Air Plan Approval; Washington; Regional Haze Progress Report, 36752-36755 [2018-16266]

Download as PDF 36752 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 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). In addition, the 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. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 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 October 1, 2018. 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. 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, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. Dated: July 17, 2018. Cathy Stepp, Regional Administrator, Region 5. 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. 2. In § 52.770, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entry for ‘‘1–3–4’’ under ‘‘Article 1. General Provisions’’ ‘‘Rule 3. Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ to read as follows: ■ § 52.770 * Identification of plan. * * (c) * * * * * EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS Indiana citation Indiana effective date Subject EPA approval date Notes Article 1. General Provisions * * * * * * * * 7/31/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation]. * * * Rule 3. Ambient Air Quality Standards * 1–3–4 ................................ * * * Ambient air quality standards ..................................... * * * * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018–16247 Filed 7–30–18; 8:45 am] * 8/11/2017 * * ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BILLING CODE 6560–50–P daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R10–OAR–2018–0001; FRL–9981–50Region 10] Air Plan Approval; Washington; Regional Haze Progress Report Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Jul 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ACTION: Final rule. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to the regional haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by Washington on November 6, 2017. Washington submitted its Regional Haze Progress Report (‘‘progress report’’ or ‘‘report’’) and a negative declaration stating that further revision of the existing regional haze SIP is not needed at this time. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\31JYR1.SGM 31JYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations Washington submitted both the progress report and the negative declaration in the form of implementation plan revisions as required by federal regulations. The progress report addresses the federal Regional Haze Rule requirements under the Clean Air Act to submit a report describing progress in achieving reasonable progress goals established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of the state’s existing plan addressing regional haze. DATES: This final rule is effective August 30, 2018. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2018–0001. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and is publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. Jeff Hunt at (206) 553–0256, or hunt.jeff@ epa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. I. Background Information On May 31, 2018, the EPA proposed to approve Washington’s Regional Haze Progress Report (83 FR 24954). An explanation of the Clean Air Act requirements, a detailed analysis of the submittal, and the EPA’s reasons for proposing approval were provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking, and will not be restated here. The public comment period for the proposal ended July 2, 2018. daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES II. Response to Comments We received six comments on the rulemaking. After reviewing the comments, we have determined that four of the comments are outside the scope of our proposed action and fail to identify any material issue necessitating a response. The fifth and sixth comments, submitted by TransAlta Centralia Generation LLC (TransAlta) and an anonymous commenter, are described below. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Jul 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 Comment 0012: In its comment, TransAlta stated: ‘‘We write to comment on the future operations of TransAlta’s Centralia Power Plant in the Regional Haze 5-Year Progress Report. The Progress Report and its supporting documents describe the ‘retirement’ or ‘closure’ of TransAlta’s Centralia Power Plant in reference to reducing emissions and impacts. However, TransAlta and a number of other parties have always anticipated that when the Centralia Power Plant ceases coal-fired operations, it would likely convert one or both boilers to use gas instead of coal. Rather than shuttering the plant, TransAlta envisions retrofitting the facility to accommodate fuel-switching to natural gas as a means to supply power for Washington State until renewable energy is reliably sufficient. TransAlta estimates a reduction in emissions as a result of this fuelswitching, but does not anticipate ceasing operations or closing the Centralia Power Plant.’’ TransAlta then requested that the EPA make specific wording changes to the narrative text of the state’s progress report, and supporting documents, to reflect this position. Comment 0013: Purportedly in response to TransAlta’s Comment 0012, an anonymous commenter stated: ‘‘The agreement to close a plant means that it is CLOSED. The last minute attempt to re-engineer the plant to burn a different type of fossil fuel is a contradiction of the plan.’’ Response: Under the Clean Air Act the EPA has the authority to approve or disapprove SIP revisions submitted by the states. We do not have the authority to modify the narrative text of state submissions, or supporting documents, other than disapproval or partial disapproval. To the extent TransAlta believes that Washington’s narrative description of the existing best available retrofit technology (BART) Order 6426 (order) is ambiguous or incorrect regarding facility operation after 2020 and 2025, this comment could have been submitted during the state public comment period. In reviewing Appendix G. Ecology’s Responses to Comments Received during the Public Comment Period, we see no evidence of TransAlta requesting changes or commenting on this issue during the state public comment period.1 As discussed in the proposal for this action, the primary purpose of the 1 The EPA was sent a copy of TransAlta’s December 13, 2017, letter with similar comments. This letter was written after the state public comment period closed on August 1, 2017, and also after submission of the SIP revision to the EPA on November 6, 2017. PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 36753 progress report is to evaluate whether the existing regional haze plan is adequate for meeting the reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for the first regional haze planning period, ending in 2018. The TransAlta BART order, as approved into the SIP states, ‘‘Coal units BW21 and BW22 will permanently cease burning coal and be decommissioned as follows: (4.1) One coal fired unit must permanently cease burning coal no later than December 31, 2020. (4.2) The second coal fired unit must permanently cease burning coal no later than December 31, 2025.’’ To the extent that TransAlta and Washington may or may not agree about the interpretation of these conditions as they relate to potential future revisions to the BART order, potential future changes under the new source review program, or potential use of the facility beyond 2020 and 2025, we note these issues are outside the scope of this action evaluating progress during the first planning period. We encourage TransAlta to resolve these issues directly with Washington as the state develops the regional haze update for the next planning period (2018–2028). In the interim, we do not believe this comment constitutes a sufficient basis for disapproving or partially disapproving Washington’s progress report. As stated in our proposed approval of Washington’s Regional Haze Progress Report, the progress report contained the information required by 40 CFR 51.308 and demonstrated that Washington is meeting or exceeding all reasonable progress goals for all Class I areas within Washington’s borders, and implementation of the regional haze SIP has enabled other nearby states to meet RPGs for Class I areas where Washington sources are reasonably anticipated to contribute to visibility impairment. In addition, Washington’s progress report contained an assessment of the status of all measures included in the SIP that were implemented during the first planning period, such as compliance with the BART emission limit for nitrogen oxides at TransAlta’s Centralia Power Plant. Therefore, our position remains that the appropriate action is to approve Washington’s Regional Haze Progress Report. III. Final Action The EPA is approving the Washington Regional Haze Progress Report, submitted on November 6, 2017, as meeting the applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act and the federal Regional Haze Rule, as set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g). The EPA is also approving Washington’s determination that the existing regional haze SIP is E:\FR\FM\31JYR1.SGM 31JYR1 36754 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations adequate to meet the state’s visibility goals established for the first planning period and requires no substantive revision at this time, as set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(h). We have also determined that Washington fulfilled the requirements in 40 CFR 51.308(i) regarding state coordination with Federal Land Managers. 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, the 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because actions such as SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866; • 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 this action does not involve technical standards; and • does not provide the 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). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land and is also not approved to apply in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 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. The 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 October 1, 2018. 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. 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, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: July 23, 2018. Chris Hladick, Regional Administrator, Region 10. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 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 WW—Washington 2. In § 52.2470(e), amend table 2 by adding the entry ‘‘Regional Haze Progress Report’’ after the entry ‘‘Regional Haze State Implementation Plan—BP Cherry Point Refinery BART Revision’’ to read as follows: ■ § 52.2470 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * TABLE 2—ATTAINMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OTHER PLANS daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area * * Regional Haze Progress Report ... * Statewide ............... * VerDate Sep<11>2014 * 16:21 Jul 30, 2018 State submittal date * Jkt 244001 PO 00000 * 11/6/2017 EPA approval date Explanations * * 7/31/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation]. * * Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 * Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\31JYR1.SGM * 31JYR1 * Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations [FR Doc. 2018–16266 Filed 7–30–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2016–0076; 4500030115] RIN 1018–BC82 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Five Poecilotheria Tarantula Species From Sri Lanka Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine endangered species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, for the following five tarantula species from Sri Lanka: Poecilotheria fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata. The effect of this regulation will be to add these species to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. DATES: This rule becomes effective August 30, 2018. ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the internet at http:// www.regulations.gov at docket number FWS–HQ–ES–2016–0076. Comments and materials we received, as well as supporting documentation we used in preparing this rule, are available for public inspection at http:// www.regulations.gov. SUMMARY: Don Morgan, Chief, Branch of Delisting and Foreign Species, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803; telephone, 703–358–2171. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service at 800–877–8339. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES Executive Summary Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), a species may be protected through listing as an endangered species or threatened species if it meets the definition of an ‘‘endangered species’’ or ‘‘threatened species’’ under the Act. Listing a species as an endangered or threatened species can only be completed by issuing a rule. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Jul 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 What this document does. This rule will add the following five tarantula species to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 17.11(h)) as endangered species: Poecilotheria fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata. The basis for our action. Under the Act, we use the best available scientific and commercial data to determine whether a species meets the definition of a ‘‘threatened species’’ or an ‘‘endangered species’’ because of any one or more of the following five factors or the cumulative effects thereof: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) Disease or predation; (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. We have determined on the basis of the best available scientific and commercial data that P. fasciata, P. ornata, P. smithi, P. subfusca, and P. vittata are in danger of extinction because of ongoing habitat loss and degradation and the cumulative effects of this and other threat factors. One species, P. smithi, is also in danger of extinction because of the effects of stochastic (random) processes. Peer review and public comment. We sought comments from independent peer reviewers to ensure that our designation is based on scientifically sound data and analyses. We invited these peer reviewers to comment on our listing proposal. We also considered all comments and information received from the public during the comment period. Previous Federal Action We received a petition, dated October 29, 2010, from WildEarth Guardians requesting that the following 11 tarantula species in the genus Poecilotheria be listed under the Act as endangered or threatened: Poecilotheria fasciata, P. formosa, P. hanumavilasumica, P. metallica, P. miranda, P. ornata, P. pederseni, P. rufilata, P. smithi, P. striata, and P. subfusca. The petition identified itself as such and included the information as required by 50 CFR 424.14(a). We published a 90-day finding on December 3, 2013 (78 FR 72622), indicating that the petition presents substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that listing these 11 species may be warranted. At that time we also (1) notified the public that we were initiating a review of the status of these species to determine if listing them is PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 36755 warranted, (2) requested from the public scientific and commercial data and other information regarding the species, and (3) notified the public that at the conclusion of our review of the status of these species, we would issue a 12month finding on the petition, as provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act. We published a 12-month finding and proposed rule for listing the five Poecilotheria species that are endemic to Sri Lanka (Poecilotheria fasciata, P. ornata, P. pederseni, P. smithi, and P. subfusca) on December 14, 2016 (81 FR 90297). In our 12-month finding and proposed rule we determined that these five species were in danger of extinction throughout their ranges and proposed listing them as endangered under the Act. We requested input from the public, range country, other interested parties, and peer reviewers during a 60day public comment period that ended February 13, 2017. Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule In preparing this final rule, we reviewed and fully considered comments from the public and peer reviewers on the proposed rule. This final rule incorporates minor changes to our proposed listing based on the comments we received (See: Summary of Comments and Recommendations). Background Taxonomy and Species Descriptions Poecilotheria is a genus of arboreal spiders endemic to Sri Lanka and India. The genus belongs to the family Theraphosidae, often referred to as tarantulas, within the infraorder Mygalomorphae. As with most theraphosid genera, Poecilotheria is a poorly understood genus. The taxonomy has never been studied using modern DNA technology; therefore, species descriptions are based solely on morphological characteristics. Consequently, there have been several revisions, additions, and subtractions to the list of Poecilotheria species over the last 20 years (Nanayakkara 2014a, pp. 71–72; Gabriel et al. 2013, entire). The World Spider Catalog (2017, unpaginated; 2016, unpaginated) currently recognizes 14 species of Poecilotheria. The Integrated Taxonomic Information System currently identifies 16 species in the genus, based on the 2011 version of the same catalog. Because the World Spider Catalog is the widely accepted authority on spider taxonomy, we consider the Poecilotheria species recognized by the most recent (2017) version of this catalog to be valid. Based on the World E:\FR\FM\31JYR1.SGM 31JYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 31, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36752-36755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16266]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2018-0001; FRL-9981-50-Region 10]


