UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION Ill 1650 Arch Street

## ~

# rQ'\ {0)

# \W Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

## ~**~**

# tF U

The Honorable Robert M. Summers, Secretary Maryland Department ofthe Environment 1800 Washington Boulevard Baltimore, Maryland 21230 Dear Secretary Summers: On January 8, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Maryland Department ofthe Environment (MDE). The SIP revision addresses the infrastructure elements specified in section 110(a)(2)(A) through (M) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) which are necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 2008 lead national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the State ofMaryland. EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR). Ifmembers ofyour staffhave any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Emlyn Velez-Rosa, Office ofAir Pr9gram Planning, at (215) 814-2038, or velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. Sincerely,

# ~(A_\./~C~ 

# @._ + DianaEsher, Director Air Protection Division

cc: George (Tad) Aburn, Jr., Director, Air and Radiation Management Administration Diane Franks, Program Manager, Air Quality Planning



# .,. tJ Printedon I00% recycled/recyclablepaper with I00%post-consumer fiber and process chlorine free. Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST (In accordance with 40 CFRPart 51

- App
. V) SIP Submitted by: Maryland Department ofthe Environment

Date Received: January 11, 2013 Subject: Approval of 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) SIP Infrastructure Requirements 2008 LeadNational Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Completeness Review Completed by: Emlyn Velez-Rosa Date Completed: January 15, 2013 Administrative Materials ACCEPTABLE 

# I EPA REQUIREMENT 

## I STATE SUBMITTAL 

# I (X) 

# I 1. A formal letter ofsubmittal from the Governor orhis**~esignee,** requesting EPA approval ofthe plan or revision hereof. 1. A letter dated January 3, 2013 from Dr. Robert M. Summers, Secretary ofMaryland Department ofthe Environment (MDE) to Shawn M. Garvin, EPA Regional Administrator. 2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code 2. Not a regulatory change, however applicable portions of orbody ofregulations; or issued the permit, order, or consent section 110(a)(2) ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA) are adopted in**~greement** in final form. That evidence shall include the date Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) under 40 CFRPart**~f**adoption or fmal issuance,as well as the effective date ofthe 52 Subpart V. plan, ifdifferent from the adoption/issuance date. Checkto see ifthe regulation, permit, order or consent decree has a sunset or expiration date. Ifso it is not acceptable as a SIP submission.**~.** Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State lawto adopt and implement the plan. 

# !4. A copy ofactual regulation, or document submitted for 3. Maryland has the authoritypursuant to Maryland Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404,2-101-2-103,2-301- 2-303, 10-102, 10-103, Annotated Code ofMaryland. 4. State regulations have been previously adopted and are X


### X

XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including being certified orreferenced in the submittal. indication ofthe changes made to the existing approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy**o~**the official X State regulation/document signed, stamped, dated by the • appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable


### .

1by the State. The effective date ofthe regulation/document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

5. Evidence that the State followed all ofthe procedural 5. The submittal letter dated January 3, 2013 confirms that all X equirements ofthe State's laws and constitution in conducting required administrative procedures were properly followed for and completing the adoption/issuance ofthe plan. this SIP revision. A copy ofpublic hearing notice and transcript were included. 6. Evidence that public notice was given ofthe proposed 6. Copy ofnotice ofpublic hearing as published on the MDE change consistent withprocedures approved by EPA, including website onNovember 2, 2012, requesting both public written X the date ofpublication ofsuch notice. and oral comments by December 5, 2012. 7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordance 7. The public hearing was held on December 5, 2012 in with the information provided in the public notice and the accordance with informationprovided in notice. A certified X State's laws and constitution, ifapplicable. transcript was provided. 8. Compilation ofpublic comments and the State's response 8. No public comments were received at the hearing or during thereto. the comment period. X

Technical Materials 1. Identification ofall regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Lead (2008 NAAQS) X 2. Identification ofthe locations ofaffected sources including 2. Most ofthe State regulations certified or referenced inthe the EPA attainment/nonattainment designation ofthe locations SIP submittal apply statewide.EPA REQUIREMENT land the status ofthe attainment plan for the affected area(s).

3. Quantification ofthe changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates ofchanges in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification ofchanges in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations ofthe differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result ofthe revision.**~-The** State's demonstration that the national ambient air**~uality** standards, prevention ofsignificant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected ifthe plan is approved land implemented. 5. Modeling information required to support the proposed !revision, including input data, output data, models used, ambient monitoring dataused, meteorological dataused, Dustification for use ofoffsite data (where used), modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination ofadequacy ofthe modeling analysis. 6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are 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. STATE SUBMITTAL

3. This SIP submittal does not include modification ofexisting emission limits.

4. The SIP revision addresses necessary elements for implementation ofthe 2008 lead NAAQS.

5. Any pertinent modeling information is contained in40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V.

6. Maryland has adopted control measures and emission limitations that are listed in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V.

7. Maryland has adopted control measures and emission limitations that are listed in 40 CFRPart 52 Subpart V. (X) X

X



### X

X

X

XEPA REQIDREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) 8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how 8. Compliance/enforcement strategies are indicated in compliance will be determined in practice. Maryland SIP at 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V. X
9. Special economic and technologicaljustifications required by 9. Not applicable. No specialjustifications are required. I**~y** applicable EPApolicies. (Ifa policy is not appropriate, X**~xplain** why.) 10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a 10. Not applicable. Not a Section 107 request. !maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant X I INAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. I I I