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

- App. V)

SIP Submitted by: Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control

Date Submitted: 3/23/12 Subject: Delaware Requirements for Preconstruction Review, Emissions Offset Provisions and PSD for PM2.5

Completeness Review Completed by: Gerallyn Duke Date Completed: 4/23 /12

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 14, 2012 on behalf of the State of Delaware from Collin P. O’Mara, Secretary, DNREC to Shawn M. Garvin, Regio nal Administrator, EPA Region III X

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. Check to see if the regulation, permit, order or consent decree has a sunset or expiration date. If so it is not acceptable as a

SIP submission. 2. The Or der has an issuance date of January 17, 2012, effective date February 11, 2012. The Order was signed by the Secretary. X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. Yes, DE has authority to revise and implement SIP with EPA oversight and approval. 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 appr oved 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/docum ent 4. Yes . Document entitled, “7 DE Admin. Code 1125, Requirements for Preconstruction Review: Sections 1.9 (‘Definitions’), 2.0 (‘Emissions Offset Provisions’ ), and 3.0 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality [PSD]) ” effective February 11, 2012. Cover letter dated M arch 14, 2012 transmitting the document states that the revision is effective February 11, 2012

. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself.

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 Secretary’s Order No.: 2012

- A

- 0003 describes procedures followed and appears to be in accordance with applicable requiremen ts. Also, the Memorandum, dated January 5, 2012, from the Public Hearing Officer to the Cabinet Secretary states that DNREC adhered to all appropriate Delaware statues and the regulatory development process in

this matter. 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 was given to the public in the Delaware Register of Regulations on May 1 , 201 1 and in multipl e newspapers of general circulatio n including but not

limited to The Delaware State News and The News Journal on April 17, 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. Certification dated March 12, 2012 and signed by Ali Mitzakhalili, Director of Division of Air Quality, certifies that the public hearing that was held on May 23, 2011 was held in

accordance with the notic e required by 40 CFR 51.102. X

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

thereto. 8. Hearing Officer’s Report dated January 5, 2012. X

Technical Materials

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Regulations regarding particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers (PM 2.5 ) subject to new source review (NSR) permitting. 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. Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications Locating in Nonattainment Areas and Attainment Areas 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 3. NA XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result

of the revision.

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 imple mented. 4. The revised SIP should be the same as or equivalent to the revised federal NSR permitting program which, among other things, is intended to protect the NAAQS for PM 2.5 . The regulations will enhance the current approved program in

Delaware

. 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

mo dels used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. 5. NA X

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

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

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

9. Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why.) 9. No economic impact is seen and this addition will bring

De laware DNREC regulations to be consistent with the Federal program. This will also fulfill a needed in the program which was represented in a Federal Register notice dated May 16,

2008

– 73 FR28321 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. 9. NA X