MEMORANDUM TO: Charles Tamulonis cc: Lynn Knight, ERG Shari Barash, EPA FROM: Jim Buchert, Kathy Coon 110476.1000.017 File DATE: December 31, 2001 SUBJECT: Tasks in Technical Directive of December 6, 2001 Regarding the MP& M Rule This Memorandum is in response to your Technical Directive of December 6, 2001, under Work Assignment: 0 17, of Contract No: 68 C01 073, where you requested ERG to perform several tasks in regard to the MP& M rule. Each task of your Technical Directive is discussed separately below.

Tasks 1 & 2. Read the highlighted portions of the comments attached to Elenda Besedin's email, and check the bioconcentration factor for lead in fish tissue Versar recommends the following responses to the commenter's concerns:

Comment 1: " EPA used a bioconcentration factor of 49 L/ kg for estimating lead concentrations in fish, but other recent EPA documents proposed a bioconcentration for lead in fish tissue of 0.09 L/ kg, a differential factor of more than 500."

Response:

EPA believes the use of a BCF value of 49 L/ kg for lead in fish tissue is justified. This value, which indicates that lead has a slight potential to bioaccumulate, is based on the " weighted average BCF for lead and the edible portion of all freshwater and estuarine aquatic organisms consumed by Americans" as reported in the 1980 ambient water quality criteria document for lead ( EPA 440/ 5 80 057). This value is also currently reported in the 1996 Superfund Chemical Data Matrix ( EPA 540/ R 96/ 028). The median BCF value of 42 for fish, presented in ATSDR's Toxicological Profile for Lead is very similar. Typically, a conservative value ( i. e., the highest BCF) among comparable candidate values is selected for human health effect estimations. In the case of lead, the value of 49 L/ kg was selected by EPA. EPA considers its selection to be consistent with the BCF value and guidelines used in numerous past rule makings.

Comment 2: " For the 31 pollutants projected to exceed aquatic life based AWQC, numerical water quality criteria are available for only 14. EPA has, therefore, imputed water quality criteria from some unknown source and both their applicability and validity are suspect until substantial scientific and peerreviewed data are provided in the record. Nearly 56 percent of the baseline exposures in EPA's assessment are attributable to pollutants for which no AWQC exist."

Response:

As acknowledged by the commentor, ideally, EPA would have developed a full suite of ambient freshwater and saltwater quality criteria for the protection of aquatic life and human health for all 2 pollutants considered in the environmental benefits assessment. However, EPA has not been able to develop this suite of criteria and thus, must estimate " criteria values" using available data within the context of a scientifically defensible methodology for prioritizing and selecting values most representative of a chemical's toxicity. The methodology developed by EPA for selecting these values is explained in Attachment 1] References and codes for the values used for the pollutants of concern are also provided ( See Attachments 2 and 3). The record has been updated accordingly.

Comment 3: " EPA included two chemicals in the projected exceedances for human health based AWQC for which there are no AWQC, p cresol and pyridine. EEBA, Table E. 8. Theses chemicals account for 18 of 11,343 exceedances at baseline conditions, resulting in a modest overestimate of projected exceedances."

Response:

See response to Comment 2.

Comment 4: " In its environmental benefits analysis, EPA projected substantial reductions in water quality exceedances associated with manganese and iron. The naturally occurring concentrations of these two constituents are often above the water quality criteria concentrations. Furthermore, the projected reduction in water quality exceedances associated with consumption of organisms is attributable to only two compounds  arsenic and manganese. Such exceedances attributable solely to manganese comprise about 51 percent of this total. Accordingly, it is inappropriate to include manganese and iron in the evaluation of benefitting reaches, unless background levels of these elements are taken into consideration."

Response:

EPA does not agree with the commentor's contention that manganese and iron should not be considered pollutants of concern because they are common components of natural waters. EPA acknowledges that both manganese and iron may be present at concentrations that may be greater than the water quality criteria concentrations. However, the environmental assessment assumes that the background concentrations of each pollutant, both in the receiving stream and in the POTW influent are equal to zero; therefore, the analysis evaluates only the impacts of discharging facilities. This is consistent with the assessments conducted for other rule makings. In addition, the toxicological data for these compounds indicate that above certain concentrations, impacts may occur.

Comment 5: " Of the 31 chemicals presented in Table X 1, numerical AWQC are actually available for only 14. EPA has not provided the proper information in the record showing and justifying the values used for AWQC for these constituents. Until such justification is provided, exceedances attributed to these constituents are not valid. For the constituents in question, removal of acute and chronic exceedances due to unjustified AWQC represents a decrease in baseline exceedances of 8 percent and 39 percent, respectively."

Response: 1Note that the technical directive cites incorrect table references. The aquatic life values in Appendix E are in Table E. 3, not E. 10. Also, Table 13.3 appears to only include POCs for which human health values have been used. The complete list of all POCs is in Table E. 2. In addition, phosphate ( but not elemental phosphorus) is on the list of aquatic life and human values in Appendix E, Tables E. 3 and E. 2; conversely, elemental phosphorus ( but not phosphate) is on the list of human health values in Table 13.3. We have included phosphate on our tables in Attachment 2 based on your directions. Diethyl ether has not been included even though it appears on Table 13.3, but not on Tables E. 2 or E. 3 ( which state 132 POCs in the title, but include only 131 POCs). This was also based on your direction.

3 See response to Comment 2.

Comment 6: These sulfide exceedances comprise 25 percent of all projected chronic aquatic life exceedances. In addition, sulfide comprises 17 percent of the projected reductions in exceedances based on the proposed option. However, sulfide is a very volatile constituent, and is likely transient and shortlived once it enters a receiving stream. It is likely that any benefits attributable to sulfide are overestimated."

Response:

Hydrogen sulfide is a soluble, highly poisonous, gaseous compound having the characteristic odor of rotten eggs. It will dissolve in water at 4,000 mg/ L at 20 ° C and 1 atmosphere of pressure. When soluble sulfides are added to water, they react with hydrogen ions to form HS! or H2S, the proportion of each depending on the pH. The degree of hazard exhibited by sulfide to aquatic animal life is dependent on the temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen. At lower pH values a greater proportion is in the form of the toxic undissociated H2S. Long term data, both in field situations and under controlled conditions, demonstrate hydrogen sulfide toxicity at low concentrations. EPA has established AWQC at 2 µ g/ L ( chronic aquatic life).

EPA also recognizes that the hazard from hydrogen sulfide to aquatic life is often localized and transient. However, the environmental assessment is designed to evaluate aquatic life impacts at the point of discharge, not considering pollutant fate processes, using estimated concentrations that are environmentally conservative. These assumptions are consistent with other rulemakings.

Task 3. Check the numbers for all the AWQCs ( AWQCs for human health and those for Aquatic Life) used for the MP& M rule. You can find tables of the AWQCs for the MP& M rule in the Economic, Environmental, and Benefits Assessment in Chapter 13 ( Table 13.3 for Human AWQCs) and Appendix E for aquatic life ( in particular Table E. 10). The EEBA can be found, by chapter, on the MP& M website at: " www. epa. gov/ ost/ guide/ mpm/ rule. html" 1 This task was accomplished by comparing the aquatic life values in the current version of EPA's Toxics Data Base ( TDB) to the aquatic life values in Appendix E, Table E. 3 of the MP& M Economic, Environmental, and Benefits Assessment. Similarly, the human health values in the current version of EPA's Toxics Data Base ( TDB) were compared to the human health values in Appendix E, Table E. 2 of the MP& M Economic, Environmental, and Benefits Assessment. The inconsistencies discovered are discussed below in Table 1. Please note the units for the Henry's Law Constants ( HLC) in the TDB are atm m3/ mol. 4 Table 1: Inconsistencies With Human Health and Aquatic Life Toxicity Data Chemical CAS Number Comments Fluorene 86737 A Bioconcentration Factor ( BCF) of 30 L/ kg is given in Table E. 3. The BCF was revised to 288 L/ kg on April 26, 2000. Based on this revised BCF, the Human Health, water and organisms value was revised to 720 µ g/ L and the Human Health, organisms only value was revised to 1,500 µ g/ L. The EPA WAM was notified of this change. See Toxic and Pollutant Weighting Factor Report, August, 2000.

N nitrosopiperidine 100754 The BCF value is missing on Table E. 3. The BCF should be 1.1 L/ kg. This value has remained the same in the TDB since at least 1994.

Diphenyl Ether 101848 References for toxicity and physical/ chemical property data as reported in Tables E. 2 and E. 3 are unknown. Versar did not supply these values. Since 1994, the TDB reflects values for diphenyl ether as noted here: BCF value = 930 L/ kg; Koc value = 7,800; Acute Freshwater Aquatic Life value = 4,000 µ g/ L; and Chronic Saltwater Aquatic Life value = 240 µ g/ L. The current version of the TDB does not have a value for biodegradation half life.

2,4 dimethylphenol 105679 HLC was revised to 9.51E 7 atm m3/ mol on May 15, 2000. The EPA WAM was notified of this change.

p Cresol 106445 HLC was revised to 1.0E 6 atm m3/ mol on May 15, 2000. The EPA WAM was notified of this change.

Xylene, m 108383 HLC was revised to 7.18E 3 atm m3/ mol on May 15, 2000. The EPA WAM was notified of this change.

Nickel 7440020 The drinking water value of 100 µ g/ L was remanded in 1995. The EPA WAM was notified of this change.

Ammonia as N 7664417 The chronic freshwater aquatic life value of 2,280 µ g/ L was revised to 3,060 µ g/ L on January 19, 2000, based on December 1999 AWQC update. The EPA WAM was notified of this change. See Toxic and Pollutant Weighting Factor Report, August 2000. HLC was revised to 1.61E 5 atm m3/ mol on May 15, 2000.

Sulfide 18496258 BCF and RfD values missing on Tables E. 3 and E. 2. BCF should be 3.1 L/ kg and RfD should be 0.003 mg/ kg/ day. Based on this new BCF and RfD, the human health, water and organisms value is 100 µ g/ L and the human health, organisms only value is 10,000 µ g/ L. The EPA WAM was notified of this change. See Toxic and Pollutant Weighting Factor Report, August 2000. These values were added to the TDB on February 23, 2000. 5 Task 4. Provide proper documentation for all AWQCs used in the analysis. We will need this for the record, but we can discuss whether we need a listing of references and citations or actual copies of studies.

All of the references for the AWQCs and physical chemical property data used in the analysis are provided in the tables located in Attachment 2. These references were originally provided in October 1999 and were revised for the August 2000 Toxic and Pollutant Weighting Factor Report. At a minimum, the tables contain the particular value and the reference. In some cases, additional information ( e. g., species) is provided to assist in the verification of the data. Citations for the reference numbers listed in the tables and a description of the codes are provided in Attachment 3.

Please note that we are unable to guarantee, as you requested, that the values reported in Attachment 2 will not change in the next 6 months to 1 year. At this time, we are not planning any revisions with the exception of dioxins and furans.

If you have any questions, please give us a call. A1 1 ATTACHMENT 1 Selection of Toxicity and Physical Chemical Property Data A1 2 Water Quality Criteria The analysis obtains the AWQC ( or toxic effect levels) for the protection of aquatic life and human health from a variety of sources, including EPA criteria documents, EPA's ASTER, and EPA's IRIS. It uses ecological toxicity estimations when published values are not available. The hierarchies used to select the appropriate aquatic life and human health values are described in the following sections.

