submitted revised submittals on April 30, 2007
and June 11, 2007, to among other things, replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS in
Virginia. The SIP revisions incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx, annual
SO2, and ozone-season NOx into the Virginia SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport
Rule, following the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina, the CAIR SIP approved by EPA on
December 28, 2007 (72 FR 73602) cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency
identified in the April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA also is correcting
and narrowing its approval of that SIP submittal. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA made a
finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
deficiency with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not, subsequent to
that date received and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the
provisions of section CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for

11


-------
the state of Virginia addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997
ozone NAAQS and 2006 PM25 NAAQS.

West Virginia

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not, subsequent to that date received and approved SIP revisions
to correct either deficiency. West Virginia submitted a CAIR SIP in parts, including the parts
submitted on June 8, 2007 and on April 22, 2008, to replace the CAIR FIP for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS and the CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 in West Virginia. These SIP revisions
incorporated the CAIR trading programs for annual NOx, annual SO2, and ozone-season NOx
into the West Virginia SIP. As noted in the preamble to the Transport Rule, following the D.C.
Circuit decision in North Carolina, the abbreviated CAIR SIP revision approved by EPA on
December 18, 2007 (72 FR 71576) and the CAIR SIP revision approved by EPA on August 4,
2009 (74 FR 38536), cannot be said to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiencies identified in the
April 25, 2005 finding of failure to submit. In this action, EPA is correcting and narrowing its
approval of those SIP submittals. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA made a finding of failure to
submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with
respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not, subsequent to that date received
and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section
CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of West
Virginia addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Wisconsin

On April 25, 2005 EPA made a finding of failure to submit a SIP to address the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 21147) and has not,
subsequent to that date received and approved a SIP revision to correct the deficiency. On June
19, 2007, Wisconsin submitted an abbreviated CAIR SIP to, among other things, modify the
CAIR FIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for Wisconsin. As noted in the preamble to the Transport
Rule, the abbreviated SIPs approved by EPA on October 16, 2007 (72 FR 58542), modified but
did not replace the CAIR FIPs promulgated by EPA. Following approval of the abbreviated
CAIR SIP, the CAIR FIP remained the legal vehicle for implementation of the CAIR ozone-
season requirements in Wisconsin. The CAIR FIPs were found unlawful and remanded to EPA
to be replaced by rules consistent with the D.C. Circuit decision in North Carolina. EPA's
approval of an abbreviated CAIR SIP thus has no impact on EPA's authority and obligation to
promulgate a FIP to correct the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency identified in the April 25, 2005
finding of failure to submit. In addition, on June 9, 2010, EPA made a finding of failure to
submit a SIP to address the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) deficiency with
respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (75 FR 32673) and has not, subsequent to that date received
and approved a SIP that corrects the deficiency. Based on these facts, the provisions of section
CAA 110(c)(1) establish that the Administrator shall promulgate FIPs for the state of Wisconsin
addressing the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

12


-------