Air Plan Approval; Arizona; Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 89355-89357 [2023-28495]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Proposed Rules Dated: December 20, 2023. Martha Guzman Aceves, Regional Administrator, Region IX. 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 ADDRESSES: [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 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: 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. SUMMARY: 89355 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 MCAQD 100 ...................................................................... General Provisions and Definitions ..................... ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 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 1 ADEQ submitted the amendment to MCAQD Rule 100 electronically on August 23, 2023. ADEQ’s submittal letter is dated August 23, 2023. 2 See 87 FR 8418 (February 15, 2022). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:35 Dec 26, 2023 Jkt 262001 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 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Revised 8/9/2023 Submitted on 1 8/23/2023 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 E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM 27DEP1 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 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:35 Dec 26, 2023 Jkt 262001 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) PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM 27DEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2023 / Proposed Rules 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 Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period. AGENCY: 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 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:35 Dec 26, 2023 Jkt 262001 ‘‘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 Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 89357 Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period. ACTION: 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. SUMMARY: 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 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM 27DEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 89355-89357]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28495]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 [email protected].

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             8/9/2023   \1\ 8/23/2023
                                                      Definitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ADEQ submitted the amendment to MCAQD Rule 100 
electronically on August 23, 2023. ADEQ's submittal letter is dated 
August 23, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

[[Page 89356]]

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.

[[Page 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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.