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

- App. V)

SIP Submitted by: Maryland Department of the Environment

Date Submitted: J une 25 , 2015 Subject: Maryland’s Negative Declaration for the Co ntrol Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for Automobile and Light

- Duty Truck

Assembly Coatings

Completeness Review Completed by: Irene Shandruk Date Completed: Ju ly 23 , 2015

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 date d J une 25 , 2015 from Benjamin H. Grumbles, Secretary, Maryland Department of the Environment

, to Shawn Garvin, Regional Administrator. 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. Th is is not a regulatory change but a negative declaration

d ocumenting that the State does not have any stationary sources or emitting facilities to which the Automobile and Light

- Duty Truck Assembly Coatings CTG applies. X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. The State has legal authority to adopt a negative declaration for the aforementioned source category under the Maryland Environment Article, §§1

- 101, 1

- 404, 2

- 101

– 2

- 103, 2

- 301

— 2

- 303, 10

- 102, and 10

- 103, Annotated Code of Maryland; Ch.23,

Acts of 2006. XEPA 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 co py 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 documen t itself. 4. The submittal is a letter declaring that the State does not have any stationary sources or emitting facilities to which the Automobile and Light

- Duty Truck Assembly Coatings CTG applies. 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. Cover letter transmitting the SIP revision dated J une 25

, 20 15 . Copies and certification 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. Notice of public hearing and public comment period was published on MDE’s web site on November 25 , 201 4

. A hearing transcript is provided. 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. Original Transcript of Public Hearing was provided in the

J une 25 , 20 1 5 submittal. X

8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. 8. No public comments were received

. XTechnical Materials

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITT AL (X)

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. VOCs 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. State of Maryland.

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. N ot applicable. N o change is emiss ions is expected. 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 a pproved 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. N ot applicable. N o change is emissions is expected. X

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeepi ng/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 7. Not applicable. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITT AL (X)

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

9. Special economic and technological just ifications required by any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why.) 9. Not applicable. X

10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant NAAQS for at least 10 y ears after redesignation. 10. Not applicable because this is not a section 107 request. X