# From Wersinger Kate

## kwersingersteptoe.corn Sent Wednesday April

## 29 2009 

## 822 

# PM

# GMT To Boucher Michael 

## rnboucherrnckennalong corn 

# Cc Edwards.Denniseparnail.epa.gov Hardy.Michaeleparnail epa.gov philip.rossepa.gov Subject 

## Attach Nalco.pdf 

## Nalco.pdf Mr Boucher At the request of

## Mr Ross attached is public disclosure copy of document submitted yesterday in further support of Nalcos petition to cancel 

### Buckmans ammonia products

Please let

### me know ifyou have any questions

Best regards Kate Wersinger Legal Executive Assistant

to Elizabeth 

### Brown and Seth Goldberg Steptoe Johnson 

### LLP 1330 Connecticut 

### Avenue

# NW Washington 

## DC 20036-1795 

## 202 429-6214

The message is ready to be sent with thefollowing file or link attachments

Nalco.pdf

Note To protect against computer viruses e-mail programs 

### may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments Check your e-mail security settings to determine 

### how attachments are handled

# STEPT0E

# jOHNSON AlT

## ORNEYS AT 

## LAW Seth Goldberg 1330 Connecticut Avenue 

## NW 202429.6233 Washington 

### DC 20046-3795 sgoldbergsteptoe.com Tel 202.429.3000 Fax 202.429.3902 steptoe.com April 

## 28 2009 

## ByHand Delivery Public Disclosure 

### Copy

Michael 

### Hardy Dennis 

### Edwards Antimicrobials Division Office of Pesticide 

### Programs

## 7504P 751 

## OP U.S Environmental Protection

### Agency One Potomac Yard 2777 South Crystal Drive Arlington 

# VA 22202
Philip 

### Ross Senior Attorney Pesticides and Toxic Substances 

## Law Office

## 2333 United States Environmental Protection

### Agency Washington 

## DC 20460
Dear Messrs Hardy Edwards and 

### Ross



## am writing on behalf of

### Nalco 

## Inc inresponse to letter dated 

### December 

## 19 2008 that Michael 

### Boucher sent 

## you alleging that Nalco has been 

### making pesticidal claims for

## ammonia and that those claims are

## somehow relevant to

## EPAs consideration of

### Nalco petition to cancel the registrations 

## EPA has granted to 

## Buckman for

### ammonia used to stabilize chlorine inwater treatment systems This letter contains trade secret confidential business information Since Nalco brought the 

### ammonia issue to the attention of

## EPA in

### 2007 and petitioned for cancellation of the registration for

### ammonia that 

## EPAgranted to 

## Buckman Nalco has consistently explained that 

### ammonia is stabilizer or adjuvant and that the active ingredient in water treatment systems isChlorine 

### As with 

## many inert ingredients or adjuvants it enhances the stability and therefore the effectiveness of the chlorine but isnot

### by itselfactive This is explained in ourOctober 

## 27 2007 initial letter to

## EPAand 

### December 2007 petition to cancel 

## Buckmans registration for

### ammonia as an antimicrobial 

### the Petition or 

### Nalcos Petition In fact as 

### Nalco has previously pointed 

### outammonia is 

### good source offood for

### microorganisms and therefore 

### would function as pro-microbial if it

### were used alone in water 

### system See 

### Nalcos Petition at Section II

### and cited references in

## EPAGuidance 

## Manual Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants 

### April

## 1999

WASifi

# NC NEW YORK 

### CFOCAG0 PHOLrOX LOS ANGELES CENTURY 

### COY LONDON BRUSSO

### Messrs Hardy Edwards and 

### Ross 

## USEPA STEPTOE 

# JOHNSON April

## 28 2009 Page of Public Disclosure 

## Copy

Nalco categorically rejects 

## Buckmans claim that it has taken position at odds with the scientific facts and regulatory precedent that 

### ammonia and otherstabilizers used in chlorinebased water treatment systems are not pesticides and do not require registration Nalco called this situation to the attention of

# EPA Nalco performed extensive research to 

### document the scientific principles that underlie the effectiveness of stabilized chlorine in water treatment and 

## EPAs long recognition of the fact that only the active ingredient in stabilized chlorine and similar systems has been required to be registered by

# EPA This information should provide the basis for

## EPAs decision 

### onNalcos Petition to 

### Cancel 

## Any statements that 

## mayor

## maynot have been said in presentation are irrelevant to

# EPA consideration of the petition to cancel 

## Buckmans registrations 

### Nalco continues to believe the petition represents the only correct interpretation of

## FIFRA in this context and urges

## EPA to grant it

### promptly 

## Below Nalco responds to

# MrBouchers assertions regarding statements 

### made byNalco representatives the significance ofany such statements the importance of the pending petition to cancel and the unlawful 