( a) Aquatic Life EPA establishes AWQC for many pollutants for the protection of freshwater aquatic life ( acute and chronic criteria). The acute value represents a maximum allowable 1 hour average concentration of a pollutant at any time and can be related to acute toxic effects on aquatic life. The chronic value represents the average allowable concentration of a toxic pollutant over a 4 day period at which a diverse genera of aquatic organisms and their uses should not be unacceptably affected, provided that these levels are not exceeded more than once every 3 years.

For pollutants for which no AWQC are developed, the analysis uses specific toxicity values ( acute and chronic effect concentrations reported in published literature or estimated using various application techniques). When selecting values from the literature, the analysis prefers measured concentrations from flow through studies under typical pH and temperature conditions. The test organism has to be a North American resident species of fish or invertebrate. The hierarchies used to select the appropriate acute and chronic values are listed below in descending order of priority.

Acute Aquatic Life Values:

1. National acute freshwater/ saltwater quality criteria 2. Lowest reported acute test values ( 96 hour LC50 for fish and 48 hour EC50/ LC50 for daphnids)

3. Lowest reported LC50 test value of shorter duration, adjusted to estimate a 96 hour exposure period 4. Lowest reported LC50 test value of longer duration, up to a maximum of 2 weeks of exposure 5. Estimated 96 hour LC50 from the ASTER QSAR model Chronic Aquatic Life Values: A1 3 ( Eq. 1)

( Eq. 2) 1. National chronic freshwater/ saltwater quality criteria 2. Lowest reported maximum allowable toxicant concentration ( MATC), lowest observed effect concentration ( LOEC), or no observed effect concentration ( NOEC)

3. Lowest reported chronic growth or reproductive toxicity test concentration 4. Estimated chronic toxicity concentration from a measured acute: chronic ratio for a less sensitive species, QSAR model ( U. S. EPA, 1998/ 1999), or default acute: chronic ratio of 10: 1 ( b) Human Health EPA establishes AWQC for the protection of human health in terms of a pollutant's toxic effects,

including carcinogenic potential, using two exposure routes: ( 1) ingesting the pollutant via contaminated aquatic organisms only, and ( 2) ingesting the pollutant via both water and contaminated aquatic organisms. The values are determined as follows.

For Toxicity Protection ( ingestion of organisms only):

where:

HHoo = human health value ( µ g/ L) RfD = reference dose for a 70 kg individual ( mg/ day) IRf = fish ingestion rate ( 0.0065 kg/ day) BCF = bioconcentration factor ( L/ kg) CF = conversion factor for units ( 1,000 µ g/ mg)

For Carcinogenic Protection ( ingestion of organisms only):

where: A1 4 ( Eq. 3)

( Eq. 4) HHoo = human health value ( µ g/ L) BW = body weight ( 70 kg) RL = risk level ( 10 6) SF = cancer slope factor ( mg/ kg day) 1 IRf = fish ingestion rate ( 0.0065 kg/ day) BCF = bioconcentration factor ( L/ kg) CF = conversion factor for units ( 1,000 µ g/ mg)

For Toxicity Protection ( ingestion of water and organisms):

where:

HHwo = human health value ( µ g/ L) RfD = reference dose for a 70 kg individual ( mg/ day) IRw = water ingestion rate ( 2 L/ day) IRf = fish ingestion rate ( 0.0065 kg/ day) BCF = bioconcentration factor ( L/ kg) CF = conversion factor for units ( 1000 µ g/ mg)

For Carcinogenic Protection ( ingestion of water and organisms):

where:

HHwo = human health value ( µ g/ L) BW = body weight ( 70 kg) RL = risk level ( 10 6) SF = cancer slope factor ( mg/ kg day) 1 IRw = water ingestion rate ( 2 L/ day) IRf = fish ingestion rate ( 0.0065 kg/ day) BCF = bioconcentration factor ( L/ kg) CF = conversion factor for units ( 1,000 µ g/ mg) A1 5 The analysis derives the values for ingesting water and organisms by assuming an average daily ingestion rate of 2 liters of water, an average daily fish consumption rate of 6.5 grams of potentially contaminated fish products, and an average adult body weight of 70 kilograms ( U. S. EPA, 1991). If EPA has established a slope factor, the analysis uses values protective of carcinogenicity to assess the potential effects on human health.

The analysis develops protective concentration levels for carcinogens in terms of nonthreshold lifetime risk level, using criteria at a risk level of 10 6 ( 1E 6). This risk level indicates a probability of 1 additional case of cancer for every 1 million persons exposed. Toxic effects criteria for noncarcinogens include systemic effects ( e. g., reproductive, immunological, neurological, circulatory, or respiratory toxicity), organ specific toxicity, developmental toxicity, mutagenesis, and lethality.

The hierarchy used to select the most appropriate human health criteria values is listed below in descending order of priority:

1. Human health criteria values calculated using EPA's IRIS RfDs or SFs in conjunction with adjusted 3 percent lipid BCF values derived from Quality Criteria for Water ( U. S. EPA, 1980). Three percent is the mean lipid content of fish tissue reported in the study from which the average daily fish consumption rate of 6.5 g/ day is derived.

2. Human health criteria values calculated using current IRIS RfDs or SFs and representative BCF values for common North American species of fish or invertebrates or estimated BCF values.

3. Human health criteria values calculated using RfDs or SFs from EPA's HEAST or EPA's Region III RBC Table in conjunction with adjusted 3 percent lipid BCF values derived from Quality Criteria for Water ( U. S. EPA, 1980).

4. Human health criteria values calculated using current RfDs or SFs from HEAST or EPA's Region III RBC Table and representative BCF values for common North American species of fish or invertebrates or estimated BCF values.

5. Criteria from the Quality Criteria for Water ( U. S. EPA, 1980).

6. Human health values calculated using RfDs or SFs from data sources other than IRIS, HEAST, or Region III RBC Table.

This hierarchy is based on Section 2.4.6 of the Technical Support Document for Water Qualitybased Toxics Control ( U. S. EPA, 1991), which recommends using the most current risk information from A1 6 IRIS when estimating human health risks. In cases where chemicals have both RfDs and SFs from the same level of the hierarchy, the analysis calculates human health values using the formulas for carcinogenicity, which always result in the more stringent value, given the risk levels employed.

Physical Chemical Property Data The analysis uses 3 measures of physical chemical properties to evaluate environmental fate:

Henry's Law constant ( HLC), organic carbon adsorption partition coefficient ( Koc) and biodegradation half life ( BD).

HLC is the ratio of vapor pressure to solubility and is indicative of the propensity of a chemical to volatilize from surface water ( Lyman et al., 1982). The larger the HLC, the more likely that the chemical will volatilize. The analysis obtains most HLCs from EPA's Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances'

( OPTS) 1989 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Risk Screening Guide ( U. S. EPA, 1989), and Syracuse Research Corporation's CHEMFATE database.

Koc is indicative of the propensity of an organic compound to adsorb to soil or sediment particles and, therefore, to partition to such media. The larger the Koc, the more likely that the chemical will adsorb to solid material. The analysis obtains most Kocs from Syracuse Research Corporation's CHEMFATE database.

