[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 20872]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6775]

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

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Enabling a Secure Environment for Vehicle-to-Infrastructure
Research Workshop; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: ITS Joint Program Office, Research and Innovative Technology
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Intelligent
Transportation System Joint Program Office (ITS JPO) will hold a free
public meeting on the Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) research program
on April 18, 2012, 8:30 a.m.-3:30 p.m. at ITS America, 1100 17th Street
NW., Suite 1200, Washington DC 20036,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The meeting will
also be available by webinar. Persons planning to attend the workshop
or participate in the webinar should register online no later than
April 15, 2012 at http://www.itsa.org/v2i.
    This public meeting is being held in support of the V2I for Safety
Program for Connected Vehicles Initiative lead by the ITS JPO. The
meeting will allow primary stakeholders and subject matter experts to
review concepts of how selected safety applications will work that
involve infrastructure components. The outcome of this meeting will
provide customer based feedback on how these safety applications can be
developed to achieve maximum effectiveness while minimizing cost.
    The purpose of the V2I program is to enable the development of
vehicle based applications and safety systems that will assist drivers
in avoiding crashes. As part of this program, FHWA's role is to develop
roadside equipment and other enabling technologies that will enable
these safety applications to function properly.
    If you have any questions or you need any special accommodations,
please send an email to Adam Hopps at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 15th day of March 2012.
Shelley Row,
Director, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. 2012-6775 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-HY-P


ATTACHMENT C:

Load Calculations in g TEQ Calculated Loads for Stand Alone Chlor alkali Facilities PPGWV OCTFLA Total Facility Code Key 2378TCDD    DF Dow, Freeport, TX 12378PeCDD 0  0.02 DP Dow, Plaquemine, LA 123478HxCDD    PPGLC PPG, Lake Charles, LA 123678HxCDD    PPGWV PPG, Natrium, WV 123789HxCDD    GGP Georgia Gulf, Plaquemine, LA 1234678HpCDD 0 0.00 0.01 OCDPTX Oxyvinyls, Deer Park, TX OCDD 0 0.00 0.01 OCBGTX Oxyvinyls, LaPorte, TX ( Battleground Plant)

2378TCDF 0 0.02 0.03 OCLPTX Oxyvinyls, LaPorte, TX 12378PeCDF 0 0.05 0.07 OCINGTX Occidental, Ingleside, TX 23478PeCDF 1 0.43 0.94 OCTFLA Occidental, Taft, LA 123478HxCDF 0 0.30 0.37 123678HxCDF 0 0.12 0.14 234678HxCDF  0.06 0.06 123789HxCDF  0.06 0.06 1234678HpCDF 0 0.04 0.05 1234789HpCDF  0.01 0.01 OCDF 0 0.00 0.00 Total 0.677 1.085 1.76 Calculated Loads for Integrated Chlor alkali and Vinyl Facilities DF DP PPGLC GGP OCDPTX OCBGTX /

OCLPTX OCINGTX Total 2378TCDD CBI CBI  CBI    0.03 12378PeCDD CBI CBI  CBI    0.17 123478HxCDD CBI CBI 0.0001 CBI  0.0000  0.18 123678HxCDD CBI CBI  CBI  0.0000  0.00 123789HxCDD CBI CBI  CBI  0.0000  0.09 1234678HpCDD CBI CBI 0.0020 CBI 0.0071 0.0001 0.0006 0.18 OCDD CBI CBI 0.0019 CBI 0.0167 0.0004 0.0006 0.09 2378TCDF CBI CBI 0.0679 CBI 0.0511 0.0000  0.38 12378PeCDF CBI CBI 0.1160 CBI 0.0444 0.0002  0.34 23478PeCDF CBI CBI 0.9629 CBI 0.1124 0.0001  2.51 123478HxCDF CBI CBI 0.3197 CBI 0.1501 0.0007  3.24 123678HxCDF CBI CBI 0.1169 CBI 0.0217 0.0005  0.14 234678HxCDF CBI CBI 0.1221 CBI  0.0004  0.66 123789HxCDF CBI CBI 0.0724 CBI  0.0000  0.19 1234678HpCDF CBI CBI 0.0293 CBI 0.0046 0.0004 0.0060 1.38 1234789HpCDF CBI CBI 0.0127 CBI 0.0001 0.0001 0.0013 0.21 OCDF CBI CBI 0.0089 CBI 0.0034 0.0010 0.0023 0.34 Total CBI CBI 1.8329 CBI 0.4116 0.0039 0.0109 10.13 Summary ATTACHMENT C:

Load Calculations in g TEQ Dow, Freeport, TX Concentrations and Flows TEF Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ppq Conc ppq Conc ppq 2378TCDD 1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDD 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDD 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDD 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 2378TCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDF 0.05 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 23478PeCDF 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 234678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234789HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDF 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI Flow ( MGD) CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI Date 2001 2002 2003 2001 2002 2003 2001 2002 2003 Stream Name Outfall 102 Outfall 102 Outfall 102 Outfall 701 Outfall 701 Outfall 701 Outfall 202 Outfall 202 Outfall 202 Load Calculations TEF 2001 2002 2003 erage Annual L 2001 2002 2003 verage Annual Lo 2001 2002 2003 erage Annual Lo 2378TCDD 1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDD 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDD 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDD 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 2378TCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDF 0.05 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 23478PeCDF 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 234678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234789HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDF 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI Total Facility Load Chlor alkali Chlor alkali Vinyl Vinyl DF1 DF 1 DF 2 DF2 DF ATTACHMENT C:

Load Calculations in g TEQ Dow, Plaquemine, LA Concentrations and Flows TEF Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ppq Conc ppq Conc ppq 2378TCDD 1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDD 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDD 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDD 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 2378TCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDF 0.05 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 23478PeCDF 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 234678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234789HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDF 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI Flow ( MGD) CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI Date 2001 2002 2003 2001 2002 2003 Stream Name Outfall 301 Outfall 301 Outfall 301 Outfall 2001 Outfall 2001 Outfall 2001 Load Calculations TEF 2001 2002 2003 verage Annual Lo 2001 2002 2003 verage Annual Loa 2378TCDD 1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDD 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDD 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDD 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 2378TCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 12378PeCDF 0.05 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 23478PeCDF 0.5 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123478HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 234678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 123789HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234678HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI 1234789HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI OCDF 0.001 CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI CBI Total Facility Load Chlor alkali Vinyl Chlor alkali Vinyl DP ATTACHMENT C: Load Calculations in g TEQ PPG, Lake Charles, LA Concentrations and Flows CA/ Vinyl TEF Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) 2378TCDD 1 0 0 0 12378PeCDD 0.5 0 0 0 123478HxCDD 0.1 0 19.6 0 123678HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 123789HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 1234678HpCDD 0.01 0 75.1 12.1 OCDD 0.001 55.7 696 99.9 2378TCDF 0.1 9.8 4.9 39.9 12378PeCDF 0.05 10.7 28 142 23478PeCDF 0.5 11.8 43.3 117 123478HxCDF 0.1 30.9 393 190 123678HxCDF 0.1 8.31 104 70.4 234678HxCDF 0.1 13.7 82.2 72.4 123789HxCDF 0.1 5.9 0 43.7 1234678HpCDF 0.01 21.9 1240 172 1234789HpCDF 0.01 14.6 425 73.7 OCDF 0.001 56.3 10200 494 Flow ( MGD) 2.93 0.0501 11.6 Date 3/ 20/ 02 2/ 28/ 02 Stream Name Outfall 101.1 Outfall 101.4 Load Calculations TEF Outfall 101.1 Outfall 101.4 Total 2378TCDD 1   0   12378PeCDD 0.5   0   123478HxCDD 0.1  0.00 0.000136  0.00 123678HxCDD 0.1   0   123789HxCDD 0.1   0   1234678HpCDD 0.01  0.00 5.2E 05 0.00 0.00 OCDD 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.000274 0.00 0.00 2378TCDF 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.004001 0.06 0.07 12378PeCDF 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.002263 0.11 0.12 23478PeCDF 0.5 0.02 0.00 0.025381 0.94 0.96 123478HxCDF 0.1 0.01 0.00 0.015228 0.30 0.32 123678HxCDF 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.004084 0.11 0.12 234678HxCDF 0.1 0.01 0.00 0.006115 0.12 0.12 123789HxCDF 0.1 0.00  0.002388 0.07 0.07 1234678HpCDF 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.001745 0.03 0.03 1234789HpCDF 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.000885 0.01 0.01 OCDF 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.000934 0.01 0.01 Chlor alkali Chlor alkali Total Facility Load CA/ Vinyl PPGLC ATTACHMENT C: Load Calculations in g TEQ PPG, Natrium, WV Concentrations and Flows TEF Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) 2378TCDD 1 0 0 12378PeCDD 0.5 0 1.65 123478HxCDD 0.1 0 0 123678HxCDD 0.1 0 0 123789HxCDD 0.1 0 0 1234678HpCDD 0.01 23.1 9.14 OCDD 0.001 355 189 2378TCDF 0.1 5.96 0 12378PeCDF 0.05 12 8.92 23478PeCDF 0.5 12.5 36.9 123478HxCDF 0.1 20 15.7 123678HxCDF 0.1 8.13 2.99 234678HxCDF 0.1 0 0 123789HxCDF 0.1 0 0 1234678HpCDF 0.01 13.1 0 1234789HpCDF 0.01 0 0 OCDF 0.001 78.3 29.7 Flow ( MGD) 14.6 15 Date 12/ 18/ 03 3/ 5/ 04 Stream Name K2 North Sewer Load Calculations for K2 and North Sewer TEF K2 North Sewer Total 2378TCDD 1   0 12378PeCDD 0.5  0.02 0.017096 123478HxCDD 0.1   0 123678HxCDD 0.1   0 123789HxCDD 0.1   0 1234678HpCDD 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.006553 OCDD 0.001 0.01 0.00 0.011077 2378TCDF 0.1 0.01  0.012021 12378PeCDF 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.021345 23478PeCDF 0.5 0.13 0.38 0.508401 123478HxCDF 0.1 0.04 0.03 0.072875 123678HxCDF 0.1 0.02 0.01 0.022595 234678HxCDF 0.1   0 123789HxCDF 0.1   0 1234678HpCDF 0.01 0.00  0.002642 1234789HpCDF 0.01   0 OCDF 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.002195 PPGWV ATTACHMENT C: Load Calculations in g TEQ Concentrations and Load Calculations for Georgia Gulf, Plaquemine, LA TEF Conc ppq Total Facility Load ( g TEQ) 2378TCDD 1 CBI CBI 12378PeCDD 0.5 CBI CBI 123478HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI 123678HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI 123789HxCDD 0.1 CBI CBI 1234678HpCDD 0.01 CBI CBI OCDD 0.001 CBI CBI 2378TCDF 0.1 CBI CBI 12378PeCDF 0.05 CBI CBI 23478PeCDF 0.5 CBI CBI 123478HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI 123678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI 234678HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI 123789HxCDF 0.1 CBI CBI 1234678HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI 1234789HpCDF 0.01 CBI CBI OCDF 0.001 CBI CBI Flow ( MGD) CBI CBI GGP ATTACHMENT C:

Load Calculations in g TEQ Oxyvinyls, Deer Park, TX Concentrations and Flows TEF Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L)

