31460 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 112 / Monday, June 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

relationship between the National 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it is consistent 

with the fundamental federalism 

principles and preemption requirements 

described in Executive Order 13132. 

Also, this proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175 (Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments) because it would not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

If you believe this proposed rule has 

implications for federalism or Indian 

tribes, please call or email the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this rule elsewhere in this 

preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Directive 023–01, Rev. 1, 

associated implementing instructions, 

and Environmental Planning 

COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which 

guide the Coast Guard in complying 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This proposed 

rule involves regulations establishing a 

security zone that would prohibit entry 

whenever an LNG carrier is moored at 

the facility. Normally such actions are 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph L60(a) of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 1. A 

preliminary Record of Environmental 

Consideration supporting this 

determination is available in the docket. 

For instructions on locating the docket, 

see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to call or email the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places, or vessels. 

V. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We view public participation as 

essential to effective rulemaking, and 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period. 

Your comment can help shape the 

outcome of this rulemaking. If you 

submit a comment, please include the 

docket number for this rulemaking, 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov. If your material 

cannot be submitted using https://

www.regulations.gov, call or email the 

person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

We accept anonymous comments. 

Comments we post to https://

www.regulations.gov will include any 

personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

submissions in response to this 

document, see DHS’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

Documents mentioned in this NPRM 

as being available in the docket, and 

public comments, will be in our online 

docket at https://www.regulations.gov 

and can be viewed by following that 

website’s instructions. We review all 

comments received, but we will only 

post comments that address the topic of 

the proposed rule. We may choose not 

to post off-topic, inappropriate, or 

duplicate comments that we receive. If 

you go to the online docket and sign up 

for email alerts, you will be notified 

when comments are posted or a final 

rule is published. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing 

to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise § 165.819(a)(1)(ii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.819 Security Zone; Sabine Bank 

Channel, Sabine Pass Channel and SabineNeches Waterway, TX. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Sabine Pass LNG, Cameron Parish, 

LA: (A) All mooring basin waters 

horeward of a line connecting the 

following points—beginning at the 

shoreline in position 29°44′34.7′′ N, 

093°52′29′′ W; then to a point at 

29°44′31.4′′ N, 093°52′26.4′′ W; then to 

a point at 29°44′25.2′′ N, 093°52′14.6′′ 

W; then to the shoreline at 29°44′24.4′′ 

N, 093°52′11.4′′ W. 

(B) All mooring basin waters 

shoreward of a line connecting the 

following points—beginning at the 

shoreline in position 29°44′23.4′′ N, 

093°52′10.3′′ W; then to a point at 

29°44′22.3′′ N, 093°52′9.8′′ W; then to a 

point at 29°44′18′′ N, 093°52′3.6′′ W; 

then to the shoreline at 29°44′17.4′′ N, 

093°52′2.3′′ W. 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 25, 2021. 

Molly A. Wike, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur. 

[FR Doc. 2021–11650 Filed 6–11–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0548; FRL–10023–49– 

OAR] 

Intended Air Quality Designations for 

the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards; Response to the 

July 10, 2020, Court Decision 

Addressing El Paso, Texas and Weld 

County, Colorado: Notification of 

Availability and Public Comment 

Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 112 / Monday, June 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules 31461 

ACTION: Notification of availability and 

public comment period. 

SUMMARY: This notification is hereby 

given that the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency) has posted on 

our public electronic docket and 

internet website revised responses to 

certain state designation 

recommendations for the 2015 Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) (2015 Ozone NAAQS). These 

responses include our intended 

designations for El Paso County, Texas 

(associated with the previously 

designated Don ̃ a Ana County, New 

Mexico nonattainment area) and Weld 

County, Colorado (associated with the 

Denver Metro/North Front Range, 

Colorado nonattainment area). The EPA 

invites the public to review and provide 

input on our intended designations 

during the comment period specified in 

the DATES section. The EPA sent its 

revised responses directly to the states 

of Texas and Colorado on or about May 

24, 2021. The EPA intends to make final 

designation determinations for the 

counties addressed by these responses 

no earlier than 120 days from the date 

the EPA notified the states of the 

Agency’s intended designations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 14, 2021. Please refer to 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

additional information on the comment 

period. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2017–0548, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Out of an abundance of caution for 

members of the public and our staff, the 

EPA Docket Center and Reading Room 

are closed to the public, with limited 

exceptions, to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket 

Center staff will continue to provide 

remote customer service via email, 

phone, and webform. We encourage the 

public to submit comments via https:// 

www.regulations.gov, as there may be a 

delay in processing mail and faxes. 

