44106 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 182 / Thursday, September 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 60 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0696; FRL–9968–02– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS86 

Technical Amendments to Procedure 6 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing minor 

technical amendments to Procedure 6 

that were proposed in the Federal 

Register on May 19, 2016. Procedure 6 

includes quality assurance (QA) 

procedures for hydrogen chloride (HCl) 

continuous emission monitoring 

systems (CEMS) used for compliance 

determination at stationary sources. The 

QA procedures specify the minimum 

requirements necessary for the control 

and assessment of the quality of CEMS 

data submitted to the EPA. This action 

establishes consistent requirements for 

ensuring and assessing the quality of 

HCl data measured by CEMS that meet 

initial acceptance requirements in 

Performance Specification (PS) 18 of 

appendix B to part 60. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 23, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this rulemaking under Docket 

ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0696. All 

documents in the docket are listed at 

https://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, 

EPA WJC West Building, 1301 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20004. The Public Reading Room is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the EPA 

Docket Center is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Raymond Merrill, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Assessment Division, Measurement 

Technology Group (Mail Code: E143– 

02), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 

27709; telephone number: (919) 541– 

5225; fax number: (919) 541–0516; 

email address: merrill.raymond@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information in this preamble is 

organized as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. Where can I get a copy of this document 

and other related information? 

C. Judicial Review 

II. Background 

III. Final Revisions to Procedure 6 

IV. Summary of Major Comments and 

Responses 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

The major entities that would 

potentially be affected by Procedure 6 

for gaseous HCl CEMS are those entities 

that are required to install a new HCl 

CEMS, relocate an existing HCl CEMS, 

or replace an existing HCl CEMS under 

any applicable subpart of 40 CFR parts 

60, 61, or 63 that were initially accepted 

following requirements in PS 18 of 

appendix B in part 60. Table 1 of this 

preamble lists the current federal rules 

by subpart and the corresponding 

source categories to which Procedure 6 

potentially would apply. 

TABLE 1—SOURCE CATEGORIES THAT

WOULD POTENTIALLY BE SUBJECT

TO PROCEDURE 6 

Subpart(s) Source category 

40 CFR Part 63 

Subpart LLL ... Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry. 

Subpart 

UUUUU.

Coal- and Oil-fired. 

Electric Utility Steam Generating Units. 

The requirements of Procedure 6 may 

also apply to stationary sources located 

in a state, district, reservation, or 

territory that adopts Procedure 6 in its 

implementation plan. 

Table 2 lists the corresponding North 

American Industry Classification 

(NAICS) codes for the source categories 

listed in Table 1 of this preamble. 

TABLE 2—NAICS FOR POTENTIALLY

REGULATED ENTITIES

Industry NAICS 

codes 

Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Utility 

Steam Generating Units ........... 221112 a 921150 

Portland Cement Manufacturing 

Plants ........................................ 327310 

a Industry in Indian Country. 

Tables 1 and 2 are not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather they provide a 

guide for readers regarding entities 

potentially affected by this action. If you 

have any questions regarding the 

potential applicability of Procedure 6 to 

a particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

B. Where can I get a copy of this 

document and other related 

information? 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of this action 

is available on the Internet through the 

EPA’s Technology Transfer Network 

(TTN) Web site, a forum for information 

and technology exchange in various 

areas of air quality management, 

measurement standards and 

implementation, etc. Following 

publication in the Federal Register, the 

EPA will post the Federal Register 

version of the promulgation and key 

technical documents on the TTN at 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/ 

promulgated.html. 

C. Judicial Review 

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

Air Act (CAA), judicial review of this 

final rule is available only by filing a 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 182 / Thursday, September 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 44107 

petition for review in the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit by November 20, 2017. Under 

section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an 

objection to this final rule that was 

raised with reasonable specificity 

during the period for public comment 

can be raised during judicial review. 

Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the 

CAA, the requirements established by 

this final rule may not be challenged 

separately in any civil or criminal 

proceedings brought by the EPA to 

enforce these requirements. Section 

307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides 

that ‘‘[o]nly an objection to a rule or 

procedure which was raised with 

reasonable specificity during the period 

for public comment (including any 

public hearing) may be raised during 

judicial review.’’ This section also 

provides a mechanism for us to convene 

a proceeding for reconsideration, ‘‘[i]f 

the person raising an objection can 

demonstrate to the EPA that it was 

impracticable to raise such objection 

within [the period for public comment] 

or if the grounds for such objection 

arose after the period for public 

comment (but within the time specified 

for judicial review) and if such objection 

is of central relevance to the outcome of 

the rule.’’ Any person seeking to make 

such a demonstration to us should 

submit a Petition for Reconsideration to 

the Office of the Administrator, U.S. 

