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

- App. V) SI P Submitted by : Mary land Department of the Environment Date Submitted: April 22, 2010 Subject: Adoption of EPA CTG for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings amendments t o Regulation .32 and new Regulation .33 under

COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from specific Processes. Completeness Review Completed by : Gregory Becoat /s/ Date Completed: September 10, 2010 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. L etter dated April 22 , 20 09 from Shari T. Wilson , Secretary , Mary land Department of the Environment (MDE) to Shawn Garvin, Regio nal Administrator and letter dated June 2, 2010 from Diane Franks, Manager, MDE to Christina Fernandez, Chief. X

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 State has submitted evidence that the regulations were adopted and approved in final form on March 21, 2010 , with an effective date of April 19 , 20 10

. X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority

under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. The regulations were issued pursuant to Mary land Environment Article, §§1

- 101, 1

- 404, 2

- 101

– 2

- 103, 2

- 301

— 2

- 303, 10

- 102, and 10

- 103, Annotated Code of Mary land; XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) 4. A cop y 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 cop y 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. 4. A cop y of the proposed rule was published in the Maryland Register on December 18, 2009 , and the final rule was published in the Maryland Register on April 9, 2010 with an effective date of April 19, 2010

. 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. Cover letter transmitting the SIP revision dated April 22 , 20 09 . Cop ies and certification of public heari ng notices. X

6. 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. 6. Notice of public hearing and public comment period was published on MDE website and The Washington Post , on December 17, 2009, as well as, The Baltimore Sun and The Frederick News

- Post , on December 18, 2009, A hearing transcript is provided. X

7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordance with the info rmation provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 7. Original Transcript of Public Hearing was provided in the April 22, 20 09 submittal. X

8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. 8. No comment s were given and provided in MDE’s April 22, 20 09 submittal. XTechnical Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) 1. I dentification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. The submittal identifies VOCs, which are precursors of 8

-

hour ozone. X

2. I dentification 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. State of Mary land. 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 di fferences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision. 3. Not applicable. The plan established requirements to limit volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from flexible package printing. 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 implemented. 4. The SI P revision consists o f an amendment to new regulation, .33 under COMAR 26.11.19 . This CTG will reduce emissions of VOCs from flat wood paneling coating operations, which will aid in the (1) attainment of the 8

- hour ozone standard, and (2) improvement of the ambient air quality in Mary land. 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, assumption s, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analy sis. 5. Not applicable. No modeling demonstration was required to support the required revision. No additional modeling bey ond UAM attainment modeling is needed. X

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

. 6. The plan established requirements to limit VOCs from flat wood paneling coating operations. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) 7. Evidence that the plan contains emissio n limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where necessary , to ensure emission levels. 7. The plan established requirements to limit VOCs from flat wood paneling coating operations, and contains work practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements. X

8. Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 8. The plan established requirements to limit VOCs from flat wood paneling coating operations. X 9. Special economic and technological justifications required b y an y applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why .) 9. No special justifications are required. X 10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant NAAQS for at least 10 y ears after redesignation. 10. Not applicable because this is not a section 107 request. X