SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST(in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51 - App. V)SIP Submitted by: Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)Date Submitted: August 4, 2014Subject: 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for the Maryland portion of the Washington DC-MD-VA NonattainmentArea (DC Area) for the 2008 Ozone StandardCompleteness ReviewCompleted by: Marilyn PowersDate Completed: September 25, 2014Administrative MaterialsACCEPTABLEEPA REQUIREMENTSTATE SUBMITTAL(X)1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or hisdesignee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revisionthereof.1. Submittal letter dated August 4, 2014 from MDE SecretaryRobert M. Summers to EPA Regional Administrator ShawnGarvin. Submittal letter was received on August 6, 2014.X2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State codeor body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consentagreement in final form. That evidence shall include the dateof adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of theplan, if different from the adoption/issuance date.2. N/A (Not a regulatory change - the submittal is a baseyear emissions inventory for approval as required under CAA172(c)(3).3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authorityunder State law to adopt and implement the plan.3. Environmental Article, Title 2, Annotated Code ofMaryland, 2-103, 2-301, and 2-302.X4. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted forapproval and incorporation by reference into the plan,including indication of the changes made to the existingapproved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copyof the official State regulation/document signed, stamped,dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fullyenforceable by the State. The effective date of theregulation/document shall, whenever possible, be indicated inthe document itself.4. A copy of the 2011 base year emissions inventory for theMaryland portion of the DC Area was included in thesubmittal.5. Evidence that the State followed all of the proceduralrequirements of the State's laws and constitution in conductingand completing the adoption/issuance of the plan.5. The submittal letter states that all required administrativeprocedures were properly followed throughout the hearingprocess.X6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposedchange consistent with procedures approved by EPA, includingthe date of publication of such notice.6. The Certificate of Publication shows that public notice ofthe proposed change was published on the MDE website onMay 1, 2014.X7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordancewith the information provided in the public notice and theState's laws and constitution, if applicable.7. A hearing transcript provided documentation that the publichearing was held on June 12, 2014 in accordance with theMaryland Administrative Procedure Act. The submittal letterstates that all required administrative procedures were properlyfollowed throughout the hearing process. A copy of the May 1,2014 public notice for the public hearing in included in thesubmittal.8. Compilation of public comments and the State's responsethereto.8. The submittal provided a compilation of public commentsand Maryland’s response to the comments.XEPA REQUIREMENTSTATE SUBMITTAL1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan.1. Section 1.1 of the 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventoryindicates that typical ozone season day emissions weredeveloped for VOC, NOx, and CO.X2. Identification of the locations of affected sources includingthe EPA attainment/nonattainment designation of the locationsand the status of the attainment plan for the affected area(s).2. The base year inventory affects the Maryland portion of theWashington DC nonattainment area for the 2008 ozoneNAAQS.X3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissionsfrom the affected sources; estimates of changes in currentactual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate,quantification of changes in actual emissions from affectedsources through calculations of the differences between certainbaseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a resultof the revision.3. Not applicable.X4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient airquality standards, prevention of significant deteriorationincrements, reasonable further progress demonstration, andvisibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approvedand implemented.4. Not applicable.X5. Modeling information required to support the proposedrevision, including input data, output data, models used,ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used,justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes ofmodels used, assumptions, and other information relevant tothe determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis.5. Not applicable.6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations arebased on continuous emission reduction technology.6. Not applicable.7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work7. Not applicable.Xpractice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements,where necessary, to ensure emission levels.8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including howcompliance will be determined in practice.8. Not applicable.X9. Special economic and technological justifications requiredby any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate,explain why.)9. Not applicable.10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by amaintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevantNAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation.10. Not applicable.X