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 Subject 

Indiana 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Notes 

Article 1. General Provisions 

*******

Rule 3. Ambient Air Quality Standards 

*******

1–3–4 ................................ Ambient air quality standards ..................................... 8/11/2017 7/31/2018, [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–16247 Filed 7–30–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

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. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36753 

1The 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. 

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 hunt.jeff@

epa.gov. 

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 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 

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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
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

Name of SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

Regional Haze Progress Report ... Statewide ............... 11/6/2017 7/31/2018, [Insert Federal Register citation].

* * * * * * * 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 147 / Tuesday, July 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 36755 

[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 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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: 

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. 

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 

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 12- 

month 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 60- 

day 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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES