12136 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter III 

[Docket ID ED–2021–OSERS–0003] 

Proposed Priority and Requirements— 

Training of Interpreters for Individuals 

Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and 

Individuals Who Are DeafBlind 

Program 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priority and 

requirements. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Education (Department) proposes a 

priority and requirements for the 

Training of Interpreters for Individuals 

Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing and 

Individuals Who Are DeafBlind 

program, Assistance Listing Number 

84.160D. The Department may use the 

priority and requirements for 

competitions in fiscal year 2021 and 

later years. We take this action to 

provide training to working interpreters 

in order to develop a new skill area or 

enhance an existing skill area. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before April 1, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail, commercial delivery, 

or hand delivery. We will not accept 

comments submitted by fax or by email 

or those submitted after the comment 

period. To ensure that we do not receive 

duplicate copies, please submit your 

comments only once. In addition, please 

include the Docket ID at the top of your 

comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov to submit your 

comments electronically. Information 

on using Regulations.gov, including 

instructions for accessing agency 

documents, submitting comments, and 

viewing the docket, is available on the 

site under ‘‘How to use 

Regulations.gov’’ in the Help section. 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver 

your comments about the proposed 

priority and requirements, address them 

to Kristen Rhinehart-Fernandez, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW, Room 5094, Potomac 

Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202– 

2800. 

Privacy Note: The Department’s 

policy is to make all comments received 

from members of the public available for 

public viewing in their entirety on the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

commenters should be careful to 

include in their comments only 

information that they wish to make 

publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristen Rhinehart-Fernandez, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW, Room 5094, Potomac 

Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202– 

2800. Telephone: (202) 245–6103. 

Email: Kristen.Rhinehart@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding the 

proposed priority and requirements. To 

ensure that your comments have 

maximum effect in developing the 

notice of final priority and 

requirements, we urge you to identify 

clearly the specific section of the 

proposed priority and requirements that 

each comment addresses. 

In addition to your general comments 

and recommended clarifications, we 

seek input on the proposed design of the 

training. We are particularly interested 

in your feedback on the following 

questions: 

1. Do the four specialty areas 

identified in the proposed priority meet 

the current needs in the field of 

interpreting for individuals who are 

deaf, hard of hearing, or DeafBlind? Are 

there other specialty areas that should 

be considered? If so, please provide 

information to demonstrate need and 

explain why. 

2. Are there challenges to providing 

an induction experience for all 

participants as a requirement for 

successfully completing the program? 

For example, is there a limited number 

of potential induction opportunities that 

might be available for participants? If so, 

please provide information to describe 

any challenges and options for how 

induction opportunities may be 

reasonably incorporated into the 

training program. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 and their overall requirement 

of reducing regulatory burden that 

might result from the proposed priority 

and requirements. Please let us know of 

any further ways we could reduce 

potential costs or increase potential 

benefits while preserving the effective 

and efficient administration of the 

program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about the proposed priority and 

requirements by accessing 

Regulations.gov. Due to the COVID–19 

pandemic, the Department buildings are 

currently not open. However, upon 

reopening, you may also inspect the 

comments in person in Room 5059, 550 

12th Street SW, Washington, DC, 

between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 

p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through 

Friday of each week except Federal 

holidays. Please contact the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Assistance to Individuals With 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request, we will 

provide an appropriate accommodation 

or auxiliary aid to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for the proposed priority and 

requirements. If you want to schedule 

an appointment for this type of 

accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: Under the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 

(Rehabilitation Act), the Rehabilitation 

Services Administration (RSA) makes 

grants to public and private nonprofit 

agencies and organizations, including 

institutions of higher education, to 

establish interpreter training programs 

or to provide financial assistance for 

ongoing interpreter programs to train a 

sufficient number of qualified 

professionals (as defined in 34 CFR 

396.4) throughout the country. 

The purpose of the program is to train 

interpreters to effectively interpret and 

transliterate using spoken, visual, and 

tactile modes of communication; ensure 

the maintenance of the interpreting 

skills of qualified interpreters; and 

provide opportunities for interpreters to 

raise their skill level in order to meet 

the highest standards approved by 

certifying associations and to effectively 

meet the communication needs of 

individuals who are deaf or hard of 

hearing and individuals who are 

DeafBlind. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 709(c) 

and 772(a) and (f). 

Proposed Priority: This notice 

contains one proposed priority. 

Interpreter Training in Specialty Areas 

Background 

The Department has long been 

committed to improving the delivery of 

vocational rehabilitation (VR) services 

to, and the employment outcomes of, 

individuals with disabilities who are 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 12137 

1 ‘‘Individual who is deaf,’’ ‘‘individual who is 

hard of hearing,’’ and ‘‘individual who is deafblind’’ are defined in 34 CFR 396.4. 

2RSA uses data collected through the Case 

Service Report (RSA–911) (OMB control number 

1820–0508) for the State VR Services Program and 

the State Supported Employment (SE) Services 

Program to describe the performance of the VR and 

SE programs in the Annual Report to the Congress 

and the President as required by sections 13 and 

101(a)(10) of the Rehabilitation Act. 