2378TCDD 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12378PeCDD 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123478HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123678HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123789HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1234678HpCDD 0.01 33.8 18 0 5.2 10 9.7 0 8.55 0 13 7.8 5.2 6.2 5.6 0 0 OCDD 0.001 183 580 130 110 200 160 86 119 17 420 130 77 120 140 68 35.3 2378TCDF 0.1 1060 5.6 6.9 6.4 7.2 4.5 6.9 3.69 4.26 2.9 0 10 9.7 22 0 2.44 12378PeCDF 0.05 3350 18 0 18 18 10 15 4.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23478PeCDF 0.5 2300 7.6 0 0 6 0 0 3.19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123478HxCDF 0.1 4170 26 22 19 30 19 22 5.84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123678HxCDF 0.1 1170 6.6 3.6 6.3 8.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 234678HxCDF 0.1 411 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123789HxCDF 0.1 1140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1234678HpCDF 0.01 1180 0 0 0 18 15 0 3.99 9.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 37.1 1234789HpCDF 0.01 700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.4 OCDF 0.001 1050 40 48 0 35 46 0 28.8 0 34 45 21 88 28 0 682 Flow ( MGD) 0.234 63.2 62.6 61.3 45.9 68 74 74 0.194 4.2 4.045 6.14 3.56 2.65 7.03 2.425 Date Aug 00 Mar 98 May 98 Aug 98 Jan 99 Feb 99 Aug 99 Aug 00 Nov 01 Mar 98 May 98 Aug 98 Jan 99 Feb 99 Aug 99 Nov 01 Stream Name Outfall 201 Outfall 002 Outfall 002 Outfall 002 Outfall 002 Outfall 002 Outfall 002 Outfall 002 Outfall 101 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Load Calculation Outfall 002 TEF Mar 98 May 98 Aug 98 1998 Load Jan 99 Feb 99 Aug 99 1999 Load Aug 00 2000 Load Average Annual Load 2378TCDD 1

12378PeCDD 0.5

123478HxCDD 0.1

123678HxCDD 0.1

123789HxCDD 0.1

1234678HpCDD 0.01 0.0157  0.0044 0.007 0.0063 0.0091  0.005 0.0087 0.0087 0.0069 OCDD 0.001 0.0506 0.0112 0.0093 0.024 0.0127 0.0150 0.0088 0.012 0.0122 0.0122 0.0160 2378TCDF 0.1 0.0489 0.0597 0.0542 0.054 0.0457 0.0423 0.0705 0.053 0.0377 0.0377 0.0483 12378PeCDF 0.05 0.0786  0.0762 0.052 0.0571 0.0470 0.0767 0.060 0.0212 0.0212 0.0444 23478PeCDF 0.5 0.3318   0.111 0.1902   0.063 0.1631 0.1631 0.1124 123478HxCDF 0.1 0.2270 0.1903 0.1609 0.193 0.1902 0.1785 0.2249 0.198 0.0597 0.0597 0.1501 123678HxCDF 0.1 0.0576 0.0311 0.0534 0.047 0.0533   0.018   0.0217 234678HxCDF 0.1

123789HxCDF 0.1

1234678HpCDF 0.01     0.0114 0.0141  0.009 0.0041 0.0041 0.0042 1234789HpCDF 0.01

OCDF 0.001 0.0035 0.0042  0.003 0.0022 0.0043  0.002 0.0029 0.0029 0.0026 Load Calculation Outfall 001 TWF Mar 98 May 98 Aug 98 1998 Load Jan 99 Feb 99 Aug 99 1999 Load Nov 01 2001 Load Average Annual Load 2378TCDD 421,600,000

12378PeCDD 215,384,615

123478HxCDD 43,076,923

123678HxCDD 41,791,045

123789HxCDD 43,076,923

1234678HpCDD 4,179,104 0.0008 0.0004 0.0004 0.0005 0.0003 0.0002  0.0002   0.00024 OCDD 423,510 0.0024 0.0007 0.0007 0.0013 0.0006 0.0005 0.0007 0.0006 0.0001 0.0001 0.00066 2378TCDF 6,696,140 0.0017  0.0085 0.0034 0.0048 0.0081  0.0043 0.0008 0.0008 0.00283 12378PeCDF 3,294,118

23478PeCDF 32,941,176

123478HxCDF 6,658,740

123678HxCDF 6,666,667

234678HxCDF 6,666,667

123789HxCDF 6,658,740

1234678HpCDF 665,874         0.0012 0.0012 0.00041 1234789HpCDF 666,667         0.0004 0.0004 0.00014 OCDF 67,367 0.0002 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0004 0.0001  0.0002 0.0023 0.0023 0.00089 Total Load for Outfalls 001 and 002 TWF Total Facility Load 2378TCDD 421,600,000

12378PeCDD 215,384,615

123478HxCDD 43,076,923

123678HxCDD 41,791,045

123789HxCDD 43,076,923

1234678HpCDD 4,179,104 0.0071 OCDD 423,510 0.0167 2378TCDF 6,696,140 0.0511 12378PeCDF 3,294,118 0.0444 23478PeCDF 32,941,176 0.1124 123478HxCDF 6,658,740 0.1501 123678HxCDF 6,666,667 0.0217 234678HxCDF 6,666,667

123789HxCDF 6,658,740

1234678HpCDF 665,874 0.0046 1234789HpCDF 666,667 0.0001 OCDF 67,367 0.0034 OCDPTX ATTACHMENT C:

Load Calculations in g TEQ Oxyvinyls, LaPorte, TX Concentrations and Flows TEF Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ( pg/ L) Conc ppq Conc ppq Conc ppq 2378TCDD 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12378PeCDD 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123478HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 0.03 0 0.03 0 123678HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 0.04 0 0.11 0 123789HxCDD 0.1 0 0 0 0.07 0 0.06 0 1234678HpCDD 0.01 0 3.22 7.43 1.77 0 1.5 6.98 OCDD 0.001 180 180 193 71.64 0 12.83 32.2 2378TCDF 0.1 0 0 0 0.32 0 0 0 12378PeCDF 0.05 0 0 0 0.33 0 1.81 8.04 23478PeCDF 0.5 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.41 0 123478HxCDF 0.1 0 0 2.76 0.61 0 3.35 14.8 123678HxCDF 0.1 0 0 2.68 0.57 0 1.39 11.7 234678HxCDF 0.1 0 0 2.86 0.51 0 0.59 7.23 123789HxCDF 0.1 0 0 0 0.08 0 0.14 0 1234678HpCDF 0.01 0 0 5.09 0 30 29.53 64.1 1234789HpCDF 0.01 0 0 0 0.55 4 4.02 18.6 OCDF 0.001 0 0 7.83 0.93 900 632.64 1560 Flow ( MGD) 1.9425 1.239 1.622 1.68 0.525 0.893 0.893 Date Feb 96 Oct 02 Mar 03 May 03 May 95 Mar 03 Mar 03 Stream Name Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Outfall 001 Univ of Houston Study Load Calculations TEF Feb 96 1996 Load Oct 02 2002 Load Mar 03 May 03 2003 Load Average Annual Load May 95 1995 Load 3 Mar 3 Mar 2003 Load Average Annual Load 2378TCDD 1

