3932 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

J. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR 

part 51 

This proposed action does not involve 

technical standards. 

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 12989 (59 

FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it 

does not establish an environmental 

health or safety standard. 

III. Statutory Authority 

Statutory authority for this action 

comes from section 211(o) of the Clean 

Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7545(o). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 80 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Diesel fuel, Fuel 

additives, Gasoline, Imports, Oil 

imports, Penalties, Petroleum, 

Renewable fuel, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Andrew Wheeler, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 

CFR part 80 as follows: 

PART 80—REGISTRATION OF FUELS 

AND FUEL ADDITIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 80 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7521, 7542, 

7545, and 7601(a). 

Subpart M—RENEWABLE FUEL 

STANDARD 

■ 2. Amend § 80.1451 by adding 

paragraphs (a)(1)(xiv)(E) and (F) to read 

as follows: 

§ 80.1451 What are the reporting 

requirements under the RFS program? 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(xiv) * * * 

(E) For obligated parties that meet the 

requirements for a small refinery under 

§ 80.1441(e)(2)(iii), for the 2019 

compliance year, annual compliance 

reports must be submitted no later than 

November 30, 2021. 

(F) For obligated parties, for the 2020 

compliance year, annual compliance 

reports must be submitted no later than 

January 31, 2022. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 80.1464 by adding 

paragraphs (g)(7), (8) and (9) to read as 

follows: 

§ 80.1464 What are the attest engagement 

requirements under the RFS program? 

(g) * * * 

(7) For obligated parties that meet the 

requirements for a small refinery under 

§ 80.1441(e)(2)(iii), for the 2019 

compliance year, reports required under 

this section must be submitted to the 

EPA no later than June 1, 2022. 

(8) For obligated parties, for the 2020 

compliance year, reports required under 

this section must be submitted no later 

than June 1, 2022. 

(9) For RIN-generating renewable fuel 

producers, RIN-generating importers of 

renewable fuel, and other parties 

owning RINs, for the 2020 compliance 

year, reports required under this section 

shall be submitted to the EPA no later 

than June 1, 2022. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–00204 Filed 1–14–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 751 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0163; EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2016–0387 and EPA–HQ–OPPT– 

2016–0231; FRL–10018–67] 

RIN 2070–AK03; 2070–AK11 and 2070–AK07 

Withdrawal of Proposed Rules; 

Discontinuing Three Rulemaking 

Efforts Listed in the Semiannual 

Regulatory Agenda 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rules. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is withdrawing the 

proposed regulatory requirements 

described in the three proposed rules 

that are identified in this document. 

This document summarizes the 

proposed rules and provides a brief 

explanation for the Agency’s decision 

not to finalize the proposed actions. 

DATES: As of January 15, 2021, the 

proposed rule published on December 

16, 2016 (81 FR 91592; FRL–9949–86); 

the proposed rule published on January 

19, 2017 (82 FR 7432; FRL–9950–08); 

and the portion of the proposed rule 

published on January 19, 2017 (82 FR 

7464; FRL–9958–57) that pertains to nMethylpyrrolidone (NMP) and 

methylene chloride in commercial paint 

and coating removal, are withdrawn. 

ADDRESSES: The dockets are available at 

http://www.regulations.gov or at the 

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

for the OPP Docket it is (703) 305–5805, 

and the telephone number for the OPPT 

Docket is (202) 566–0280. 

Due to the public health concerns 

related to COVID–19, the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is 

closed to visitors with limited 

exceptions. The staff continues to 

provide remote customer service via 

email, phone, and webform. For the 

information on EPA/DC services, 

submitting comments and docket 

access, please visit https://

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katherine Sleasman (7101M), Mission 

Support Division, Office of Program 

Support, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; telephone number: (703) 

347–0409; email address: 

sleasman.katherine@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Does this action apply to me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general and may be of particular 

interest to those persons who follow 

proposed rules issued under section 6(a) 

of the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2605. Since others 

may also be interested, the Agency has 

not attempted to describe all the specific 

entities potentially interested. 

II. Why is EPA issuing this withdrawal 

of proposed rules? 

This document serves the following 

purposes: 

1. It announces to the public that EPA 

is withdrawing certain proposed rules 

for which the Agency no longer intends 

to issue a final rule; and 

2. It officially terminates the ongoing 

rulemaking activities, which allows the 

Agency to close out the individual 

rulemaking entries for these actions that 

appear in EPA’s Semiannual Regulatory 

Agenda. 

All agencies publish Semiannual 

Regulatory Agendas describing 

regulatory actions they are developing 

or have recently completed. These 

agendas are published in the Federal 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 3933 

Register, usually during the spring and 

fall of each year, as part of the Unified 

Agenda of Federal Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Actions (Semiannual 

Regulatory Agenda). The Agency 

publishes the EPA Semiannual 

Regulatory Agenda to update the public 

about: Regulations and major policies 

currently under development, reviews 

of existing regulations and major 

policies, and rules and major policies 

completed or canceled since the last 

Semiannual Regulatory Agenda. 

The Semiannual Regulatory Agenda is 

often used as a tool to solicit interest 

and participation from stakeholders. As 

such, EPA believes that the public is 

best served by a Semiannual Regulatory 

Agenda that reflects active rulemaking 

efforts. The withdrawal of these inactive 

rulemaking efforts will streamline EPA’s 

Semiannual Regulatory Agenda and 

allow the public to better identify and 

focus on those rulemaking activities that 

are active. 

For the individual reasons described 

in this document, the Agency has 

decided not to complete these actions at 

this time. By withdrawing the proposed 

rules, the Agency is eliminating the 

pending nature of those prior regulatory 

actions and clarifying its intent for 

future risk management action 

concerning these chemicals. 

Specifically, EPA is initiating separate 

risk management actions to address 

unreasonable risks identified for these 

chemicals following the recent issuance 

of final risk evaluations under TSCA 

section 6(b) for trichloroethylene (TCE), 

methylene chloride (MC) (for portions 

related to commercial paint and coating 

removal), and NMP. 

III. Which proposed rules are being 

withdrawn? 

This unit identifies the proposed 

regulatory actions that are being 

withdrawn and provides a summary of 

what was proposed. The ‘‘RIN’’ refers to 

the regulatory identification number 

assigned to the rulemaking effort in the 

Semiannual Regulatory Agenda. 

EPA issued three proposed rules 

under sections 6(a) and 26(l)(4) of the 

TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2605(a) and 2625(l)(4) 

(82 FR 7464; FRL–9958–57); (81 FR 

91592; FRL–9949–86); (82 FR 7432; 

FRL–9950–08). Two of the actions 

proposed to address unreasonable risks 

that EPA had preliminarily identified 

with certain uses of TCE, which is a 

volatile organic compound widely used 

in industrial and commercial processes 

with some uses in consumer and 

commercial products; and one of the 

actions proposed to address 

unreasonable risks that EPA had 

preliminarily identified with certain 

uses of NMP and MC, which are 

solvents used in a variety of 

applications, including paint and 

coating removal (although the Agency is 

only withdrawing the portions related to 

NMP and MC commercial paint and 

coating removal). 

A. Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation 

of Certain Uses Under TSCA § 6(a); 

Proposed Rule; RIN 2070–AK03 

On December 16, 2016 (81 FR 91592; 

FRL–9949–86), EPA issued a proposed 

rule under TSCA section 6(a), 15 U.S.C. 

2605(a), to address unreasonable risks 

that EPA had preliminarily determined 

exist with certain uses of TCE: Aerosol 

degreasing and spot cleaning in dry 

cleaning. EPA proposed to prohibit the 

manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for use 

in aerosol degreasing and for use in spot 

cleaning in dry cleaning facilities; to 

prohibit commercial use of TCE for 

aerosol degreasing and for spot cleaning 

in dry cleaning facilities; to require 

manufacturers, processors, and 

distributors, except for retailers of TCE 

for any use, to provide downstream 

notification of these prohibitions 

throughout the supply chain; and to 

require limited recordkeeping. 

The rulemaking docket for this action 

is available under docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0163. 

B. Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation 

of Use in Vapor Degreasing Under TSCA 

Section 6(a); Proposed Rule; RIN 2070– 

AK11 

On January 19, 2017 (82 FR 7432; 

FRL–9950–08), EPA issued a proposed 

rule under TSCA section 6(a), 15 U.S.C. 

2605(a), to address unreasonable risks 

that EPA had preliminarily determined 

exist with use of TCE in vapor 

degreasing. EPA proposed to prohibit 

the manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for use in vapor 

degreasing; to prohibit commercial use 

of TCE in vapor degreasing; to require 

manufacturers, processors, and 

distributors, except for retailers of TCE 

for any use, to provide downstream 

notification of these prohibitions 

throughout the supply chain; and to 

require limited recordkeeping. 

The rulemaking docket for this action 

is available under docket ID number 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0387. 

C. n-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP); 

Regulation of Certain Uses Under TSCA 

Section 6(a); Proposed Rule; RIN 2070– 

AK07 

On January 19, 2017 (82 FR 7464; 

FRL–9958–57), EPA issued a proposed 

rule under TSCA section 6(a), 15 U.S.C. 

2605(a), to address risks that EPA had 

preliminarily identified with certain 

uses of NMP, which is a solvent used in 

a variety of applications, including 

paint and coating removal. EPA 

preliminarily identified significant 

health risks associated with NMP use in 

commercial and consumer paint and 

coating removal and EPA proposed a 

determination that these are 

unreasonable risks. EPA co-proposed 

two different options: one co-proposal 

was to prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of NMP for all 

consumer and commercial paint and 

coating removal; to prohibit the use of 

NMP for all commercial paint and 

coating removal; to require downstream 

notification of these prohibitions 

throughout the supply chain; to require 

recordkeeping; and to provide a timelimited exemption from these proposed 

regulations on NMP for coating removal 

uses critical for national security. As an 

alternate proposal, EPA proposed that 

(1) commercial users of NMP for paint 

and coating removal establish a worker 

protection program for dermal and 

respiratory protection and not use paint 

and coating removal products that 

contain greater than 35 percent NMP by 

weight (except for product formulations 

destined to be used by Department of 

Defense (DoD) or its contractors 

performing work only for DoD projects); 

and (2) processors of products 

containing NMP for paint and coating 

removal reformulate products such that 

these products do not exceed a 

maximum of 35 percent NMP by weight, 

identify gloves that provide effective 

protection for the formulation, and 

provide warning and instruction labels 

on the products. The rulemaking docket 

for this action is available under docket 

ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0231. 

This withdrawal applies to provisions 

related to NMP of the proposed rule that 

published on January 19, 2017. 

D. Methylene chloride (MC); Regulation 

of Certain Uses Under TSCA Section 

6(a); Proposed Rule; RIN 2070–AK07 

The proposed rule on January 19, 

2017 (82 FR 7464; FRL–9958–57), which 

was identified under RIN 2070–AK07, 

also proposed requirements for MC. 

Requirements addressing the use of MC 

for consumer paint and coating removal 

were subsequently finalized under RIN 

2070–AK07 (see 84 FR 11420, March 27, 

2019) (FRL–9989–29). The Agency also 

announced an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking on March 27, 

2019, (84 FR 11466; FRL–9989–30) to 

solicit public input on training, 

certification, and limited access 

requirements that could address any 

3934 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

unreasonable risks that EPA could 

potentially find to be presented by MC 

when used for commercial paint and 

coating removal. This withdrawal only 

applies to provisions of the January 19, 

2017 proposed rule related to 

commercial paint and coating removal 

of MC. The rulemaking docket for this 

action is available under docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0231. 

IV. Why are these proposed rules being 

withdrawn? 

The 2016 and 2017 proposed rules 

addressed a limited number of 

conditions of use (COUs) for TCE, MC 

and NMP pursuant to TSCA sections 

6(a) and 26(l)(4). The COUs not 

otherwise addressed by final regulatory 

action that were the subject of the 

earlier EPA risk assessments and 

proposed rules, as well as additional 

COUs for these chemical substances, 

were evaluated as part of the first ten 

risk evaluations conducted under TSCA 

section 6(b). Final risk evaluations for 

all three substances have been issued 

recently under TSCA section 6(b) and, 

consistent with the statute, EPA is 

proceeding to initiate regulatory action 

to address the unreasonable risks 

identified in the final risk evaluations 

for TCE (85 FR 37942, June 24, 2020; 

FRL–10011–16); MC (85 FR 75010, 

November 24, 2020; FRL–10016–91; 

FRL–9989–29); and NMP (the 

announcement is scheduled to publish 

in the Federal Register on December 30, 

2020 and can be identified under FRL– 

10017–18). As a result, the retention of 

the inactive prior proposals on the 

Agency’s regulatory agenda is not 

necessary; indeed, retaining these 

inactive proposals could be duplicative 

or could create unnecessary public 

confusion about the extent and nature of 

the regulatory actions the Agency 

intends to take to address unreasonable 

risks identified for these chemical 

substances. Furthermore, EPA is 

withdrawing the proposed rules to 

promote regulatory efficiency because it 

is impossible for EPA to finalize the 

rules as proposed and at the same time 

meet its statutory obligation under 

TSCA section 6 for risk management 

rulemaking following finalization of risk 

evaluations in which EPA makes 

findings of unreasonable risk. If EPA 

were to finalize the 2016 and 2017 rules 

as proposed, the Agency would be 

leaving out efforts to address additional 

COUs for these chemical substances that 

were determined to present 

unreasonable risk as part of the TSCA 

section 6(b) risk evaluations. EPA would 

not be able to say that its obligations 

under TSCA section 6 were met with 

regard to these chemical substances 

without issuing supplemental proposed 

and final rules for the additional COUs 

determined to present unreasonable 

risks in the TSCA section 6(b) risk 

evaluations. While the Agency has 

discretion to undertake multiple risk 

management actions with regard to 

unreasonable risks associated with 

different COUs for a single chemical 

substance (and, in fact, did so to address 

the acute unreasonable risks associated 

with MC in consumer paint and coating 

removal), it is more efficient to take risk 

management action on multiple COUs at 

once where unreasonable risks are 

identified, particularly where regulatory 

approaches to different COUs can be 

combined. In addition, where EPA has 

completed risk evaluations for chemical 

substances, EPA believes the Agency 

will be able to more efficiently address 

obligations under TSCA section 6(c) 

(requirements applicable to 

promulgation of TSCA section 6(a) 

rules), section 26 (including 

requirements related to best available 

science and weight of scientific 

evidence), and other requirements 

applicable to TSCA section 6(a) 

rulemakings through a single 

rulemaking process, rather than 

supplementing prior proposals. 

Therefore, EPA will initiate regulatory 

actions to address all of the COUs 

determined to present unreasonable 

risks for a given chemical substance and 

will withdraw the earlier proposed 

actions. 

EPA proposed these rules under 

TSCA section 6(a), which provides 

authority for EPA to ban or restrict the 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

use, and disposal of chemical 

substances, with certain limitations. 

TSCA section 26(l)(4) authorizes EPA to 

issue rules under TSCA section 6(a) for 

chemicals listed in the 2014 Update to 

the TSCA Work Plan for Chemical 

Assessments for which EPA published 

completed risk assessments prior to 

June 22, 2016, consistent with the scope 

of the completed risk assessment and 

other applicable requirements of TSCA 

section 6. 