The biodegradation half life ( BD) is the empirically derived length of time during which half the amount of a chemical in water is degraded by microbial action in the presence of oxygen. BD is indicative of the environmental persistence of a chemical released into the water column. The analysis obtains most BDs from the Handbook of Environmental Degradation Rates ( Howard, 1991). A2 1 ATTACHMENT 2 Toxicity and Physical Chemical Property Data Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Value Code Species Ref Value Code Species Ref Value Ref Number Chemical Name ( L/ kg) 1 51285 2,4 DINITROPHENOL 1160 L9 RT 300 790 LM FM 301 1.51 1 2 57125 CYANIDE 22 C NA 1 5.2 C NA 1 1 1 3 59507 4 CHLORO 3 METHYLPHENOL 4050 L9 FM 301 1300 REP DM 300 79 114 4 62533 ANILINE 250 L4 DM 300 4 REP DM 300 19.9 200 5 62759 N NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE 280000 L9 SC 300 4000 ECGR GA 300 0.026 1 6 65850 BENZOIC ACID 180000 L9 MF 300 17178 @ LM FM 301 15 114 7 67641 2 PROPANONE 6210000 L9 FM 301 1866000 LN CD 300 0.39 200 8 67663 CHLOROFORM 13300 L9 BG 301 6300 REP DM 300 3.75 1 9 68122 N, N DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE 7100000 L9 BG 301 710000 @ A10 NA NA 0.005 17 10 75003 CHLOROETHANE 65614 @ L9 CF 301 21069 @ LM FM 301 7.2 200 11 75092 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 330000 L9 FM 301 82500 GRO FM 301 0.91 1 12 75150 CARBON DISULFIDE 2100 L4 DM 300 2 C NA 3 11.5 200 13 75354 1,1 DICHLOROETHENE 11600 L4 DM 300 5114 @ LM FM 301 5.6 1 14 75694 TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE 17387 @ L9 RT 301 6412 @ LM FM 301 49 114 15 78591 ISOPHORONE 120000 L4 DM 300 11000 GRO FM 300 4.38 1 16 78831 ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL 949000 L9 CY 301 4000 REP DM 300 2.2 34 17 78933 2 BUTANONE 3220000 L9 FM 301 233550 @ LM FM 301 1 200 18 79016 TRICHLOROETHENE 40700 L9 FM 301 14850 LL FL 300 10.6 1 19 80626 METHYL METHACRYLATE 191000 L9 BG 301 19100 @ AAB NA 2 6.6 200 20 83329 ACENAPHTHENE 580 L9 BR 301 208 GRO FM 301 242 1 21 84742 DI N BUTYL PHTHALATE 850 L9 FM 301 500 REP DM 300 89 1 22 85018 PHENANTHRENE 180 LR7 BA 301 19 GRO RT 301 486 1 23 85687 BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE 820 L9 RT 300 260 REP DM 301 414 1 24 86306 N NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE 5800 L9 BG 300 1000 LO DM 6 136 1 25 86737 FLUORENE 212 L4 DM 300 8 REP DM 300 288 1 26 88755 2 NITROPHENOL 160000 L9 FM 301 3451 @ LM FM 301 13.5 200 27 91203 NAPHTHALENE 1600 L9 RT 300 370 GRO CO 300 10.5 1 28 91576 2 METHYLNAPHTHALENE 1133 @ L9 RT 301 417 @ LM FM 301 2566 300 29 92524 BIPHENYL 360 L4 DM 301 230 REP DM 301 436 200 30 95476 O XYLENE 3820 L4 DM 300 1332 @ LM FM 301 208 191 31 95487 O CRESOL 14000 L9 FM 301 2251 @ LM FM 301 18 200 32 98555 ALPHA TERPINEOL 12742 @ L9 RT 301 4879 @ LM FM 301 48 301 33 98862 ACETOPHENONE 162000 L9 FM 301 31094 @ LM FM 301 11 114 34 99876 P CYMENE 6500 L4 DM 300 237 @ LM FM 301 770 114 35 100027 4 NITROPHENOL 7680 L4 DM 300 1300 REP DM 300 79 200 36 100414 ETHYLBENZENE 9090 L9 FM 301 4600 ECGR GA 300 37.5 1 37 100425 STYRENE 4020 L9 FM 301 402 @ A10 NA NA 13.5 200 38 100516 BENZYL ALCOHOL 10000 L9 BG 300 1000 @ A10 NA NA 4 114 39 100754 N NITROSOPIPERIDINE 1019538 @ L9 DM 301 282592 @ LM FM 301 1.1 200 40 101848 DIPHENYL ETHER 4000 L9 FM 301 213 @ LM FM 301 930 114 41 105679 2,4 DIMETHYLPHENOL 2120 L9 NA 1 1970 GRO FM 301 94 1 42 106445 P CRESOL 7500 L9 RT 301 2570 GRO FM 300 17.6 200 43 107028 ACROLEIN 14 L9 FM 301 5.8 @ ACR DM 1 215 1 44 108101 4 METHYL 2 PENTANONE 505000 L9 FM 301 50445 @ LM FM 301 2.4 200 45 108372 1 BROMO 3 CHLOROBENZENE 1784 @ L9 RT 301 682 @ LM FM 301 190 43 46 108383 M XYLENE 16000 L9 FM 301 3900 ECGR GA 300 208 191 47 108883 TOLUENE 5500 L9 CO 300 1000 REP DM 300 10.7 1 48 108907 CHLOROBENZENE 2370 L9 GF 301 2100 GRO RT 300 10.3 1 49 108952 PHENOL 4200 L4 DM 301 200 GRO RT 301 1.4 1 50 110861 PYRIDINE 93800 L9 FM 301 25000 GRO DM 300 2 200 51 112403 N DODECANE 18000 L4 DM ( 1) 1300 LN DM ( 1) 14500 114 52 112958 N EICOSANE 18000 L4 DM ( 1) 1300 LN DM ( 1) 100000 301 53 117817 BIS( 2 ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE 130 1 54 117840 DI N OCTYL PHTHALATE 690 LR7 CF 1 69 @ A10 NA NA 5460 200 55 120127 ANTHRACENE 2.78 L9 BG 300 2.2 REP DM 300 478 1 56 122394 DIPHENYLAMINE 3790 L9 FM 301 734 @ LM FM 301 269 114 57 123911 1,4 DIOXANE 9850000 L9 FM 301 1457300 @ LM FM 301 0.4 200 58 124185 N DECANE 18000 L4 DM 300 1300 LN DM 300 8800 114 59 127184 TETRACHLOROETHENE 4990 L9 RT 301 510 GRO DM 300 30.6 1 60 129000 PYRENE 591 @ L9 RT 301 61 @ LM FM 301 1110 1 61 131113 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 33000 L4 DM 1 1700 LO DM 6 36 1 62 132650 DIBENZOTHIOPHENE 420 L4 DM 300 122 @ LM FM 301 1100 17 63 137304 ZIRAM / CYMATE 8 L9 FM 300 1.8 GRO RT 300 0.001 17 64 142621 HEXANOIC ACID 320000 L9 FM 301 15170 @ LM FM 301 16 114 65 206440 FLUORANTHENE 45 L4 CD 301 7.1 LC FM 300 1150 1 66 544763 N HEXADECANE 18000 L4 DM ( 1) 1300 LN DM ( 1) 32300 114 67 591786 2 HEXANONE 428000 L9 FM 301 38868 @ LM FM 301 6.6 114 68 593453 N OCTADECANE 18000 L4 DM ( 1) 1300 LN DM ( 1) 10100 114 69 606202 2,6 DINITROTOLUENE 18500 L9 FM 300 60 REP DM 300 12 200 Acute Values ( ug/ L) Chronic Values ( ug/ L) Bioconcentration Factor ( BCF) Table 1: Freshwater Aquatic Life Values A2  2 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Value Code Species Ref Value Code Species Ref Value Ref Number Chemical Name ( L/ kg) Acute Values ( ug/ L) Chronic Values ( ug/ L) Bioconcentration Factor ( BCF) Table 1: Freshwater Aquatic Life Values 70 629594 N TETRADECANE 18000 L4 DM ( 1) 1300 LN DM ( 1) 19500 114 71 629970 N DOCOSANE 530000 L4 DM 300 68000 LN DM 300 100000 301 72 630013 N HEXACOSANE 530000 L4 DM ( 1) 68000 LN DM ( 1) 73 630024 N OCTACOSANE 530000 L4 DM ( 1) 68000 LN DM ( 1) 74 638686 N TRIACONTANE 530000 L4 DM ( 1) 68000 LN DM ( 1) 75 646311 N TETRACOSANE 530000 L4 DM ( 1) 68000 LN DM ( 1) 100000 301 76 694804 1 BROMO 2 CHLOROBENZENE 2942 @ L9 RT 301 1196 @ LM FM 301 240 17 77 832699 1 METHYLPHENANTHRENE 555 @ L9 RT 301 54 @ LM FM 301 4790 17 78 1576676 3,6 DIMETHYLPHENANTHRENE 543 @ L9 RT 301 21 @ LM FM 301 33000 17 79 1730376 1 METHYLFLUORENE 627 @ L9 RT 301 115 @ LM FM 301 3300 17 80 2027170 2 ISOPROPYLNAPHTHALENE 540 @ L9 RT 301 78 @ LM FM 301 3200 17 81 7429905 ALUMINUM 750 C NA 1 87 C NA 1 231 1 82 7439896 IRON 1000 C NA 3 83 7439921 LEAD 65 C NA 1 2.5 C NA 1 49 18 84 7439954 MAGNESIUM 64700 L9 SC 300 6470 @ A10 NA NA 85215 190 85 7439965 MANGANESE 388 LO RT 15 86 7439976 MERCURY 1.4 C NA 1 0.77 C NA 1 5500 18 87 7439987 MOLYBDENUM 27.8 LO RT 15 88 7440020 NICKEL 470 C NA 1 52 C NA 1 47 1 89 7440224 SILVER 3.4 C NA 1 0.34 @ A10 NA NA 0.5 1 90 7440235 SODIUM 1640000 L4 DM 300 1020000 ECRE DM 300 91 7440280 THALLIUM 1400 L4 DM 1 40 LC FM 1 116 1 92 7440315 TIN 18.6 LO RT 15 93 7440326 TITANIUM 191 LO RT 15 94 7440360 ANTIMONY 3500 L4 CD 1 1600 LC FM 1 1 1 95 7440382 ARSENIC 340 C NA 1 150 C NA 1 44 1 96 7440393 BARIUM 410000 L4 DM 300 2813 LO RT 15 97 7440417 BERYLLIUM 130 L9 GU 1 5.3 LC DM 1 19 1 98 7440428 BORON 31.6 LO RT 15 99 7440439 CADMIUM 4.3 C NA 1 2.2 C NA 1 64 1 100 7440473 CHROMIUM 570 C NA 1 74 C NA 1 16 1 101 7440484 COBALT 1620 L4 DM 59 49 GRO FM 300 102 7440508 COPPER 13 C NA 1 9 C NA 1 360 1 103 7440575 GOLD 104 7440622 VANADIUM 11200 L9 FL 12 9 LO RT 15 105 7440655 YTTRIUM 106 7440666 ZINC 120 C NA 1 120 C NA 1 47 1 107 7440702 CALCIUM 200000 LO BG 300 108 7664417 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 13300 C NA 1 3060 C NA 1 109 7782492 SELENIUM 12.83 C NA 1 5 C NA 1 4.8 1 110 14265442 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 111 14808798 SULFATE 1000000 GRO DW 300 112 16887006 CHLORIDE 860000 C NA 1 230000 C NA 1 113 16984488 FLUORIDE 1600 L9 NA 14 160 @ A10 NA NA 114 18496258 TOTAL SULFIDE 2 C NA 1 3.1 114 115 18540299 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 16 C NA 1 11 C NA 1 16 1 116 20324338 TRIPROPYLENEGLYCOL METHYL ETHER 2484600 @ L9 DM 301 683870 @ LM FM 301 0.2 43 117 136777612 O+ P XYLENE 2600 L9 RT 300 1205 @ LM FM 301 208 191 118 179601231 M+ P XYLENE 2600 L9 RT 300 1205 @ LM FM 301 208 191 119 C003 BOD 5 DAY ( CARBONACEOUS) 120 C004 CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND ( COD) 121 C009 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 122 C010 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 123 C012 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON ( TOC) 124 C021 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN 125 C020 TOTAL RECOVERABLE PHENOLICS 126 C025 AMENABLE CYANIDE 127 C036 OIL AND GREASE ( AS HEM) 128 C037 TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ( AS SGT HEM) 129 C042 WEAK ACID DISSOCIABLE CYANIDE 130 PHOSPHORUS as PO4 131 OIL AND GREASE A2  3 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Number Chemical Name 1 51285 2,4 DINITROPHENOL 2 57125 CYANIDE 3 59507 4 CHLORO 3 METHYLPHENOL 4 62533 ANILINE 5 62759 N NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE 6 65850 BENZOIC ACID 7 67641 2 PROPANONE 8 67663 CHLOROFORM 9 68122 N, N DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE 10 75003 CHLOROETHANE 11 75092 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 12 75150 CARBON DISULFIDE 13 75354 1,1 DICHLOROETHENE 14 75694 TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE 15 78591 ISOPHORONE 16 78831 ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL 17 78933 2 BUTANONE 18 79016 TRICHLOROETHENE 19 80626 METHYL METHACRYLATE 20 83329 ACENAPHTHENE 21 84742 DI N BUTYL PHTHALATE 22 85018 PHENANTHRENE 23 85687 BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE 24 86306 N NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE 25 86737 FLUORENE 26 88755 2 NITROPHENOL 27 91203 NAPHTHALENE 28 91576 2 METHYLNAPHTHALENE 29 92524 BIPHENYL 30 95476 O XYLENE 31 95487 O CRESOL 32 98555 ALPHA TERPINEOL 33 98862 ACETOPHENONE 34 99876 P CYMENE 35 100027 4 NITROPHENOL 36 100414 ETHYLBENZENE 37 100425 STYRENE 38 100516 BENZYL ALCOHOL 39 100754 N NITROSOPIPERIDINE 40 101848 DIPHENYL ETHER 41 105679 2,4 DIMETHYLPHENOL 42 106445 P CRESOL 43 107028 ACROLEIN 44 108101 4 METHYL 2 PENTANONE 45 108372 1 BROMO 3 CHLOROBENZENE 46 108383 M XYLENE 47 108883 TOLUENE 48 108907 CHLOROBENZENE 49 108952 PHENOL 50 110861 PYRIDINE 51 112403 N DODECANE 52 112958 N EICOSANE 53 117817 BIS( 2 ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE 54 117840 DI N OCTYL PHTHALATE 55 120127 ANTHRACENE 56 122394 DIPHENYLAMINE 57 123911 1,4 DIOXANE 58 124185 N DECANE 59 127184 TETRACHLOROETHENE 60 129000 PYRENE 61 131113 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 62 132650 DIBENZOTHIOPHENE 63 137304 ZIRAM / CYMATE 64 142621 HEXANOIC ACID 65 206440 FLUORANTHENE 66 544763 N HEXADECANE 67 591786 2 HEXANONE 68 593453 N OCTADECANE 69 606202 2,6 DINITROTOLUENE Value Code Species Ref Value Code Species Ref Value Ref ( L/ kg) 1500 L9 SM 300 940 GRO SM 300 1.51 1 1 C NA 1 1 C NA 1 1 1 79 114 29400 L9 SS 300 2940 @ A10 NA NA 19.9 200 4300000 LA7 MC 300 430000 @ AAB NA NA 0.026 1 15 114 5640000 L9 GS 300 10000 GRO HC 300 0.39 200 19610 LD BS 301 1961 @ A10 NA NA 3.75 1 0.005 17 7.2 200 256000 L9 MS 1 2560 @ A10 NA NA 0.91 1 2 C NA 3 11.5 200 224000 L9 OS 300 22400 @ A10 NA NA 5.6 1 49 114 12900 L9 MS 1 1290 @ AAB NA NA 4.38 1 600000 L9 BR 300 60000 @ AAB NA NA 2.2 34 1287000 LA2 BR 300 128700 @ A10 NA NA 1 200 14000 L9 OS 300 2000 LC GS 1 10.6 1 6.6 200 970 L9 MS 1 710 LC SM 1 242 1 450 L9 SC 300 3.4 EC50 DF 300 89 1 110 LD BR 301 11 @ A10 NA NA 486 1 510 L9 SP 300 400 LN MS 5 414 1 3300000 L9 MC 1 33000 @ AAB NA NA 136 1 1000 L9 PW 300 100 @ AAB NA NA 288 1 32000 L9 SM 300 16000 LM SM 300 13.5 200 1200 L9 OG 300 120 GRO OG 300 10.5 1 600 L9 BW 300 60 @ A10 NA NA 2566 300 4600 L9 SM 300 460 @ A10 NA NA 436 200 6000 L9 DC 300 600 @ A10 NA NA 208 191 10200 L9 SC 300 1020 @ A10 NA NA 18 200 48 301 11 114 4400 L9 OS 300 440 @ A10 NA NA 770 114 7170 L9 MS 1 1900 GRO SM 300 79 200 430 L9 SB 1 43 @ A10 NA NA 37.5 1 9100 L9 SM 300 910 @ A10 NA NA 13.5 200 15000 L9 IS 300 1500 @ AAB NA NA 4 114 1.1 200 2400 L9 SM 300 240 @ A10 NA NA 930 114 94 1 NA NA NA NA 17.6 200 55 L9 EO 1 5.5 @ AAB NA NA 215 1 812000 L9 BR 300 81200 @ A10 NA NA 2.4 200 190 43 12000 L9 DC 300 1200 @ A10 NA NA 208 191 6300 L9 SB 1 5000 LC SM 1 10.7 1 10500 L9 SM 1 1050 @ AAB NA NA 10.3 1 5800 L9 GS 1 2410 REP OS 301 1.4 1 2 200 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 14500 114 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 100000 301 130 1 5460 200 40 E NA 25 16 E NA 25 478 1 269 114 0.4 200 500000 L9 SM 300 50000 @ A10 NA NA 8800 114 10200 L9 MS 1 450 LC MS 1 30.6 1 1110 1 58000 L9 SM 1 5800 @ AAB NA NA 36 1 1100 17 5200 LA4 LK 180 520 @ AAB NA 2 0.001 17 16 114 40 L9 MS 1 16 LV MS 1 1150 1 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 32300 114 6.6 114 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 10100 114 12 200 Acute Values ( ug/ L) Chronic Values ( ug/ L) Bioconcentration Factor ( BCF) Table 2: Saltwater Aquatic Life Values A2  4 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Number Chemical Name 70 629594 N TETRADECANE 71 629970 N DOCOSANE 72 630013 N HEXACOSANE 73 630024 N OCTACOSANE 74 638686 N TRIACONTANE 75 646311 N TETRACOSANE 76 694804 1 BROMO 2 CHLOROBENZENE 77 832699 1 METHYLPHENANTHRENE 78 1576676 3,6 DIMETHYLPHENANTHRENE 79 1730376 1 METHYLFLUORENE 80 2027170 2 ISOPROPYLNAPHTHALENE 81 7429905 ALUMINUM 82 7439896 IRON 83 7439921 LEAD 84 7439954 MAGNESIUM 85 7439965 MANGANESE 86 7439976 MERCURY 87 7439987 MOLYBDENUM 88 7440020 NICKEL 89 7440224 SILVER 90 7440235 SODIUM 91 7440280 THALLIUM 92 7440315 TIN 93 7440326 TITANIUM 94 7440360 ANTIMONY 95 7440382 ARSENIC 96 7440393 BARIUM 97 7440417 BERYLLIUM 98 7440428 BORON 99 7440439 CADMIUM 100 7440473 CHROMIUM 101 7440484 COBALT 102 7440508 COPPER 103 7440575 GOLD 104 7440622 VANADIUM 105 7440655 YTTRIUM 106 7440666 ZINC 107 7440702 CALCIUM 108 7664417 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 109 7782492 SELENIUM 110 14265442 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 111 14808798 SULFATE 112 16887006 CHLORIDE 113 16984488 FLUORIDE 114 18496258 TOTAL SULFIDE 115 18540299 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 116 20324338 TRIPROPYLENEGLYCOL METHYL ETHER 117 136777612 O+ P XYLENE 118 179601231 M+ P XYLENE 119 C003 BOD 5 DAY ( CARBONACEOUS) 120 C004 CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND ( COD) 121 C009 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 122 C010 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 123 C012 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON ( TOC) 124 C021 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN 125 C020 TOTAL RECOVERABLE PHENOLICS 126 C025 AMENABLE CYANIDE 127 C036 OIL AND GREASE ( AS HEM) 128 C037 TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ( AS SGT HEM) 129 C042 WEAK ACID DISSOCIABLE CYANIDE 130 PHOSPHORUS as PO4 131 OIL AND GREASE Value Code Species Ref Value Code Species Ref Value Ref ( L/ kg) Acute Values ( ug/ L) Chronic Values ( ug/ L) Bioconcentration Factor ( BCF) Table 2: Saltwater Aquatic Life Values 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 19500 114 500000 L9 SM 300 50000 @ A10 NA NA 100000 301 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 500000 L9 SM ( 1) 50000 @ A10 NA NA 100000 301 240 17 4790 17 33000 17 3300 17 3200 17 231 1 33000 L4 SS 300 3300 @ A10 NA NA 210 C NA 1 8.1 C NA 1 49 18 85215 190 10 GRO PO 300 1.8 C NA 1 0.94 C NA 1 5500 18 74 C NA 1 8.2 C NA 1 47 1 1.9 C NA 1 0.19 @ A10 NA NA 0.5 1 2130 L9 MS 1 213 @ A10 NA NA 116 1 4800 L9 PH 1 2900 LC IS 1 1 1 69 C NA 1 36 C NA 1 44 1 19 1 42 C NA 1 9.3 C NA 1 64 1 1100 L9 NA 1 50 C NA 1 16 1 NA 10 GRO PO 300 4.8 C NA 1 3.1 C NA 1 360 1 90 C NA 1 81 C NA 1 47 1 3800 570 290 C NA 1 71 C NA 1 4.8 1 2 C NA 1 3.1 114 1100 C NA 1 50 C NA 1 16 1 0.2 43 6000 L9 DC 300 600 @ A10 NA NA 208 191 6000 L9 DC 300 600 @ A10 NA NA 208 191 A2  5 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Number Chemical Name 1 51285 2,4 DINITROPHENOL 2 57125 CYANIDE 3 59507 4 CHLORO 3 METHYLPHENOL 4 62533 ANILINE 5 62759 N NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE 6 65850 BENZOIC ACID 7 67641 2 PROPANONE 8 67663 CHLOROFORM 9 68122 N, N DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE 10 75003 CHLOROETHANE 11 75092 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 12 75150 CARBON DISULFIDE 13 75354 1,1 DICHLOROETHENE 14 75694 TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE 15 78591 ISOPHORONE 16 78831 ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL 17 78933 2 BUTANONE 18 79016 TRICHLOROETHENE 19 80626 METHYL METHACRYLATE 20 83329 ACENAPHTHENE 21 84742 DI N BUTYL PHTHALATE 22 85018 PHENANTHRENE 23 85687 BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE 24 86306 N NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE 25 86737 FLUORENE 26 88755 2 NITROPHENOL 27 91203 NAPHTHALENE 28 91576 2 METHYLNAPHTHALENE 29 92524 BIPHENYL 30 95476 O XYLENE 31 95487 O CRESOL 32 98555 ALPHA TERPINEOL 33 98862 ACETOPHENONE 34 99876 P CYMENE 35 100027 4 NITROPHENOL 36 100414 ETHYLBENZENE 37 100425 STYRENE 38 100516 BENZYL ALCOHOL 39 100754 N NITROSOPIPERIDINE 40 101848 DIPHENYL ETHER 41 105679 2,4 DIMETHYLPHENOL 42 106445 P CRESOL 43 107028 ACROLEIN 44 108101 4 METHYL 2 PENTANONE 45 108372 1 BROMO 3 CHLOROBENZENE 46 108383 M XYLENE 47 108883 TOLUENE 48 108907 CHLOROBENZENE 49 108952 PHENOL 50 110861 PYRIDINE 51 112403 N DODECANE 52 112958 N EICOSANE 53 117817 BIS( 2 ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE 54 117840 DI N OCTYL PHTHALATE 55 120127 ANTHRACENE 56 122394 DIPHENYLAMINE 57 123911 1,4 DIOXANE 58 124185 N DECANE 59 127184 TETRACHLOROETHENE 60 129000 PYRENE 61 131113 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 62 132650 DIBENZOTHIOPHENE 63 137304 ZIRAM / CYMATE 64 142621 HEXANOIC ACID 65 206440 FLUORANTHENE 66 544763 N HEXADECANE 67 591786 2 HEXANONE 68 593453 N OCTADECANE 69 606202 2,6 DINITROTOLUENE Value Code Ref Value Code Ref Value Ref Value Ref 70 @ T 14000 @ T 0.002 303 700 @ T 220000 @ T 0.02 303 56000 @ T 270000 @ T 2 302 5.8 @ C 95 @ C 0.0057 303 0.00069 @ C 8.1 @ C 51 303 130000 @ T 2900000 @ T 4 303 3500 @ T 2800000 @ T 0.1 303 5.7 @ C 470 @ C 0.0061 303 0.01 303 3500 @ T 220000000 @ T 0.1 302 12 @ C 520 @ C 0.0029 305 0.4 305 4.7 @ C 1600 @ C 0.0075 303 0.06 303 3400 @ T 94000 @ T 0.1 303 0.057 @ C 3.2 @ C 0.6 303 0.009 303 9100 @ T 66000 @ T 0.3 303 36 @ C 2600 @ C 0.00095 303 0.2 303 10000 @ T 1500000 @ T 0.3 303 21000 @ T 6500000 @ T 0.6 303 3.1 @ C 92 @ C 0.011 305 0.006 305 48000 @ T 2300000 @ T 1.4 303 1200 @ T 2700 @ T 0.06 303 2700 @ T 12000 @ T 0.1 303 3000 @ T 5200 @ T 0.2 303 5 @ C 16 @ C 0.0049 303 720 @ T 1500 @ T 0.04 303 680 @ T 21000 @ T 0.02 303 75 @ T 84 @ T 0.02 305 720 @ T 1200 @ T 0.05 303 42000 @ T 100000 @ T 2 302 1700 @ T 30000 @ T 0.05 303 3400 @ T 98000 @ T 0.1 303 220 @ T 1100 @ T 0.008 305 3100 @ T 29000 @ T 0.1 303 6700 @ T 160000 @ T 0.2 303 10000 @ T 810000 @ T 0.3 302 540 @ T 2300 @ T 0.02 303 170 @ T 3100 @ T 0.005 302 410 @ T 1000 @ T 0.02 302 2800 @ T 360000 @ T 0.08 302 42000 @ T 100000 @ T 2 302 6800 @ T 200000 @ T 0.2 303 680 @ T 21000 @ T 0.02 303 21000 @ T 4600000 @ T 0.6 303 35 @ T 5400 @ T 0.001 303 1.8 @ C 5.9 @ C 0.014 303 0.02 303 37 @ T 39 @ T 0.02 302 4100 @ T 6800 @ T 0.3 303 470 @ T 1000 @ T 0.025 303 3.2 @ C 2400 @ C 0.011 303 320 @ T 3500 @ T 0.052 305 0.01 303 230 @ T 290 @ T 0.03 303 310000 C 1 2900000 C 1 700 @ T 220000000 @ T 0.02 146 300 @ T 370 @ T 0.04 303 1400 @ T 65000 @ T 0.04 305 34 @ T 900 @ T 0.001 302 Water & Organisms Organisms Only Slope Factor ( mg/ kg/ day) ( mg/ kg/ d) 1 Reference Dose ( RfD) Value ( ug/ L) Table 3: Human Health Values Value ( ug/ L)

A2  6 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Number Chemical Name 70 629594 N TETRADECANE 71 629970 N DOCOSANE 72 630013 N HEXACOSANE 73 630024 N OCTACOSANE 74 638686 N TRIACONTANE 75 646311 N TETRACOSANE 76 694804 1 BROMO 2 CHLOROBENZENE 77 832699 1 METHYLPHENANTHRENE 78 1576676 3,6 DIMETHYLPHENANTHRENE 79 1730376 1 METHYLFLUORENE 80 2027170 2 ISOPROPYLNAPHTHALENE 81 7429905 ALUMINUM 82 7439896 IRON 83 7439921 LEAD 84 7439954 MAGNESIUM 85 7439965 MANGANESE 86 7439976 MERCURY 87 7439987 MOLYBDENUM 88 7440020 NICKEL 89 7440224 SILVER 90 7440235 SODIUM 91 7440280 THALLIUM 92 7440315 TIN 93 7440326 TITANIUM 94 7440360 ANTIMONY 95 7440382 ARSENIC 96 7440393 BARIUM 97 7440417 BERYLLIUM 98 7440428 BORON 99 7440439 CADMIUM 100 7440473 CHROMIUM 101 7440484 COBALT 102 7440508 COPPER 103 7440575 GOLD 104 7440622 VANADIUM 105 7440655 YTTRIUM 106 7440666 ZINC 107 7440702 CALCIUM 108 7664417 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 109 7782492 SELENIUM 110 14265442 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 111 14808798 SULFATE 112 16887006 CHLORIDE 113 16984488 FLUORIDE 114 18496258 TOTAL SULFIDE 115 18540299 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 116 20324338 TRIPROPYLENEGLYCOL METHYL ETHER 117 136777612 O+ P XYLENE 118 179601231 M+ P XYLENE 119 C003 BOD 5 DAY ( CARBONACEOUS) 120 C004 CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND ( COD) 121 C009 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 122 C010 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 123 C012 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON ( TOC) 124 C021 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN 125 C020 TOTAL RECOVERABLE PHENOLICS 126 C025 AMENABLE CYANIDE 127 C036 OIL AND GREASE ( AS HEM) 128 C037 TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ( AS SGT HEM) 129 C042 WEAK ACID DISSOCIABLE CYANIDE 130 PHOSPHORUS as PO4 131 OIL AND GREASE Value Code Ref Value Code Ref Value Ref Value Ref Water & Organisms Organisms Only Slope Factor ( mg/ kg/ day) ( mg/ kg/ d) 1 Reference Dose ( RfD) Value ( ug/ L) Table 3: Human Health Values Value ( ug/ L)