3Remote learning means programming where at 

least part of the learning occurs away from the 

physical building in a manner that addresses a 

learner’s educational needs. Remote learning may 

include online, hybrid/blended learning, or nontechnology-based learning (e.g., lab kits, project 

supplies, paper packets). 85 FR 86550 (December 

30, 2020) 

deaf, hard of hearing, or DeafBlind 1 and 

has funded interpreter training projects 

since 1974. In 2016, the Department 

funded four national projects to provide 

specialized training in the areas of 

dysfluent language competencies, 

behavioral health interpreting, protactile American Sign Language (ASL), 

and preparing interpreters, especially 

those from communities of color and 

heritage signing backgrounds, to work in 

legal settings. The Department also 

funded a national project to provide 

experiential learning to novice 

interpreters and reduce the length of 

time between graduation and 

certification. Information about the 2016 

interpreter training projects may be 

accessed through the Rehabilitation 

Services Administration’s National 

Clearinghouse of Rehabilitation 

Training Materials (NCRTM) at 

ncrtm.ed.gov. 

Further, the Rehabilitation Act 

continues to support the 

communication needs of individuals 

who are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

DeafBlind. The Rehabilitation Act 

requires that the State Plan establish 

and maintain minimum standards to 

ensure the availability of personnel 

within the designated State unit, to the 

maximum extent feasible, trained to 

communicate in the native language or 

mode of communication of an applicant 

or eligible individual (section 

101(7)(C)). When this is not possible, 

such as for individuals who are deaf, 

hard of hearing, or DeafBlind, the 

services of interpreters trained to 

communicate using the native language 

or mode of communication of an 

applicant or eligible individual are 

used. Section 302(f) of the 

Rehabilitation Act addresses the need 

for providing interpreting services for 

individuals who are deaf, hard of 

hearing, or DeafBlind by authorizing 

grants for the training of interpreters. 

To continue to effectively meet the 

communication needs of individuals 

who are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

DeafBlind, the Department proposes a 

priority to provide training to working 

interpreters (i.e., interpreters with a 

baccalaureate degree in ASL-English 

who possess a minimum of three years 

of relevant experience as an interpreter) 

in one of four specialty areas. This 

priority focuses on preparing 

interpreters to work in VR settings. 

According to the RSA–911,2 in program 

year (PY) 2019, 7.43 percent (64,860) of 

all VR participants (872,643) were deaf, 

hard of hearing, or DeafBlind. 

Specifically, 2.6 percent were deaf, 4.68 

percent were hard of hearing, and 0.15 

percent were DeafBlind. The RSA–911 

data show that interpreter services were 

used by 1,404 VR participants who 

achieved competitive integrated 

employment (CIE) outcomes in PY 2019, 

including 1,144 participants who are 

deaf, 231 participants who are hard of 

hearing, and 29 participants who are 

DeafBlind. 

Interpreter training in specific 

specialty areas is necessary to meet the 

ongoing and diverse needs of 

individuals who are deaf, hard of 

hearing, and DeafBlind. A 2015 Trends 

Survey documented 47 percent of 

service providers reporting an increase 

in the number of deaf individuals 

pursuing education or employment in 

specialized fields (Schafer and Cokely, 

2016). Interpreters must be able to 

understand and communicate 

proficiently using technical vocabulary 

and highly specialized discourse in a 

variety of complex specialty areas in 

both ASL and English. 

In order to effectively train working 

interpreters in specific specialty areas, 

we propose a priority that incorporates 

high-quality remote learning,3 field 

induction, mentorship, and coaching. 

Unlike spoken language majors, which 

often include a semester or year-long 

study abroad experience, many 

interpreting majors do not offer 

immersion opportunities. Classroom 

instruction alone is inadequate, and 

meaningful program interaction with 

diverse communities of deaf people is 

missing from most programs (Cokely 

and Cogen, 2015). 

Experiential learning theory, a 

learning style first introduced by David 

Kolb in 1984, describes the value of 

learning through experience and 

meaningful program interaction, such as 

induction, mentorship, and coaching 

(Bentley-Sassaman, 2014). Working 

interpreters can apply Kolb’s 

experiential learning theory to enhance 

their professional growth and skills. 

Under Kolb’s approach, there are four 

key abilities that create an effective 

learning cycle. These abilities include 

concrete experience (CE), reflective 

observation (RO), abstract 

conceptualization (AC), and active 

experimentation (AE). To achieve CE, 

working interpreters must involve 

themselves fully, openly, and without 

bias in new experiences. To achieve RO, 

working interpreters must reflect on and 

observe their experiences from many 

perspectives. To achieve AC, working 

interpreters must create concepts that 

integrate their observations into 

logically sound theories. Lastly, to 

achieve AE, working interpreters must 

use these theories to make decisions and 

solve problems (Bentley-Sassaman, 

2014). 

According to Bentley-Sassaman 

(2014), the majority of learning for ASLEnglish interpreters takes place in the 

field, where they have hands-on 

experiences and the guidance of a 

mentor. Mentoring refines skills 

development through observation and 

reflection and builds on the experiential 

learning component. Under a mentor’s 

supervision, students have the 

opportunity to apply foundational 

knowledge and then gather feedback 

from their mentor and apply it to their 

next activity or interpretation 

assignment. 

Through the proposed priority, the 

Secretary intends to award one national 

project in each of the following 

specialty areas: (1) Increasing skills of 

novice interpreters, (2) trilingual 

interpreting (including Spanish) (i.e., 

language fluency in first, second, and 

third languages with one of the three 

languages being ASL), and (3) advanced 

skills for working interpreters. In 

addition, the Secretary intends to award 

four national projects in a fourth 

specialty area, a field-initiated project. 

With respect to Specialty Area (1) 

(increasing skills for novice 

interpreters), according to the National 

Interpreter Education Center (NIEC), 

challenges facing interpreter training 

and education programs are prevalent. 

In 2015, NIEC conducted a study to 

examine the disconnect between 

interpreter education and workreadiness (Cogen and Cokely, 2015). Its 

findings suggest that interpreter training 

and education programs have, in many 

instances, failed to produce ASL-fluent 

graduates. Graduates are generally 

unable to understand the English 

message and interpret it accurately from 

spoken English to ASL and from ASL to 

spoken English in a manner that is 

fluent and matches the source message 

in content, tone, and register. 

Data gathered from the 2015 NIEC 

trends survey and two needs 

assessments revealed that newly 

graduated interpreters have a limited 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
12138 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

working ability to communicate in ASL 

and that the gap between interpreter 

graduation and readiness to work 

continues to grow. Furthermore, trends 

survey data suggests that recent 

graduates from interpreter education 

programs do not have access to 

structured post-graduation pathways, 

which threatens work-readiness and 

puts interpreters and their future 

consumers at an increased risk (Cogen 

and Cokely, 2015). 

With respect to Specialty Area (2) 

(trilingual interpreting (including 

Spanish)), in 2015, the Census Bureau 

estimated that over 60 million U.S. 

residents speak a language other than 

English at home. In a 2018 study, the 

University of Texas at Austin examined 

60 interpreter training programs (ITPs) 

across nine States and one territory, 

with 31 programs responding, to 

examine the incorporation of curricula 

focused on Spanish language within 

interpreter settings in the U.S. (QuintoPozos et al., 2018). The study revealed 

that 90 percent of interpreter training 

program students were from nonEnglish speaking homes, 88 percent of 

whom were from Spanish speaking 

homes. Only 32 percent of respondents 

indicated that their ITP contained 

content and training on interpreting in 

settings where languages other than ASL 

and English are used. None of the ITPs 

surveyed offered certificates or degree 

programs specifically focused on 

languages other than ASL or English. 

The National Consortium for 

Interpreter Education Centers (NCIEC), 

funded by the Department, developed 

curricula for professional development 

in Spanish-influenced settings, and the 

National Multicultural Interpreter 

Program (NMIP) created curriculum for 

interpreters in multicultural and 

multilingual settings (Quinto-Pozos et 

al., 2018). The NCIEC and NMIP 

curricula are publicly available and free 

of cost. Survey results from the 

University of Texas at Austin indicated 

that only 45 percent of ITPs reported 

using NCIEC curricula, and only 33 

percent of ITPs reported using NMIP 

curriculum, respectively. Despite the 

accessibility of the curricula, only a 

minority of ITPs currently incorporate 

the content into their programs. We also 

believe there may be parts of the 

country where multiple languages are 

spoken by deaf individuals and 

individuals who are hard of hearing. 

Therefore, applicants may address 

multiple language combinations in their 

proposals. 

With respect to Specialty Area (3) 

(advanced skills for working 

interpreters), it is crucial for interpreters 

to continue to improve their working 

knowledge and skills and stay up to 

date on ethical considerations in 

interpreting. According to the RSA–911 

data, in program year (PY) 2019 

employment outcomes for individuals 

who are deaf, hard of hearing, and 

DeafBlind were 60 percent, 82 percent, 

and 47 percent, respectively. 

Employment outcomes for the overall 

population of individuals receiving VR 

services was 43 percent in PY 2019. As 

employment possibilities and 

opportunities for individuals who are 

deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind 

grow, more individuals are pursuing 

advanced degrees and working in 

specialized professions. Cogen and 

Cokely (2015) documented a notable 

increase in individuals who are deaf or 

hard of hearing and are pursuing careers 

in specialized areas such as law, 

medicine, engineering, and high-tech 

industry. For this reason, interpreters 

with advanced skills and knowledge of 

highly specialized terminology, 

discourse, and emerging areas of ASL 

are needed. Currently, it is difficult to 

find interpreters who have the 

knowledge and linguistic range in both 

English and ASL to interpret in highly 

specialized areas. The 2015 NIEC trends 

survey indicated that 87 percent of 

respondents found it difficult to find 

qualified interpreters (Schafer and 

Cokely, 2016). Furthermore, interpreters 

working in advanced and specialized 

professions must be trained and 

competent in ethical considerations of 

advanced study and specialized 

professions. 

With respect to Specialty Area (4) 

(field initiated), projects must be 

designed to develop training for 

interpreters in areas where no training 

currently exists, where the existing 

training is no longer current or relevant, 

or to enhance training in an area that 

has received increased emphasis under 

the Rehabilitation Act. Field-initiated 

topics that would not be eligible under 

this proposed priority and requirements 

include, for example, topics focusing on 

educational interpreting for prekindergarten (pre-k) to grade 12 students 

and other topics that are not related to 

interpreting for individuals receiving 

VR services. While there is emphasis in 

the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act (WIOA) on providing 

services and support to transition-age 

youth, the purpose of this program is to 

train interpreters to serve consumers in 

the rehabilitation process. The 

Department has other resources to 

support programs preparing pre-K to 

grade 12 personnel, including, for 

example, grant awards under the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act Personnel Preparation in Special 

Education, Early Intervention, and 

Related Services program, which 

includes funding to train personnel who 

serve school-age children with low 

incidence disabilities, such as visual 

impairments, hearing impairments, and 

simultaneous visual and hearing 

impairments. 

Under Specialty Area (4), the 

Department’s interest is in, but is not 

limited to, the following topic areas: 

Topic area (a) (interpreting in 

healthcare including interpreting for 

hard-to-serve populations) would 

address the increased need for 

interpreters within medical, behavioral, 

and mental health settings as well as 

settings where domestic violence or 

substance abuse issues are present. 

Individuals who are deaf, hard of 

hearing, and DeafBlind need access to 

both interpreting services and qualified 

interpreters trained in specialized 

medical settings. In the 2015 NCIEC 

Trends Report, 89 percent of 

respondents indicated that it is 

‘‘somewhat’’ to ‘‘very difficult’’ to find 

interpreters who have the skills, 

knowledge, and training to effectively 

serve individuals with mental health 

concerns (Cogen and Cokely, 2015). 

In 2009, a comparison report was 

developed reflecting a deaf consumer 

needs assessment from two composite 

groups (Cokely and Winston, 2009). 

Data was collected through 1,250 

electronic surveys from deaf consumers 

through the National Association for the 

Deaf (NAD). Data was also collected 

through focus group and interview 

sessions with 61 individual consumers 

not typically associated with NAD 

membership. In both composite groups, 

the highest number of respondents 

identified ‘‘health’’ settings as the most 

difficult, as well as the most important, 

for securing interpreting services. 

Cokely and Winston (2009) explain the 

need to better understand health-related 

sub-settings and the various factors that 

make it difficult to attain interpreter 

services in those settings so access to 

both interpreting services and qualified 

interpreters may be increased. 

Topic area (b) (interpreting for 

individuals who are DeafBlind) would 

build upon the 2016 grant to train 

interpreters to meet the growing needs 

of individuals who are DeafBlind and 

increase their autonomy and selfdetermination. Techniques for 

interpreting for individuals who are 

DeafBlind include, print on palm (POP), 

tactile sign language, tracking, tactile 

fingerspelling, Tadoma, pro-tactile 

American sign language (PTASL), and 

others. Interpreting for individuals who 

are DeafBlind is a skilled practice that 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 12139 

requires the expansion of the typical 

interpreter role. Qualified DeafBlind 

interpreters provide visual 

environmental information, modify the 

signing space, manage the distance 

between consumer and interpreter, 

regulate pacing, and understand the 

importance of appropriate clothing in 

accommodating individuals who are 

DeafBlind (Interpreter Resources, 2020). 

As of 2018, there were approximately 

150 Interpreter Training Programs in the 

United States, only six of which offered 

coursework dedicated to DeafBlind 

interpreting (DeafBlind Interpreting, 

2018). The lack of learning 

opportunities has yielded a very limited 

pool of interpreters with expertise in 

this specialization. Most ITP students 

exit educational programs with limited 

or no skills in the specialization 

(DeafBlind Interpreting, 2018). A grant 

under this topic area could focus on any 

one of the stated techniques for 

interpreting for individuals who are 

DeafBlind. 

Topic area (c) (atypical language 

interpreting) would build on the 2016 

grant to improve services for individuals 

who are not skilled users of ASL. At the 

time of this notice, 31 working 

interpreters have completed the 

program of study and induction, another 

19 have completed training, and 18 are 

engaged in induction. To date, 3,304 

working interpreters enrolled in selfdirected training with 1,121 having 

successfully completed at least one of 

the four modules. There is also a need 

to expand such services to the senior 

deaf population who may use older 

signs or suffer from dementia, and to 

individuals from foreign countries who 

do not yet use ASL fluently. 

For topic area (d) (other topics), 

applicants must demonstrate the need 

for the training in a proposed new topic 

area or, in areas for which there is 

existing training, demonstrate that the 

existing training is not adequately 

meeting the needs of interpreters 

working in the field of VR. 

Nothing in the proposed priority and 

requirements would alter an applicant’s 

or grantee’s obligations to comply with 

nondiscrimination requirements in the 

U.S. Constitution and Federal civil 

rights laws, including 

nondiscrimination on the basis of race 

or ethnicity, among other bases. 

References 

Bentley-Sassaman, J. ‘‘The Experiential 

Learning Theory and Interpreter 

Education.’’ International Journal of 

Interpreter Education. (2014): 62–67. 

Cogen, C., M.Ed., and Cokely, D. ‘‘Preparing 

Interpreters for Tomorrow: Report on a 

Study of Emerging Trends in Interpreting 

and Implications for Interpreter 

Education.’’ National Interpreter 

Education Center at Northeastern 

University. (2015). 

Cokely, D. and Winston, E. ‘‘Comparison 

Report. Phases I & II, Deaf Consumer 

Needs Assessment.’’ The National 

Consortium of Interpreter Education 

Centers. (2009): 18–22. 

‘‘DeafBlind Interpreting: Toward Effective 

Practice.’’ DeafBlind Interpreting 

National Training and Resource Center at 

Western Oregon University. (2018): 1– 

177. 

‘‘Interpreter Resources: Interpreters for the 

Deaf-Blind.’’ RIT Libraries. (2020) 

Quinto-Pozos, D., Martinez, M., Suarez, A., 

and Zech, R. ‘‘Beyond Bilingual 

Programming: Interpreter Education in 

the U.S. Amidst Increasing Linguistic 

Diversity.’’ International Journal of 

Interpreter Education. 10(1) (2018): 46– 

59. 

Schafer, T., MPA. MIP, Center Director, and 

Cokely, D., Ph.D., Principal Investigator, 

‘‘Report on the National Needs 

Assessment Initiative New ChallengesNeeded Challenges.’’ National Interpreter 

Education Center at Northeastern 

University. (March 2016). 

Proposed Priority 

The purpose of this proposed priority 

is to fund projects that provide training 

to working interpreters in one of four 

specialty areas to effectively meet the 

communication needs of individuals 

who are deaf or hard of hearing and 

individuals who are DeafBlind receiving 

VR services. The projects must achieve, 

at a minimum, the following outcomes: 

An increase in the number of 

interpreters who are trained to work 

with deaf VR consumers who require 

specialized interpreting; and an increase 

in the number of interpreters trained in 

specialty areas who obtain or advance in 

employment in the areas for which they 

were prepared. 

Application Requirements 

The Department proposes the 

following requirements for this activity. 

We may apply one or more of these 

requirements in any year in which this 

activity is in effect. RSA encourages 

innovative approaches to meet these 

requirements: 

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Significance of the Project,’’ how the 

proposed project will address the need 

for sign language interpreters in a 

specialty area. To address this 

requirement, applicants must: 

(1) Present applicable data 

demonstrating the need for interpreters 

in the specialty area for which training 

will be developed by the project and 

delivered in at least three distinct, 

noncontiguous geographic areas, which 

may include the U.S. Territories; 

(2) Present baseline data for the 

number or estimated number of working 

interpreters currently trained in the 

specialty area. In the event that an 

applicant proposes training in a new 

specialty area that does not currently 

exist or for which there are no baseline 

data, the applicant should provide an 

adequate explanation of the lack of 

reliable data and may report zero as a 

baseline; 

(3) Explain how the project will 

increase the number and quality of 

working interpreters in a specialty area 

who demonstrate the necessary 

competencies to meet the 

communication needs of individuals 

who are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

DeafBlind. To meet this requirement, 

the applicant must— 

(i) Identify competencies that working 

interpreters must demonstrate in order 

to provide high-quality services in the 

identified specialty area using practices 

that demonstrate a rationale or are based 

on instruction supported by evidence, 

when available; and 

(ii) Demonstrate that the identified 

competencies are based on practices 

that demonstrate a rationale or are 

supported by evidence that will result 

in effectively meeting the 

communication needs of individuals 

who are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

DeafBlind. 

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of Project Design,’’ how the 

proposed project will— 

(1) Develop a new training program or 

stand-alone modules and conduct a 

pilot by the end of the first year of the 

project. Applicants must provide 

justification in their application if they 

determine additional time may be 

necessary to fully develop and pilot the 

curricula before the end of the first year. 

The training program or stand-alone 

modules must contain remote learning 

(as defined in this priority) experiences 

that advance engagement and learning 

(e.g., synchronous and asynchronous 

professional learning, professional 

learning networks or communities, and 

coaching) that could also be 

incorporated into an existing 

baccalaureate or graduate degree ASLEnglish (or ASL-other spoken language) 

program, as appropriate. Applicants 

may choose to award continuing 

education credits (CEUs) or college or 

master’s level credits to participants in 

the training program. Applicants should 

note that while pre-service training is 

not the focus of this program, a variety 

of resources may be considered (such as 

available pre-service training material) 

that may inform, support, or strengthen 

the development of training for ASLVerDate Sep<11>2014 16:34 Mar 01, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02MRP1.SGM 02MRP1

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
12140 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

4When preparing outreach and recruitment 

materials, selection criteria for training programs, as 

well as criteria for selecting trainers employed 

under the grant, applicants should cast a wide net 

for participants of all races and not preclude 

participation based on race, color, or national 

origin. 

English interpreter training in 

specialized areas. 

(2) Deliver the training or stand-alone 

modules remotely to at least three 

distinct, noncontiguous geographic 

areas identified in paragraph (a)(1) of 

these application requirements in years 

two, three, four and five of the project. 

Applicants may also deliver in-person 

training, as appropriate, to support 

participants’ application of knowledge, 

skills, and competencies gained through 

online training. 

(3) Provide mentoring and coaching to 

participants, as needed. This may 

include, but is not limited to, one-onone instruction to address specific areas 

identified by an advisor as needing 

further practice, and providing written 

feedback from observed interpreting 

situations, from deaf consumers, from 

trained mentors, including written 

feedback from mentoring sessions, and 

from others, as appropriate; 

(4) Develop a self-directed track and 

make it available to the public for 

independent remote learning by the end 

of the second year of the project. 

Applicants must develop a curriculum 

guide for each module and make 

available relevant materials from the 

training program. Applicants may offer 

CEUs to participants who successfully 

complete the self-directed track; 

(5) Be based on current research and 

make use of practices that demonstrate 

a rationale or are supported by 

promising evidence (as defined in 34 

CFR 77.1). To meet this requirement, the 

applicant must describe— 

(i) How the proposed project will 

incorporate current research and 

practices that demonstrate a rationale or 

are supported by promising evidence in 

the development and delivery of 

training and in the development of 

products and materials; 

(ii) How the proposed project will 

ensure that working interpreters interact 

with individuals with disabilities who 

are deaf, hard of hearing, or DeafBlind 

and have a range of communication 

skills, from those with limited language 

skills to those with high-level, 

professional language skills, as 

appropriate. 

(c) In the narrative section of the 

application under ‘‘Quality of Project 

Services,’’ the applicant must— 

(1) Demonstrate how the project will 

ensure equal access and treatment for 

eligible project participants who are 

members of groups who have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability; 

(2) Describe the criteria that will be 

used to identify applicants for 

participation in the program, including 

any pre-assessments that may be used to 

determine the skill, knowledge base, 

and competence of the working 

interpreter; 

(3) Describe how the project will 

outreach 4 to working interpreters, 

especially working interpreters from 

rural areas, Indian Tribes, and 

traditionally underrepresented groups; 

(4) Describe how the project will 

provide feedback, resources, and next 

steps to applicants who may not be 

accepted into the program due to 

insufficient skills, knowledge base, and 

competence; 

(5) Describe the approach that will be 

used to enable more working 

interpreters to participate in and 

successfully complete the training 

program, specifically participants who 

need to work while in the program, have 

child care or elder care considerations, 

or live in geographically isolated areas; 

(6) Describe how the project will 

incorporate adult learning principles 

and practices that demonstrate a 

rationale or are supported by promising 

evidence for adult learners; 

(7) Demonstrate how the project is of 

sufficient scope, intensity, and duration 

to adequately prepare working 

interpreters in the identified specialty 

area of training. To address this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe how— 

(i) The components of the proposed 

project will support working 

interpreters’ acquisition and 

enhancement of the competencies 

identified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of these 

application requirements; 

(ii) The components of the project 

will provide working interpreters 

opportunities to apply their content 

knowledge in a variety of practical 

settings; 

(iii) The proposed project will 

establish induction experiences in the 

specialty area for participants as a 

requirement for completion in the 

training program. Applicants may 

determine the appropriate scope and 

length of time for the induction; 

(8) Demonstrate how the proposed 

project will actively engage 

representation from consumers, 

consumer organizations, and service 

providers, especially State VR agencies 

and their partners, interpreters, 

interpreter educators, and individuals 

who are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

DeafBlind in all aspects of the project; 

(9) Describe how the project will 

conduct dissemination, coordination, 

and communication activities. To meet 

this requirement, the applicant must— 

(i) Disseminate information to 

working interpreters about training 

available in specialized areas and to 

State VR agencies and their partners, 

American Job Centers, and other 

workforce partners about how to locate 

specialized interpreters in their State 

and local areas; 

(ii) Establish a state-of-the-art website 

or modify an existing website for 

communicating with participants and 

stakeholders and ensure that all material 

developed by the grant and posted on 

the website are accessible to individuals 

with disabilities in accordance with 

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973 and title II of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, as applicable. The 

website must provide a central location 

for all material related to the project, 

such as reports, training curricula, 

audiovisual materials, webinars, 

communities of practice, and other 

relevant material developed by the 

grant; 

(iii) Disseminate information about 

the project, including, but not limited 

to, products such as training curricula, 

presentations, reports, effective 

practices for training working 

interpreters in specialized areas, and 

other relevant information through the 

NCRTM; 

(iv) In the final year of the budget 

period, ensure that all training materials 

have been provided to the NCRTM and 

the website and IT platform can be 

sustained, or coordinate with RSA to 

transition the website to the NCRTM; 

(v) Establish one or more 

communities of practice in the specialty 

area of training that focuses on project 

activities in this priority and acts as a 

vehicle for communication and 

exchange of information among 

participants in the program and other 

relevant stakeholders; 

(vi) Communicate, collaborate, and 

coordinate with other relevant 

Department-funded projects, as 

applicable; 

(vii) Maintain ongoing 

communication with the RSA project 

officer and other RSA staff as required; 

and 

(viii) Communicate, collaborate, and 

coordinate, as appropriate, with key 

staff in State VR agencies, such as the 

State Coordinators for the Deaf; State 

and local partner programs; consumer 

organizations and associations, 

including those that represent 

individuals who are deaf, hard of 

hearing, or DeafBlind; and relevant RSA 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 12141 

partner organizations and associations; 

and 

(ix) Disseminate to baccalaureate or 

graduate degree ASL-English programs, 

as well as to relevant Departmentfunded programs and Federal partners, 

as applicable, the training material and 

products for incorporation into existing 

curricula, as well as products, effective 

practices for training working 

interpreters in specialized areas, 

challenges and solutions, results 

achieved, and lessons learned. To 

satisfy this requirement, the grantee 

must develop participant guides, 

implementation materials, toolkits, 

manuals, and other relevant material for 

interpreter educators and others, as 

appropriate, to incorporate or build into 

existing programs. 