Hand deliveries and couriers may be 

received by scheduled appointment 

only. For further information on EPA 

Docket Center services and the current 

status, please visit us online at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to our public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., comments hosted 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-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general questions concerning this 

action, please contact Carla Oldham, 

U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, Air Quality Policy 

Division, C541A, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27709, telephone (919) 541– 

3347, email at oldham.carla@epa.gov or 

Andrew Leith, U.S. EPA, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, Air 

Quality Policy Division, C541A, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 

telephone (919) 541–1069, email at 

leith.andrew@epa.gov. The following 

EPA contacts can answer questions 

regarding areas in a particular EPA 

Regional office: 

Regional Office Contacts: 

Region VI—Carrie Paige (214) 665–6521, 

email at paige.carrie@epa.gov. 

Region VIII—Abby Fulton, (303) 312– 

6563, email at fulton.abby@epa.gov. 

The public may inspect the 

recommendations from the states and 

tribes, our recent letters notifying the 

affected states and tribes of our intended 

designations, and area-specific technical 

support information at the following 

locations: 

Regional offices Affected state(s) 

EPA Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Dallas, Texas 75270 ........................... New Mexico and Texas. 

EPA Region 8, Air Quality Planning Branch, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 

Denver, Colorado 80202.

Colorado. 

Most of the EPA offices are closed to 

reduce the risk of transmitting COVID– 

19, but staff remain available via 

telephone and email. The EPA 

encourages the public to review 

designation recommendations from 

states, our recent letters notifying the 

affected states of our intended 

designations, and area-specific technical 

support information online at https://

www.epa.gov/ozone-designations and in 

the public docket for these ozone 

designations at https://

www.regulations.gov under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0548. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What is the purpose of this action? 

The purpose of this notification of 

availability is to solicit input from 

interested parties other than states on 

the EPA’s recent revised responses to 

the state designation recommendations 

for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. These 

responses, and their supporting 

technical analyses, can be found at 

https://www.epa.gov/ozonedesignations and in the public docket 

for these ozone designations at https:// 

www.regulations.gov under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0548. 

On October 1, 2015, the EPA 

Administrator signed a notification of 

final rulemaking that revised the 

primary and secondary ozone NAAQS 

(80 FR 65292; October 26, 2015). The 

EPA established the revised primary 

and secondary ozone NAAQS at 0.070 

parts per million (ppm). The 2015 

Ozone NAAQS are met at an ambient air 

quality monitoring site when the 3-year 

average of the annual fourth highest 

daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration (i.e., the design value) is 

less than or equal to 0.070 ppm. The 

revised standards will improve public 

health protection, particularly for at-risk 

groups including children, older adults, 

people of all ages who have lung 

diseases such as asthma, and people 

who are active outdoors, especially 

outdoor workers. They also will 

improve the health of trees, plants and 

ecosystems. 

After the EPA promulgates a new or 

revised NAAQS, the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires the EPA to designate all 

areas of the country as either 

‘‘Nonattainment,’’ ‘‘Attainment,’’ or 

‘‘Unclassifiable,’’ for that NAAQS. The 

process for these initial designations is 

contained in CAA section 107(d)(1) (42 

U.S.C. 7407). After promulgation of a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
31462 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 112 / Monday, June 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

new or revised NAAQS, each governor 

or tribal leader has an opportunity to 

recommend air quality designations, 

including the appropriate boundaries 

for nonattainment areas, to the EPA. The 

EPA considers these recommendations 

as part of its duty to promulgate the 

formal area designations and boundaries 

for the new or revised NAAQS. By no 

later than 120 days prior to 

promulgating designations, the EPA is 

required to notify states, territories, and 

tribes, as appropriate, of any intended 

modifications to an area designation or 

boundary recommendation that the EPA 

deems necessary. Accordingly, the EPA 

designated all areas of the country as to 

whether they met, or did not meet, the 

NAAQS in three rounds, resulting in 52 

nonattainment areas. 

In Round 1 (82 FR 54232; November 

6, 2017), the EPA designated 2,646 

counties, two separate tribal areas and 

five territories as attainment/ 

unclassifiable, and one area as 

unclassifiable. In Round 2 (83 FR 25776; 

April 30, 2018), the EPA designated 51 

nonattainment areas, one unclassifiable 

area, and all remaining areas as 

attainment/unclassifiable, except for the 

eight counties in the San Antonio, Texas 

area. In Round 3 (83 FR 35136; July 17, 

2018), the EPA designated one county in 

the San Antonio area as nonattainment 

and the other seven counties as 

attainment/unclassifiable. 

Several environmental and public 

health advocacy groups, three local 

government agencies, and the state of 

Illinois filed a total of six petitions for 

review challenging the EPA’s 2015 

ozone NAAQS designations 

promulgated on April 30, 2018. The 

District of Columbia Circuit Court 

consolidated the petitions into a single 

case, Clean Wisconsin v. EPA, 964 F.3d 

1145 (D.C. Cir. 2020). Collectively, the 

petitioners challenged aspects of the 

EPA’s final designations associated with 

nine nonattainment areas. The 

petitioners primarily argued that the 

EPA improperly designated counties (in 

whole or part) as attainment that should 

have been designated as nonattainment 

because of contribution to nearby 

counties with violating monitors. In its 

response brief, the EPA requested 

voluntary remand of the final 

designation decisions for ten counties 

associated with four nonattainment 

areas to further review those 

designations. 

On July 10, 2020, the District of 

Columbia Circuit Court granted the 

EPA’s requests for voluntary remand 

and remanded several other counties. In 

total, the Court remanded 16 counties 

associated with nine nonattainment 

areas back to the EPA, including nearby 

counties that EPA designated as 

attainment. The Court did not vacate the 

initial April 30, 2018 designations, but 

required the EPA to ‘‘issue revised 

designations as expeditiously as 

practicable.’’ In light of the Court 

decision, the EPA re-evaluated the 

existing technical record that was used 

for the initial April 2018 designations, 

to support either revising or reaffirming 

the designations for these areas. 

The EPA is responding to this remand 

through two separate Federal Register 

documents. The first document, signed 

on May 24, 2021, finalizes designation 

decisions for 14 counties. EPA’s 

December 2017 initial designations and 

April 2018 final designations aligned 

with Texas’ and Colorado’s 

recommendations for El Paso and Weld 

Counties, respectively, and so, at that 

time, the EPA had no need to, and did 

not, notify the two states that the 

Agency planned to modify the states’ 

recommendations. However, the EPA’s 

intended designations for those areas in 

response to the court’s remand would 

modify the states’ recommendations. As 

such, the EPA is acting consistently 

with the CAA requirement that the EPA 

notify the relevant states and allow 

them to ‘‘demonstrate why any 

proposed modification is 

inappropriate,’’ and is undertaking a 

120-day process. 

In the EPA’s April 2018 final 

designations, the intended boundary for 

the El Paso-Las Cruces nonattainment 

area only contained the southeastern 

portion of Don ̃ a Ana County, New 

Mexico, and so was called the ‘‘Don ̃ a 

Ana County, New Mexico’’ 

nonattainment area in that final action. 

The EPA’s intended modification of 

Texas’s attainment recommendation 

would expand the boundary of the 

nonattainment area to include multiple 

counties and thus, become a multi-state 

nonattainment area. As such, in keeping 

with the EPA practices, the Agency 

intends to name the nonattainment area 

based on the Combined Statistical Area 

that comprised its area of analysis. 

II. Instructions for Submitting Public 

Comments and Internet Website for 

Rulemaking Information 

A. Invitation to Comment 

The purpose of this document is to 

solicit input from interested parties, 

other than the states to which we have 

sent notification letters, on the EPA’s 

recent responses to the designation 

recommendations for the 2015 Ozone 

NAAQS. These responses, and their 

supporting technical analyses, can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/ozonedesignations and in the public docket 

for these ozone designations at Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0548. The 

EPA Docket Office can be contacted at 

(202) 566–1744, and is located at EPA 

Docket Center Reading Room, WJC West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. 

However, as noted earlier, the EPA 

Docket Center and Reading Room are 

closed to the public, with limited 

exceptions, to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket 

Center staff will continue to provide 

remote customer service via email, 

phone, and webform. We encourage the 

public to submit comments via https:// 

www.regulations.gov, as there may be a 

delay in processing mail and faxes. 

Hand deliveries and couriers may be 

received by scheduled appointment 

only. For further information on EPA 

Docket Center services and the current 

status, please visit us online at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

CAA section 107(d)(1) provides a 

process for air quality designations that 

involves recommendations by states, 

territories, and tribes to the EPA and 

responses from the EPA to those parties, 

prior to the EPA promulgating final area 

designations and boundaries. The EPA 

is not required under the CAA section 

107(d)(1) to seek public comment 

during the designation process, but we 

are electing to do so for these areas with 

respect to the 2015 Ozone NAAQS to 

gather additional information for the 

EPA to consider before making final 

designations for the specific areas 

addressed in the EPA’s recent letters to 

states and tribes. The EPA is basing its 

final designations decisions on data and 

information contained in the existing 

designations record. As such, the EPA 

will not consider new information 

submitted by states or during the public 

comment process that is not a part of the 

existing record, although EPA will 

consider new analysis based on the 

existing record. The EPA’s reliance on 

the existing record to support the 

designations is reasonable in light of the 

circumstances. The CAA does not 

specify what data the Agency must rely 

on in re-promulgating designations 

upon remand from a court. As such, the 

EPA’s reasonable reliance on the 

existing record reflects the EPA’s 

dedication to national consistency and 

the specific direction of the court in 

Clean Wisconsin: ‘‘to issue revised 

designations as expeditiously as 

practicable’’ in responding to the 

remand. 

Section 107(d) of the CAA lays out a 

particular timeline for designations 

decisions to be made, triggered from the 

date a NAAQS is promulgated. For the 

2015 ozone NAAQS, the designation of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 112 / Monday, June 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules 31463 

1Catawba County v. EPA, 571 F.3d 20, 51 (D.C. 

Cir. 2009); see also Mississippi Comm’n v. EPA, 790 

F.3d 138, 160 (D.C. Cir. 2015). 

every area of the country apart from 

those remanded to the Agency relied on 

the existing record. As the D.C. Circuit 

stated in previous cases reviewing 

EPA’s designations decisions, 

‘‘inconsistency is the hallmark of 

arbitrary agency action.’’ 1 Relying on 

the data available to the Agency at the 

time of the April 2018 designations 

action would prevent inconsistent 

treatment between the remanded 

counties and every other area of the 

country. In addition, this action 

proposes to expand the boundaries of 

existing nonattainment areas but does 

not create any new nonattainment areas. 

Understanding that it is important to 

treat areas across the country 

consistently, it is that much more 

important that EPA treat different 

portions of the same nonattainment area 

consistently. For example, in this action 

the EPA is proposing to expand the 

boundary of the Denver Metro/North 

Front Range, Colorado nonattainment 

area to include the entirety of Weld 

County, rather than excluding the 

northern portion of the county. It would 

be illogical in this type of situation for 

the Agency to use one set of data (e.g., 

2014–2016 design values) for the 

previously-designated portion of the 

nonattainment area, which includes 

seven full and two partial counties, and 

a different set (e.g., 2017–2019 or 2018– 

2020 design values) for the new portion 

of Weld County. 

The D.C. Circuit’s direction to act ‘‘as 

expeditiously as practicable’’ also 

weighs in favor of using the existing 

record. Gathering and analyzing new 

data would necessarily have taken much 

longer, especially because a large 

portion of the data the EPA generally 

relies upon in its designations decisionmaking process is obtained outside the 

Agency, including from states. 

Treating different portions of the same 

nonattainment area consistently also 

applies to the attainment date for the 

Denver Metro/North Front Range, 

Colorado and El Paso-Las Cruces 

nonattainment areas. 

The EPA invites public input on our 

responses to states regarding these areas 

during the 30-day comment period 

provided in this notification. To receive 

full consideration, input from the public 

must be submitted to the docket by July 

14, 2021. This notification and 

opportunity for public comment does 

not affect any rights or obligations of 

any state, or tribe, or of the EPA, which 

might otherwise exist pursuant to the 

CAA section 107(d). 

Please refer to the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section in this 

document for specific instructions on 

submitting comments and locating 

relevant public documents. 

In establishing nonattainment area 

boundaries for a particular area, CAA 

section 107(d)(1)(A) requires the EPA to 

include within the boundaries both the 

area that does not meet the standard and 

any nearby area contributing to ambient 

air quality in the area that does not meet 

the NAAQS. We are particularly 

interested in receiving comments using 

data in the existing record that support 

a position that a specific geographic area 

should not be categorized as full county 

nonattainment. The EPA encourages 

commenters to support their feedback 

using relevant information addressing 

the CAA section 107(d)(1)(A) criteria. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible. 

• Provide your input by the comment 

period deadline identified. 

The EPA intends to make final 

designation determinations for the 

counties addressed by these responses 

as expeditiously as practicable, but no 

earlier than 120 days from the date the 

EPA notified the states of the Agency’s 

intended designations. This would 

complete the designation process for the 

2015 Ozone NAAQS. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI 

information to the EPA through https:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI in a 

disk or CD ROM that you mail to the 

EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD 

ROM as CBI and then identify 

electronically within the disk or CD 

ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

part 2. Send or deliver information 

identified as CBI only to the following 

address: Tiffany Purifoy, OAQPS CBI 

Officer, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Mail Code 

C404–02, Research Triangle Park, NC 

27711, telephone (919) 541–0878, email 

at purifoy.tiffany@epa.gov, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2017– 

0548. There will be a delay in 

confirming receipt of CBI packages, 

because the EPA–RTP office is closed to 

reduce the risk of transmitting COVID– 

19. Due to the office closure, EPA is also 

requesting that parties notify the 

OAQPS Document Control Officer via 

telephone, (919) 541–0878, or email at 

purifoy.tiffany@epa.gov when mailing 

information identified as CBI. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

C. Where can I find additional 

information for this rulemaking? 

The EPA has also established a 

website for this rulemaking at https://

www.epa.gov/ozone-designations. The 

website includes the state, territorial 

and tribal recommendations, the EPA’s 

intended area designations, information 

supporting the EPA’s preliminary 

designation decisions, the EPA’s 

designation guidance for the 2015 

Ozone NAAQS, as well as the 

rulemaking actions and other related 

information that the public may find 

useful. 

D. Clean Air Act Section 307(b) 

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA governs 

judicial review of final actions by the 

EPA. This section provides, in part, that 

petitions for review must be filed in the 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit: (i) When the Agency 

action consists of ‘‘nationally applicable 

regulations promulgated, or final action 

taken, by the Administrator,’’ or (ii) 

when such action is locally or regionally 

applicable, ‘‘if such action is based on 

a determination of nationwide scope or 

effect and if in taking such action the 

Administrator finds and publishes that 

such action is based on such a 

determination.’’ For locally or regionally 

applicable final actions, the CAA 

reserves to EPA complete discretion 

whether to invoke the exception in (ii). 

If finalized, the action designating the 

two areas discussed in this notification 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS would be 

‘‘nationally applicable’’ within the 

meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). If 

EPA takes final action designating these 

two areas, in the alternative, the 

Administrator intends to exercise the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
31464 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 112 / Monday, June 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

2 In deciding whether to invoke the exception by 

making and publishing a finding that a final action 

on these designations is based on a determination 

of nationwide scope or effect, the Administrator 

will also take into account a number of policy 

considerations, including his judgment balancing 

the benefit of obtaining the D.C. Circuit’s 

authoritative centralized review versus allowing 

development of the issue in other contexts and the 

best use of Agency resources. 

3 In the report on the 1977 Amendments that 

revised section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress 

noted that the Administrator’s determination that 

the ‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ exception applies 

would be appropriate for any action that has a 

scope or effect beyond a single judicial circuit. See 

H.R. Rep. No. 95–294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 

U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402–03. Further, the EPA’s intended 

action is in response to a remand from the D.C. 

Circuit. As is the case with the EPA’s intended 

action on these two designations, challenges to the 

EPA’s original action were heard in the D.C. Circuit 

because the action was nationally applicable and, 

in the alternative, the EPA made and published a 

finding that the action was based on a 

determination of nationwide scope or effect. 

complete discretion afforded to him 

under the CAA to make and publish a 

finding that the final action (to the 

extent a court finds the action to be 

locally or regionally applicable) is based 

on a determination of ‘‘nationwide 

scope or effect’’ within the meaning of 

CAA section 307(b)(1).2 If EPA finalizes 

this action, it will designate two areas 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, located in 

two non-adjacent states, in two different 

EPA regions, and in two different 

federal judicial circuits, that were 

remanded to EPA by the D.C. Circuit 

Court of Appeals.3 It would apply a 

uniform, nationwide analytical method 

and interpretation of CAA section 

107(d)(1) to these areas across the 

country in a single final action, and the 

final action would be based on this 

common core of determinations. More 

specifically, for example, the final 

action would be based on a 

determination by the EPA to evaluate 

areas nationwide under a common five 

factor analysis in determining whether 

areas were in violation of or 

contributing to an area in violation of 

the 2015 Ozone NAAQS at the time of 

the April 2018 designations final action. 

Panagiotis Tsirigotis, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. 

[FR Doc. 2021–11456 Filed 6–11–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Chapter 1 

[WC Docket No. 18–89; DA 21–607; FR ID 

31200] 

Wireline Competition Bureau Seeks 

Comment on Secure and Trusted 

Communications Networks 

Reimbursement Program Application 

Filings and Process 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) 

seeks comment on the proposed 

application filing process for the $1.9 

billion Secure and Trusted 

Communications Networks 

Reimbursement Program 

(Reimbursement Program). The Bureau 

also seeks comment on proposed 

information fields to be collected on 

forms eligible providers of advanced 

communications services will be 

required to submit to request funding 

allocations and disbursements from the 

Reimbursement Program. 

DATES: Comments due by June 23, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 

1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 

interested parties may submit 

comments, identified by WC Docket No. 

20–89, and must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission by any of the following 

methods: 

• Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the internet by 

accessing the ECFS: https://

www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. 

• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. 

• Filings can be sent by commercial 

overnight courier or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 

Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 

20701. 

• U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 45 L Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20554. 

• Effective March 19, 2020, and until 

further notice, the Commission no 

longer accepts any hand or messenger 

delivered filings at its headquarters. 

This is a temporary measure taken to 

help protect the health and safety of 

individuals, and to mitigate the 

transmission of COVID–19. See FCC 

Announces Closure of FCC 

Headquarters Open Window and 

Change in Hand-Delivery Policy, Public 

Notice, DA 20–304 (March 19, 2020), 

https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcccloses-headquarters-open-window-andchanges-hand-delivery-policy. 

• People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (Braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Koves, Wireline 

Competition Bureau, 202–418–7400 or 

by emailing supplychain@fcc.gov. The 

Commission ask that requests for 

accommodations be made as soon as 

possible in order to allow the agency to 

satisfy such requests whenever possible. 

Send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer and Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at (202) 418–0530. For 

additional information on this matter, 

please email supplychain@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s document 

(Public Notice), in WC Docket No. 18– 

89; DA 21–607, released May 24, 2021. 

Due to the COVID–19 pandemic, the 

Commission’s headquarters will be 

closed to the general public until further 

notice. The full text of this document is 

available at the following internet 

address: https://www.fcc.gov/document/ 

wcb-seeks-comment-supply-chainreimbursement-program-procedures. 

I. Introduction 

1. By the Public Notice, the Wireline 

Competition Bureau (Bureau) provides 

additional details and seeks comments 

on the proposed application filing 

process for the Reimbursement Program. 

The Bureau also seeks comments on 

proposed information fields to be 

collected on forms eligible providers of 

advanced communications services will 

be required to submit to request funding 

allocations and disbursements from the 

Reimbursement Program. 

II. Discussion 

2. FCC Form 5640—Application 

Request for Funding Allocation and 

Reimbursement Claim Requests. The 

Commission describes the proposed 

approach to process and review 

application requests for funding 

allocations submitted by applicants and 

reimbursement claim requests 

submitted by participants. The 

Commission proposes to issue 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1