20000 @ T 47000 @ T 1 305 300 T 1 0.3 305 50 T 1 100 T 1 0.14 303 0.05 T 1 0.051 T 1 0.005 303 610 @ T 4600 @ T 0.02 303 170 @ T 110000 @ T 0.005 303 1.8 @ T 6.5 @ T 0.00007 305 0.6 302 4 305 14 @ T 4300 @ T 0.0004 303 0.02 @ C 0.16 @ C 1.5 303 0.0003 303 1000 T 1 0.07 303 66 @ T 1100 @ T 0.002 303 0.09 303 14 @ T 84 @ T 0.0005 303 50000 @ T 1000000 @ T 1.5 303 0.06 305 650 @ T 1200 @ T 0.04 305 0.007 302 9100 @ T 69000 @ T 0.3 303 170 @ T 11000 @ T 0.005 303 0.06 303 100 @ T 10000 @ T 0.003 303 100 @ T 2000 @ T 0.003 303 42000 @ T 100000 @ T 2 302 42000 @ T 100000 @ T 2 302 A2  7 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Number Chemical Name 1 51285 2,4 DINITROPHENOL 2 57125 CYANIDE 3 59507 4 CHLORO 3 METHYLPHENOL 4 62533 ANILINE 5 62759 N NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE 6 65850 BENZOIC ACID 7 67641 2 PROPANONE 8 67663 CHLOROFORM 9 68122 N, N DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE 10 75003 CHLOROETHANE 11 75092 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 12 75150 CARBON DISULFIDE 13 75354 1,1 DICHLOROETHENE 14 75694 TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE 15 78591 ISOPHORONE 16 78831 ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL 17 78933 2 BUTANONE 18 79016 TRICHLOROETHENE 19 80626 METHYL METHACRYLATE 20 83329 ACENAPHTHENE 21 84742 DI N BUTYL PHTHALATE 22 85018 PHENANTHRENE 23 85687 BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE 24 86306 N NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE 25 86737 FLUORENE 26 88755 2 NITROPHENOL 27 91203 NAPHTHALENE 28 91576 2 METHYLNAPHTHALENE 29 92524 BIPHENYL 30 95476 O XYLENE 31 95487 O CRESOL 32 98555 ALPHA TERPINEOL 33 98862 ACETOPHENONE 34 99876 P CYMENE 35 100027 4 NITROPHENOL 36 100414 ETHYLBENZENE 37 100425 STYRENE 38 100516 BENZYL ALCOHOL 39 100754 N NITROSOPIPERIDINE 40 101848 DIPHENYL ETHER 41 105679 2,4 DIMETHYLPHENOL 42 106445 P CRESOL 43 107028 ACROLEIN 44 108101 4 METHYL 2 PENTANONE 45 108372 1 BROMO 3 CHLOROBENZENE 46 108383 M XYLENE 47 108883 TOLUENE 48 108907 CHLOROBENZENE 49 108952 PHENOL 50 110861 PYRIDINE 51 112403 N DODECANE 52 112958 N EICOSANE 53 117817 BIS( 2 ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE 54 117840 DI N OCTYL PHTHALATE 55 120127 ANTHRACENE 56 122394 DIPHENYLAMINE 57 123911 1,4 DIOXANE 58 124185 N DECANE 59 127184 TETRACHLOROETHENE 60 129000 PYRENE 61 131113 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 62 132650 DIBENZOTHIOPHENE 63 137304 ZIRAM / CYMATE 64 142621 HEXANOIC ACID 65 206440 FLUORANTHENE 66 544763 N HEXADECANE 67 591786 2 HEXANONE 68 593453 N OCTADECANE 69 606202 2,6 DINITROTOLUENE Value Temp Ref ( oF) Value Ref Value Ref Value Code Ref 0.000000443 NS 200 2386 191 263 229 45 114 16 301 200 M 304 0.0000025 NS 36 604 36 100 301 0.0000019 NS 200 54 206 26 206 0.000000263 NS 200 12 206 180 229 0.00000154 20 301 182 206 16 301 0.00004 NS 200 18 206 7 229 0.00367 NS 200 40 206 180 229 100 THM 304 0.000000018 25 43 6.1 43 16 301 0.00882 NS 200 37.6 206 28 229 0.00219 NS 200 28 206 28 229 5 M 304 0.0303 NS 200 89 206 0.0261 NS 200 343 206 180 229 7 M 304 0.097 25 206 93 206 360 229 0.00000576 NS 114 25 206 28 229 0.0000118 25 206 61.7 34 7.2 229 0.00006 NS 200 5.2 206 7 229 0.0103 NS 200 104 206 360 229 5 M 304 0.00034 25 200 22 200 28 229 0.00009 NS 18 3890 206 102 229 0.00000181 23 206 6310 206 23 229 0.00002 NS 206 18800 206 200 229 0.00000126 NS 200 17000 206 7 229 0.000005 NS 200 1200 206 34 229 0.00006 25 206 2830 206 60 229 0.00000947 NS 200 114 206 28 229 0.00048 NS 200 871 206 20 229 0.00052 NS 230 8500 206 20 301 0.0003 NS 200 1400 206 7 229 0.00519 NS 200 129 206 28 229 10000 M 304 0.0000012 NS 200 103 206 7 229 0.0000544 20 301 589 301 15 301 0.00001 NS 100 45 206 16 301 0.011 25 206 4000 114 100 301 4.15E 10 25 206 236 206 7 229 0.00788 NS 1 250 206 10 229 700 M 304 0.00283 NS 200 920 206 28 229 100 M 304 0.000000743 25 301 6.1 36 16 301 0.000000275 NS 200 9 206 180 229 0.000448 20 301 7800 36 0.000000951 25 206 18 206 7 229 0.000001 25 206 49 206 0.667 229 0.00012 NS 200 5 206 28 229 0.00014 NS 200 19 206 7 229 0.00078 25 43 1500 43 100 301 0.00718 25 206 190 206 28 229 10000 M 304 0.00664 NS 200 95 206 22 229 1000 M 304 0.00377 NS 200 275 206 150 229 100 M 304 0.000000333 NS 200 30.2 206 3.5 229 0.00000888 NS 200 5 200 7 229 95000 114 17 301 30000000 301 17 301 0.0000001 25 230 87420 206 23 229 6 M 304 0.000000445 NS 200 2390 206 28 229 0.00007 NS 200 16000 206 460 229 0.000000496 20 206 1910 34 20 301 0.0000048 NS 200 17 200 180 229 58200 114 17 301 0.0184 NS 200 363 206 360 229 5 M 304 0.000011 25 307 62700 206 1900 229 0.000000105 NS 200 40 206 7 229 0.00002 25 43 11000 43 0.4 114 0.0000225 20 301 38 36 12 301 0.0000161 25 307 41700 206 440 229 207000 114 17 301 0.000113 25 301 12 36 16 301 66900 114 17 301 0.000000747 NS 200 100 200 180 229 Henry's Law Constant ( Koc) Half life ( days) Drinking Water degradation Bio Coefficient Adsorption Table 4: Physical/ Chemical Properties Value ( ug/ L) ( atm/ m3 mole)