12378PeCDD 0.5

123478HxCDD 0.1      0.000007 0.000003 0.000001   0.000004  0.000002 0.000001 0.000002 123678HxCDD 0.1      0.000009 0.000005 0.000002   0.000014  0.000007 0.000003 0.000005 123789HxCDD 0.1      0.000016 0.000008 0.000003   0.000007  0.000004 0.000002 0.000005 1234678HpCDD 0.01   0.0001 0.00 0.00017 0.000041 0.000104 0.000053   0.000019 0.000086 0.000052 0.000026 0.000079 OCDD 0.001 0.00048 0.00 0.0003 0.00 0.00043 0.000166 0.000299 0.000364   0.000016 0.000040 0.000028 0.000014 0.000377 2378TCDF 0.1      0.000074 0.000037 0.000012       0.000012 12378PeCDF 0.05      0.000038 0.000019 0.000006   0.000112 0.000496 0.000304 0.000152 0.000158 23478PeCDF 0.5      0.000348 0.000174 0.000058   0.000253  0.000126 0.000063 0.000121 123478HxCDF 0.1     0.00062 0.000142 0.000380 0.000127   0.000413 0.001826 0.001120 0.000560 0.000686 123678HxCDF 0.1     0.00060 0.000132 0.000366 0.000122   0.000171 0.001443 0.000807 0.000404 0.000526 234678HxCDF 0.1     0.00064 0.000118 0.000380 0.000127   0.000073 0.000892 0.000482 0.000241 0.000368 123789HxCDF 0.1      0.000019 0.000009 0.000003   0.000017  0.000009 0.000004 0.000007 1234678HpCDF 0.01     0.00011  0.000057 0.000019 0.00022 0.000218 0.000364 0.000791 0.000578 0.000398 0.000417 1234789HpCDF 0.01      0.000013 0.000006 0.000002 0.00003 0.000029 0.000050 0.000229 0.000140 0.000084 0.000086 OCDF 0.001     0.00002 0.000002 0.000010 0.000003 0.00065 0.000653 0.000780 0.001925 0.001353 0.001003 0.001006 Total Facility Load Chlor alkali OCLPTX  Vinyl OCBGTX  Chlor alkali Vinyl OCBGTX & OCLPTX ATTACHMENT C: Load Calculations in g TEQ Concentrations and Load Calculations for Occidental, Ingleside, TX TEF Conc ppq Total Facility Load ( g TEQ) 2378TCDD 1 0  12378PeCDD 0.5 0  123478HxCDD 0.1 0  123678HxCDD 0.1 0  123789HxCDD 0.1 0  1234678HpCDD 0.01 29 0.00056 OCDD 0.001 330 0.00064 2378TCDF 0.1 0  12378PeCDF 0.05 0  23478PeCDF 0.5 0  123478HxCDF 0.1 0  123678HxCDF 0.1 0  234678HxCDF 0.1 0  123789HxCDF 0.1 0  1234678HpCDF 0.01 310 0.00600 1234789HpCDF 0.01 69 0.00133 OCDF 0.001 1200 0.00232 Flow ( MGD) 1.4 Date Sep 99 Stream Name Outfall 001 OCINGTX ATTACHMENT C: Load Calculations in g TEQ Occindental, Taft, LA Concentrations and Flows TEF Conc ( pg/ L) 2378TCDD 1 0 12378PeCDD 0.5 0 123478HxCDD 0.1 0 123678HxCDD 0.1 0 123789HxCDD 0.1 0 1234678HpCDD 0.01 3.46 OCDD 0.001 25.3 2378TCDF 0.1 50.2 12378PeCDF 0.05 233 23478PeCDF 0.5 221 123478HxCDF 0.1 769 123678HxCDF 0.1 306 234678HxCDF 0.1 164 123789HxCDF 0.1 156 1234678HpCDF 0.01 1160 1234789HpCDF 0.01 179 OCDF 0.001 455 Flow ( MGD) 2.8 Date May 02 Stream Name Outfall 001 Load Calculations for Outfall 001 TEF 2002 Load 2378TCDD 1  12378PeCDD 0.5  123478HxCDD 0.1  123678HxCDD 0.1  123789HxCDD 0.1  1234678HpCDD 0.01 0.0001 OCDD 0.001 0.0001 2378TCDF 0.1 0.0194 12378PeCDF 0.05 0.0451 23478PeCDF 0.5 0.4274 123478HxCDF 0.1 0.2975 123678HxCDF 0.1 0.1184 234678HxCDF 0.1 0.0634 123789HxCDF 0.1 0.0603 1234678HpCDF 0.01 0.0449 1234789HpCDF 0.01 0.0069 OCDF 0.001 0.0018 OCTFLA


Public Meeting to Discuss the Public Meeting to Discuss the Development of Regulations for Development of Regulations for Aircraft Drinking Water Systems Aircraft Drinking Water Systems U. S. Environmental Protection Agency *** Washington, DC June 1, 2005 2 Agenda Agenda

9: 30 am Welcome, Introductions, and Review Agenda

9: 45 am Panel: Background on Proposed Rulemaking

10: 45 am Break

11: 00 am Panel: Background on Proposed Rulemaking

11: 30 am Stakeholder Perspectives: Issues for Consideration

12: 00 pm Lunch ( on your own)

1: 00 pm Stakeholder Perspectives: Issues for Consideration

2: 00 pm Break

2: 15 pm Options for a Collaborative Approach to Rulemaking

3: 45 pm Wrap up/ Next Steps

4: 00 pm Adjourn 3 Objectives Objectives

Present information relevant to the proposed rulemaking;

Provide an opportunity for affected stakeholders and the interested public to raise issues for consideration in the development of the proposed rule; and

Provide an opportunity for stakeholders and the interested public to comment on options for a collaborative process to develop the rule. 4 Why New Regulations?

Why New Regulations?

° Existing National Primary Drinking Water Regulations ( NPDWRs) designed for traditional,

stationary water systems ° Aircraft board water from multiple sources some of which are foreign sources that are not subject to EPA drinking water standards.

° Frequent transfer of water provides opportunities for cross contamination 5 Statutory Authority Statutory Authority ° Safe Drinking Water Act ° EPA regulates public water systems ( PWSs) in U. S.

° PWS: a system that regularly serves an average of at least 25 people daily at least 60 days per year ° Including interstate carrier conveyances ( ICCs):

airplanes, trains, water vessels and buses 6 ICC Program Administration ICC Program Administration ° ICC program jointly administered by EPA and the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA).

  Source water ( domestic): State/ EPA   Watering points: FDA   Onboard: drinking water ( EPA) / culinary water ( FDA) 7 Classification of Aircraft PWSs Classification of Aircraft PWSs under NPDWRs under NPDWRs   Transient noncommunity water systems   Surface water systems   Population served   1,000 persons or fewer per day ( majority of aircraft) 8 NPDWR Requirements for Transient NPDWR Requirements for Transient Noncommunity Water Systems using Surface Noncommunity Water Systems using Surface Water ( serving 1000 or fewer)

Water ( serving 1000 or fewer)

° 1 total coliform sample/ month ° 1 nitrate sample/ year ° 1 nitrite sample/ 3 years ° 1 sanitary survey/ 5 years ° Surface Water Treatment Rule/ Long Term 1 requirements ° 1 disinfectant residual sample/ month ° 2 log ( 99%) removal of Cryptosporidium with filtration ° 3 log ( 99.9%) removal Giardia with filtration and disinfection ° 4 log ( 99.99%) removal of viruses with filtration and disinfection ° Turbidity monitoring at the filters ( performance standard depends on technology used) 9 Water Supply Guidance Water Supply Guidance

WSG 29 ( 10/ 01/ 86) outlined EPA & FDA's roles in implementing the NPDWRs for ICCs. The guidance includes:

1) Monitoring requirements applied to ICCs 2) Approved operation and maintenance programs in lieu of monitoring 10 Existing Regulatory Authority to Modify Existing Regulatory Authority to Modify NPDWR Requirements NPDWR Requirements

Satisfy the interconnection condition of § 141.29 Monitoring of Consecutive PWSs:

  When a public water system supplies water to one or more other public water systems, the state may modify the monitoring requirements  to the extent that the interconnection justifies treating them as a single system for monitoring purposes .

  Cannot be met by majority of aircraft since they obtain water from non PWSs ( i. e., foreign sources) 11 Baseline Sampling Baseline Sampling ° ATA sampled 265 aircraft ° 2.7% total coliform positive ° All E. coli negative ° EPA sampled 327 aircraft ° 15% total coliform positive ° 2 E. coli positive samples 12 Baseline Sampling ( cont'd)

Baseline Sampling ( cont'd)

° In both sets of samples, a large percentage had a non detectable chlorine residual ° ATA   41%

° EPA   21% ( raw data)

° No turbidity, nitrate or nitrite samples exceeded the standards 13 Administrative Orders Administrative Orders on Consent on Consent ° Based on agreements in principle developed via lengthy discussions with the Air Transport Association 14 Administrative Orders Administrative Orders on Consent ( cont'd)

on Consent ( cont'd)

° Establish:

° Interim monitoring requirements ° Best management practices ° Corrective action and public notification requirements ° Study of possible sources of contamination outside of the aircraft 15 Administrative Orders Administrative Orders on Consent ( cont'd)

on Consent ( cont'd)

° Require submission of information related to the practices of boarding water from sources outside of the U. S. to increase EPA's understanding of this extraterritorial issue 16 Key Issues for the Development of a Key Issues for the Development of a New Aircraft Drinking Water Rule New Aircraft Drinking Water Rule 1. Which contaminates are of concern for aircraft water systems that take on water from domestic sources only, or from both domestic and foreign sources?

2. What is the appropriate monitoring frequency for aircraft water systems that take on water from domestic sources only, or both domestic and foreign sources? 17 Key Issues ( cont'd)

Key Issues ( cont'd)

3. What is the appropriate frequency for disinfecting and flushing aircraft water systems?

4. Should aircraft that obtain all of their water from another public water system be classified as a " consecutive" public water system that can obtain reduced monitoring requirements under EPA's regulations ( 40 CFR141.29)? 18 Key Issues ( cont'd)

Key Issues ( cont'd)

5. Are there feasible treatment technologies that can be used to treat drinking water onboard aircraft?

6. What should be done to address the low disinfectant residual levels in the drinking water found on a high percentage of aircraft?

7. How should EPA address aircraft water from sources outside of the U. S.? 19 Rule Development Schedule Rule Development Schedule

Public Kickoff Meeting: June 1, 2005

Options Development, Stakeholder Collaboration &

Selection: June 2005   May 2006

Final Agency Review: June 2006

OMB Review: July 2006   September 2006

Publish Proposed Rule: January 2007

Public Comment Period: January 2007   Mar 2007

Response to Comments & Final Option Selection: April 2007   September 2007

Internal/ Final Agency Review: October 2007   April 2008

OMB Review: June 2008   August 2008

Publish Final Rule: January 2009 20 Contact Information Contact Information Rick Naylor Drinking Water Protection Branch ( 4606M)

Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Phone: ( 202) 564 3847 Fax: ( 202) 564 3755 Email: naylor. richard@ epa. gov


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 70 (Friday, April 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20303-20304]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07945]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0147; Notice 2]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements Agency Information
Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collections and their expected
burden. The Federal Register Notice soliciting public comment on the
ICR, with a 60-day comment period was published on January 21, 2014, at
79 FR 3467.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 12, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Stevens, NHTSA 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Room W43-490, Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Steven's telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please identify the relevant collection of
information by referring to its OMB Control Number.

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725-17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

    Title: 49 CFR Part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
    OMB Number: 2127-0045.
    Type of Request: Extension of a Currently Approved Collection.
    Abstract: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's
statute at 49 U.S.C. 30118, Notification of Defects and Noncompliance,
and 49 U.S.C. 30120, Remedies for Defects and Noncompliance, generally
requires manufacturers of motor vehicles and items of replacement
equipment to conduct a notification and remedy campaign (recall) when
their products are determined to contain a safety-related defect or a
noncompliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS).
Those sections require a manufacturer of motor vehicles or motor
vehicle equipment to notify distributors, dealers, and purchasers if
any of the manufacturer's products are determined to either contain a
safety-related defect or fail to comply with an applicable FMVSS. The
manufacturer is under a concomitant obligation to remedy such defect or
noncompliance. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h), Exemptions,
a manufacturer may seek an exemption from these notification and remedy
requirements on the basis that the defect or noncompliance is
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety. NHTSA exercised
this statutory authority to excuse inconsequential defects or
noncompliances when it promulgated 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for
Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance. This regulation establishes
the procedures for manufacturers to submit exemption petitions to the
agency and the procedures the agency will use in evaluating those
petitions. The petition must state the full name and address of the
applicant, the nature of its organization (e.g., individual,
partnership, or corporation), and the name of the State or country
under the laws of which it is organized. See 49 CFR 556.4(b)(3). The
petition must also describe the motor vehicle or item of replacement
equipment, including the number involved and the period of production,
and the defect or noncompliance concerning which an exemption is
sought. See 49 CFR 556.4(b)(4). The petition must also set forth all
data, views, and arguments of the petitioner supporting the petition,
and be accompanied by three copies of the report the manufacturer has
submitted, or is submitting, to NHTSA in accordance with 49 CFR part
573, relating to its determination of the existence of the safety-
related defect or noncompliance that is the subject of the petition.
See 49 CFR 556.4(b)(5) and (6). These requirements allow the agency to
ensure that inconsequentiality petitions are both properly
substantiated and efficiently processed.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit entities that
manufacture or import motor vehicles or motor vehicle replacement
equipment.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 150 hours.
    Comments are Invited On: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of

the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
    A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30
days of publication.

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014-07945 Filed 4-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 184 (Thursday, September 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65286-65289]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22760]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0209; FRL-9952-74-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Alabama and North Carolina; Interstate
Transport--2010 NO2 Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
revision to the North Carolina SIP, submitted by the

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) on March
24, 2016, and the portions of a revision to the Alabama State
Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Alabama Department of
Environmental Management (ADEM) on December 9, 2015, addressing the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) interstate transport (prongs 1 and 2)
infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2010 1-hour Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The CAA
requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, commonly
referred to as an ``infrastructure SIP.'' Specifically, EPA is
approving North Carolina's March 24, 2016, SIP submission and the
portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015, SIP submission addressing
interstate transport requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for these actions under Docket
Identification No EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0209. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information 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 Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman of the Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Lakeman can be reached by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    By statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA are to be submitted by states within three years after
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the new or revised
NAAQS. EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for
the purpose of satisfying the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) require states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements
for monitoring, basic program requirements, and legal authority that
are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the newly
established or revised NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(1)
provides the procedural and timing requirements for infrastructure
SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet
for the infrastructure SIP requirements related to a newly established
or revised NAAQS. The contents of an infrastructure SIP submission may
vary depending upon the data and analytical tools available to the
state, as well as the provisions already contained in the state's
implementation plan at the time in which the state develops and submits
the submission for a new or revised NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four distinct
components, commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed
in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit
any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 1) and from interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in
another state (prong 2). EPA sometimes refers to these two prongs
conjointly as the ``good neighbor'' provision of the CAA. The third and
fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are
provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration
of air quality in another state (prong 3) and from interfering with
measures to protect visibility in another state (prong 4). Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions ensuring
compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate
and international pollution abatement.
    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on August 1,
2016 (81 FR 50409), EPA proposed to approve North Carolina's March 24,
2016, SIP submission and the portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015,
SIP submission addressing interstate transport requirements for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS. The NPRM provides additional detail
regarding the rationale for EPA's actions, including further discussion
of the requirements for prongs 1 and 2. Comments on the proposed
rulemaking were due on or before August 31, 2016. EPA received no
adverse comments on the proposed actions. All other applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements for Alabama and North Carolina for the
2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS have been or will be addressed in
separate rulemakings.

II. Final Actions

    As described previously, EPA is approving North Carolina's March
24, 2016, SIP revision and the portions of Alabama's December 9, 2015,
SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 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, these
actions merely approve state law as meeting federal requirements and do
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, these actions:
     Are not ``significant regulatory actions'' 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);
     do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     are 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.);
     do 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);
     do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     are 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
     do 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).

The SIPs are 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 rules do
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will they 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 these actions 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. These actions are not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of these actions must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals
for the appropriate circuit by November 21, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of these actions 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. These actions 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, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 13, 2016.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    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 B--Alabama

0
2. Section 52.50(e) is amended by adding a new entry for ``110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 NO2
NAAQS--Update'' at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.50  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Alabama Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               State
   Name of nonregulatory  SIP     Applicable  geographic  submittal date/  EPA approval date      Explanation
            provision             or  nonattainment area  effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)           Alabama...............       12/9/2015  9/22/2016, [Insert  Addressing Prongs
 Infrastructure Requirements for                                           Federal Register    1 and 2 of
 the 2010 NO2 NAAQS--Update.                                               citation].          Section
                                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I
                                                                                ) only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart II--North Carolina

0
3. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry ``Good Neighbor
Provisions (Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) for the 2010 1-hour
NO2 NAAQS'' at the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                              EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         State       EPA approval      Federal Register
             Provision              effective date       date              citation             Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Good Neighbor Provisions (Section        3/24/2016       9/22/2016  [Insert Federal        .....................
 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) for the 2010                                    Register citation]
 1-hour NO2 NAAQS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-22760 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 23288]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09088]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Membership of Performance Review Board For Senior
Executives (PRB)

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby provides notice of
the membership of its Performance Review Board (PRB) for the
Commission's Senior Executive Service (SES) members. The function of
this board is to make recommendations relating to the performance of
senior executives in the Commission. This action is undertaken in
accordance with Title 5, U.S.C., Section 4314(c)(4).
    The Commission's PRB will remove the following members:

David L. Morenoff

    The Commission's PRB will add the following members:

Max J. Minzner

    Dated: April 14, 2016.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-09088 Filed 4-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


The size of all the documents in these folders is 50 MB.  Because of the
unusually large size of these documents they are not available for
download from www.regulations.gov. Copies of these documents (listed
below) are available for public inspection at the EPA Region III address
listed in the Federal Register Proposed Rules document. For further
information, EPA Region III’s point of contact (POC) is listed in this
docket.

File Folder:	Appendices

Files:	APPENDICES-cover page.pdf

Appendix 1-1a Contribution Assessment Chapt_1-9--2006[1].1006.pdf

Appendix 1-1b A- Supplement_Brigantine_8[1].25.06.pdf

Appendix 3-1 Final Intermin Principles for Regional Haze.pdf

Appendix 4-1a US DOI Letter - Delaware Comments.pdf

Appendix 4-1b DNREC Responses to DOI Comments.pdf

Appendix 7-1 MANE-VU_2002 Base Year Final_V3_TSD_11-20-06.pdf

Appendix 7-2 MANEVU 2002 Inventory data.pdf

Appendix 7-3 EGU_Projections_Summary_Final.pdf

Appendix 7-4 MANEVU_Emission_Projections_TSD_.pdf

Appendix 7-5 Emission Projection Tables.pdf

Appendix 7-6 Reg 24 VOC controls.pdf

Appendix 8-1 BART Letters.pdf

Appendix 8-2a City of Dover BART final Analysis and Proposal 060207.pdf

Appendix 8-2b City of Dover - MRS - BART Analysis Addendum to FLM.pdf

Appendix 8-2c Indian River NRG addendum.pdf

Appendix 8-2d Indian River NRG.pdf

Appendix 8-2e Edge Moor BART final report 7 22 08 .pdf

Appendix 8-3 Reg. 30 Title V.pdf

Appendix 8-4 DE Regulation 1102.pdf

Appendix 8-5 Claymont Steel Permit 7-2-08.pdf

Appendix 8-6 Multi_p_TechSptDoc1.pdf

Appendix 8- 2d Edge Moor BARTre-submittal report final 6 25 07 submt to
DNREC 7 3 07.pdf

Appendix 9-1 Baseline and Natural_Background Visibility Conditions.pdf

Appendix 9-2 The Nature of the Fine Particle and Regional Haze Problems
in MANEVU Class I.pdf

Appendix 9-3 Assessment of RPG for RH in MANEVU.pdf

Appendix 9-4 Five Factor Analysis of BART-Eligible Sources.pdf

Appendix 9-5 BART_Control_Assessment.pdf

Appendix 9-6 Modeling_for_Reasonable_Progress_Final_021208[1].pdf

Appendix 9-7 2018 Visibility Projections FINAL 05 13 08.pdf

Appendix 9-8 Non-EGU Source Shutdowns in MANEVU.pdf

Appendix 9-9 Top_EGU_list_  the 167 FINAL list.pdf

Appendix 9-10 Construction_TSD_102006.pdf

Appendix 9-11 Hopke Receptor Modeling Study Final Report.pdf

Appendix 9-12 Pages from Inter-RPO Consultation Briefing book_vol
1[1].pdf

Appendix 10-1 Final_consultation_framework_060510[1].pdf

File Folder:	Final Marked and Unmarked SIP to EPA - Narrative

Files:	DE_ Proposed_Visibility_SIP_draft_SOUL 9_24_08.pdf


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 202 (Friday, October 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58704-58706]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23021]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93371; File No. SR-OCC-2021-011]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Concerning the Interest Rates Used for Options Pricing in the STANS
Methodology Description

October 18, 2021.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Exchange Act'' or ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice
is hereby given that on October 6, 2021, the Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by OCC. OCC filed the
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \3\ of the Act and
Rule 19b-4(f)(1) \4\ thereunder so that the proposal was effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the
Proposed Rule Change

    OCC is filing a proposed rule change to make clarifying changes to
OCC's System for Theoretical Analysis and Numerical Simulation
(``STANS'') Methodology Description concerning the interest rates used
for options pricing. The proposed changes to OCC's STANS Methodology
Description are contained in confidential Exhibit 5 of filing SR-OCC-
2021-011. Material proposed to be added to the STANS Methodology
Description as currently in effect is underlined and material proposed
to be deleted is marked in strikethrough text. All capitalized terms
not defined herein have the same meaning as set forth in the OCC By-
Laws and Rules.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ OCC's By-Laws and Rules can be found on OCC's public
website: https://www.theocc.com/Company-Information/Documents-and-Archives/By-Laws-and-Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, OCC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A),
(B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these
statements.

(A) Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Proposed Rule Change

(1) Purpose
Background
    STANS is OCC's proprietary risk management system for calculating
Clearing Member margin requirements.\6\ The STANS methodology utilizes
large-scale Monte Carlo simulations to forecast price and volatility
movements in determining a Clearing Member's margin requirement.\7\
STANS margin requirements are calculated at the portfolio level of
Clearing Member accounts with positions in marginable securities and
consists of an estimate of two primary components: A base component and
a concentration/dependence stress test add-on component. The base
component is an estimate of a 99% expected shortfall \8\

