SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST 

 (in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51 - App. V) SIP Submitted by: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADQ) Date Submitted: July 17, 2014 Subject: 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for the Northern Virginia portion of the Washington 

Nonattainment Area (DC Area) for the 2008 Ozone Standard 

Completeness Review Completed by: Marilyn Powers Date Completed: September 25, 2014 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 August 4, 2014 from VDirector David K. Paylor to EPA Air Division D

Esher. Submittal letter was received on July 19, 

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 base year emissions inventory was finaliproposed on April 23, 2013 (no comments were proposed inventory). 

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

3. The submittal letter states that the revision is under the authority of the Code of Virginia 10.1the Code of Virginia Title 10.1 Chapter 13 provauthority to adopt and revise regulations as needNAAQS. 
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 the 2011 base year emissions invenNorthern Virginia portion of the DC Area was insubmittal. 

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 Certification of Public Participation Actithat State administrative procedures were follow

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. The submittal includes a copy of the notice ohearing and public comment period that was pubVirginia Register of Regulations on March 24, 2

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 Certification of Public Participation Activiincluded with the submittal stating that State admprocedures were followed, and that a public heaon April 22, 2014, in accordance with the public 

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

8. The State received no public comments on its Area’s emissions inventory. 
EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL 

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Section 1.1 of the 2011 Base Year Emissions 

indicates that typical ozone season day emissiondeveloped for VOC, NOx, and CO. 

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 base year inventory affects the Northern portion of the DC Area. The Northern Virginia includes the counties of Arlington, Fairfax, LoudPrince William, and the cities of Alexandria, FaiChurch, Manassas, and Manassas Park. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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

6. Not applicable. 
7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work 

practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 

7. Not applicable. 

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

8. Not applicable. 

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

9. Not applicable. 

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.