A2  8 3/ 11/ 2003 Attachment 2: AWQC Values and References for MP& M Rule CAS Number Chemical Name 70 629594 N TETRADECANE 71 629970 N DOCOSANE 72 630013 N HEXACOSANE 73 630024 N OCTACOSANE 74 638686 N TRIACONTANE 75 646311 N TETRACOSANE 76 694804 1 BROMO 2 CHLOROBENZENE 77 832699 1 METHYLPHENANTHRENE 78 1576676 3,6 DIMETHYLPHENANTHRENE 79 1730376 1 METHYLFLUORENE 80 2027170 2 ISOPROPYLNAPHTHALENE 81 7429905 ALUMINUM 82 7439896 IRON 83 7439921 LEAD 84 7439954 MAGNESIUM 85 7439965 MANGANESE 86 7439976 MERCURY 87 7439987 MOLYBDENUM 88 7440020 NICKEL 89 7440224 SILVER 90 7440235 SODIUM 91 7440280 THALLIUM 92 7440315 TIN 93 7440326 TITANIUM 94 7440360 ANTIMONY 95 7440382 ARSENIC 96 7440393 BARIUM 97 7440417 BERYLLIUM 98 7440428 BORON 99 7440439 CADMIUM 100 7440473 CHROMIUM 101 7440484 COBALT 102 7440508 COPPER 103 7440575 GOLD 104 7440622 VANADIUM 105 7440655 YTTRIUM 106 7440666 ZINC 107 7440702 CALCIUM 108 7664417 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 109 7782492 SELENIUM 110 14265442 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 111 14808798 SULFATE 112 16887006 CHLORIDE 113 16984488 FLUORIDE 114 18496258 TOTAL SULFIDE 115 18540299 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM 116 20324338 TRIPROPYLENEGLYCOL METHYL ETHER 117 136777612 O+ P XYLENE 118 179601231 M+ P XYLENE 119 C003 BOD 5 DAY ( CARBONACEOUS) 120 C004 CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND ( COD) 121 C009 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 122 C010 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 123 C012 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON ( TOC) 124 C021 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN 125 C020 TOTAL RECOVERABLE PHENOLICS 126 C025 AMENABLE CYANIDE 127 C036 OIL AND GREASE ( AS HEM) 128 C037 TOTAL PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS ( AS SGT HEM) 129 C042 WEAK ACID DISSOCIABLE CYANIDE 130 PHOSPHORUS as PO4 131 OIL AND GREASE Value Temp Ref ( oF) Value Ref Value Ref Value Code Ref Henry's Law Constant ( Koc) Half life ( days) Drinking Water degradation Bio Coefficient Adsorption Table 4: Physical/ Chemical Properties Value ( ug/ L) ( atm/ m3 mole)

126000 114 17 301 110000000 301 17 301 17 301 17 301 17 301 420000000 301 17 301 0.0006 25 43 1500 43 100 301 0.0000078 25 43 36000 43 0.0000053 25 43 330000 43 20 301 0.00008 25 43 33000 43 0.00063 25 43 33000 43 50 SM 304 300 SM 304 15 TT 304 50 SM 304 0.018 NS 114 30000 114 2 M 304 300 114 100 SM 304 2 M 304 6 M 304 50 M 304 2000 M 304 4 M 304 5 M 304 100 M 304 1300 TT 304 5000 SM 304 0.0000161 25 206 3.1 18 16 191 50 M 304 250000 SM 304 250000 SM 304 4000 M 304 100 M 304 1E 10 25 43 46 43 16 301 0.0076 NS 200 260 206 28 229 10000 M 304 0.0076 NS 200 260 206 28 229 10000 M 304 A2  9 3/ 11/ 2003 A3 1 ATTACHMENT 3 Aquatic Life and Human Health Coding Sheet and References A3 2 AQUATIC LIFE AND HUMAN HEALTH DATA CODES Aquatic Life Data Codes Acute Toxicity Codes C EPA CRITERIA E ESTIMATED ( NEELY, 1983) EC50 LOWEST REPORTED LA2 ADJUSTED 24 HOUR LC50 ( X 0.66) LA7 ADJUSTED 72 HOUR LC50 ( X 0.92) LD ADJUSTED 24 HOUR EC50 ( X 0.53) LL LOWEST REPORTED LOEL VALUE LR7 LOWEST REPORTED 7 DAY LC50 LT LOWEST TOXIC CONCENTRATION ( NO TIME GIVEN) L4 LOWEST REPORTED 48 HOUR EC50 LA4 ADJUSTED 48 HOUR LC50 ( X0.81) L9 LOWEST REPORTED 96 HOUR LC50 @ L9 QSAR ESTIMATED 96 HOUR LC50 Chronic Toxicity Codes C EPA CRITERIA E ESTIMATED ( NEELY, 1983) ECGR LOWEST REPORTED 96 HR EC50 FOR ALGAE ( GROWTH EFFECT) ECRE LOWEST REPORTED 96 HR EC50 FOR ALGAE ( REPRODUCTIVE EFFECT) GRO LOWEST REPORTED VALUE FROM CHRONIC GROWTH TEST LC LOWEST REPORTED CHRONIC VALUE LM LOWEST REPORTED MATC VALUE LN LOWEST REPORTED NOEC VALUE LO LOWEST REPORTED OTHER VALUE LV LOWEST REPORTED VALUE REP LOWEST REPORTED VALUE FROM CHRONIC REPRODUCTION TEST @ LM QSAR ESTIMATED MATC VALUE @ A10 ESTIMATED FROM ACUTE VALUE USING ACUTE: CHRONIC RATIO OF 10 @ AAB ESTIMATED FROM ACUTE VALUE USING ACUTE: CHRONIC RATIO OF 10 ( PREVIOUSLY RATIO OF 100) @ ACR ESTIMATED FROM ACUTE VALUE USING CHEMICAL SPECIFIC ACUTE: CHRONIC RATIO AQUATIC LIFE AND HUMAN HEALTH DATA CODES ( CONT'D)

A3 3 Freshwater Aquatic Species Codes AC ATLANTIC COD GADUS MORHUA BA BASS MICROPTERUS SPP BG BLUEGILL LEPOMIS MACROCHIRUS BR BROWN TROUT ( FRESHWATER) SALMO TRUTTA, SALVENLINUS FONINALIS BR BRINE SHRIMP ( SALTWATER) ARTEMIA SALINA BS BRINE SHRIMP ARTEMIA SALINA BW BROWN SHRIMP PENAEUS AZTECUS CD WATER FLEA CERIODAPHNIA DUBIA CERIODAPHNIA RETICULATA, ETC. CF CATFISH HETROPNEUSTES FOSSILIS, ICTALURUS PUNCTATUS CO COHO SALMON ONCORHYCHUS KISUTCH CY CRAYFISH DC DUNGENESS CRAB CANCER MAGISTER DF DINOFLAGELLATE ( SALTWATER) GYMNODINIUM BREVE DM WATER FLEA DAPHNIA MAGNA DW DUCKWEED LEMNA MINOR EO EASTERN OYSTER CRASSOSTREA VIRGININA FL FLAGFISH JORDANELLA FLORIDAE FM FATHEAD MINNOW PIMEPHALES PROMELAS GA GREEN ALGAE GF GOLDFISH CARASSIUS AURATUS GS GRASS SHRIMP PALAEMONETES KADIAKENSIS/ PUGIO GU GUPPY POECILIA RETICULATA HC HARD CLAM MERCENARIA MERCENARIA IS INLAND SILVERSIDE MENIDA BERYLLINA LK LONGNOSE KILLIFISH FUNDULUS SIMILIS MC MUMMICHOG FUNDULUS HETEROCLITUS MF MOSQUITO FISH GAMBUSIA AFFINIS MS MYSID SHRIMP MYSIDOPSIS BAHIA NA NOT AVAILABLE/ APPLICABLE OG PINK SALMON ONCORHYNCHUS GORBUSCHA OS OPPOSUM SHRIMP MYSIDOPSIS BAHIA PH PACIFIC HERRING CLUPEA HARENGUS PALIASI PO PACIFIC OYSTER CRASSOSTREA GIGAS PW POLYCHAETE WORM NEANTHES/ NEREIS ARENACEODENTATA RT RAINBOW TROUT SALMO GAIRDNERI, ONCORHYNCHUS MYKISS SB STRIPED BASS MORONE SAXATILIUS SC SCUD ( SALTWATER) COROPHIUM ACHERUSICUM/ ELASMOPUS PECTINICRUS SC SCUD ( FRESHWATER) GAMMARUS SPP. SM SHEEPSHEAD MINNOW CYPRINDON VARIEGATUS SP SHINER PERCH CYMATOGASTER AGGREATA SS SAND SHRIMP CRANGON CRAGON/ SEPTERMSPINOSA/ VULGARIS AQUATIC LIFE AND HUMAN HEALTH DATA CODES ( CONT'D)

A3 4 Human Health Data Codes C CRITERION FOR CARCINOGENICITY PROTECTION ( Risk Level = 10E 6) T CRITERION FOR SYSTEMIC TOXICITY PROTECTION @ C NON CRITERION CALCULATED VALUE FOR CARCINOGENICITY PROTECTION @ T NON CRITERION CALCULATED VALUE FOR SYSTEMIC TOXICITY PROTECTION Drinking Water Criteria Codes M MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL ESTABLISHED FOR HEALTH BASED EFFECT SM SECONDARY MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL ( SMCL) ESTABLISHED FOR TASTE OR AESTHETIC EFFECT THM MCL ESTABLISHED FOR TRIHALOMETHANES TT TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY ACTION LEVEL ESTABLISHED R 1 REFERENCES U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. Technical Support Document for Water Quality based Toxics Control. Washington, DC: U. S. EPA, Office of Water. EPA/ 505/ 2 90 001.

1 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Ambient Water Quality Criteria Documents. Washington, DC: U. S. EPA, Office of Water. EPA 440/ 5 80 Series. Also refers to any update of criteria documents ( EPA 440/ 5 85 and EPA 440/ 5 87 Series) or any Federal Register notices of criteria corrections. The most recent National Recommended Water Quality Criteria used in this report were published in the Federal Register on December 10, 1998.

2 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1972. ` Blue Book' ( Water Quality Criteria  1972). Washington, DC: U. S. EPA, Office of Water. EPA R3 73 033.

3 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. ` Red Book' ( Quality Criteria For Water). Washington, DC: U. S. EPA, Office of Water.

5 Verschueren, K. 1983. Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic Chemicals  2nd Edition. New York, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

6 Leblanc GA. 1980. " Acute Toxicity of Priority Pollutants to Water Flea" ( Daphnia magna). Bull Environm Contam Toxicol 24: 684 691.

12 Holdway DA, Spraque JB. 1979. " Chronic Toxicity of Vanadium to Flagfish." Water Research 13: 905 910.

14 Zang, R., S. Zhang. 1982. " Toxicity of Fluorides to Fishes." C. A. Selects  Environmental Pollution 24,97: 176354k.

15 Birge, WJ. 1979. " Aquatic Toxicity Tests on Inorganic Elements Occurring in Oil Shale." Oil Shale Symposium  Sampling, Analysis and Quality Assurance, March 1979. EPA 600/ 9 80 022.

17 Little, A. D. 1986. Bioaccumulation Study. Report prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc. for the U. S. EPA.

18 ICF, Inc. 1985. Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual  Draft. Manual prepared by ICF, Inc. for the U. S. EPA.

25 Neely M. 1983. Versar, Inc., Springfield, VA. Memorandum to R. Healy, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.

34 Clay, DR. 1986. Office of Toxic Substances, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Memorandum to JM Conlon OWRS U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.

36 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1982. Aquatic Fate Process Data for Organic Priority Pollutants. Washington, DC: U. S. EPA. R 2 43 Arthur D. Little. 1983 ( April 28). Evaluation of Waterborne Exposure Pathways to Paragraph 4( c) Pollutants. Draft Report. Also: Paragraph 4( c) list of detected chemicals.

59 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. 1973. Toxicity of Power Plant Chemicals to Aquatic Life. Washington, DC: U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.

100 Environ Corporation. 1986. RCRA Appendix VIII Data Base. Washington, DC: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.

114 Lyman WJ, Reehl WF, Rosenblatt DH. 1982. Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods  Environmental Behavior of Organic Compounds. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, ( reported or estimated using methods outlined).

119 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998/ 1999. QSAR. Duluth, MN: U. S. EPA, Environmental Research Laboratory.

146 Worthing CR. 1987. The Pesticide Manual  a World Compendium, Eighth Edition. Surry, UK: The British Crop Protection Council. ISBN 0 948404 42 6.