(d) In the narrative section of the 

application under ‘‘Quality of the 

Evaluation Plan,’’ include an evaluation 

plan. To meet this requirement, the 

evaluation plan must describe— 

(1) Standards and targets for 

measuring the effectiveness of the 

program; 

(2) An approach for measuring 

knowledge, skills, and competencies 

before and after successful completion 

of training; 

(3) An approach for gathering 

information from participants about 

their knowledge of VR, estimated 

percentage of workload interpreting for 

VR consumers before specialty training, 

and estimated percentage of workload 

interpreting for VR consumers who are 

deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind 

after specialty training; 

(4) An approach for incorporating oral 

and written feedback from trainers and 

deaf consumers, and any feedback from 

coaching or mentoring sessions 

conducted with the participants; 

(5) Methodologies, including 

instruments, data collection methods, 

and analyses that will be used to 

evaluate the project and how the 

methods of evaluation will produce 

quantitative and qualitative data to 

demonstrate whether the project 

activities achieved their intended 

outcomes; 

(6) Measures of progress in 

implementation, including the extent to 

which the project activities and 

products have reached their intended 

recipients, measures of intended 

outcomes or results in order to evaluate 

those activities, and how well the goals 

and objectives of the proposed project, 

as described in the logic model (as 

defined in 34 CFR 77.1), have been met; 

and how well the goals and objectives 

of the proposed project, as described in 

its logic model have been met; 

(7) How the evaluation will be 

coordinated, implemented, and revised, 

as needed, during the project. The 

applicant must designate at least one 

individual with sufficient dedicated 

time, demonstrated experience in 

evaluation, and knowledge of the 

project to coordinate and conduct the 

evaluation. This may include, but is not 

limited to, making revisions post award 

in order to reflect any changes or 

clarifications, as needed, to the model 

and to the evaluation design and 

instrumentation with the logic model 

(e.g., designing instruments and 

developing quantitative or qualitative 

data collections that permit collecting of 

progress data and assessing project 

outcomes); 

(8) How evaluation results will be 

used to examine the effectiveness of the 

training. To address this requirement, 

applicants must provide an approach for 

determining— 

(i) What practice(s) was most effective 

in training working interpreters in the 

respective specialty area; and 

(ii) What practice(s) was most 

effective in narrowing working 

interpreters’ skill gaps and what data 

demonstrates the practice(s) was 

effective. 

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Adequacy of Project Resources,’’ 

how— 

(1) The proposed project will 

encourage applications for employment 

with the project from persons who are 

members of groups that have 

historically been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability; 

(2) Describe any proposed consultants 

or contractors named in the application, 

their areas of expertise, and provide a 

rationale to demonstrate the need; 

(3) Describe costs associated with 

technology, including, but not limited 

to, maintaining an online learning 

platform, state-of-the-art archiving and 

dissemination platform, and 

communication tools (i.e., Microsoft 

Teams, Zoom, Google, Amazon Chime, 

Skype, etc.) ensuring all products and 

services are accessible to individuals 

with disabilities in accordance with 

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973 and title II of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, as applicable, including 

costs associated with captioning and 

transcription services, and 

cybersecurity; and 

(4) The applicant and any identified 

partners have adequate resources to 

carry out the proposed activities. 

(f) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of the Management Plan,’’ how 

the applicant will ensure that— 

(1) The project’s intended outcomes, 

including the evaluation, will be 

achieved on time and within budget, 

through— 

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities of 

key project personnel, consultants, and 

contractors, as applicable; 

(ii) Procedures to track and ensure 

completion of the action steps, 

timelines, and milestones established 

for key project activities, requirements, 

and deliverables; 

(iii) Internal monitoring processes to 

ensure that the project is being 

implemented in accordance with the 

established application and project 

plan; and 

(iv) Internal financial management 

controls to ensure accurate and timely 

obligations, drawdowns, and reporting 

of grant funds, as well as monitoring 

contracts, in accordance with the 

Uniform Administrative Requirements, 

Cost Principles, and Audit 

Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 

CFR part 200 and the terms and 

conditions of the Federal award. 

(2) The allocation of key project 

personnel, consultants, and contractors, 

as applicable, including levels of effort 

of key personnel that are appropriate 

and adequate to achieve the project’s 

intended outcomes, including an 

assurance that key personnel will have 

enough availability to ensure timely 

communications with stakeholders and 

RSA; 

(3) The products and services are of 

high quality, relevance, and usefulness, 

in both content and delivery; 

(4) The proposed project will benefit 

from a diversity of perspectives; and 

(5) Projects will be operated in a 

manner consistent with 

nondiscrimination requirements 

contained in the U.S. Constitution and 

the Federal civil rights laws; 

(g) Address the following application 

requirements. The applicant must— 

(1) Include, in Appendix A, a logic 

model that depicts, at a minimum, the 

goals, activities, outputs, and short and 

long-term outcomes of the proposed 

project, and 

(2) Include, in Appendix A, personloading charts and timelines, as 

applicable, to illustrate the management 

plan described in the narrative. 

Types of Priorities 

When inviting applications for a 

competition using one or more 

priorities, we designate the type of each 

priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
12142 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Final Priority and Requirements 

We will announce the final priority 

and requirements in a document in the 

Federal Register. We will determine the 

final priority and requirements after 

considering responses to the proposed 

priority and requirements, and other 

information available to the Department. 