EPA, Room 3000, William Jefferson 

Clinton Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, 

with a copy to both the person(s) listed 

in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the 

Associate General Counsel for the Air 

and Radiation Law Office, Office of 

General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), 

U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

II. Background 

On July 7, 2015, the EPA published 

Procedure 6, which is a companion to 

PS 18. Procedure 6 specifies the 

minimum QA requirements necessary 

for control and assessment of the quality 

of CEMS data submitted to the EPA 

used for HCl emissions compliance 

determination at stationary sources (80 

FR 38628). Performance Specification 

18 and Procedure 6 are applicable to the 

evaluation of HCl continuous 

monitoring instruments for Portland 

cement facilities, electric generating 

units and industrial, commercial, and 

institutional boilers and process heaters. 

After publication of Procedure 6, certain 

minor inconsistencies with treatment of 

data above span and how to calculate 

the error of CEMS accuracy using 

dynamic spiking were identified. The 

EPA proposed to correct the minor 

inconsistencies in PS 18 and Procedure 

6 through a direct final action titled, 

‘‘Technical Amendments to 

Performance Specification 18 and 

Procedure 6.’’ 81 FR 31515 (May 19, 

2016). One substantive comment was 

received regarding changes to Procedure 

6. The EPA finalized PS 18 and 

withdrew Procedure 6 (81 FR 52348). 

With this action, the EPA is responding 

to that comment and finalizing 

corrections to Procedure 6. 

III. Final Revisions to Procedure 6 

This action finalizes changes to 

Procedure 6 that were proposed on May 

19, 2016 (81 FR 31577), and responds to 

the substantive comment received in 

response to that proposal by: 

(1) Clarifying that the QA for data 

above span is subject to the specific 

requirements in applicable rules or 

permits, which supersede the general 

requirements in Procedure 6 (section 

4.1.5); 

(2) Clarifying the time that triggers 

conducting an above span CEMS 

response check (section 4.1.5.1); 

(3) Correcting the incomplete 

reference to equations used to calculate 

dynamic spiking error (section 5.2.4.2). 

IV. Summary of Major Comments and 

Responses 

A commenter stated that one of the 

revisions to Procedure 6, as proposed by 

EPA on May 19, 2016, appeared to 

significantly change the applicability of 

certain QA requirements, contending 

that to do so would be inconsistent with 

the EPA’s justification for the QA 

procedure originally promulgated in the 

2015 final rule (80 FR 38628; July 7, 

2015). The EPA agrees with the 

commenter that the obligation to follow 

the procedure for treatment of data 

above span should remain as originally 

promulgated: As existing only where 

required by an applicable regulation. 

The EPA’s intent was not to enlarge the 

applicability of Procedure 6 for 

treatment of data above span, but simply 

to make clear that (to the extent this 

procedure even applies) it is 

furthermore superseded if alternate 

terms are specified in another 

applicable rule or permit. Thus, for 

example, where an applicable rule or 

permit accommodates a concentration 

level between 50 and 150 percent of the 

highest hourly concentration, during the 

period of measurements above span, 

that would be an acceptable 

implementation of Procedure 6, 

notwithstanding the default 

specification of section 4.1.5.1.1 that 

concentrations must be between 75 

percent and 125 percent of the highest 

hourly concentration. The EPA has 

revised its proposed change to section 

4.1.5 accordingly. It remains the case 

that the procedure under section 4.1.5 is 

not required unless separately mandated 

by an applicable regulation. The EPA 

also notes that with this amendment to 

section 4.1.5, the proposed amendment 

to section 4.1.5.3 (specifically noting 

that section 4.1.5.3 would not apply if 

‘‘otherwise specified in an applicable 

rule or permit’’) is superfluous. The 

caveat previously proposed specifically 

for section 4.1.5.3 should apply to all of 

section 4.1.5. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was, therefore, not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. This action provides performance 

criteria and QA test procedures for 

assessing the acceptability of HCl CEMS 

performance and data quality. These 

criteria and QA test procedures do not 

add information collection requirements 

beyond those currently required under 

the applicable regulation. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities. This action provides facilities 

with an alternative to PS 15 and Fourier 

transform infrared spectroscopy for 

measuring HCl, which are currently 

required in several rules. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
44108 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 182 / Thursday, September 21, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. This action provides 

performance criteria and QA test 

procedures for assessing the 

acceptability of HCl CEMS performance 

and data quality. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not concern an 

environmental health risk or safety risk. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 

FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it 

does not establish an environmental 

health or safety standard. This 

regulatory action is a technical 

correction to a previously promulgated 

regulatory action and does not have any 

impact on human health or the 

environment. Documentation for this 

decision is provided in the Summary of 

Major Comments and Responses section 

of this preamble. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

This action is subject to the CRA, and 

the EPA will submit a rule report to 

each House of the Congress and to the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Continuous 

emission monitoring systems, Hydrogen 

chloride, Performance specifications, 

Test methods and procedures. 

Dated: September 13, 2017. 

E. Scott Pruitt, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 60—STANDARDS OF 

PERFORMANCE FOR NEW 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 60 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Amend appendix F to part 60 under 

‘‘Procedure 6’’ by revising sections 

‘‘4.1.5’’, ‘‘4.1.5.1’’ and ‘‘5.2.4.2’’ to read 

as follows: 

Appendix F to Part 60—Quality 

Assurance Procedures 

* * * * * 

Procedure 6. Quality Assurance 

Requirements for Gaseous Hydrogen 

Chloride (HCl) Continuous Emission 

Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance 

Determination at Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

4.1.5 Additional Quality Assurance for 

Data above Span. This procedure must be 

used when required by an applicable 

regulation and may be used when significant 

data above span are being collected. 

Furthermore, the terms of this procedure do 

not apply to the extent that alternate terms 

are otherwise specified in an applicable rule 

or permit. 

4.1.5.1 Any time the average measured 

concentration of HCl exceeds 150 percent of 

the span value for two consecutive one-hour 

averages, conduct the following ‘above span’ 

CEMS response check. 

* * * * * 

5.2.4.2 Calculate results as described in 

section 6.4. To determine CEMS accuracy, 

you must calculate the dynamic spiking error 

(DSE) for each of the two upscale audit gases 

using Equation A5 in appendix A to PS–18 

and Equation 6–3 in section 6.4 of Procedure 

6 in appendix B to this part. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–20172 Filed 9–20–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Parts 2 and 8 

[Docket No. USCG–2016–0880] 

RIN 1625–AC35 

Adding the Polar Ship Certificate to the 

List of SOLAS Certificates and 

Certificates Issued by Recognized 

Classification Societies 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule adds the Polar 

Ship Certificate to a list of certificates 

that certain U.S. and foreign-flag ships 

will need to carry on board if they 

engage in international voyages in polar 

waters. This rule also enables the Coast 

Guard to authorize recognized 

classification societies to issue the Polar 

Ship Certificate on the Coast Guard’s 

behalf. We are taking this action because 

the International Convention for Safety 

of Life at Sea (SOLAS) has been 

amended to require certain ships 

operating in Arctic or Antarctic waters 

to have a Polar Ship Certificate. This 

rule will help ensure that U.S.-flagged 

ships that need this certificate— 

commercial cargo ships greater than 500 

gross tonnage and passenger ships 

carrying more than 12 passengers, that 

operate in polar waters as defined by 

SOLAS chapter XIV while engaged in 

international voyages—will be able to 

obtain it in a timely manner. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

October 23, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: To view comments and 

material submitted in response to our 

proposed rule, as well as documents 

mentioned in this final rule preamble as 

being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG– 

2016–0880 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and 

click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Then click on Open 

Docket Folder on the line associated 

with this rule. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this document call or 

email Lieutenant Chris Rabalais, 

Systems Engineering Division (CG– 

ENG–3), Coast Guard; telephone 202– 

372–1485, email 

Christopher.P.Rabalais@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble 

I. Abbreviations 

II. Regulatory History 

III. Basis, Purpose, and Background 

IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes 

V. Regulatory Analyses 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES