My read between the lines of "This revised framework will be based on the COVID-19 community levels, risk of new variants, national data, and the latest science." is that they're basing the policy on the "Community Transmission level" metric and not the newer "Community Level" metric. Along with looking at a national number instead of differences by locality.
Looking at the two maps, the first is still mostly Red/Orange compared to Yellow/Blue. Certainly a single national color would be more Red/Orange. That would match a policy of extending mask usage.
The second map is mostly Green/Yellow, so policy focused on this nationally could be different. It's a little squishy for Yellow so if you regroup it as Green vs Yellow/Orange the result would be different.
The statement is short, so it's not possible to tell if they're more concerned about staff or travelers. Someone like a bus driver or TSA screener would have a much larger exposure risk than someone transiting through. It could be as simple as they're most concerned about illness causing staff shortages and the easiest way to reduce staff illness is the increased protection of both the staff and travelers they encounter being masked. Combined with that it's easier to just extend the blanket policy than create a more targeted one that's different for different scenarios. Simple and consistent with the past vs nuanced and targeted, even if that means overdoing the use of masks. On the theory that over use requiring more often than necessary has less impact than under use.
Maybe it's just the second but they want to only use Green not Yellow to drop, plus a national metric. For instance, a bus driver going through the Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia tri-state area clearly has a higher risk than one someplace else.
So, just a big hedge that it's easier to extend and be sure than to drop and if changes bring it back.
