Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 68367 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by January 13, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking action. This 

rulemaking action to remove Virginia’s 

NLEV program from the Virginia SIP 

may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce its requirements. 

(See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: September 30, 2013. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart VV—Virginia 

■ 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by removing the entries 

for 9 VAC 5 Chapter 200 ‘‘National Low 

Emission Vehicle Program’’ in its 

entirety. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27029 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0997; FRL–9901– 

38–Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Ohio NOX SIP Call Rule Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: On November 15, 2010, Ohio 

EPA submitted to EPA revisions to Ohio 

OAC 3745–14. EPA is approving these 

revisions under the Clean Air Act, 

which allows for Ohio’s Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program rules to 

supersede Ohio’s nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call 

Budget Trading Program rules, but leave 

other requirements of the NOX SIP Call 

in place for units not covered by CAIR. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 13, 

2014, unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by December 16, 2013. If 

adverse comments are received, EPA 

will publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2010–0997, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
68368 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, 

Chief, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional Office official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2010– 

0997. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Sarah 

Arra, Environmental Scientist, at (312) 

886–9401 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401, 

Arra.Sarah@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Background 

II. Analysis of Ohio’s SIP Revisions 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), 

EPA published the ‘‘Finding of 

Significant Contribution and 

Rulemaking for Certain States in the 

Ozone Transport Assessment Group 

Region for Purposes of Reducing 

Regional Transport of Ozone,’’ 

commonly referred to as the NOX SIP 

Call. Under the NOX SIP Call, 22 states 

and the District of Columbia, including 

Ohio, were required to submit plans 

reducing NOX emissions to reduce 

ozone transport throughout the eastern 

half of the United States. The 

obligations of the rule could be met 

through a cap and trade program for 

NOX emissions (referred to as the NOX

Budget Trading Program) for large 

electric generating units (EGUs) and 

other large boilers and turbines (nonEGUs), along with controls on cement 

kilns and large internal combustion 

engines. Under the NOX SIP Call, states 

have flexibility in determining where 

NOX emission reductions are achieved 

and can choose other ways to comply. 

For the most part, states found that 

EGUs and other large industrial boilers, 

cement kilns, and internal combustion 

engines were the most cost-effective 

sources for NOX emissions reductions. 

On May 12, 2005 (70 CFR 25162), 

EPA published the ‘‘Rule to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate 

Matter and Ozone,’’ commonly known 

as the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). 

This rule required 28 states and the 

District of Columbia to submit plans 

reducing NOX and sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

emissions to reduce the interstate 

transport of ozone and fine particulates. 

Each state generally has separate 

budgets for ozone season NOX, annual 

NOX, and annual SO2 emissions. For 

each covered pollutant, the state must 

achieve the required emission 

reductions either by requiring EGUs 

(and large non-EGUs in the case of 

ozone season NOX) to participate in an 

EPA-administered interstate cap and 

trade system that caps emissions in two 

stages, or by meeting an individual state 

emissions budget through measures of 

the state’s choosing. CAIR includes a 

NOX Ozone Season Trading Program 

that supersedes the NOx Budget Trading 

Program. States subject to both the NOX

SIP Call and CAIR’s ozone season NOX

requirements (including Ohio) could 

choose to participate in the CAIR NOX

Ozone Season Trading Program and in 

so doing satisfy the requirements of the 

NOX SIP Call with regard to EGUs and 

large non-EGUs. In 2008, the D.C. 

Circuit Court of Appeals remanded 

CAIR to EPA but left the rule in place 

pending its replacement. North Carolina 

v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir.), 

modified, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 

2008). 

In response to the remand of CAIR, on 

August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), EPA 

published the ‘‘Federal Implementation 

Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particulate Matter and Ozone and 

Correction of SIP Approvals,’’ 

commonly known as the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR). CSAPR 

addresses interstate transport of ozone 

and fine particulates by setting state 

budgets for 28 states, including Ohio, 

for ozone season NOX, annual NOX, and 

annual SO2 emissions. CSAPR also 

establishes emissions trading programs 

that would replace the CAIR emissions 

trading programs. On August 21, 2012, 

the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 

vacated CSAPR, and ordered EPA to 

continue implementing CAIR in the 

interim. On June 24, 2013, the U.S. 

Supreme Court granted EPA’s petition 

for certiorari and agreed to review the 

decision by the D.C. Circuit Court. EME 

Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 

F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), cert. granted, 81 

U.S.L.W. 3702 (U.S. June 24, 2013) (No. 

12–1182). In the meantime, and unless 

the EME Homer City decision is 

reversed or otherwise modified by the 

Supreme Court, CAIR remains in place 

and EPA intends to act in accordance 

with the D.C. Circuit opinion in EME 

Homer City. 

II. Analysis of Ohio’s SIP Revisions 

On November 15, 2010, Ohio EPA 

submitted to EPA revisions to Ohio 

OAC 3745–14, the chapter containing 

Ohio’s rules for the NOX SIP Call. The 

revisions were specifically in sections 

3745–14–01 and 3745–14–06, and allow 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 68369 

for Ohio’s CAIR NOX Ozone Season 

Trading Program rules to supersede 

Ohio’s NOX Budget Trading Program 

rules. Although Ohio submitted these 

revisions before the promulgation of 

CSAPR, the revisions are still relevant 

given the continuing implementation of 

CAIR. 

The first revision adds a subsection to 

OAC 3745–14–01 which allows units 

subject to OAC 3745–109, Ohio’s CAIR 

rules, to be exempt from Ohio’s NOX

Budget Trading Program rules. In 

context, the new subsection states, ‘‘(2) 

The following units shall be exempt 

from the requirements of the NOX

budget trading program: (a) Any unit to 

which Chapter 3745–109 of the 

Administrative Code applies.’’ (OAC 

3745–14–01(C)) (emphasis added 

showing new language). Because 

participation in the CAIR NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program satisfies the 

NOX SIP Call for EGUs and large nonEGUs, units subject to CAIR would not 

need additional rules under the NOX

SIP Call. Also, Ohio’s requested 

revisions to OAC 3745–14–01 would 

leave the monitoring and reporting 

requirements of OAC 3745–14 in place 

for any EGUs or large non-EGUs subject 

to the NOX SIP Call that would not 

otherwise be required to monitor and 

report ozone season NOX emissions 

using 40 CFR Part 75. 

The second revision adds a subsection 

to OAC 3745–14–06 addressing excess 

emissions for the 2008 control period, 

the final year of the NOX Budget 

Trading Program. Under the trading 

programs, affected units are allocated a 

certain number of allowances each year. 

An allowance is equal to a ton of NOX

emissions. Allowances can also be 

transferred to or from other participating 

units. The resulting number of 

allowances held for a given unit makes 

up the unit’s compliance account. At 

the end of each year, allowances equal 

to the unit’s actual emissions for the 

covered period are deducted from the 

unit’s compliance account. Any excess 

of the unit’s emissions over the total 

number of allowances in the compliance 

account, as well as any additional 

quantity of allowances owed due to the 

excess emissions penalty, is deducted 

from the unit’s allocations for 

subsequent years. The SIP revision for 

OAC 3745–14–06 provides that 

allowance deductions related to any 

excess emissions by a unit for the 2008 

control period should be taken from the 

unit’s CAIR NOX Ozone Season Trading 

Program compliance account rather than 

the unit’s NOX Budget Trading Program 

compliance account, because NOX

Budget Trading Program compliance 

accounts would not receive any 

allowance allocations for years after 

2008. 

2008 was the year the NOX Budget 

Trading Program transitioned to the 

CAIR NOX Ozone Season Trading 

Program, therefore the deduction of 

allowances based on a source’s old NOX

Budget Trading Program budget from 

the source’s new CAIR NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program budget ensures 

that the source is still accountable for 

emissions penalties based on excess 

emissions despite the rule transition. 

EPA finds the revisions to OAC 3745– 

14–01, transitioning applicable 

emissions units from Ohio’s NOX

Budget Trading Program rules to Ohio’s 

CAIR rules, and revisions to OAC 3745– 

14–06, transitioning 2008 allowance 

deductions, approvable under the Clean 

Air Act. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving revisions to OAC 

3745–14, specifically the additions to 

sections 3745–14–01 and 3745–14–06 

and the associated renumbering. CAIR is 

the current rule implementing a trading 

program to address interstate transport 

and was promulgated to replace the 

NOX SIP Call. CAIR is a more stringent 

program and exceeds the requirements 

of the NOX SIP Call. These revisions 

allow for Ohio’s CAIR NOX Ozone 

Season Trading Program to replace 

Ohio’s NOX Budget Trading Program 

where applicable, but leave the 

requirements of the NOX SIP Call in 

place for units not covered by CAIR. 

These revisions are consistent with the 

Clean Air Act and CAIR. 

We are publishing this action without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

state plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective January 13, 2014 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by December 

16, 2013. If we receive such comments, 

we will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. If we do not receive any 

comments, this action will be effective 

January 13, 2014. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act and 

applicable Federal regulations. 42 

U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, 

in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
68370 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by January 13, 2014. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purposes of judicial review nor does 

it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review may be filed, 

and shall not postpone the effectiveness 

of such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: September 16, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATON OF IMPLEMETATION 

PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.1870 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(159) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1870 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(159) On August November 15, 2010, 

Ohio submitted revisions to Ohio 

Administrative Code Chapter 3745–14, 

Rules 3745–14–01 and 3745–14–06. The 

revisions sunset NOX Budget Trading 

Program rules for units subject to CAIR 

NOX Ozone Season Trading Program 

rules. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 

3745–14–01 ‘‘Definitions and general 

provisions.’’, effective October 18, 2010. 

(B) Ohio Administrative Code Rule 

3745–14–06 ‘‘The NOx allowance 

tracking system.’’, effective October 18, 

2010. 

(C) October 8, 2010, ‘‘Director’s Final 

Findings and Orders’’, signed by Chris 

Korleski, Director, Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27142 Filed 11–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2013–0114; 

30120–1113–0000–C4] 

RIN 1018–AZ90 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Technical Corrections for 

Kirtland’s Warbler 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, announce the revised 

taxonomy of Dendroica kirtlandii 

(Kirtland’s warbler) under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). We are revising the List 

of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

to reflect the scientifically accepted 

taxonomy and nomenclature of this 

species. We revise the scientific name of 

the species as follows: Setophaga 

kirtlandii (= D. kirtlandii). 

DATES: This rule is effective February 

12, 2014 without further action, unless 

significant adverse comment is received 

by January 13, 2014. If significant 

adverse comment is received, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the rule 

in the Federal Register. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2013–0114. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R3– 

ES–2013–0114; Division of Policy and 

Directives Management; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 

Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. 

See Public Comments in SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for more information about 

submitting comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barbara Hosler, Endangered Species 

Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Ecological Services Field 

Office, 2651 Coolidge Road, East 

Lansing, Michigan 44823; telephone 

517–351–6326. Individuals who are 

hearing impaired or speech impaired 

may call the Federal Relay Service at 

800–877–8337 for TTY (telephone 

typewriter or teletypewriter) assistance. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of This Rule 

The purpose of our direct final rule is 

to notify the public that we are revising 

the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife to reflect the scientifically 

accepted taxonomy and nomenclature of 

one bird species listed under section 4 

of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The 

change to the List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)) 

reflects the most recently accepted 

scientific name in accordance with 50 

CFR 17.11(b). 

We are publishing this rule without a 

prior proposal because this is a 

noncontroversial action that, in the best 

interest of the regulated public, should 

be undertaken in as timely a manner as 

possible. This rule will be effective, as 

published in this document, on the 

effective date specified in DATES, unless 

we receive significant adverse 

comments on or before the comment 

due date specified in DATES. Significant 

adverse comments are comments that 

provide strong justification as to why 

our rule should not be adopted or why 

it should be changed. 

If we receive significant adverse 

comments, we will publish a document 

in the Federal Register withdrawing 

this rule before the effective date, and 

we will engage in the normal 


TKELleY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES