294 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the 

General Preamble for the Implementation of title I 

of the CAA Amendments of 1990 on April 16, 1992 

(see 57 FR 13498) and supplemented that guidance 

on April 28, 1992 (see 57 FR 18070). EPA has 

provided further guidance on processing 

redesignation requests in the following documents: 

1. ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value 

Calculations,’’ Memorandum from Bill Laxton, 

Director, Technical Support Division, June 18, 

1990; 2. ‘‘Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of 

Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, 

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 

30, 1992; 3. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Redesignations,’’ 

Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/ 

Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992; 

4. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, September 4, 1992 

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni 

Memorandum’’); 5. ‘‘State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air 

Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, October 28, 1992; 6. ‘‘Technical Support 

Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/ 

Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 

1993; 7. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for 

Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After November 

15, 1992,’’ Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, September 17, 1993 (hereinafter referred 

to as the ‘‘Shapiro Memorandum’’); 8. ‘‘Use of 

Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations 

for Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, 

Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 

1993; 9. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) 

Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation 

Dated: December 19, 2024. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30717 Filed 1–2–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2022–0789; FRL–10888– 

03–R4] 

Air Quality Designations; KY; 

Redesignation of the Kentucky Portion 

of the Louisville, KY-IN 2015 8-Hour 

Ozone Nonattainment Area to 

Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is withdrawing its 

proposed approval of the request to 

redesignate the Kentucky portion of the 

Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana, 2015 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment area 

(hereinafter referred to as the 

‘‘Louisville, KY-IN Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to 

attainment for the 2015 8-hour ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS or standards). EPA is 

withdrawing its April 18, 2023, 

proposed approval and is now 

proposing to deny Kentucky’s request to 

redesignate the Kentucky portion of the 

Area from nonattainment to attainment, 

based on the Area’s violation of the 

NAAQS. EPA is taking no action at this 

time on Kentucky’s maintenance plan, 

including the regional motor vehicle 

emission budgets for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and volatile organic compounds 

(VOC) for the years of 2019 and 2035, 

submitted with Kentucky’s 

redesignation request for the Louisville, 

KY-IN Area. The redesignation request 

and maintenance plan state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision were 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Kentucky, through the Kentucky Energy 

and Environment Cabinet (Cabinet), 

Division of Air Quality (DAQ), on 

September 6, 2022. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 3, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2022–0789 at http://

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 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah LaRocca, 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– 

8994. Ms. Sarah LaRocca can also be 

reached via electronic mail at 

larocca.sarah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On September 6, 2022, Kentucky 

submitted a request to redesignate the 

Kentucky portion of the Louisville, KYIN 2015 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

area from nonattainment to attainment. 

Accompanying Kentucky’s request for 

redesignation under Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) section 107(d)(3)(D) was a SIP 

revision containing a maintenance plan 

for the Area, as is required by CAA 

sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) and 175A in 

order for EPA to redesignate an area 

from nonattainment to attainment. On 

April 18, 2023, EPA proposed to take 

the following separate but related 

actions addressing the September 6, 

2022, submittal: (1) to approve 

Kentucky’s plan for maintaining the 

2015 ozone NAAQS (maintenance plan), 

including the associated motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (budgets) for the 

Louisville, KY-IN Area, and incorporate 

the plan into the SIP, and (2) to 

redesignate the Kentucky portion of the 

Area to attainment for the 2015 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA also notified the 

public of the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the budgets for the 

Area. The Louisville, KY-IN Area is 

composed of Bullitt, Jefferson, and 

Oldham Counties in Kentucky, and 

Clark and Floyd Counties in Indiana. 

These proposed actions are summarized 

below and described in greater detail in 

the notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) published on April 18, 2023. 

See 88 FR 23598. 

II. Criteria for Redesignation 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA prohibits the 

redesignation of such an area unless: (1) 

the EPA Administrator determines that 

the area has attained the applicable 

NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully 

approved the applicable 

implementation plan for the area under 

section 110(k); (3) the Administrator 

determines that the improvement in air 

quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

applicable SIP and applicable Federal 

air pollutant control regulations and 

other permanent and enforceable 

reductions; (4) the Administrator has 

fully approved a maintenance plan for 

the area as meeting the requirements of 

section 175A; and (5) the state 

containing such area has met all 

requirements applicable to the area for 

purposes of redesignation under section 

110 and part D of the CAA.1


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2025 / Proposed Rules 295 

to Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary D. 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, October 14, 1994 (hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘Nichols Memorandum’’); and 10. 

‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment 

Demonstration, and Related Requirements for 

Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ 

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995. 

2See, e.g., 59 FR 22757 (May 3, 1994) (denial of 

redesignation request for Richmond, VA); 62 FR 

49154 (September 19, 1997) (denial of redesignation 

request for Birmingham, AL); 61 FR 19193 (May 1, 

1996) (denial of redesignation request for 

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA); 61 FR 50718 

(September 27, 1996) (denial of redesignation 

request for the Kentucky portion of the CincinnatiHamilton KY-OH area); 84 FR 16214 (April 18, 

2019) (denial of redesignation request for the 

Wisconsin portion of the Chicago-Naperville, IL-INWI area). 

Regarding the first criterion’s 

requirement that the area ‘‘has attained’’ 

the relevant NAAQS, since the passage 

of the 1990 Amendments to the CAA, 

EPA has consistently read that provision 

to require continued attainment until 

EPA’s action redesignating the area, and 

to prohibit redesignation where an area 

violates the standard during the 

pendency of the Agency’s review of the 

state’s request. See Calcagni 

Memorandum at 5 (‘‘Regions should 

advise States of the practical planning 

consequences if EPA disapproves the 

redesignation request or if the request is 

invalidated because of violations 

recorded during the EPA’s review.’’) 

(emphasis added). The Agency’s 

interpretation of that provision is 

supported by the Act’s definition of 

attainment and nonattainment areas in 

CAA section 107(d)(1)(A), which 

defines a nonattainment area as ‘‘any 

area that does not meet’’ the NAAQS 

(CAA section 107(d)(1)(A)(i)) and an 

attainment area as ‘‘any area that meets’’ 

the NAAQS. The use of the present 

tense in CAA section 107(d)(1)(A) is 

consistent with the use of the present 

perfect tense in CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i), which tasks EPA with 

determining that an area ‘‘has attained’’ 

the NAAQS, as opposed to attaining at 

some previous time (e.g., ‘‘had attained) 

with subsequent violations. See 62 FR 

49154 (September 19, 1997) (laying out 

statutory analysis supporting EPA’s 

interpretation of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i) in denial of the 

Birmingham, AL 1-hour ozone 

redesignation request). EPA has applied 

this interpretation of the first attainment 

redesignation criterion in numerous 

redesignation actions.2

Courts have confirmed EPA’s 

interpretation of the first criterion in 

cases with factually similar 

circumstances to those present here. In 

Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth 

Alliance v. Browner, although denying 

the petitioner’s challenge based on their 

failure to preserve an issue for litigation, 

the Third Circuit laid out its agreement 

with EPA’s reading of the provisions. 

See 121 F.3d 106 (3d Cir. 1997). 

Petitioners there argued that EPA was 

not permitted to consider violations that 

occurred after the submission of its 

redesignation request (and in that case, 

violations that occurred after EPA’s 18- 

month statutory window to act on the 

state’s request, per CAA section 

107(d)(3)(D)). See id. at 111. The Court, 

in an opinion authored by then Judge 

Alito, wrote, ‘‘[e]ven if we were to reach 

the merits of petitioner’s argument, we 

would hold that 42 U.S.C. 7407(d)(3)(D) 

did not preclude the EPA from 

considering the summer 1995 

exceedance data. The language of the 

provision that enumerates the 

redesignation criteria tends to support 

this result. Under 42 U.S.C. 

7407(d)(3)(E)(i), the EPA Administrator 

‘may not’ promulgate a redesignation of 

a nonattainment area unless, among 

other things, ‘the Administrator 

determines that the area has attained the 

[NAAQS]. The use of the term ‘has 

attained’ instead of ‘attained’ may be 

interpreted as suggesting that the 

attainment must continue until the date 

of the redesignation.’’ Id. at 113. The 

Court further stated that it did not agree 

with petitioners that the mandatory 

window established by the Act for EPA 

to approve or deny a state’s 

redesignation request ‘‘conclusively 

indicate[s] that Congress intended to 

prohibit the EPA from taking action 

after the expiration of the statutorily 

specified time period.’’ Id. And finally, 

the Court signaled its agreement with 

the Agency that continued fulfillment of 

the first redesignation criterion is 

paramount to approving a state’s 

request: ‘‘Since 42 U.S.C. 

7407(d)(3)(E)(i) prohibits the EPA from 

redesignating an area that is not in 

attainment of the NAAQS, the EPA 

correctly denied Pennsylvania’s request 

for redesignation. . . . An area’s failure 

to attain a NAAQS is the most 

fundamental criterion in its designation 

as a nonattainment area.’’ Id. at 118 n.5. 

Similarly, the Sixth Circuit has 

interpreted the first redesignation 

criterion consistent with the Third 

Circuit and with EPA. In 

Commonwealth of Kentucky v. EPA, 

Kentucky argued that EPA should not 

have denied its request to redesignate its 

portion of the Cincinnati-Northern 

Kentucky OH-KY nonattainment area to 

attainment based on a ‘‘single violation 

in July 1995’’ when the area had 

measured clean data in ‘‘the period 

specified in the redesignation request, 

i.e., 1992–1994.’’ No. 96–4274, 1998 

U.S. App. LEXIS 21686, at 5–6 (6th Cir. 

Sept. 2, 1998). Similar to the Petitioner’s 

arguments in the Third Circuit case 

discussed above, Kentucky asserted that 

‘‘Congress could have been more clear if 

it had used the simple present tense 

(‘attains’) or the progressive present 

tense (‘is attaining’) to explicitly require 

continuing compliance.’’ Id. at 9. But 

the Court, agreeing with EPA, held that 

‘‘Congress also could have been more 

clear if it had used the simple past tense 

(‘attained’) to require a noncontinuing 

compliance. Congress declined both of 

these options and simply used the 

present perfect tense (‘has attained’). 

According to standard usage, the 

present perfect tense denotes past action 

with an abiding effect or continuing 

relevance. . . . Thus, the phrase ‘has 

attained,’ as the Third Circuit 

concluded, requires ‘that the attainment 

must continue until the date of 

redesignation.’ ’’ Id. (citation to Third 

Circuit decision omitted). The Sixth 

Circuit bolstered its reading of the first 

redesignation criterion by pointing to 

the Act’s requirements regarding 

maintenance. Id. at 10. 

Significantly, in both cases where 

parties challenged EPA’s interpretation 

that the first redesignation criterion 

requires continued attainment of the 

NAAQS through the Agency’s final 

action redesignating the area, the 

reviewing courts, ‘‘after applying all 

relevant interpretive tools, conclude[d]’’ 

that EPA’s reading was ‘‘best.’’ See 

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 

144 S. Ct. 2244, 2266 (2024). The Third 

Circuit and the Sixth Circuit opinions 

interpreting CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) 

only cited Chevron deference to the 

Agency as a backstop to their own 

examination of the text of the provision 

and conclusion about the best reading of 

the Act’s first redesignation criterion. 

See SPGA v. Browner, 121 F.3d at 113; 

Kentucky v. EPA, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 

21686, at 11. Those courts’ findings that 

the CAA redesignation provision 

‘‘requires that the attainment must 

continue until the date of 

redesignation’’ was made in the course 

of those courts ‘‘do[ing] their ordinary 

job of interpreting statutes,’’ ‘‘based on 

the traditional tools of statutory 

construction.’’ See Loper Bright, 144 S. 

Ct. at 2267–68. 

III. Kentucky’s Redesignation Request 

and SIP Revision 

On April 18, 2023, EPA proposed to 

approve Kentucky’s September 6, 2022, 

redesignation request and its 

maintenance plan SIP revision based, in 

part, on complete, quality-assured, and 

certified 2019–2021 design values for 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
296 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

3EPA’s full rationale for its proposed approval 

actions was provided in the NPRM. 

4On February 21, 2022, Indiana submitted a 

separate redesignation request and maintenance 

plan for its portion of the Louisville, KY-IN Area. 

On July 5, 2022, EPA approved the redesignation 

request and maintenance plan for the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville, KY-IN Area. See 87 FR 

39750. 

5The design value for an area is the highest 3- 

year average of the annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour ozone concentration recorded at 

any monitor in the area. 

6Final air quality design values for all criteria 

pollutants, including ozone, are available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values. 

These design values are calculated in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 50. 

each monitor in the Louisville, KY-IN 

Area.3 These design values are equal to 

or less than the level of the 2015 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and were the most 

current design values at the time of 

proposal. See 88 FR 23598. Consistent 

with its longstanding interpretation of 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i), EPA stated 

in the NPRM that the Agency would not 

take final action to approve the 

redesignation of the Kentucky portion of 

the Louisville, KY-IN Area if the threeyear design value for the Area exceeded 

the NAAQS prior to EPA’s finalization 

of the redesignation. See 88 FR at 23601. 

Although preliminary 2022 ozone 

monitoring data at the time of proposal 

indicated an attaining 2022 design value 

for the Louisville, KY-IN Area,4 the 

complete, quality-assured, and certified 

2021–2023 design value of 0.072 parts 

per million (ppm) exceeds the NAAQS 

as discussed below. 

IV. 2023 Violation of the NAAQS for 

Ozone in the Louisville, KY-IN Area 

For ozone, an area may be considered 

to be attaining the 2015 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS if it meets that standard, as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

50.19 and Appendix U of 40 CFR part 

50, based on three complete, 

consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To 

attain the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

the 3-year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ozone concentrations measured at each 

monitor within an area must not exceed 

0.070 ppm. Based on the data handling 

and reporting convention described in 

40 CFR part 50, Appendix U, the 2015 

8-hour ozone NAAQS are attained if the 

design value is 0.070 ppm or below. The 

data must be collected and qualityassured in accordance with 40 CFR part 

58 and recorded in EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS). 

EPA reviewed complete, qualityassured, and certified ozone monitoring 

data from monitoring stations in the 

Louisville, KY-IN Area for the 2015 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS for 2021 through 

2023, and the highest 3-year design 

value 5 for 2021–2023 for the Louisville, 

KY-IN Area is 0.072 ppm, which 

exceeds the standard of 0.070 ppm.6

Further, preliminary 2024 monitoring 

data indicates a 2022–2024 design value 

of 0.075 ppm for the Area. Therefore, 

the Louisville, KY-IN Area does not 

meet the first statutory criterion for 

redesignation to attainment of the 2015 

8-hour ozone NAAQS found in section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA. 

V. Public Comments Received on EPA’s 

April 18, 2023, Proposal 

EPA received three sets of adverse 

comments on the April 18, 2023, NPRM. 

Commenters asserted that the 

Louisville, KY-IN Area did not attain 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS with 2020–2022 

data, expressed concern regarding 

ambient air ozone exceedances, and 

stated that the reduction in emissions in 

the Area were not permanent and 

enforceable. As EPA is withdrawing its 

proposed approval of the redesignation 

request, the comments on the earlier 

proposal are moot. 

VI. Proposed Action 

EPA is withdrawing its April 18, 

2023, proposed approval of Kentucky’s 

request to redesignate the Kentucky 

portion of the Louisville, KY-IN 2015 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment area to 

attainment for the 2015 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. For the reasons provided in 

this notice, EPA is proposing to deny 

Kentucky’s September 6, 2022, 

redesignation request on the basis that 

the violations of the NAAQS 

experienced in the Area during the 

pendency of EPA’s review of the request 

demonstrate that the Area has not met 

the first redesignation criterion. EPA is 

not proposing to take action on the 

Commonwealth’s accompanying 

submissions to fulfill the other 

redesignation criteria, given its 

proposed denial of the request based on 

air quality data. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

This proposed action is not a 

significant regulatory action as defined 

in Executive Order 12866, as amended 

by Executive Order 14094, and is 

therefore not subject to a requirement 

for Executive Order 12866 review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This proposed action does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the PRA because it does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this proposed action will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

This proposed action will not impose 

any requirements on small entities 

because it merely proposes to deny a 

redesignation request as not meeting 

Federal requirements. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This proposed action does not contain 

an unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The proposed action 

imposes no enforceable duty on any 

state, local or tribal governments or the 

private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This proposed action does not have 

Federalism implications. It will not 

have substantial direct effects on the 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed action does not have 

tribal implications, as specified in 

Executive Order 13175, because the 

Area’s SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction, and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this proposed action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. Therefore, this 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2025 / Proposed Rules 297 

proposed action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it 

merely proposes to deny a redesignation 

request as not meeting Federal 

requirements. Furthermore, EPA’s 

Policy on Children’s Health does not 

apply to this proposed action. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211 because it is not 

a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This proposed action does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898 and Executive 

Order 14096: Federal Actions To 

Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations and Revitalizing Our 

Nation’s Commitment to Environmental 

Justice for All 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with EJ 

concerns to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law. 

Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our 

Nation’s Commitment to Environmental 

Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 

2023) builds on and supplements E.O. 

12898 and defines EJ as among other 

things, the ‘‘just treatment and 

meaningful involvement of all people 

regardless of income, race, color, 

national origin, or Tribal affiliation, or 

disability in agency decision-making 

and other Federal activities that affect 

human health and the environment.’’ 

Neither the Cabinet nor the Louisville 

Metro Air Pollution Control District 

evaluated EJ considerations as part of 

the Cabinet’s redesignation request; the 

CAA and applicable implementing 

regulations neither prohibit nor require 

an evaluation. EPA did not perform an 

EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in 

this proposed action. Consideration of 

EJ is not required as part of this 

proposed action, and there is no 

information in the record upon which 

this decision is based that is 

inconsistent with the stated goal of 

Executive Order 12898/14096 of 

achieving EJ for communities with EJ 

concerns. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: December 23, 2024. 

Jeaneanne Gettle, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2024–31617 Filed 1–2–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Parts 2, 7, 11, 12, and 39 

[FAR Case 2019–014, Docket No. FAR– 

2019–0014, Sequence No. 1] 

RIN 9000–AN97 

Federal Acquisition Regulation: 

Strengthening America’s 

Cybersecurity Workforce 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are 

proposing to amend the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to 

incorporate a framework for describing 

cybersecurity workforce knowledge and 

skill requirements used in contracts for 

information technology support services 

and cybersecurity support services in 

line with an Executive Order to enhance 

the cybersecurity workforce. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 

Secretariat Division at the address 

shown below on or before March 4, 

2025 to be considered in the formation 

of the final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

response to FAR Case 2019–014 to the 

Federal eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

‘‘FAR Case 2019–014’’. Select the link 

‘‘Comment Now’’ that corresponds with 

‘‘FAR Case 2019–014’’. Follow the 

instructions provided on the ‘‘Comment 

Now’’ screen. Please include your name, 

company name (if any), and ‘‘FAR Case 

2019–014’’ on your attached document. 

If your comment cannot be submitted 

using https://www.regulations.gov, call 

or email the points of contact in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 

this document for alternate instructions. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite ‘‘FAR Case 2019–014’’ in 

all correspondence related to this case. 

Comments received generally will be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal and/or business confidential 

information provided. Public comments 

may be submitted as an individual, as 

an organization, or anonymously (see 

frequently asked questions at https://

www.regulations.gov/faq). 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: For 

clarification of content, contact Ms. 

Malissa Jones, Procurement Analyst, at 

571–882–4687 or by email at 

malissa.jones@gsa.gov. For information 

pertaining to status, publication 

schedules, or alternate instructions for 

submitting comments if https://

www.regulations.gov cannot be used, 

contact the Regulatory Secretariat at 

202–501–4755 or GSARegSec@gsa.gov. 

Please cite ‘‘FAR Case 2019–014.’’ 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing 

to revise the FAR to incorporate the 

NICE Workforce Framework for 

Cybersecurity (NICE Framework), 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) Special Publication 

800–181 and additional tools to 

implement it at https://www.nist.gov/ 

nice/framework, for describing 

workforce knowledge and skill 

requirements used in contracts for 

information technology support services 

and cybersecurity support services in 

line with Executive Order (E.O.) 13870, 

America’s Cybersecurity Workforce. 

E.O. 13870 requires agencies to 

incorporate the NICE Framework, NIST 

Special Publication 800–181 into 

workforce knowledge and skill 

requirements used in contracts for 

information technology and 

cybersecurity services. DoD, GSA, and 

NASA are proposing to revise the FAR 

to ensure that when acquiring 

information technology support services 

or cybersecurity support services, 

agencies describe the cybersecurity 

workforce tasks, knowledge, skills, and 

work roles to align with the NICE 

Framework. 

The NICE Framework is a nationally 

focused resource that categorizes and 

describes cybersecurity work. The NICE 

Framework establishes a common 

language that defines and categorizes 

cybersecurity competency areas and 

work roles, including the knowledge 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1