This document does not preclude us 

from proposing additional priorities, 

requirements, definitions, or selection 

criteria, subject to meeting applicable 

rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This document does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we 

choose to use the proposed priority and 

requirements, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) determines whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive order and subject to 

review by OMB. Section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 defines a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as an 

action likely to result in a rule that 

may— 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affect a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or Tribal governments or 

communities in a material way (also 

referred to as an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule); 

(2) Create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

stated in the Executive order. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this proposed 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

13563, which supplements and 

explicitly reaffirms the principles, 

structures, and definitions governing 

regulatory review established in 

Executive Order 12866. To the extent 

permitted by law, Executive Order 

13563 requires that an agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

upon a reasoned determination that 

their benefits justify their costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are proposing the priority and 

requirements only on a reasoned 

determination that their benefits would 

justify their costs. In choosing among 

alternative regulatory approaches, we 

selected those approaches that would 

maximize net benefits. Based on the 

analysis that follows, the Department 

believes that this regulatory action is 

consistent with the principles in 

Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and Tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. The costs 

would include the time and effort in 

responding to the priority and 

requirements for entities that choose to 

respond. In addition, we have 

considered the potential benefits of this 

regulatory action and have noted these 

benefits in the background section of 

this document. 

Clarity of the Regulations 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

Presidential memorandum ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing’’ 

require each agency to write regulations 

that are easy to understand. 

The Secretary invites comments on 

how to make the proposed priority and 

requirements easier to understand, 

including answers to questions such as 

the following: 

• Are the requirements in the 

proposed regulations clearly stated? 

• Do the proposed regulations contain 

technical terms or other wording that 

interferes with their clarity? 

• Does the format of the proposed 

regulations (grouping and order of 

sections, use of headings, paragraphing, 

etc.) aid or reduce their clarity? 

• Would the proposed regulations be 

easier to understand if we divided them 

into more (but shorter) sections? 

• Could the description of the 

proposed regulations in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this preamble be more helpful in 

making the proposed regulations easier 

to understand? If so, how? 

• What else could we do to make the 

proposed regulations easier to 

understand? 

To send any comments that concern 

how the Department could make these 

proposed regulations easier to 

understand, see the instructions in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Certification: The Secretary certifies that 

this proposed regulatory action would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The U.S. Small Business 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 39 / Tuesday, March 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules 12143 

Administration Size Standards define 

‘‘small entities’’ as for-profit or 

nonprofit institutions with total annual 

revenue below $7,000,000 or, if they are 

institutions controlled by small 

governmental jurisdictions (that are 

comprised of cities, counties, towns, 

townships, villages, school districts, or 

special districts), with a population of 

less than 50,000. 

The small entities that this proposed 

regulatory action would affect are public 

or private nonprofit agencies and 

organizations, including Indian Tribes 

and IHEs that may apply. We believe 

that the costs imposed on an applicant 

by the proposed priority and 

requirements would be limited to 

paperwork burden related to preparing 

an application and that the benefits of 

the proposed priority and requirements 

would outweigh any costs incurred by 

the applicant. There are very few 

entities that could provide the type of 

technical assistance required under the 

proposed priority and requirements. For 

these reasons, the proposed priority and 

requirements would not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: 

The proposed priority and requirements 

contain information collection 

requirements that are approved by OMB 

under OMB control number 1820–0018. 

The proposed priority and requirements 

do not affect the currently approved 

data collection. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

contact person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format. The Department 

will provide the requestor with an 

accessible format that may include Rich 

Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), 

a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc, or 

other accessible format. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. You may access the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Portable Document Format 

(PDF). To use PDF, you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

David Cantrell, 

Deputy Director, Office of Special Education 

Programs. Delegated the Authority To Perform 

the Functions and Duties of the Assistant 

Secretary for the Office of Special Education 

and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04369 Filed 2–26–21; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0459; FRL–10017– 

93–Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; FL; Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Infrastructure 

Elements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Florida State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted 

by the Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection (FDEP), 

Division of Air Resources Management, 

to EPA on August 26, 2020. The Clean 

Air Act (CAA or Act) requires that each 

state adopt and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each national ambient 

air quality standard (NAAQS) 

promulgated by EPA, commonly 

referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure SIP.’’ 

This submission addresses certain 

greenhouse gas (GHG) Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

permitting requirements for the 2008 

and 1997 8-hour ozone and the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. 

Additionally, EPA is proposing to 

convert the previous disapprovals of 

Florida’s infrastructure SIPs related to 

the CAA GHG PSD permitting 

requirements for the above NAAQS to 

full approvals. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 1, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2020–0459 at 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

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. 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, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pearlene Williams, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air and 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

The telephone number is (404) 562– 

9144. Ms. Williams can also be reached 

via electronic mail at 

williams.pearlene@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA, states are required to submit SIP 

revisions meeting the applicable 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) within 

three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS or within such 

shorter period as EPA may prescribe. 

Section 110(a)(2) requires states to 

address basic SIP elements such as 

requirements for monitoring, basic 

program requirements, and legal 

authority that are designed to assure 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS. States were previously 

required to submit such SIPs for the 

2008 and 1997 8-hour ozone and the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS to EPA within three years of 

promulgation of the respective NAAQS. 

This action only pertains to sections 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS