UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION Ill 

1650 Arch Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029 

The Honorable Benjamin H. Grumbles, Secretary 

Maryland Department of the Environment 

1800 Washington Boulevard 

Baltimore, MD 21230 

Dear Secretary Grumbles: 

MAY 0 6 Z01~ 

On April13, 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the 

Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Maryland Department of the Environment 

containing amendments to Maryland's Clean Car regulations that incorporate by reference the most 

recent updates to Maryland's program from California's Low Emission Vehicle III program. EPA has 

,determined that Maryland's SIP submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing 

it to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) action. 

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Brian Rehn, Office of Air 

Program Planning, at (215) 814-2176, or at rehn.brian@epa.gov. He is the principal contact for this 

rule making. 

Sincerely, 

- ---= J) ~ 0-\\LSL / 

Diana Esher, Director 

Air Protection Division 

cc: George (Tad) Abum, Jr., Director, Air and Radiation Management Administration 

0 Printed on I 00% recycled/recyclable paper with I 00% post-consumer fiber and process chlorine free. 

Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474 
SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST 

 (in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51 - App. V) SIP Submitted by: Maryland  Date Submitted: April 13, 2015  Subject: Maryland Low Emissions Vehicle (LEV) Program Amendments (Revision #15-02) 

Completeness Review  Completed by: Brian Rehn  Date Completed: April 30, 2015 Administrative Materials 

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL 

1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof. 

1. Submittal letter (dated April 13, 2015) from Benjamin Grumbles of the Maryland DepartmenEnvironment (MDE) to EPA Regional AdminisGarvin. 

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. 

2. MDE published a notice of final action in the 2015 edition of the Maryland Register adopting 

the LEV program Regulation .02 under COMAR This action memorialized adoption of the LEV ramendments proposed by the Secretary of the EDecember 4, 2014 (Volume 41, Issue 24). The the final action was February 16, 2015. The finamendments to Regulation .02 were adopted as 

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 

3. The Maryland Clean Cars Act of 2007 requiradopt regulations implementing the California LMaryland, and also compelled an annual review changes in California's emission standards for th

The Clean Cars Act of 2007 was signed into law O’Malley on April 24, 2007. 
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL 

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. A copy of Maryland’s proposed regulation, athe December 1, 2014 edition of the Maryland Rincluded in the SIP. A copy of the final rule, as February 6, 2015 Maryland Register, was includ

The final form version of the rule was unchangeproposed rule. The proposed Regulation .02 noCalifornia documents incorporated by reference 

The SIP also includes a copy of the regulations bMaryland, as published in the respective edition California Code of Regulations. 

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 state has followed its own procedural reqhas submitted as part of the SIP submittal: the fletter from MDE Secretary Summers dated Apricopy of the final notice printed in the February 6

of the Maryland Register; a copy of the final tex26.11.34.02 (effective February 16, 2014), and ccertification of public hearing notices. 

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. A Certification of Publication is provided indnotice of public hearing and public comment peon the MDE website between November 24, 207, 2015. Notice of the public hearing appeared Register on December 1, 2014. 

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 transcript and public hearing statement mathe public hearing held on January 7, 2015 was part of the SIP submittal. 

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

8. Maryland received no comments during the scomment period and no one attended the public 
Technical Support 

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL 

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. The Maryland Low Emission Vehicle progra

address emissions from highway motor vehicles oxides and volatile organic compounds (specificmethane organic gases), both of which are precuground-level ozone formation. The MD LEV praddresses greenhouse gas emissions from new hvehicles. The program also addresses air toxics 

motor vehicles (including benzene, 1,3-butadien

acetaldehyde). 

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 program is effective statewide in MarylaLEV program affects auto manufacturers that pr

vehicles for sale in Maryland, auto dealers in M

car-buying public and businesses. 

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. The regulatory revisions of Rcontained in the SIP set emission limits on new (less than 14,000 lbs gross vehicle weight ratingsale in Maryland. Benefits of these program revcalculated in this plan, but an analysis for future nonattainment area plans that rely upon benefits Vehicle program will be prepared by Maryland each of those future plans. 

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. The regulatory revisions regemissions for vehicles sold in MY 2015 and beystandards more stringent than those currently in Maryland. Future SIP plans that rely on the benprogram will analyze the benefits of the programphased in due to future fleet turnover. 
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL 

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 support the required revision. 

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

6. Not applicable. This SIP revision regulated nemissions limits, not emissions limits applicable 

source where continuous emissions technology applicable. 

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 

7. The California LEV rules being IBR’d by Mrevised Regulation .02 under COMAR 26.11.34 the SIP contain the necessary emission limits anrecordkeeping requirements. 

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 

8. Methods for determining compliance with thprogram are included in the California CCR ruleby Maryland in Regulation .02 under COMAR 2

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. 

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