SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST ( In accordance with 40 CFR Part 51

- App. V)

SIP Submitted by: Maryland Department of the Environment

Date Received : December 31, 2012 Subject: 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Completeness Review Completed by: Ruth Knapp /s/ Date Completed: December 31 , 201 2

Administrative Materials

ACCEPTABLE

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

1. A formal le tter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision

thereof. 1. Letter dated December 27 , 2012 from Dr. Robert M

. Summers Secretary, Maryland Department of the Environment to Shawn Garvin Regional Administr ator. X

2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, or consent agreement in final form. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effec tive date of the plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date. Check to see if the regulation, permit, order or consent decree has a sunset or expiration date. If so it is not acceptable as a

SIP submission. 2. Yes applicable portions of 110(a)(2 ) are adopted in the State

SIP under 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V Maryland. X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. Yes Mary land has the authority pursuant to Maryland

Environment Article, §§1

- 101, 1

- 404, 2

- 101

– 2

- 103, 2

- 301

— 2

- 303, 10

- 102, 10

- 103, Annotated Code of Maryland

. x

4. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including 4. S tate regulations have been previously adopted and are being

ce rtified or referenced in the submittal

. xEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

indication of the changes ma de 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 by 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 requirements of the State's laws and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. 5. Cover letter transmitting the SIP revision dated December 27, 2012. Copies of public hearing notices. X

6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice. 6. Public notice was provided on Nov. 14, 2012 on the MDE

website and public notice page and a public hearing was held on Dec. 21, 2012. X

7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 7. The public hearing was held on December 21, 2012 in

a ccord ance with information in the notice and a signed transcript was provided dated Dec. 2 6, 2012. X

8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response

thereto. 8. Yes public comments were receive d and responded to by Maryl a nd. X

Technical Materials

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Yes the plan regulates VOC and NOX as precursors of

Ozone. x

2. Identificatio n 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). 2. Most regulations apply statewide as applicable.

x

3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected 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 allowable emissions anticipated as a result

of the revision. 3. This SIP submittal does not modify existing emission limits. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality st andards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. 4. Yes all major stationary sources are subject to

Nonattainme nt NSR and PSD permitting programs. X

5. Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, 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. 5. The authority to do modeling is discussed in the revision

under Element K. x

6. Evidence, where necessary, t hat emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology. 6

. Maryland has adopted control measures and emission

limitations that are listed in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V Maryland. x

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limi tations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 7. Maryland has emission limitation s and controls as indicated

in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V Maryland. x

8. Compliance/enforcement st rategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 8 Maryland had compliance/enforcement strategies as

indicated in their SIP at 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V Maryland. x

9. Special economic and technological justifications required by

any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why.) 9. N/A x

10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. 10. N/A x