over a two-day time horizon. The concentration/dependence stress test
add-on is obtained by considering increases in the expected margin
shortfall for an account that would occur due to (i) market movements
that are especially large and/or in which certain risk factors would
exhibit perfect or zero correlations rather than correlations otherwise
estimated using historical data or (ii) extreme and adverse
idiosyncratic movements for individual risk factors to which the
account is particularly exposed. OCC uses the STANS methodology to
measure the exposure of portfolios of options and futures cleared by
OCC and cash instruments in margin collateral.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Exchange Act Release No. 91079 (Feb. 8, 2021), 86 FR
9410 (Feb. 12, 2021) (File No. SR-OCC-2020-016). OCC makes its STANS
Methodology description available to Clearing Members. An overview
of the STANS methodology is available at https://www.theocc.com/Risk-Management/Margin-Methodology.
    \7\ See OCC Rule 601.
    \8\ The expected shortfall component is established as the
estimated average of potential losses higher than the 99% value at
risk threshold. The term ``value at risk'' or ``VaR'' refers to a
statistical technique that, generally speaking, is used in risk
management to measure the potential risk of loss for a given set of
assets over a particular time horizon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the STANS methodology, the interest rate discount curve is a
critical input for OCC's pricing models. OCC's pricing models are
developed using the Black-Scholes framework. OCC uses the interest rate
curve, which is constructed from market instruments, along with
dividends, implied borrow cost, and implied volatility to specify
underlying price dynamics. OCC uses this data along with exchange
listed option price data to calibrate the implied borrow cost and
implied volatility parameters used in the option pricing models. STANS
margins are computed using models to generate 10,000 scenarios on
underlying price and implied volatility, and those price and implied
volatility scenarios are used as inputs to the option pricing model
(along with the interest rate curve) to re-price the options. The
margin base component is then determined from the profit-and-loss
distribution of the scenario prices.
    OCC currently constructs the interest rate discount curve using
instruments referencing the London Interbank Offered Rate (``LIBOR'').
LIBOR is a key benchmark interest rate at which major global banks lend
to one another in the international interbank market for short-term
loans. LIBOR is also commonly used by financial market participants
more broadly to gauge prevailing interest rates; however, financial
market participants are expected to largely transition away from the
use of LIBOR by the end of 2021.\9\ Accordingly, OCC intends to
transition to a new benchmark rate for constructing its interest rate
curve to align with this industry transition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See https://www.sec.gov/news/public-statement/libor-transition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The STANS Methodology Description currently provides a general
description of OCC's method for constructing the interest rate discount
curve but does not specify any particular benchmark rate.\10\ While the
STANS Methodology Description is intended to provide flexibility in the
benchmark rate used, the document contains certain details of the
interest rate curve construction process that more closely reflect the
use of LIBOR as the benchmark rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Changes
    OCC proposes to revise its STANS Methodology Description to clean
up certain details regarding the interest rate curve construction
process. Section 3.2 of the STANS Methodology Description describes
OCC's method for constructing the interest rate discount curve used to
accurately price the options cleared by OCC. While the STANS
Methodology Description does not specify the interest rate used in this
process, the document contains certain details that more closely
reflect the use of LIBOR as the benchmark rate. As noted above, the
industry plans to transition away from using LIBOR as the benchmark for
short-term interest rates by the end of 2021. OCC therefore proposes
additional clarifying and clean up changes to the STANS Methodology
Description so that the methodology more accurately reflects the
potential use of different industry standard benchmark rates to
construct the interest rate discount curve in STANS.
(2) Statutory Basis
    OCC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with Section
17A of the Act \11\ and the rules thereunder applicable to OCC. Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \12\ requires, in part, that the rules of a
clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of derivative agreements, contracts, and
transactions and to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds
which are in its custody or control or for which it is responsible. The
proposed rule change would make minor changes to the STANS Methodology
Description to clarify the use of different industry benchmark interest
rates used for discounting options pricing. The proposed rule change
would ensure that OCC's STANS methodology documentation remains
accurate and is aligned with standard industry practice after the
industry transitions away from LIBOR. OCC uses the margin it collects
from a defaulting Clearing Member to protect other Clearing Members
from losses that may result from the default and ensure that OCC is
able to continue the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
its cleared products. Moreover, OCC believes that accurate calculation
of margin requirements is necessary to help OCC manage the risk of a
Clearing Member default without recourse to the assets of non-
defaulting Clearing Members, which supports the safeguarding of
securities and funds in OCC's custody or control. OCC believes that the
proposed rule change would result in more accurate documentation for
its margin methodology and is therefore consistent with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Act Rules 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (iii) \14\ further require
that a covered clearing agency establish, implement, maintain and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to cover
its credit exposures to its participants by establishing a risk-based
margin system that, among other things: (1) Considers, and produces
margin levels commensurate with, the risks and particular attributes of
each relevant product, portfolio, and market and (2) calculates margin
sufficient to cover its potential future exposure to participants in
the interval between the last margin collection and the close out of
positions following a participant default. The proposed rule change
would result in more accurate documentation for OCC's STANS margin
methodology, particularly once the industry and OCC transition away
from LIBOR later this year. OCC therefore believes the proposed rule
change would result in more accurate policies and procedures that are
reasonably designed to produce margin levels commensurate with the
risks and particular attributes of its cleared options and calculate
margin sufficient to cover its potential future exposure to
participants in the interval between the last margin collection and the
close out of positions following a participant default. In this way,
OCC believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of Rules 17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (iii).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (iii).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(i) and (iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Section 17A(b)(3)(I) of the Act \16\ requires that the rules of a
clearing agency not impose any burden on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. OCC does not
believe that the proposed rule change

would have any impact or impose a burden on competition. The proposed
rule change would make clarifying and clean up changes to OCC's margin
methodology concerning the industry benchmark interest rates used for
discounting options pricing. OCC does not believe that the proposed
rule change would unfairly inhibit access to OCC's services or
disadvantage or favor any particular user in relationship to another
user. OCC therefore does not believe that the proposed rule change
would have any impact or impose a burden on competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(C) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change
Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments on the proposed rule change were not and are not
intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change and
none have been received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act,\17\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(1) thereunder,\18\ the proposed rule change is filed for immediate
effectiveness because it constitutes a stated policy, practice, or
interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or
enforcement of an existing rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Notwithstanding its immediate effectiveness, implementation
of this rule change will be delayed until this change is deemed
certified under CFTC Rule 40.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-OCC-2021-011 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2021-011. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's website at
https://www.theocc.com/Company-Information/Documents-and-Archives/By-Laws-and-Rules.
    All comments received will be posted without change. Persons
submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit
personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2021-011 and
should be submitted on or before November 12, 2021.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-23021 Filed 10-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P