In the June 2014 TSCA Work Plan 

Chemical Risk Assessment for TCE, EPA 

characterized risks from the use of TCE 

in commercial degreasing and in some 

consumer uses. On December 16, 2016, 

based on the 2014 Risk Assessment for 

TCE, EPA preliminarily determined that 

these risks are unreasonable risks and 

proposed regulatory action; specifically, 

EPA proposed to prohibit the 

manufacture, processing, distribution in 

commerce, or commercial use of TCE in 

spot cleaning in dry cleaning facilities 

and aerosol degreasing (81 FR 91592; 

FRL–9949–86). On January 19, 2017, 

EPA proposed to address the 

unreasonable risks from TCE when used 

in vapor degreasing (82 FR 7432; FRL– 

9950–08). These uses of TCE were 

subsequently identified as conditions of 

use within the scope of the risk 

evaluation for TCE under TSCA section 

6(b). EPA issued the final risk 

evaluation for TCE in November 2020 

(85 FR 75010, November 24, 2020; FRL– 

10016–91) which determined that 52 

out of 54 conditions of use of TCE 

present unreasonable risks of injury to 

health. EPA is withdrawing the 2016 

and 2017 proposed rules on TCE for the 

reasons discussed earlier in this section. 

For more information about TCE and 

details about the risk evaluation for 

TCE, see the TSCA website at https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluationtrichloroethylene-tce-0#riske valuation. 

In the March 2015 TSCA Work Plan 

Chemical Risk Assessment for NMP, 

EPA characterized risks from use of this 

chemical in paint and coating removal. 

On January 19, 2017, based on the 2015 

Risk Assessment for NMP, EPA 

preliminarily determined that the use of 

NMP in commercial and consumer paint 

and coating removal poses an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health, 

and proposed options for addressing 

that risk. The uses of NMP in 

commercial and consumer paint and 

coating removal were identified as 

conditions of use within the scope of 

the risk evaluation for NMP under 

TSCA section 6(b). EPA issued the final 

risk evaluation for NMP in December 

2020 (the announcement is scheduled to 

publish in the Federal Register on 

December 30, 2020 and can be 

identified under FRL–10017–18). EPA 

evaluated commercial and consumer 

use of NMP in paint and coating 

removal as COUs in the scope of the risk 

evaluation, along with other COUs for 

NMP. In response to public and peer 

review comments on the draft risk 

evaluation, EPA modified its approach 

for calculating dose-response, which 

resulted in a change in the point of 

departure and modified risk estimates 

for many COUs, including modified risk 

estimates for the use of NMP in 

consumer paint and coating removal. 

These changes are discussed in the 

Executive Summary and in Section 3.2, 

for the points of departure, of the final 

NMP risk evaluation and differ from the 

preliminary determination of 

unreasonable risk in the draft NMP risk 

evaluation and the 2017 proposed NMP 

rule. EPA is withdrawing the 2017 

proposed rule on NMP, i.e., those 

portions of the proposal not related to 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2021 / Proposed Rules 3935 

the final rule on MC in consumer paint 

and coating removal, for the reasons 

discussed earlier in this section. The 

withdrawal of this rulemaking effort 

may have an immediate effect on other 

TSCA requirements for NMP. 

Withdrawal of the proposal would 

terminate export notification 

requirements for NMP. However, the 

Agency believes withdrawing the 

proposal will clarify which action the 

Agency is currently pursuing, and 

reduce the need for additional, 

piecemeal or supplemental risk 

management actions as a result of the 

final determinations in the risk 

evaluation conducted under TSCA 

section 6(b). As noted in Unit V., the 

Agency is initiating risk management 

action on this chemical. For more 

information about NMP and details 

about the risk evaluation for NMP, see 

the TSCA website at https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-nmethylpyrrolidone-nmp-0. 

On March 27, 2019, in the final rule 

for MC in consumer paint and coating 

removal (RIN 2070–AK07), EPA 

explained that the Agency was not 

finalizing the proposed risk 

determination or proposed regulation 

for MC commercial paint and coating 

removal as part of that action. Similar to 

NMP, EPA evaluated commercial use of 

MC in paint and coating removal as a 

COU in the scope of the TSCA section 

6(b) risk evaluation for MC, along with 

other COUs. EPA issued the final risk 

evaluation for MC on June 24, 2020 (85 

FR 37942; FRL–10011–16). For more 

information about MC and details about 

the risk evaluation for MC, see the 

TSCA website at https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/final-risk-evaluationmethylene-chloride. 