180 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Acute Toxicity Handbook of Chemicals to Estuarine Organisms. Gulf Breeze, FL: Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory, U. S. EPA. EPA/ 800/ 8 87/ 017.

190 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Aquatic Toxicity Information Retrieval ( AQUIRE) Data Base. Duluth MN: U. S. EPA, Environmental Research Laboratory.

200 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1989. Computer Database of Physical/ Chemical Properties for SARA 313 Chemicals ( Used in the Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Risk Screening Guide). Washington, DC: U. S. EPA, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. EPA 560/ 2 89 002.

206 SRC. 1992 1999. Syracuse Research Corporation. CHEMFATE Data Base Retrievals.

229 Howard, PH. Editor. 1991. Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chemicals. Chelsea, MI: Lewis Publishers, Inc.

230 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Superfund Chemical Data Matrix ( SCDM). Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC: U. S. EPA.

300 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998/ 1999. Aquatic Toxicity Information Retrieval ( AQUIRE) Data Base. Duluth, MN: U. S. EPA, Environmental Research Laboratory.

301 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998/ 1999. Assessment Tools for Evaluation of Risk ( ASTER) DataBase. Duluth, MN: U. S. EPA, Environmental Research Laboratory.

302 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables. Washington, DC: U. S. EPA, Office of Research and Development and Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. R 3 303 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998/ 1999. Integrated Risk Information System ( IRIS). Cincinnati, Ohio: U. S. EPA, Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment.

304 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1996. Current Drinking Water Standards  National Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Regulations. Washington, DC: Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water. 1998 Data Base retrieval.

305 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Region III Risk Based Concentration Table, Philadelphia, PA: U. S. EPA, October 1998.

307 SRC. 1996. User's Guide for EPIWIN © . EPI  Estimation Programs Interface for Microsoft Windows 3.1. September 1996. Syracuse Research Corporation, Syracuse, NY.

308 U. S. Public Health Service. 1994. Toxicological Profile for White Phosphorus. Draft. Athens, GA: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U. S. Public Health Service.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4530-4531]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01518]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2006-26367]

Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee and Subcommittee: Public
Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that its Motor Carrier Safety Advisory
Committee (MCSAC) will meet on February 10-11, 2014, to provide ideas
that Agency should consider for reauthorization of the surface
transportation legislation. On February 12, 2014, MCSAC's Compliance,
Safety and Accountability (CSA) subcommittee will convene. Meetings are
open to the public for their entirety and there will be a period of
time at the end of each day for the public to submit oral comments.
    Times and Dates: The meeting will be held Monday-Tuesday, February
10-11, 2014, from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), at
the Hilton Alexandria Old Town, 1767 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
in the Washington and Jefferson Rooms on the 2nd floor. On Wednesday,
February 12, 2014, the CSA subcommittee will meet at that same location
from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Copies of the MCSAC Task Statement and an agenda
for the entire meeting will be made available in advance of the meeting
at http://mcsac.fmcsa.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Shannon L. Watson, Senior Advisor
to the Associate Administrator for Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Services for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, please
contact Ms. Dana Larkin at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by
Wednesday, February 5, 2014.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    MCSAC was established to provide FMCSA with advice and
recommendations on motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier
safety regulations. MCSAC is composed of 20 voting representatives from
safety advocacy, safety enforcement, labor, and industry stakeholders
of motor carrier safety. The diversity of the Committee ensures the
requisite range of views and expertise necessary to discharge its
responsibilities. The Committee operates as a discretionary committee
under the authority of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT),
established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. 2. See FMCSA's MCSAC
Web site for additional information about the committee's activities at
http://mcsac.fmcsa.dot.gov/.

II. Meeting Participation

    Oral comments from the public will be heard during the last half-
hour of the meetings each day. Should all public comments be exhausted
prior to the end of the specified period, the comment period will
close. Members of the public may submit written comments on the topics
to be considered during the meeting by Wednesday, February 5, 2014, to
Federal Docket Management

System (FDMC) Docket Number FMCSA-2006-26367 using any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., E.T. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

    Issued on: January 22, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-01518 Filed 1-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 20 (Wednesday, January 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6386-6389]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01984]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68718; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2013-010]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Relating to Routing Fees

January 24, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on January 18, 2013, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``NASDAQ'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have been prepared by NASDAQ.
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    NASDAQ proposes to modify Chapter XV, Section 2, entitled ``NASDAQ
Options Market--Fees and Rebates,'' which governs pricing for NASDAQ
members using the NASDAQ Options Market (``NOM''), NASDAQ's facility
for executing and routing standardized equity and index options, to
amend Routing Fees.
    While these amendments are effective upon filing, the Exchange has
designated the proposed amendments to be operative on February 1, 2013.
    The text of the proposed rule change is provided in Exhibit 5. The
text of the proposed rule change is also available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

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

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this filing is to amend the Routing Fees in Section
2(4) of Chapter XV in order to recoup costs the Exchange incurs for
routing and executing certain orders in equity options to away markets.
    Currently, the fees for routing Customer, Firm, Market Maker and
Professional orders are as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Exchange                         Customer          Firm             MM         Professional
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BATS Penny Pilot................................           $0.55           $0.55           $0.55           $0.55
BATS Non-Penny Pilot............................            0.86            0.94            0.94            0.94
BOX.............................................            0.11            0.55            0.55            0.31
BX Options Penny Pilot..........................            0.11            0.54            0.54            0.54
BX Options Non-Penny Pilot......................            0.11            0.94            0.94            0.94
CBOE............................................            0.11            0.55            0.55            0.41
CBOE orders greater than 99 contracts in NDX,               0.29            0.55            0.55             N/A
 MNX ETFs and ETNs..............................
C2..............................................            0.55            0.55            0.55            0.55
ISE (Standard)..................................            0.11            0.55            0.55            0.31
ISE Select Symbols \*\..........................            0.35            0.55            0.55            0.44
MIAX............................................            0.11            0.55            0.55            0.36
NYSE Arca Penny Pilot...........................            0.55            0.55            0.55            0.55
NYSE Arca Non-Penny Pilot.......................            0.90            0.94            0.94            0.90
NYSE AMEX.......................................            0.11            0.55            0.55            0.31
PHLX (for all options other than PHLX Select                0.11            0.55            0.55            0.31
 Symbols).......................................
PHLX Select Symbols \**\........................            0.11            0.55            0.55            0.55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to adopt new Routing Fees when routing and
executing orders in equity options to BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS''),
BOX Options Exchange LLC (``BOX''), the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``CBOE''), C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (``C2''),
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE''), the Miami
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``MIAX''), NASDAQ Options
Market (``NOM''), NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE
Amex'') and NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``Phlx''). The Exchange is proposing
to eliminate the current Routing Fees located in Section 2(4) of
Chapter XV and instead assess NOM Participants a fixed fee plus the
away market transaction fee as noted below.
    Today, the Exchange calculates Routing Fees by assessing a fixed
Routing Fee of $0.11 per contract, which is comprised of certain
Exchange costs related to routing orders to away markets plus the away
market's transaction fee. With respect to the fixed costs, the Exchange
incurs a fee when it utilizes Nasdaq Options Services LLC (``NOS''), a
member of the Exchange and the Exchange's exclusive order router.\3\
Each time NOS routes an order to an away market, NOS is charged a
clearing fee \4\ and, in the case of certain exchanges, a transaction
fee is also charged in certain symbols, which fees are passed through
to the Exchange. The Exchange currently recoups clearing and
transaction charges incurred by the Exchange as well as certain other
costs incurred by the Exchange when routing to away markets, such as
administrative and technical costs associated with operating NOS,
membership fees at away markets, Options Regulatory Fees (``ORFs'') and
technical costs associated with routing options. With respect to

away market transaction fees, the Exchange does not assess actual
transaction fees in all cases today, but rather has limited fees in
certain circumstances. In those cases the Exchange does not recover all
of its costs for routing to the away market.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See NASDAQ Rules at Chapter VI, Section 11(e) (Order
Routing).
    \4\ The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'') assesses $0.01
per contract side.
    \5\ In some cases the Exchange filed a rule change which noted
that the Exchange would not assess the actual transaction charge,
but a lower amount where the transaction fees at an away market were
higher than other markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today, the Exchange amends its Routing Fees to reflect amendments
to away market transaction fees by filing proposed rule changes. The
Exchange proposes to eliminate the current Routing Fees and instead
assess the actual away market fee assessed by the away exchange at the
time that the order was entered into the Exchange's trading system.
This transaction fee would be calculated on an order-by-order basis
since different away markets charge different amounts.\6\ The Exchange
analyzed its clearing costs,\7\ administrative and technical costs
associated with operating NOS, membership fees at away markets and
regulatory costs in determining the fixed fee for routing. With respect
to BATS, BOX, C2, CBOE, ISE, MIAX, NYSE Amex and NYSE Arca the Exchange
proposes to continue to assess $0.11 per contract in addition to the
away market's transaction fee.\8\ While this proposal does not change
the fixed cost assessed to away markets other than Phlx and BX Options,
the Exchange would assess the actual transaction fees that are in place
at the various away markets and will no longer limit those transaction
fees as it does today in certain circumstances.\9\ While clearing costs
have recently decreased,\10\ the Exchange would continue to assess
$0.11 per contract because of other increased costs. Specifically,
several exchanges have increased ORFs or adopted ORFs and the Exchange
proposes to assess the same fixed cost Routing Fee for non-NASDAQ OMX
exchanges despite the lower clearing fee.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This is similar to the methodology utilized by ISE in
assessing Routing Fees. See ISE's Fee Schedule.
    \7\ OCC recently amended its clearing fee from $0.03 per
contract side to $0.01 per contract side. See Securities Exchange
Act Release No. 68025 (October 10, 2012), 77 FR 63398 (October 16,
2012) (SR-OCC-2012-18).
    \8\ The $0.11 per contract fixed fee would apply to all options
exchanges other than Phlx and BX. The Exchange anticipates that if
other options exchanges are approved by the Commission after the
filing of this proposal, those exchanges would be assessed the $0.11
per contract fee applicable to ``all other options exchanges.'' The
Exchange currently assesses $0.11 per contract for costs incurred by
the Exchange.
    \9\ Today, the Exchange caps certain Routing Fees at certain
levels. For example, the Exchange caps BATS, NYSE Arca and BX
Options Routing Fees at $0.94 per contract.
    \10\ See note 7.
    \11\ CBOE recently increased its ORF from $.0065 to $.0085 per
contract. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68480 (December
19, 2012), 77 FR 76119 (December 26, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-118). C2
recently increased its ORF from $.0015 to $.002 per contract. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68479 (December 19, 2012), 77 FR
76131 (December 26, 2012) (SR-C2-2012-040). NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE
Amex'') recently increased its ORF from $0.004 to $0.005 per
contract. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68183 (November 8,
2012), 77 FR 68186 (November 15, 2012) (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-54). NYSE
Arca recently increased its ORF from $0.004 to $0.005 per contract.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68174 (November 7, 2012), 77
FR 67845 (November 14, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-118). MIAX recently
adopted an ORF of $0.0040 per contract side. See SR-MIAX-2012-06
(not yet published).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also analyzed costs related to routing to Phlx and BX
Options and determined to assess a lower fee of $0.05 per contract as
compared to other away markets because NOS is utilized by all three
exchanges to route orders.\12\ Phlx, BX Options and NOM all utilize NOS
which lowers the cost of routing to those markets as compared to other
away markets. In addition the fixed costs are reduced because NOS is
owned and operated by NASDAQ OMX and the three exchanges and NOS share
common technology and related operational functions. The Exchange
proposes to assess a $0.05 per contract fixed fee in addition to the
away market's transaction fee to route to Phlx and BX Options. This
proposal would reduce the fixed fees assessed today on average to route
to Phlx and BX Options from $0.11 to $0.05 per contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Chapter VI, Section 11 of the NASDAQ and BX Options
Rules and Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For all Routing Fees, the transaction fee is based on the away
market's transaction fee or rebate for particular market participants
and in the case that there is no transaction fee or rebate assessed by
the away market, the only fee assessed would be the $0.05 or $0.11 per
contract fixed fee assessed by the Exchange to recoup its costs. The
Exchange proposes to pass along any rebate paid by the away market
where there is such a rebate. Today, the Exchange does not pass along
rebates. Any rebate available would be netted against a fee assessed by
the Exchange. For example, if a Customer order is routed to BOX, and
BOX offers a customer rebate of $0.20 per contract, the Exchange would
assess a $0.11 per contract fixed fee which would net against the
rebate ($0.20 per contract in this example). The market participant for
whom the Customer contract was routed would receive a $0.09 per
contract rebate. Today the market participant does not receive a rebate
and only pays the current Routing Fees.
    As with all fees, the Exchange may adjust these Routing Fees in
response to competitive conditions by filing a new proposed rule
change.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\13\ in general, and with
Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\14\ in particular, in that they provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges
among members and issuers and other persons using any facility or
system which NOM operates or controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed Routing Fees are reasonable
because they seek to recoup costs that are incurred by the Exchange
when routing Customer, Firm, Market Maker and Professional orders to
away markets on behalf of members. Each destination market's
transaction charge varies and there is a cost incurred by the Exchange
when routing orders to away markets. The costs to the Exchange include
clearing costs, administrative and technical costs associated with
operating NOS, membership fees at away markets, ORFs and technical
costs associated with routing options. The Exchange believes that the
proposed Routing Fees would enable the Exchange to recover the costs it
incurs to route orders to away markets in addition to transaction fees
assessed to market participants for the execution of Customer, Firm,
Market Maker and Professional orders by the away market. Specifically,
other options exchanges have increased ORFs that are assessed per
transaction.\15\ The Exchange believes that it is reasonable to recoup
these costs borne by the Exchange on each transaction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ CBOE recently increased its ORF from $.0065 to $.0085 per
contract. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68480 (December
19, 2012), 77 FR 76119 (December 26, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-118). C2
recently increased its ORF from $.0015 to $.002 per contract. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 68479 (December 19, 2012), 77 FR
76131 (December 26, 2012) (SR-C2-2012-040). NYSE Amex recently
increased its ORF from $0.004 to $0.005 per contract. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 68183 (November 8, 2012), 77 FR 68186
(November 15, 2012) (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-54). NYSE Arca recently
increased its ORF from $0.004 to $0.005 per contract. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 68174 (November 7, 2012), 77 FR 67845
(November 14, 2012) (SR-NYSEArca-2012-118). MIAX recently adopted an
ORF of $0.0040 per contract side. See SR-MIAX-2012-06 (not yet
published).

