1 **Completeness Determination** Phoenix 2012 5% Plan Adopted and Submitted by ADEQ May 25 , 201 2 Adopted locally March 23 , 201 2 by MAG

Completeness Review Criteria (40 CFR part 51, appendix V) Is Criterion Satisfied? Reference in SIP document/comments

2.1 Administrative Materials

(a) A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof (hereafter “the plan”). Y Cover letter to Jared Blumenfeld , Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 from H enry

Darwin , Director, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality

, dated May 25 , 201 2

.

(b) Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter “document”) 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. Y Cover letter documents adoption of the SIP by ADEQ.

May 23 , 2012 letter from Dennis Smith , Executive Director of the Maricopa Association of Governments to Jared Blumenfeld, EPA Region 9, and Adoption Certification in Appendix E of MAG Plan document

, MAG adoption and approval of plan on May 23 , 2012

.

(c) Evidence that the State has the
necessary legal authority

under State law to adopt and implement the plan. Y In cluded Arizona statutes placing responsibility for SIP adoption with the Director of ADEQ. (49

- 404)

February 17, 1978 letter from the Gov ernor o f Arizona designating MAG as the lead planning agency for Phoenix area.2

(d) A cop y of the actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by

reference into the plan, including indication of the changes made other existing approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State regulation/document signed, stamped, dated b y the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable b y the State. The effective date of the regulation/document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. Y In cluded in the package

.

(e) Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State’s laws and constitution in conduction and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. Y Relevant requirements: ARS 41

- 1021 to 41

- 1036 ; evidence of public notice, record of comments and response to comments at ADEQ and MAG level.

The May 25 , 2012 letter included documentation that the requirements were met for the plan. The June 22 and July 2 , 2012 letters included documentation for the Dust Action General Permit. (f) Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved b y EPA, including the date of publication of such notice. Y Evidence of public notice at the MAG and ADEQ level is included in the submittal.

The May 25 , 2012 letter included documentation that the requirements were met for the plan. The June 22 and July 2 , 2012 letters included documentation for the Dust Action General Permit. (g) Certification that public hearings were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State’s law and Y In cluded

. Public hearing held by MAG on April 12, 2012 and by ADEQ

on April 24, 2012. Public hearing on the Dust Action General Permit was held on Dec ember 28, 2011.3

constitution, if applicable. (h) Compilation of public comments and the State’s responses thereto. Y In cluded , for both MAG and the ADEQ processes , including the Dust Action General Permit.

2.2 Technical Support

(a) Id entification of all regulated pollutants affected b y the plan. Y PM

- 10 identified as regulated pollutant in title and submittal letters.

(b) Id entification 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 areas. Y The plan identifies the impacted nonattainment area and details the baseline emissions and reduction in emissions from sources in the area. Also includes designation and status for the a ffected areas.

(c) 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 source through calculations of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipate d as a result of the revision. Y Projected emissions inventories for the base year and plan years are included.

(d) The State’s demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and Y This submittal contains an attainment demonstration

, motor vehicle emission budgets, a 5% reduction demonstration and demonstrates reasonable further progress, including RFP contingency requirements

.4

visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. For all requests to redesignate an area to attainment for a national primary ambient air quality

standard, under section 107 of the Act, a revision must be submitted to provi de for the maintenance of the national primary ambient air quality standards for at least 10 years as required b y section 175A of the Act. (e) Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used, justification of model selections, ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data uses, 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. Y This information is included in the submittal

.

(f) Evidence, where necessary , that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology

. N/A Not applicable in this case.

(g) Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting N/A Not applicable in this case.5

requirements, where necessary , to ensure emission levels. (h) Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. Y In cluded. Specificall y, the submittal includes a description of how compliance rates will be determined and compared against projected increases in rule effectiveness. It also includes a commitment to pursue additional measures if anticipated improvements are not realized.

(i) Special economic and technological justifications required b y any applicable EPA policies, or an explanation of why such justifications are not
necessary

. N/A Not applicable.

Reviewer: Greg Nudd Date of Review: July 2 , 20 1 2