V. How does EPA intend to proceed? 

Given the subsequent issuance of final 

risk evaluations under TSCA for TCE, 

MC and NMP that incorporated the 

COUs which the three proposed rules 

would have addressed, and the 

initiation of new rulemakings for TCE, 

MC and NMP following issuance of the 

final risk evaluations in which EPA 

made findings of unreasonable risk, EPA 

has determined that the previous 

proposed rules should be withdrawn. 

The next step in the process required by 

TSCA section 6 is addressing the 

unreasonable risks determined in the 

risk evaluations through rulemaking. 

EPA has initiated new rulemaking 

efforts to address the unreasonable risks 

determined in the final risk evaluations 

and has one year to propose and take 

public comments on any risk 

management actions. Although these 

new rulemaking efforts did not 

commence in time to be included in the 

Fall 2020 edition of the EPA’s Unified 

Regulatory Plan and Agenda, these 

rulemaking efforts will appear in the 

Spring 2021 edition of EPA’s 

semiannual Regulatory Agenda. As part 

of this effort, EPA will consider 

comments received on the previouslyreferenced ANPRM issued in 2019 

soliciting input on training, certification 

and limited access requirements that 

could address the unreasonable risks 

associated with methylene chloride in 

commercial paint and coating removal. 

For these reasons, EPA is 

withdrawing the proposed rule that 

published on December 16, 2016 (81 FR 

91592; FRL–9949–86); the proposed rule 

that published on January 19, 2017 (82 

FR 7432; FRL–9950–08); and the 

provisions related to NMP and to MC in 

commercial paint and coating removal 

in the proposed rule that published on 

January 19, 2017 (82 FR 7464; FRL– 

9958–57). 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. 

Andrew Wheeler, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00115 Filed 1–14–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 212, 225, and 252 

[Docket DARS–2020–0039] 

RIN 0750–AL15 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement: Improved 

Energy Security for Main Operating 

Bases in Europe (DFARS Case 2020– 

D030) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

implement a section of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2020 that prohibits contracts for 

the acquisition of furnished energy for 

a covered military installation in Europe 

that is sourced from inside the Russian 

Federation. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

should be submitted in writing to the 

address shown below on or before 

March 16, 2021, to be considered in the 

formation of a final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by DFARS Case 2020–D030, 

using any of the following methods: 

Æ Regulations.gov: https://

www.regulations.gov. Search for 

‘‘DFARS Case 2020–D030’’. Select 

‘‘Comment Now’’ and follow the 

instructions provided to submit a 

comment. Please include ‘‘DFARS Case 

2020–D030’’ on any attached 

documents. 

Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include 

DFARS Case 2020–D030 in the subject 

line of the message. 

Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Kimberly 

Bass, OUSD(A&S)DPC/DARS, Room 

3B938, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

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 (except allow 30 days for 

posting of comments submitted by 

mail). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Kimberly Bass, telephone 571–372– 

6174. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD is proposing to amend the 

DFARS to implement section 2821 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 (Pub. 

L. 116–92). Section 2821 prohibits use 

of energy sourced from inside the 

Russian Federation in an effort to 

promote energy security in Europe. The 

prohibition applies to all forms of 

energy ‘‘furnished to a covered military 

installation’’, as that term is defined in 

the statute, and only to main operating 

bases as defined and identified by DoD. 

This means the energy itself must be 

furnished to the military installation, 

not to a third party that uses it to create 

some other form of energy (e.g., heating, 

cooling, or electricity). The prohibition 

applies only to Europe, not to Asia; for 

example, those parts of Turkey located 

in Asia are not affected by the rule. 

DoD will promote the energy security 

of its European installations by 

encouraging energy security and energy 

resilience and will not purchase energy 

sourced from inside the Russian 

Federation unless a waiver of the 

prohibition in section 2821 is approved 

by the head of the contracting activity.