8254 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 28, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 

February to November annually, and the 

industry will benefit from extension of 

the status quo, which will reduce the 

risk of shifting legal regimes and lack of 

clarity in the event the rule goes into 

effect and is later modified or altered by 

court order. 

If the court were to vacate, enjoin or 

modify the rule shortly before or after it 

otherwise would become effective, there 

would be costs associated with reverting 

back to the previous regulatory regime 

on short notice. It will be disruptive for 

the industry to change the structure of 

its shows and the list of prohibitions in 

the event of a shifting regulatory change, 

e.g., if the court decides in favor of 

plaintiffs in any material respect. It may 

also be disruptive to horse owners and 

trainers who do not know whether to 

sell, relinquish, or re-train their horses 

to compete in the flat-shod division 

while the litigation is pending. A 

postponement will preserve the existing 

status quo—a legal and regulatory 

regime that has applied for years prior 

to the effective date—and eliminate 

uncertainty for the duration of the 

postponement, providing predictability 

to the regulated industry for at least the 

beginning of the 2025 show season, 

which starts on or about February 28, 

2025. 

Given this legal uncertainty and the 

significant issues raised in the litigation, 

maintaining the status quo will avoid 

harm to the regulated industry, 

including plaintiffs and similarly 

situated stakeholders. Setting aside 

plaintiffs’ legal challenges to the rule, 

we also note that other stakeholders 

have requested a postponement of the 

effective date for related reasons arising 

from the impending show season and a 

lack of clarity as to how the rule will 

operate: For example, one stakeholder 

group has conveyed to the Agency that 

proceeding forward with the original 

implementation date will undermine 

confidence in the Agency, the rule, and 

the ability to enforce the rule in a fair 

and transparent manner. Among other 

concerns, the stakeholder cited 

significant confusion within the 

industry about the rule, and has 

received numerous questions and 

concerns on a daily basis. There are also 

questions regarding Agency resources 

and whether personnel and funding are 

sufficient to implement the new rule. In 

light of this lack of clarity, the 

stakeholder requested that the Agency 

consider a postponement of the effective 

date of the rule, in order to afford it an 

opportunity to work collaboratively 

with APHIS to ensure that the rule 

achieves its intended purpose. 

Like the harm to the industry of not 

issuing a postponement, as discussed 

above, there are significant costs to the 

Agency associated with a change in 

regulatory regimes (i.e., if the rule is 

enjoined), such as investments in 

training of personnel, resources required 

to conduct stakeholder outreach, and 

potentially disruptions to administrative 

enforcement actions. A sixty-day delay 

will provide the Agency additional time 

to assess the impact of any decision and 

respond accordingly. 

The Agency has considered the public 

interest in furthering the humane 

treatment of horses and the effect to the 

regulated industry and APHIS, as 

described above. Considering the harms 

associated with regulatory uncertainty 

against the limited duration of the 

postponement of the rule, APHIS has 

determined that the balance of harms 

weighs in favor of a 60-day 

postponement. In accordance with law, 

this postponement is made without a 

notice-and-comment period. Notice and 

comment is not required when an 

agency delays the effective date of a rule 

under section 705 of the APA because 

such a stay is not substantive 

rulemaking; it merely maintains the 

status quo to allow for judicial review. 

See Bauer v. DeVos, 325 F. Supp. 3d 74, 

106–07 (D.D.C. 2018); Sierra Club v. 

Jackson, 833 F. Supp. 2d 11, 28 (D.D.C. 

2012). 

This postponement likewise is in 

accordance with the Presidential 

Memorandum titled ‘‘Regulatory Freeze 

Pending Review’’ issued January 20, 

2025, which orders all agencies to 

consider postponing for 60 days the 

effective date of any rule that has not 

taken effect, for the purpose of 

reviewing any question of fact, law or 

policy that the rule raises. 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 705; 15 U.S.C. 1823– 

1825 and 1828; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 23rd day of 

January 2025. 

Bruce Summers, 

Acting Deputy Under Secretary, Marketing 

and Regulatory Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01836 Filed 1–24–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 51, 52, 81, and 751 

[FRL–12583–01–OA] 

Delay of Effective Date for 4 Final 

Regulations Published by the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Between November 29, 2024, and 

December 31, 2024 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective 

dates. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

memorandum of January 20, 2025, from 

President Donald J. Trump, entitled 

‘‘Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,’’ 

this action temporarily delays until 

March 21, 2025, the effective date of the 

regulations listed in the table below. 

EPA has initially identified 4 

regulations that meet the criteria in the 

memo and may identify additional 

regulations in subsequent notices. 

DATES: As of January 28, 2025, the 

effective date of the rules published at 

89 FR 102568 (12/17/2024), 89 FR 

95034 (11/29/2024), 89 FR 106357 (12/ 

30/2024), and 89 FR 107012 (12/31/ 

2024), are delayed to a new effective 

date of March 21, 2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Nickerson, Director, Office of 

Regulatory Policy and Management, 

Office of Policy, Mail code 1804, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460; (202) 566–0326; 

nickerson.william@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is 

taking this action in response to the 

memorandum of January 20, 2025, from 

the President, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Freeze Pending Review.’’ The 

memorandum directed the heads of 

Executive Departments and Agencies to 

consider postponing for sixty days from 

the date of the memorandum the 

effective date for any rules that have 

been published in the Federal Register 

but had not yet taken effect for the 

purpose of reviewing any questions of 

fact, law, and policy that the rules may 

raise. EPA is delaying the effective dates 

for the 4 regulations listed in the table 

below. The new effective date for these 

regulations is March 21, 2025. 

The EPA is taking this action, without 

opportunity for public comment and 

effective immediately, based on the 

good cause exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B) and 553(d)(3), in that seeking 

public comment is impracticable, 

unnecessary and contrary to the public 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 17 / Tuesday, January 28, 2025 / Rules and Regulations 8255 

interest. The temporary delay in 

effective dates until March 21, 2025, is 

necessary to give Agency officials the 

opportunity for further review and 

consideration of new regulations, 

consistent with the memorandum of the 

President, dated January 20, 2025. Given 

the imminence of the effective dates of 

these regulations, seeking prior public 

comment on this temporary delay is 

impractical, as well as contrary to the 

public interest in the orderly 

promulgation and implementation of 

regulations. In addition, to the extent 

any regulation below is an interpretive 

rule, general statement of policy, or rule 

of agency organization, procedure, or 

practice, it is exempt from notice and 

comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). 

For the foregoing reasons, the good 

cause exception in 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) 

also applies to EPA’s decision to make 

this action effectively immediately. 

Moreover, to the extent that extending 

the effective date of any of these rules 

would grant an exception or relieve a 

restriction, an exception also applies 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). 

Federal Register 

citation Title Publication date 

Original 

effective 

date 

New 

effective 

date 

89 FR 102568 .... Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation under the Toxic Substances Control 

Act (TSCA).

12/17/2024 1 1/16/2025 3/21/2025 

89 FR 95034 ...... Appendix W—Revisions to the Guideline on Air Quality Models ............... 11/29/2024 1/28/2025 3/21/2025 

89 FR 106357 .... Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Alton Township 2010 Sulfur Dioxide Redesignation and Maintenance Plan.12/30/2024 1/29/2025 3/21/2025 

89 FR 107012 .... Air Plan Revisions; California; Feather River Air Quality Management 

District.

12/31/2024 1/30/2025 3/21/2025 

1On December 17, 2024, EPA published a final rule under section 6(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2605(a)) to address the unreasonable risk of injury to health presented by trichloroethylene, with an effective date of January 16, 2025. Trichloroethylene 

(TCE); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 89 FR 102568 (Dec. 17, 2024). Thirteen petitions for review of that rule were 

filed in various Circuits of the United States Courts of Appeals. On January 13, 2025, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted a petitioner’s motion to temporarily stay the rule’s effective date. The petitions were then consolidated by the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation and transferred to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. By an order dated January 16, 2025, the Third Circuit left the temporary stay of the effective date in 

place pending briefing on whether the temporary stay of the effective date should remain in effect. Because of the decisions of the Fifth and 

Third Circuits, the rule never went into effect and is therefore also covered by the terms of the Regulatory Freeze Pending Review memorandum. 

Accordingly, the Agency includes this rule in this action. 

Where appropriate, the Agency may 

consider further delaying the effective 

dates of the above-referenced 

regulations beyond March 21, 2025. If 

the Agency were to do so, consistent 

with the memorandum of the President, 

the Agency would consider whether to 

propose any later effective date for 

public comment. 

James Payne, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01866 Filed 1–27–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION 

45 CFR Part 1611 

Income Level for Individuals Eligible 

for Assistance 

AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Legal Services 

Corporation (LSC) is required by law to 

establish maximum income levels for 

individuals eligible for legal assistance. 

This document updates the specified 

income levels to reflect the annual 

amendments to the Federal Poverty 

Guidelines issued by the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). 

DATES: Effective January 28, 2025. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stefanie K. Davis, Deputy General 

Counsel and Ethics Officer, Legal 

Services Corporation, 1825 I St. NW, 

Washington, DC 20006; (202) 295–1563; 

sdavis@lsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

1007(a)(2) of the Legal Services 

Corporation Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 

2996f(a)(2), requires LSC to establish 

maximum income levels for individuals 

eligible for legal assistance. Section 

1611.3(c) of LSC’s regulations 

establishes a maximum income level 

equivalent to 125% of the Federal 

Poverty Guidelines (Guidelines), which 

HHS is responsible for updating and 

issuing. 45 CFR 1611.3(c). 

Each year, LSC updates appendix A to 

45 CFR part 1611 to provide client 

income eligibility standards based on 

the most recent Guidelines. The figures 

for 2025, set out below, are equivalent 

to 125% of the Guidelines published by 

HHS on January 17, 2025. 

In addition, LSC is publishing a chart 

listing income levels that are 200% of 

the Guidelines. This chart is for 

reference purposes only as an aid to 

recipients in assessing the financial 

eligibility of an applicant whose income 

is greater than 125% of the applicable 

Guidelines amount, but less than 200% 

of the applicable Guidelines amount 

(and who may be found to be financially 

eligible under duly adopted exceptions 

to the annual income ceiling in 

accordance with 45 CFR 1611.3, 1611.4, 

and 1611.5). 

Except where there are minor 

variances due to rounding, the amount 

by which the guideline increases for 

each additional member of the 

household is a consistent amount. 

List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 1611 

Grant programs—law, Legal services. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

the Legal Services Corporation amends 

45 CFR part 1611 as follows: 

PART 1611—ELIGIBILITY 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1611 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2996g(e). 

■ 2. Revise appendix A to part 1611 to 

read as follows: 

Appendix A to Part 1611—Income 

Level for Individuals Eligible for 

Assistance 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1