Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Proposed Rules 89355 

1ADEQ submitted the amendment to MCAQD 

Rule 100 electronically on August 23, 2023. ADEQ’s 

submittal letter is dated August 23, 2023. 

2See 87 FR 8418 (February 15, 2022). 

Dated: December 20, 2023. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28525 Filed 12–26–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2023–0599; FRL–11591– 

01–R9] 

Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Maricopa 

County Air Quality Department 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Maricopa County Air 

Quality Department (MCAQD) portion 

of the Arizona State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). These revisions concern a 

rule that includes definitions for certain 

terms that are necessary for the 

implementation of local rules that 

regulate sources of air pollution. We are 

proposing to approve the rule under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are 

taking comments on this proposal and 

plan to follow with a final action. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 26, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2023–0599 at https:// 

www.regulations.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. If you need 

assistance in a language other than 

English or if you are a person with a 

disability who needs a reasonable 

accommodation at no cost to you, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kira 

Wiesinger, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105. By phone: (415) 972–3827 or by 

email at wiesinger.kira@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. The EPA’s Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rule 

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this 

proposal with the date that it was 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to the 

EPA. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local 

agency Rule No. Rule title Revised Submitted on 

MCAQD 100 ...................................................................... General Provisions and Definitions ..................... 8/9/2023 1 8/23/2023 

Under CAA section 110(k)(1), the EPA 

must determine whether a SIP submittal 

meets the minimum completeness 

criteria established in 40 CFR part 51, 

appendix V for an official SIP submittal 

on which the EPA is obligated to take 

action. We find that the ADEQ’s August 

23, 2023 SIP submittal for MCAQD Rule 

100 meets the completeness criteria in 

40 CFR part 51 Appendix V, which 

must be met before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of this 

rulemaking? 

We approved an earlier version of 

MCAQD Rule 100 into the SIP on 

February 15, 2022.2 The Maricopa 

County Board of Supervisors adopted 

revisions to the SIP-approved version on 

August 9, 2023, and the ADEQ 

submitted them to us on August 23, 

2023. If we take final action to approve 

the August 9, 2023 version of Rule 100, 

this version will replace the previously 

approved version of this rule in the SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

The purpose of the submitted rule 

revisions is to clarify and update 

definitions in Rule 100 of the Maricopa 

County portion of the Arizona SIP as 

part of the MCAQD’s Title V permit 

program revision. Revisions include the 

following, but a more complete list and 

discussion can be found in the technical 

support document (TSD) for this action 

found in the docket: 

• The addition of definitions for the 

terms ‘‘alternative operating scenario’’ 

and ‘‘business day or working day’’ and 

a revision of the definition of ‘‘major 

source.’’ A definition for the term 

‘‘alternative operating scenario’’ was 

added to allow MCAQD Title V permit 

applications the opportunity to submit 

an alternative operating scenario for 

their source. The ‘‘major source’’ 

definition has been revised to make it 

consistent with the Title V permit 

program definition of ‘‘major source,’’ 

by including language describing a 100 

tons per year emission threshold. 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the 

rulemaking? 

Rules in the SIP must be enforceable 

(see CAA section 110(a)(2)), must not 

interfere with applicable requirements 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress or other CAA 

requirements (see CAA section 110(l)), 

and must not modify certain SIP control 

requirements in nonattainment areas 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
89356 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

without ensuring equivalent or greater 

emissions reductions (see CAA section 

193). 

Since Rule 100 sets forth the legal 

authority for the Maricopa County Air 

Pollution Rules, which include 

MCAQD’s Federal new source review 

(NSR) rules in Rule 240 for stationary 

sources located in nonattainment areas 

and in attainment and/or unclassifiable 

areas, the revisions must be more 

stringent, or at least as stringent, in all 

respects as the corresponding SIP 

definitions in 40 CFR part 51.165(a)(1) 

and 51.166(b), which are the 

implementing regulations for CAA parts 

C and D of title I. 40 CFR part 

51.165(a)(1) contains the SIP definitions 

applicable to Federal NSR operating 

permit programs for stationary sources 

located in nonattainment areas, and 40 

CFR 51.166(b) contains the SIP 

definitions for stationary sources 

located in attainment and/or 

unclassified areas. Guidance and policy 

documents that we used to evaluate 

enforceability, revision/relaxation and 

rule stringency requirements for the 

applicable criteria pollutants include 

the following: 

1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 

13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and 

Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the 

Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990). 

3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

This rule meets CAA requirements 

and relevant guidance regarding 

enforceability. The TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. The EPA’s Recommendations To 

Further Improve the Rule 

The TSD includes a recommendation 

for the next time the local agency 

modifies Rule 100. 

D. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, the EPA proposes to fully 

approve the submitted rule because it 

fulfills all relevant requirements. We 

will accept comments from the public 

on this proposal until January 26, 2024. 

