Page 1

SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST

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

SIP Submitted by: Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ)

Date Received: June 20, 2013

Subject: Revision to Regional Haze Plan Incorporating Settlement Agreement and BART Determination for AEP/PSO

Docket: EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0227

Completeness Review 

Completed by: Terry Johnson

Staff Review Date Completed: July 31, 2013

.

Administrative Materials

Item EPA Requirement State Submittal

Acceptable?

Y N

1 The package is sent with a formal submittal letter from the Governor 

or his or her designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision.

The SIP package was submitted with a formal letter signed 

by Gary Sherrer, Secretary of the Environment. X

2

Evidence is included that the State has adopted the revision in the 

State code or body of regulations, or that the State has issued the 

permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter document) in final form. 

This evidence would include effective date of revision, if different 

from adoption/issuance date. 

Date of adoption by the ODEQ: June 14, 2013 X

3

Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority 

under State law to adopt and implement the revision, e.g., a citation 

of the appropriate State authority.

The SIP package resubmits a section entitled “Legal 

Authority” with the text of referenced rules and statutes. X
Page 2

Item EPA Requirement State Submittal

Acceptable?

Y N

4

A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted 

for approval and incorporation by reference into the SIP including 

an 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, and dated by the appropriate 

State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The 

effective date of the regulation document shall, whenever possible, 

be indicated in the document itself.

The SIP package contains the full submittal and supporting 

appendices. X

5

Evidence is included that the State followed all the procedural 

requirements of its laws and/or its constitution in the conducting and 

completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. This evidence may 

be: a checklist of required steps; a copy of the requirements with 

each step clearly identified; or other appropriate documentation.

The SIP package outlines applicable public participation 

procedures in “Procedures for Notice of Opportunity for 

Public Hearing and Comment Oklahoma SIP 

Review/Revision Submittals” with which all supporting 

documentation is consistent.

X

6

Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed 

changes consistent with the procedures approved by EPA, including 

the date of publication of such notice, (e.g., notarized or certified 

copies of any public notices published in newspapers). (The notice 

should be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s).

Copies of the public notice, proof of publications, proof of 

opportunity for public hearing, and transcript of public

hearing were included as components of the SIP submittal.

X

7

A certification is included indicating that public hearing(s) was/were 

held in accordance with the information provided in the public 

notice(s) and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable.

Appendix VI furnishes a public hearing certification and 

other documentation of a public hearing. X

8 A compilation of public comments and the State's response is 

included.

Appendices V and VI compile public comments received. 

Appendix VII provides the state’s responses. X
Page 3

Technical Materials

Item EPA Requirement State Submittal

Acceptable?

Y N

1 Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision is 

included. The pollutants of concern are NOx and SO2. X

2

Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA 

attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the status 

of the attainment plan for the affected area(s) is included.

Technical support is based on visibility. However, the 

location of the affected source is currently 

attainment/unclassified for all criteria pollutants.

X

3

Quantification of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the 

affected sources is included. (Examples include estimates of 

changes in current actual emissions from affected sources and/or, 

where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions 

from affected sources through calculations of the differences 

between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated 

if the revisions were approved.)

SIP package contains appropriately quantified emission 

limitations for NOx and SO2. X

4

Demonstration is included that the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP 

demonstration and visibility, as applicable, would be protected if the 

revision were approved and implemented.

The SIP package contains necessary demonstration that 

visibility will be protected. X

5

Is there a fully approved maintenance plan for the primary ambient 

air quality standards for at least 10 years as required by § 175A of 

the Clean Air Act?

The SIP revision is not a maintenance plan. X

6 Are contingency measures included? Not for this SIP revision. X
Page 4

Item EPA Requirement State Submittal

Acceptable?

Y N

7

Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, 

including input data, output data, models used, justification of 

model(s) selected, ambient monitoring data used, meteorological 

data used, justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of 

models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the 

determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis as needed.

Modeling information was provided to support EPA 

review. X

8

Evidence is included, where necessary, that emission limitations are 

based on continuous emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on 

controls, industrial/process equipment designs, reformulated 

materials, etc.).

Emission limitations are based on the CAA requirement for 

BART. X

9

Evidence is included indicating that a SIP revision contains the 

following to ensure stated emission levels: emission limitations, 

work practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements.

Emission limitations and applicable averaging 

methodology are provided with the SIP package. X

10 Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will 

be determined in practice (including at what frequency).

The SIP revision builds on the state’s existing methods for 

determining compliance. X

11

Evidence is included as appropriate, special economic and 

technological justifications are included per applicable EPA policies 

or an explanation why such justifications are not necessary should 

be included. For example, the following types of request may 

require such justification: Alternative RACT, Long-term averaging 

VOC emission limits, Plant wide Averaging.

Not applicable. X
Page 5

Conclusion: X The proposed SIP action meets the completeness criteria.

The proposed SIP action does NOT meet the completeness criteria.