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

    In addition, the Exchange notes that it would assess a fixed fee of
$0.11 per contract, as it does today, for costs incurred by the
Exchange with respect to non-NASDAQ OMX exchanges. The Exchange
believes that the proposed fee is reasonable because while the clearing
fee itself was lowered by OCC (from $0.03 to $0.01 per contract side),
other fees, such as ORFs, have increased in recent months. The
Exchange, in analyzing its actual costs, has determined to continue to
assess a $0.11 per contract fee to represent the overall cost to the
Exchange for technical, administrative, clearing, regulatory,
compliance and other costs, in addition to the transaction fee assessed
by the away market. Also, the Exchange will assess the actual
transaction fees that are in place at the various away markets and will
no longer limit those transaction fees as it does today in certain
circumstances. The Exchange believes that it is reasonable for it to
recoup its actual costs associated with routing orders to away markets.
NOM Participants would be entitled to receive rebates offered by away
markets with this proposal, which rebates would net against fees
assessed by the Exchange for routing orders. The Exchange believes that
the opportunity to collect a rebate will reduce Routing Fees.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that it is equitable and not
unfairly discriminatory to assess a fixed cost of $0.11 per contract,
which is mostly comprised of technology, infrastructure and away market
non-transaction fee costs, to route orders to non-NASDAQ OMX away
markets because the Exchange would be assessing an overall lower fixed
fee. While the clearing cost was reduced, other fees have increased and
therefore the Exchange believes that a $0.11 per contract fee continues
to be reasonable because it represents the cost to route to non-NASDAQ
OMX away markets. The proposed $0.11 per contract fixed fee would be
assessed uniformly on all market participants in addition to the actual
transaction fees on all orders routed to non-NASDAQ OMX markets.
    The Exchange believes that it is equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to assess a fixed cost of $0.05 per contract to route
orders to NASDAQ OMX away markets (Phlx and BX Options) because the
cost, in terms of actual cash outlays, to the Exchange to route to
those markets is lower. For example, costs related to routing to Phlx
and BX Options are lower as compared to other away markets because NOS
is utilized by all three exchanges to route orders.\16\ NOS and the
three NASDAQ OMX options markets have a common data center and staff
that are responsible for the day-to-day operations of NOS. Because the
three exchanges are in a common data center, Routing Fees are reduced
because costly expenses related to, for example, telecommunication
lines to obtain connectivity are avoided when routing orders in this
instance. The costs related to connectivity to route orders to other
NASDAQ OMX exchanges are de minimis. When routing orders to non-NASDAQ
OMX exchanges, the Exchange incurs costly connectivity charges related
to telecommunication lines and other related costs. The proposed fixed
fee for routing orders to non-NASDAQ OMX exchanges is therefore
increased as compared to the fees for routing orders to NASDAQ OMX
exchanges (Phlx and BX Options), $0.11 per contract versus $0.05 per
contract, respectively. The proposed $0.05 per contract fixed fee would
be assessed uniformly on all orders routed to NASDAQ OMX markets in
addition to the actual away market transaction fee assessed by the
destination market. The Exchange also believes that it is equitable and
not unfairly discriminatory for market participants to receive rebates
on orders routed to away markets that pay rebates. Today, the Exchange
does not pay such rebates when routing orders. The Exchange would pay
rebates offered by away markets uniformly to market participants when
their orders are routed to a destination market that offers a rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Chapter VI, Section 11 of the NASDAQ and BX Options
Rules and Phlx Rule 1080(m)(iii)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly
discriminatory to pass along savings realized by leveraging NASDAQ
OMX's infrastructure and scale to market participants when those orders
are routed to Phlx and BX Options.\17\ Orders are routed to away
markets in accordance with Exchange rules based on price.\18\ Market
participants may submit orders to the Exchange as ineligible for
routing or ``DNR'' to avoid incurring the Routing Fees proposed
herein.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Today, the Exchange assesses a $0.11 per contract fixed fee
for routing orders to Phlx and BX Options. That fee is proposed to
be reduced to a $0.05 per contract fixed fee, which would be in
addition to the actual transaction fee assessed by the away market.
    \18\ See NASDAQ Rules at Chapter XII (Options Order Protection
and Locked and Crossed Market Rules).
    \19\ See NASDAQ Rules at Chapter VI, Section 11(e) (Order
Routing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose
any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the rule change
would allow the Exchange to recoup its costs when routing orders
designated as available for routing by the market participant. NOM
Participants may choose to mark the order as ineligible for routing to
avoid incurring these fees.\20\ Today, other options exchanges also
assess similar fees to recoup costs incurred when routing orders to
away markets. With respect to routing to Phlx and BX Options at a lower
cost as compared to other away markets, the Exchange does not believe
that the proposed amendments to increase those fees, while maintaining
the same fee differential imposes a burden because all market
participants would be assessed the same fees depending on the away
market. Also, the Exchange is proposing to recoup costs incurred only
when members request the Exchange route their orders to an away market.
The Exchange is passing along savings realized by leveraging NASDAQ
OMX's infrastructure and scale to market participants when those orders
are routed to Phlx and BX Options and is providing those saving to all
market participants. Finally, the Exchange routes orders to away
markets where the Exchange's disseminated bid or offer is inferior to
the national best bid (best offer) price and based on price first.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See NASDAQ Rules at Chapter VI, Section 11(e) (Order
Routing).
    \21\ See NASDAQ Rules at Chapter XII (Options Order Protection
and Locked and Crossed Market Rules).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.\22\ 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. If the
Commission takes such action, the Commission shall institute
proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be approved
or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-010 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-010. 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 Web site (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 Web site 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 NASDAQ's principal office. All comments
received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit
personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit
only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2013-010, and should
be submitted on or before February 20, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-01984 Filed 1-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 125 (Thursday, June 30, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38912-38913]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13880]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-1029; Airspace Docket No. 21-ACE-14]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airway V-175 in the Vicinity of Malden,
MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal
airway V-175 in the vicinity of Malden, MO. This action is necessary
due to the planned decommissioning of the Malden, MO, VOR Tactical Air
Navigation (VORTAC) facility, which provides navigation guidance for a
segment of the route.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, September 8, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA JO Order 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations
Group, Policy Directorate, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the route structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace
System.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2021-1029 in the Federal Register (86 FR 70423; December 10, 2021),
modifying VOR Federal airway V-175. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. No comments were received.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA Order
JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The ATS routes
listed in this document will be published subsequently in FAA Order JO
7400.11.

Differences From the Proposal

    Subsequent to the publication of the NPRM for this docket, the FAA
published a final rule in the Federal Register (87 FR 2322; January 14,
2022) that modified V-175 to read as follows: ``From Malden, MO; Vichy,
MO; Hallsville, MO. From Kirksville, MO; to Des Moines, IA. From
Redwood Falls, MN; to Alexandria, MN.'' The change was due to the
planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Worthington, MN VOR/
DME facility. This version replaces the V-175 description that was
published in the NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2021-1029 and is reflected in
``The Rule'' section, below.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending VOR Federal airway V-
175 in the vicinity of Malden, MO, due to the planned decommissioning
of the Malden, MO, VORTAC, as part of the FAA VOR MON program. The
route change is described below.
    V-175: V-175 currently consists of three separate parts: From
Malden, MO; Vichy, MO; to Hallsville, MO. From Kirksville, MO; to Des
Moines, IA. From Redwood Falls, MN; to Alexandria, MN.
    This action removes the Malden VORTAC from the route description.
As amended, V-175 extends, in three parts: From Vichy, MO, to
Hallsville, MO. From Kirksville, MO, to Des Moines, IA. From Redwood
Falls, MN to Alexandria, MN.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of modifying VOR Federal
airway V-175 due to the planned decommissioning of the Malden, MO,
VORTAC, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-
6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact
review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace
areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71,
Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic
Service Routes; and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-6.5b, which
categorically excludes from further environmental impact review
``Actions regarding establishment of jet routes and Federal airways
(see 14 CFR 71.15, Designation of jet routes and VOR Federal airways).
. .''. As such, this action is not expected to result in any
potentially significant environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA
Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the
FAA

has reviewed this action for factors and circumstances in which a
normally categorically excluded action may have a significant
environmental impact requiring further analysis. The FAA has determined
that no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of
an environmental assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR part 71 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-175 [Amended]

    From Vichy, MO; to Hallsville, MO. From Kirksville, MO; to Des
Moines, IA. From Redwood Falls, MN; to Alexandria, MN.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23, 2022.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022-13880 Filed 6-29-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P