SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST

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

SIP Submitted by: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

Date Submitted: September 29, 2011

Subject: Maintenance Plan Update, Fredericksburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area

Completeness Review 

Completed by: Gregory Becoat /s/

Date Completed: November 29, 2011

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 September 29, 2011 from David Paylor, Virginia

Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) to Diana Esher,

Director.

X

2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or 

body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, 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.

2. N/A (Not a regulatory change. The submittal upgrades the 

2009 and 2015 motor vehicle emissions budgets for nitrogen 

oxides). 

X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under 

State law to adopt and implement the plan.

3. The regulations were issued pursuant to § 10.1-1185 of the 

Code of Virginia

X
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (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, 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.

4. N/A See number 2 above. 

X

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. N/A 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. Notice of public hearing and public comment period was 

published in the Virginia Register of Regulations on August 15, 

2011. 

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 September 16, 2011 in 

accordance with State laws as evidenced by hearing transcript 

and letter dated September 29, 2011 from David Paylor, 

Director, Virginia Department of the Environmental Quality to 

Diana Esher, EPA Region 3 Air Protection Director.

X

8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. 8. One public comment was received and addressed. X
Technical Materials

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. The submittal identifies nitrogen oxides as the regulated 

pollutant affected by the plan.

 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).

2. The SIP affects the Fredericksburg Maintenance Area. 

 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. The plan includes air quality monitoring data, nitrogen 

oxides motor vehicle emissions budgets using MOVES2010a, 

Nitrogen oxides emissions from 2004 – 2015, and emission 

inventories. 

 X

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. The state updated 2004, 2009, and 2015 nitrogen oxides 

motor vehicle emissions budgets using the latest planning 

assumptions and MOVES2010a. 

 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 appropriate EPA model MOVES2010a with appropriate 

inputs and data was utilized to model the mobile emissions

 X

6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on 

continuous emission reduction technology.

6. N/A X
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice 

standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where 

necessary, to ensure emission levels.

7. Continued air quality monitoring in the region will ensure 

that if that future violations of the attainment standard should 

occur, appropriate contingency measures would be 

implemented to reduce emissions.

 X

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance 

will be determined in practice.

8. N/A X

9. Special economic and technological justifications required by any 

applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why.)

9. No special justifications are required. 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. Not applicable because this is not a section 107 request. X