### manner in

### which 

## Buckman obtained 

### and isattempting to use confidential business information that is the property of

### Nalco and its

### customer

Once you have 

### had an opportunity to review this letter in the event 

### you have any remaining questions concerning stabilized chlorine chemistry the understanding of 

### Nalco and its customer of the roles of the 

### components ofsuch system or the statements 

### made inconnection with the presentation Nalco will be pleased to have the appropriate personnel 

### meet with

## you Nalco 

### CustomerPresentations and Statements Regarding 

## Ammonia

In his letter of

### December 19

# Mr Boucher appears to claim that excerpts 

### from presentation that 

### Nalco gave to 

## somehow are inconsistent with the correct 

### view that 

### ammonia isnot pesticide 

### Nalco isperplexed 

### by this 

### claim As explained 

### above Nalco has consistently maintained that 

### ammonia and otherstabilizers are not pesticides but stabilize chlorine to enhance its persistence in particular 

### systems Nothing in the presentation 

### Nalco gave to is inconsistent with that 

### view Nalco believes these slides are entirely consistent with its position that 

### ammonia and otherstabilizers are not pesticides In fact 

### Nalco voluntarily requested review of this confidential presentation 

### by

# Mr Michael 

### Hardy to confirm that the highly technical presentation 

### was consistent with 

## FIFRA 

# MrHardy suggested 

### minorwording changes to three slides to ensure that the information 

### would not be taken out ofcontext if only the slides 

### were available 

### Nalco has incorporated those suggestions going forward 

## However Nalco submits that nothing in the confidential presentation claims that 

### ammonia is pesticidal Simply 

### putammonia isnot pesticide Nalco has no reason to claim 

### ammonia or any chlorine stabilizer isan active ingredient Itdid not

### make any such claim and will not in the future

### Messrs Hardy Edwards and 

### Ross 

## USEPA April

## 28 2009 Page of Public Disclosure 

## Copy 

## STEPT0E 

# JOF1NSON

Response to Specific Claims in

# Mr I3ouchers Letter 

### The specific portions of certain slides

# MrBoucher refers to do not support his claim that Nalco 

### was asserting 

### ammonia is pesticide
Specifically in relation to the excerpted slides the following context and 

### comments are provided

### Messrs Hardy Edwards and 

### Ross 

## USEPA April

## 28 2009 

## Page4of6 Public Disclosure 

### Copy 

# STEPT0E

# JOHNSONL

Overall the confidential presentation Nalco representatives gave to 

### Nalcos customer provided extensive information 

### on stabilized chlorine water treatment 

### systems including not only the history of stabilized chlorine but also the attributes of 

### number of proprietary stabilization systems marketed 

### byNalco Throughout the active ingredient is chlorine Therefore nothing 

### Nalco presented to its customer is inconsistent with the science regulatory history 

### and precedent that Nalco pointed out to

# EPA
As explained 

### above Nalcos statements do not alterthe science or agency precedents 

### which demonstrate that 

### ammonia isnot an active ingredient Therefore even if

# MrBoucher is

### Messrs Hardy Edwards and 

### Ross 

## USEPA ST 

# Jo SON April

## 28 2009 Page of Public Disclosure 

## Copy
assumed to be correct 

### which he is 

### notNalcos statements are irrelevant to

## EPAsconsideration of

### Nalcos petition to cancel 

## Buckmans registration Importance of

### Nalcos Petition to Cancel 

### Nalco filed its petition to cancel 

## Buckmans registration 

### on December 

## 2007 Unfortunately since 

### then 

## we have noted that 

## EPA has granted other registrations for

### ammonia compounds used inwater treatment including July 

### 15 2008 amendment to the registration of

### Busan 1215 

# EPA Reg 

# No 1448-443 to 

### add 

## new use in industrial water

### systems These

## new actions demonstrate the importance of

## EPA resolving this issue in scientifically valid and regulatorily consistent 

### manner Nalco believes the only resolution that can be supported is to cancel the registrations issued to 

## Buckman for

### ammonia compounds used to stabilize chlorine used in water treatment Nalco is willing to 

### meet with

## EPA to further explain the positions in its written submissions including the technical regulatory and legal reasons indicating that 

## EPAgranted 

## Buckmans registrations on the basis of incomplete information 

## Ammonia and other stabilizers for halogen-based pesticides clearly fall within the category of adjuvants These types of materials are not active ingredients and have never been considered as such previously Should 

## EPAchange the definition or interpretation of

### what constitutes pesticide to include 

### any separately sold adjuvant 

### would result th complete disruption of all pesticide 

### markets notjust those using halogen-based pesticides in water treatment 

### systems including 

### mostdrinking water systems in the United States There is

### no basis for limiting the change to stabilizers in water treatment systems For

### example claim that an adjuvant provides better dispersion or adhesion 

### and thus 

### wouldimprove pesticides efficacy 

### would require registration of that adjuvant as pesticide product under revised interpretation Certainly any consideration ofsuch broadly applicable and disruptive change should be performed transparently through formal process and should include both scientific input

### and input from the 

## many potentially affected stakeholders 

## Buckmans Unlawful 

### Use ofOther 

### Companies Confidential Business Information 

## Buckmans conduct in obtaining the presentation 

### Nalco gave to and its use of other

### companies confidential trade secret information should be considered 

### by

## EPA in evaluating the credibility of

## Buckmans position 

## Buckman obtained the materials it uses to support its letter illicitly Itpossesses confidential business information of

### Nalco arid without the permission of either

## company This unethical conduct should be considered 

### by

## EPA inevaluating not only the strength of

## Buckmans claims but also 

## Buckmans fitness to hold pesticide registrations at all 

### Nalco ispleased to provide 

## EPAwith complete information about its products and the claims it

### makes for

## them In fact 

### Nalco sought and received input from 

## EPAon the presentation obtained improperly 

### by

## Buckman This information isNalco trade secret information 

### Nalco has not and will not share thisinformation with its competitors including 

## Buckman Because 

## Buckman seeks to use this illicitly-obtained information for its commercial gain and to have 

## EPA act as its agent in doing 

### so Nalco

### Messrs Hardy Edwards and 

### Ross 

## USEPA STEP 10 

# jo SO April

## 28 2009 

## Page6of6 Public Disclosure 

## Copy

respectfully requests that 

## EPA not consider any of the information provided to it by 

## Buckman inform 

## Buckman of that fact and 

### commence proceeding to take appropriate disciplinary action against 

## Buckman for its unethical conduct
Please contact 

## me incase ofquestions and to discuss the results ofyour 

### review

Si erely

Seth Goldberg