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

- App. V)

SIP Submitted by: District Department of the Environment

Date Received: Ju ly 22 , 2014 Subject: District of Columbia’s Infrastructure S tate Implementation Pla n Revision for the 20 10 Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ) National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

Completeness Review Completed by: Emlyn Vélez

- Rosa Date Completed: October 27 , 201 4

Administrative Materials

ACCEPTABL E

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. A letter dated July 17 , 2014 from Keith A. Anderson

, Director of the District Department of the Environment ( DDo E)

to Sha wn M. Garvin, EPA Regional Administrator. 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 fin al 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

. Not a regulatory change, however applicable portions of

section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) are adopted in
the District of Columbia’s State Implementation Plan ( SIP ) under 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart J

. X

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary l egal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. The District of Columbia (the District) has the authority
pursuant to the District of Columbia Ai r Pollution Control Act

of 1984

. X

4. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted f or 4. State regulations have been previously adopted and are XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

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

appro priate 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. being certi fied or referenced in the submittal.

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. T he submittal l etter dated July 17, 2014 confirms that all required administrative procedures were properly followed for

this SIP revision. A copy of public hearing notice and transcript were included. X

6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with proc edures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice. 6. Provided is a c opy of the notice of public hearing and evidence of its publication on the DDoE website on April 1 8

, 2014. In the notice DDoE requested both public written and

or al comments by May 1 9 , 2014

. 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. A hearing officer’s certification for the public he aring was

p rovided. The public hearing was held on May 1 9 , 2014, as

described in the notice. X

8. Compilation of public comments and the State ’ s response thereto. 8. A compilation of public written comments and DDoE’s response was provided

. No publi c comments were received at the hearing. X

Technical Materials

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. Sulfur dioxide ( S O 2 ) ; specif ically, the 20 10 SO 2 N ational Ambient Air Quality Standard (N AAQS ) 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. Most of the State regulations certified or referenced in the SIP submittal apply statewide. XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X)

3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current

actual emissions from affecte d 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

. The SIP revision addresses necessary elements for implementation of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. This

SIP submittal does not relate to modification of existing

emission limits. X

4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, p revention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. 4. The SIP revision addresses necessary elements for implementation of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. The SIP revision submittal certifies existing air pollution control programs in the District’s SIP, as provided in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart J. X

5. Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, ou tput 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. No modeling required to support SIP

revision. X

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

. The SIP revision addresses necessary elements for implementation of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS . The SIP revision

submittal certifies that the D istrict has adopted in the SIP

control me asures and emission limitations for SO 2 , as provided

in 4 0 CFR Part 52 Subpart J

. 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 revision addresses necessary elements for implementation of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. The SIP revision

submittal certifies that the District ha s adopted in the SIP

control measures and emission limitations for SO 2 , as provided XEPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL (X) in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart J.

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

. The SIP revision addresses necessary elem ents for implementation of the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS . The SIP revision submittal certifies that the District has adopted in the SIP

c ompliance/enforcement measures for SO 2 , as provided in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart J. X

9. Special economic and technological justif ications required by any applicable EPA policies. (If a policy is not appropriate, explain why.) 9. No t applicable. 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 years after redesignation. 10. Not a pplicable. N ot a Section 107 request. X