Air Plan Approval; Washington; Regional Haze Progress Report

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a 
revision to the regional haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted 
by Washington on November 6, 2017. Washington submitted its Regional 
Haze Progress Report (``progress report'' or ``report'') and a negative 
declaration stating that further revision of the existing regional haze 
SIP is not needed at this time.

[[Page 36753]]

Washington submitted both the progress report and the negative 
declaration in the form of implementation plan revisions as required by 
federal regulations. The progress report addresses the federal Regional 
Haze Rule requirements under the Clean Air Act to submit a report 
describing progress in achieving reasonable progress goals established 
for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of the state's 
existing plan addressing regional haze.

DATES: This final rule is effective August 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2018-0001. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or 
other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. 
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on 
the internet and is publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt at (206) 553-0256, or 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

I. Background Information

    On May 31, 2018, the EPA proposed to approve Washington's Regional 
Haze Progress Report (83 FR 24954). An explanation of the Clean Air Act 
requirements, a detailed analysis of the submittal, and the EPA's 
reasons for proposing approval were provided in the notice of proposed 
rulemaking, and will not be restated here. The public comment period 
for the proposal ended July 2, 2018.

II. Response to Comments

    We received six comments on the rulemaking. After reviewing the 
comments, we have determined that four of the comments are outside the 
scope of our proposed action and fail to identify any material issue 
necessitating a response. The fifth and sixth comments, submitted by 
TransAlta Centralia Generation LLC (TransAlta) and an anonymous 
commenter, are described below.
    Comment 0012: In its comment, TransAlta stated: ``We write to 
comment on the future operations of TransAlta's Centralia Power Plant 
in the Regional Haze 5-Year Progress Report. The Progress Report and 
its supporting documents describe the `retirement' or `closure' of 
TransAlta's Centralia Power Plant in reference to reducing emissions 
and impacts. However, TransAlta and a number of other parties have 
always anticipated that when the Centralia Power Plant ceases coal-
fired operations, it would likely convert one or both boilers to use 
gas instead of coal. Rather than shuttering the plant, TransAlta 
envisions retrofitting the facility to accommodate fuel-switching to 
natural gas as a means to supply power for Washington State until 
renewable energy is reliably sufficient. TransAlta estimates a 
reduction in emissions as a result of this fuel-switching, but does not 
anticipate ceasing operations or closing the Centralia Power Plant.'' 
TransAlta then requested that the EPA make specific wording changes to 
the narrative text of the state's progress report, and supporting 
documents, to reflect this position.
    Comment 0013: Purportedly in response to TransAlta's Comment 0012, 
an anonymous commenter stated: ``The agreement to close a plant means 
that it is CLOSED. The last minute attempt to re-engineer the plant to 
burn a different type of fossil fuel is a contradiction of the plan.''
    Response: Under the Clean Air Act the EPA has the authority to 
approve or disapprove SIP revisions submitted by the states. We do not 
have the authority to modify the narrative text of state submissions, 
or supporting documents, other than disapproval or partial disapproval. 
To the extent TransAlta believes that Washington's narrative 
description of the existing best available retrofit technology (BART) 
Order 6426 (order) is ambiguous or incorrect regarding facility 
operation after 2020 and 2025, this comment could have been submitted 
during the state public comment period. In reviewing Appendix G. 
Ecology's Responses to Comments Received during the Public Comment 
Period, we see no evidence of TransAlta requesting changes or 
commenting on this issue during the state public comment period.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA was sent a copy of TransAlta's December 13, 2017, 
letter with similar comments. This letter was written after the 
state public comment period closed on August 1, 2017, and also after 
submission of the SIP revision to the EPA on November 6, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the proposal for this action, the primary purpose 
of the progress report is to evaluate whether the existing regional 
haze plan is adequate for meeting the reasonable progress goals (RPGs) 
established for the first regional haze planning period, ending in 
2018. The TransAlta BART order, as approved into the SIP states, ``Coal 
units BW21 and BW22 will permanently cease burning coal and be 
decommissioned as follows: (4.1) One coal fired unit must permanently 
cease burning coal no later than December 31, 2020. (4.2) The second 
coal fired unit must permanently cease burning coal no later than 
December 31, 2025.'' To the extent that TransAlta and Washington may or 
may not agree about the interpretation of these conditions as they 
relate to potential future revisions to the BART order, potential 
future changes under the new source review program, or potential use of 
the facility beyond 2020 and 2025, we note these issues are outside the 
scope of this action evaluating progress during the first planning 
period. We encourage TransAlta to resolve these issues directly with 
Washington as the state develops the regional haze update for the next 
planning period (2018-2028). In the interim, we do not believe this 
comment constitutes a sufficient basis for disapproving or partially 
disapproving Washington's progress report. As stated in our proposed 
approval of Washington's Regional Haze Progress Report, the progress 
report contained the information required by 40 CFR 51.308 and 
demonstrated that Washington is meeting or exceeding all reasonable 
progress goals for all Class I areas within Washington's borders, and 
implementation of the regional haze SIP has enabled other nearby states 
to meet RPGs for Class I areas where Washington sources are reasonably 
anticipated to contribute to visibility impairment. In addition, 
Washington's progress report contained an assessment of the status of 
all measures included in the SIP that were implemented during the first 
planning period, such as compliance with the BART emission limit for 
nitrogen oxides at TransAlta's Centralia Power Plant. Therefore, our 
position remains that the appropriate action is to approve Washington's 
Regional Haze Progress Report.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving the Washington Regional Haze Progress Report, 
submitted on November 6, 2017, as meeting the applicable requirements 
of the Clean Air Act and the federal Regional Haze Rule, as set forth 
in 40 CFR 51.308(g). The EPA is also approving Washington's 
determination that the existing regional haze SIP is

[[Page 36754]]

adequate to meet the state's visibility goals established for the first 
planning period and requires no substantive revision at this time, as 
set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(h). We have also determined that Washington 
fulfilled the requirements in 40 CFR 51.308(i) regarding state 
coordination with Federal Land Managers.

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, the 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 Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because actions such as SIP approvals are 
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
     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 this action does not involve technical standards; and
     does not provide the 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land and 
is also not approved to apply in any other area where the EPA or an 
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those 
areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    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. The 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 October 1, 2018. 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. 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, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 23, 2018.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart WW--Washington

0
2. In Sec.  52.2470(e), amend table 2 by adding the entry ``Regional 
Haze Progress Report'' after the entry ``Regional Haze State 
Implementation Plan--BP Cherry Point Refinery BART Revision'' to read 
as follows:


Sec.  52.2470   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                Table 2--Attainment, Maintenance, and Other Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 State
     Name of SIP provision         Applicable geographic or    submittal    EPA approval date     Explanations
                                      nonattainment area          date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
* * * * * * *
Regional Haze Progress Report..  Statewide..................    11/6/2017  7/31/2018, [Insert
                                                                            Federal Register
                                                                            citation].
 
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 36755]]

[FR Doc. 2018-16266 Filed 7-30-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P