SIP Submitted by: 

Date Submitted: 

SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST 

(in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51 - App. V) 

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 

March 5, 2012 

Subject: . Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the WV Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta WV-OH PM2.

5 

Nonattainment Area 

Completeness Review 

Completed by: Marilyn Powers 

Date Completed: August 16,2012 

Administrative Materials ACCEPTABLE 

I EPA REQUIREMENT I STATE SUBMITTAL I~ I 

1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his 1. Submittal letter dated March 5, 2011 from West Virginia X 

designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Randy C. 

thereof. Huffman, to Shawn M Garvin, Regional Administrator EPA 

Region 3. 

12. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code 2. N/A (Not a regulatory change- the submittal is a request for 

or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent redesignation, a maintenance plan, and 2008 base-year 

!agreement in final form. That evidence shall include the date inventory approval). 

of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the 

[plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date. 

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority 3. The plan states that it has the necessary legal authority and X 

under State law to adopt and implement the plan. necessary resources to enforce its rules or permit provisions on 

which the plan is based. 
I 

14. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted for 4. N/A, see 2 above. 

approval and incorpor~tion by reference into the plan, including 

indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, 

!where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official 

State regulation/document signed, stamped, dated by the 

appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable 

py the State. The effective date of the regulation/document 

shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. 

5. Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural 5. The submittal included documentation showing that the 

!requirements of the State's laws and constitution in conducting State followed State procedural and administrative 

and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. requirements in issuing the plan. 

6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed 6. The submittal included a copy of the notice of public X 

change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including hearing and public comment period that was published in the 

the date of publication of such notice. Parkersburg & Sentinel on January 23, 2012 and the West 

Virginia Register on January 20, 2012. 

7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordance 7. A transcript of the public hearing showed the public hearing X 

with the information provided in the public notice and the was held in accordance with the public notice. The March 5, 

State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 2012 submittal letter certifies that the public hearing required 

by 40 CFR 51.102 was held in accordance with state laws and 

the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1 02( d). 

8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response 8. The submittal included a compilation of comments received X 

~hereto. and the responses to the comments. 
I EPA REQIDREMENT I STATE SUBMITTAL 

I I 

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Chapter 1 of the Redesignation Request and Maintenance X 

Plan show that NOx, S02 and PM2.5 are the pollutants affected 

by the plan. 

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including 2. Wood County and the Grant tax district in Pleasants County X 

~he EPA attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations in WV (the WV Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta1997 

and the status of the attainment plan for the affected area(s). PM2.s Nonattainment Area) 

3. Quantification ofthe changes in plan allowable emissions 3. Information on the point, area and mobile source emissions X 

from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current estimates used in the request for redesignation, the PM2_5 

actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate, maintenance plan, and the 2008 attainment base year inventory 

quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected for the WV portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area are 

sources through calculations of the differences between certain provided in the submittal. The 2008 emissions level may not 

baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result be exceeded during the period of the maintenance plan. 

of the revision. 

4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air 4. The state projected emissions inventories for interim year X 

jquality standards, prevention of significant deterioration 2015 and end year 2022 that do not exceed the 2008 base year, 

increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and showing continued attainment of the PM2.5 national ambient air 

visibility, as applicable, are protected ifthe plan is approved quality standard (NAAQS) during the maintenance plan period. 

and implemented. 

5. Modeling information required to support the proposed 5. Not applicable. 

revision, including input data, output data, models used, 

ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used, 

~ustification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of 

!models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to 

lfue determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. 

6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are 6. Not applicable. 

based on continuous emission reduction technology. 

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work 7. Based on permanent and enforceable measures, West X 

!Practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, Virginia has projected emissions inventories for interim year 
!Where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 2015 and out year 2022 that demonstrate attainment 

throughout the entire maintenance period. ' 

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how 8. Identified contingency·measures will be implemented if the X 

compliance will be determined in practice. Area violates or exceeds the PM2.s standard. These measures 

are intended to bring the area back to attainment of the 

standard. 

9. Special economic and technological justifications required 9. NIA 

by any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, 

explain why.) 

10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a 10. A Maintenance Plan was submitted to EPA Region ill on X 

maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant Mrach 5, 2012, along the the redesignation request. This plan 

NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. demonstrates maintenance through 2022.