If we take final action to approve the 

submitted rule, our final action will 

incorporate this rule into the federally 

enforceable SIP. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the MCAQD’s Rule 100, General 

Provisions and Definitions, revised on 

August 9, 2023, which sets forth the 

legal authority for the Maricopa County 

Air Pollution Rules, and provides 

definitions of terms used throughout 

these rules. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region IX Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, the EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 

21879, April 11, 2023); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 

because it proposes to approve a state 

program; 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

Governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies 

to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. The EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA 

further defines the term fair treatment to 

mean that ‘‘no group of people should 

bear a disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

The State did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. The EPA did not perform an 

EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in 

this action. Due to the nature of the 

action being taken here, this action is 

expected to have a neutral to positive 

impact on the air quality of the affected 

area. Consideration of EJ is not required 

as part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of Executive Order 

12898 of achieving environmental 

justice for people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Proposed Rules 89357 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: December 20, 2023. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28495 Filed 12–26–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 203, 204, 212, and 215 

[Docket DARS–2023–0043] 

RIN 0750–AK33 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Inapplicability 

of Additional Defense-Unique Laws 

and Certain Non-Statutory DFARS 

Clauses to Commercial Item Contracts 

(DFARS Case 2018–D074); Extension 

of Comment Period 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: DoD published a proposed 

rule on November 17, 2023, proposing 

to amend the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to implement sections of the 

National Defense Authorization Acts for 

Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019 regarding 

applicability of certain solicitation 

provisions and contract clauses to 

contracts and subcontracts for 

commercial products, commercial 

services, and commercially available 

off-the-shelf items. The deadline for 

submitting comments is being extended 

to provide additional time for interested 

parties to provide comments. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published November 17, 

2023, at 88 FR 80468, is being extended. 

Comments on the proposed rule should 

be submitted in writing to the address 

shown in ADDRESSES on or before March 

15, 2024, to be considered in the 

formation of a final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by DFARS Case 2018–D074, 

using either of the following methods: 

Æ Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Search for 

‘‘DFARS Case 2018–D074’’. Select 

‘‘Comment’’ and follow the instructions 

to submit a comment. Please include 

‘‘DFARS Case 2018–D074’’ on any 

attached documents. 

Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2018–D074 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. To 

confirm receipt of your comment(s), 

please check https://

www.regulations.gov, approximately 

two to three days after submission to 

verify posting. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Jeanette Snyder, telephone 703–508– 

7524. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 17, 2023, DoD published a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register at 

88 FR 80468 seeking public comment on 

the proposed rule to amend the DFARS 

to implement sections of the National 

Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal 

Year 2018 and 2019. These sections 

address requirements related to the 

applicability of DFARS solicitation 

provisions and contract clauses to 

commercial products, commercial 

services, and commercially available 

off-the-shelf items. 

The comment period for the proposed 

rule is extended to March 15, 2024, to 

provide additional time for interested 

parties to comment on the proposed 

rule. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 203, 204, 

212, and 215 

Government procurement. 

Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Editor/Publisher, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28413 Filed 12–26–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6001–FR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 207, 215, 227, and 252 

[Docket DARS–2023–0044] 

RIN 0750–AL24 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Modular Open 

Systems Approaches (DFARS Case 

2021–D005); Extension of Comment 

Period 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking; extension of comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: DoD published an advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking on 

November 17, 2023, seeking public 

input on a proposed revision to the 

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement (DFARS) to implement 

certain elements of sections of the 

National Defense Authorization Acts for 

Fiscal Years 2012, 2017, and 2021, 

which establish contract requirements 

that enable modular open system 

approaches. The deadline for submitting 

comments is being extended to provide 

additional time for interested parties to 

provide comments. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

published November 17, 2023 at 88 FR 

80258, is extended. Comments on the 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

should be submitted in writing to the 

address shown in ADDRESSES on or 

before February 15, 2024, to be 

considered in the formation of a 

proposed rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by DFARS Case 2021–D005, 

using either of the following methods: 

Æ Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Search for 

‘‘DFARS Case 2021–D005.’’ Select 

‘‘Comment’’ and follow the instructions 

provided to submit a comment. Please 

include ‘‘DFARS Case 2021–D005’’ on 

any attached documents. 

Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2021–D005 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to https:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. To 

confirm receipt of your comment(s), 

please check https:// 

www.regulations.gov, approximately 

two to three days after submission to 

verify posting. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

David Johnson, telephone 202–913– 

5764. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 17, 2023, DoD published an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(ANPR) in the Federal Register at 88 FR 

80258 seeking public input on potential 

DFARS changes to implement certain 

elements of sections of the National 

Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal 

Years 2012, 2017, and 2021. These 

sections establish contract requirements 

that enable modular open system 

approaches. DoD held a public meeting 

on December 14, 2023, regarding this 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1