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

- App. V)

SIP Submitted by: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

Date Submitted: July 12 , 2011 Subject: Revision D06

– Consumer and Commerci al Products

Completeness Review Completed by: Gregory Becoat /s/ Date Completed: July 8 , 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 March 18, 2010 from David Paylor, Virginia Department of Environmental Qu ality (VADEQ) to David

Arnold

, Acting 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. The Commonwealth has submitted evidence that the regulations were adopted and approved in final form on November 20, 2009 , with an effective date o f March 17 , 2010

. 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

- 1308 of the Code of Virginia XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

4. A copy of actual regulation, or docume nt 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, date d 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. A copy of the final rule was published in the Virgin ia Register of Regulations on February 15, 2010 with an effective

date of March 17 , 2010

. 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/issua nce of the plan. 5. Cover lette r transmitting the SIP revision dated March 18,

2010 . Cop ies and certification of public hearing notices. X

6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, inc luding 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 February 15, 2010

. A hearing transcript is also provided. X

7. Certification that public heari ngs were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 7. Original Transcript of Public Hearing was provided in the March 18, 2010 submittal. X

8. Compilation of public commen ts and the State's response thereto. 8. Yes. Virginia responded to all public comments in included them in the March 18, 2010 submittal. XTechnical Materials

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. The submittal identifies volatile organic compounds (VOC). X

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/nonattainment designa tion of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected area(s). 2. Commonwealth of Virginia

. X

3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emiss ions 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. This revision merely amends Virginia regulations in accordance with requirement of 40 CFR Part 51. X

4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments,

re asonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. 4. Not applicable. 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. Not applicable. No modeling demonstration was required to support the required revision. X

6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology. 6. Not applicable. This revision merely amends Vir ginia regulations in accordance with requirement of 40 CFR Part 51. X

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 7. Not applicabl e XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 8. Not applicable X

9. Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, exp lain 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 n ot a section 107 request. X