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: November 15, 2012

Subject: Removal of 1979 Consent Order Provisions from SIP for Allegany County Board of Education (Beall Jr./Sr. High School) 

Completeness Review 

 Completed by: Sharon McCauley 

 Date Completed: December 17, 2012

Administrative Materials ACCEPTABLE

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his 

designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision 

thereof.

1. Letter dated November 15, 2012 from Mr. Robert M. 

Summers, Secretary, MDE (the Governor’s designee) to Mr. 

Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.

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 effective 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. The purpose of this action is to remove the Board of Education 

of Allegany County’s 1979 Consent Order from Maryland’s State 

Implementation Plan because the coal-fired boiler located at Beall 

High School has been demolished along with the entire school. 

MDE submitted proof that in 2007, the Beall Junior/Senior High 

School was demolished and replaced with a new school at a 

different location (Mt. Ridge High School). The lot where the 

school was located is now an athletic field. The facility’s permit 

has since been closed out by MDE in the Air Facility System 

database. 

X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority

under State law to adopt and implement the plan.

3. The necessary legal authority to adopt and implement this 

plan revision is established under § 2-301 et seq. of the 

Environment Article, Annotated Code of Maryland.

X

4. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted for 

approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including 

indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, 

4. A copy of the Consent Order being removed from the MDE 

SIP is included within this SIP revision submittal. X
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

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. The Department submitted proof that all State administrative 

procedures were properly followed. A Notice of the Public 

Hearing was published in the Maryland Register on June 15, 

2012 and a notice of the hearing was also provided on MDE’s 

website from May 11, 2012 through July 18, 2012.

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. On June 15, 2012, MDE announced in the Maryland Register

the opportunity for public comment and request for a public 

hearing. A Notice of Public Hearing was announced on MDE’s 

website from May 11, 2012 through July 18, 2012. Notice 

was also given to EPA, Maryland County Officials, the

immediate surrounding States, and the District of Columbia, on 

5/11/12 and, all in accordance with the requirements for 40 

CFR § 51.102(d). 

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. A public hearing was held on July 18, 2012 at the MDE 

Office in Baltimore, Maryland. No one attended the hearing 

and no comments were received during the 30-day comment 

period. The SIP submittal contains evidence of this hearing 

through the Hearing Statement. 

Notices of the proposed public hearing appeared in the: 

Maryland Register on June 15, 2012; 

MDE's website from 5/11/12 through 7/18/12; 

Baltimore Sun on June 15, 2012; 

Washington Post on June 14, 2012; 

Frederick News-Post on June 15, 2012; 

Cumberland Times-News on June 15, 2012; 

X
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

Saint Mary's Enterprise on June 15, 2012; 

Salisbury Daily Times on June 15, 2012; and the 

 Cecil Whig on June 15, 2012.

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

thereto.

8. Maryland reported that it received no testimony on this 

revision during the original public comment period, nor during 

the public hearing held in Baltimore, Maryland on 7/18/12. 

X

 Technical Materials

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Not Applicable

 

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).

2. Not Applicable

 

 

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. Not Applicable

4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air 

quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration 

increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and 

visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved 

and implemented. 

4. Not Applicable

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. Not Applicable

6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are 6. Not Applicable
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

based on continuous emission reduction technology.

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work 

practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, 

where necessary, to ensure emission levels.

7. Not Applicable

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how 

compliance will be determined in practice.

8. Not Applicable

9. Special economic and technological justifications required 

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

explain why.)

9. Not Applicable

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. Not Applicable