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

- App. V)

SIP Submitted by: District Department of the Environment

Date Submitted: March 5, 2012 Subject: Submittal of the District of Columbia’s Vo latile Organic Compounds Emissions Reductions Regulations as a SIP Revision

Completeness Review Completed by: Gregory Becoat /s/ Date Completed: August 22 , 2012

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 15, 2012 from Christophe A.G. Tulou, District Department of the Environment, to Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Region III. X

2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulatio ns; 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. A copy of the final

- form rule making amending Title 20 (Environment) of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR), Chapters 1 and 7, published in the D.C. Register on December 30, 2011 (58 DCR 011286). X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under

S tate law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. The regulations were issued pursuant to the authority set forth in the District of Columbia Air Pollution Control Act of 1984, Mayor’s Order 98

- 44, dated April 10, 1008, and Mayor’s Order

2006

- 61, dated June 14, 2006. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (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 approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the offi cial 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 final

- form rulemaking amending Title 20 (Environment) of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR), Chapters 1 and 7, published in the D.C. Register on December 30, 2011 (58 DCR 011286). The effective date of the regulation is De cember 23, 2011. X

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 letter from Christophe A.G. Tulou , Director, Distr ict Department of the Environment submitted on March 15, 2012. A copy of notice printed in the December 30, 2011 edition of the D.C. Register (58 DCR 011286). Copy of the notice posted on the District Department of the Environment website on September 1 2, 2011 and on the D.C. Municipal Regulations and D.C. Register website on August 12, 2011. 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 and public comment period was published on the District Department of the Environment website

on September 12, 2011 and on the D.C. Municipal Regulations and D.C. Register website on August 12, 2011. X

7. Certification that pu blic hearings were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 7. A public hearing was held on September 12 , 2011 in accordance with State laws as evidenced by hearing transcr ipt

and letter dated March 15, 2012 from Christophe A.G. Tulou, District Department of the Environment, to Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Region III

. X

8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. 8. All public comment s received were addressed. XTechnical Materials

EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. The submittal identifies volatile organic compounds as the regulated pollutant affected by the plan. 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. The amendments will affect the District of Columbia including nonattainment areas and maintenance areas. X

3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estim ates 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 ant icipated as a result of the revision. 3. The plan is necessary to reduce further VOC emissions in

the District. VOCs are precursors to ground

- level ozone, a principal component of smog that is formed in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight. X

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 implemente d. 4. This revision will reduce ozone precursor emission throughout the District of Columbia and therefore will reduce ozone concentrations providing progress towards attainment of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards in ozone

nonattainment a reas. 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 models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. 5. Not applicable. X

6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology. 6. Not applic able. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 7. The SIP already contains sections which contain the needed recordkeeping/re porting requirements. X

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 8. Not applicable. X

9. Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why.) 9. Not applicable. 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. 10. Not applicable. This is not a section 107 request. X