**SIP Completeness Checklist**

**State:** New Jersey

**Date of Letter:** May 14, 2009 (as supplemented on July 13, 2009) **Date Received:** May 26, 2009

**Title:** NOx RACT Source

- Specific SIP revision for the Naval Weapons Station Earle (NWSE )

**Reviewer's Name**

**- :**  Anthony (T ed) Gardella/Raymond Forde

**Review Date :**  July 22, 2009 /Updated May 12, 2011

**Result of Review:** Complete

**Submission ID Number:**

__________________ **OAQPS Number:**

__________________________

Determination of Completen ess Checklist

The following checklist is to be used to determine if a formal SIP revision submittal is complete, or if a State's request for parallel processing is adequate to initiate the federal rulemaking process. The entire checklist should be used t o determine whether a formal SIP revision submittal is complete, including a formal submittal of a revision for which a notice of proposed rulemaking was published via parallel processing on a proposed/draft version of the revision. An asterisk * indicate s the portions of the checklist that are to be used to determine if a State's request for parallel processing is adequate to initiate federal rulemaking.
The checklist serves as a guide to State/local agencies in preparing reviewable SIP packages, and for the EPA reviewers in determining whether to initiate the federal rulemaking process or return the submittal to the State/local agency. Common sense judgment must be used in assessing the completeness of a package. In doing so thereviewer must keep in m ind the objectives of the

completeness policy: (1) prompt return of SIP submittals that are inherently inadequate for review; (2) objective and consistent application of objective, understandable screening criteria; (3) reduction of the overall time and

re sources expended by both State/local agencies and EPA in the preparation and review of SIP submittals.

**Administrative Materials**

1) A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or designee requesting EPA approval of the revision. **5/14/09 letter from M** **ark N. Mauriello ,**  **Acting Commissioner NJDEP to George Pavlou,**  **Acting RA, EPA Region 2**

* A formal letter from the Governor or designee requesting that EPA propose approval of a proposed revision by parallel processing.

2) Evidence that the State has adopted the revision in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter document) in final form. That evidence should include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the rev ision if different from the adoption/issuance date. **5/12/09 letter from NJDEP’s Permit Bureau**  **Chief to NWSE (Enclosure 2),**  **supplemental information on May 21,**  **2009 w/attached Conditions of Approval**  **Document with NOx limits and other**  **compliance requirement**  **s.**
* Schedule for final adoption or issuance should be included in a State's request for parallel processing.

3) Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the revision.

* Same evidence shoul d accompany a request for parallel processing of a Proposed State revision. **N.J.A.C. 7:27**

**- 19** 3

4) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the SIP, including indication of the changes made to the existing approved SIP, where applicable. The submittal should be a copy of the official state regulation/document signed, stamped, dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation/document should, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.
* A copy of the proposed/draft regulation or document must be included in a State's request for parallel processing. **5/12/09 letter from NJDEP’s Permit Bureau**  **Chief to**  **NWSE w/attached Conditions**  **of Approval Document (Enclosure 2)**  **and supplemental**  **information on May 21, 2009** 

**.**

5) Evidence that the State followed all of the requirements of its Administrative Procedures Act (or equivalent) in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the revision. **NJDEP provided fo r**  **pub lic notice and hence**  **opportunity for public hearing**  **( Enclosure 5).** 

6) Evidence that Public Notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date o f publication of such notice. **Affidavit of Public Notice in NJ**  **newspapers . Published**  **on January 16, 2009 in The Star ledger**  **Newspaper with 30 day comment period**  **(Enclosure 6).**
7) Certification that public hearing(s) were held in accordance with the info rmation provided in the public notice and the State's Administrative Procedures Act (or equivalent). If applicable. **There were no requests for a public hearing**  **before, during, or after the public**  **hearing. Therefore, n o**  **p ublic**  **h earing was**  **conducted**

**.**
8) Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. **NJDEP responded to public comments** 

**- see**  **Enclosure 2 and 7/13/09**  **letter from NJDEP with revised response to**  **comments document.**

NOTE: Items 5

- 8 are not required for a request to parallel process a proposed/draft revision.4

**Technical Support**

* Requests for parallel processing should include all of the Technical Support required for formal submittals as follows:

1) Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision. **5 /12/09 letter from**  **NJDEP’s Permit Bureau Chief to NWSE**  **w/attached Conditions of Approval Document**  **(Enclosure 2) and**  **supplemental information on May 21,**  **2009.**

2) Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA

a ttainment/nonattainmen t designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected area(s). **Public Notice (Enclosure 6) and**  **NJDEP’s SIP Completeness Checklist**  **(Enclosure 1)**

3) Quantification of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the affecte d sources. Estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowa ble emissions anticipated post revision. **NJDEP’s SIP Completeness Checklist**  **(Enclosure 1)**

4) Demonstration that the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration/visibility are protected if revision is approved and implemented. **Not Applicable**

5) Modeling i nformation required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, justification of model selections, ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used, justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of mo dels used, assumptions, etc. **Not Applicable**5

6) Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology, e.g., add

- on controls, industrial/process equipment designs, reformulated materials, etc. **5/12/09 letter from**  **NJDEP’s Permit Bureau Chief to NWSE**  **w/attached Conditions of Approval Document**  **(Enclosure 2) and**  **supplemental information on May 21,**  **2009.**

7) Evidence that a revision contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/r eporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. **5/12/09 letter from NJDEP’s Permit Bureau**  **Chief to NWSE w/attached Conditions**  **of Approval Document (Enclosure 2)**  **and supplemental**  **information on May 21, 2009.** 
8) Compliance/enforcement s trategies including how compliance will be determined in practice, and at what frequency. **5/12/09 letter from NJDEP’s Permit Bureau**  **Chief to NWSE w/attached Conditions**  **of Approval Document (Enclosure 2)**  **and supplemental**  **information on May 21, 2009.** 

9) A s appropriate, special economic and technological justifications per applicable EPA policies. For example, economic and technological justification for alternative RACT, for long

- term averaging of VOC emission limits, or to support bubble proposals. **See the following:**  **Application Package (Enclosure 7); NJDEP’s**  **SIP Completeness Checklist (Enclosure 1)** 

**- item #s 6 and 9.**