From: "Steinwurtzel, Robert N." <rsteinwurtzel@bakerlaw.com> 

To: Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: "DeLaquil, Mark" <mdelaquil@bakerlaw.com>, Russell Kemp <rkemp@environcorp.com>, 

"Steinwurtzel, Robert N." <rsteinwurtzel@bakerlaw.com> 

Date: 06/15/2011 03:12 PM 

Subject: RE: FW: Emailing: EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0344 ltr.pdf 

Dear Chuck, 

In response to your inquiry, the ABR is continuing to review the Proposed Rule and the technical and 

supporting documents underlying EPA's proposal. Based upon this initial review, industry is concerned 

that EPA may not have developed or secured sufficient data underlying some or all of the proposed 

standards. 

I understand that, as EPA is aware, RSR, as a follow-up to its ICR submission, is re-testing its rotary 

furnace at its Middletown, NY, facility and anticipates submitting to EPA the results of that effort within 

60 days. It is also my understanding that Exide is making plans to conduct engineering tests for dioxins 

and furans (D/F) on one of the collocated reverb/blast furnace exhausts at its facility in Reading, 

Pennsylvania, to assess emissions with respect to the proposed D/F limit for collocated reverb/blast 

exhausts which limit was based solely on testing of the East Penn facility. Due to planned summer 

maintenance turnaround schedules, this testing is expected to occur in the approximate time frame of 

late August to early September with results expected to become available in late September to October. 

I am not aware that any other ABR smelter has engaged contractors to conduct new testing particularly 

in light of the time constraints imposed by the rulemaking. 

We wanted also to make you aware that it has recently come to our attention (as set forth in the 

attached article) that there is another secondary lead smelter whose emissions may not have been 

considered by EPA in the Proposed Rule: the Battery Recycling Co. in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. The lack of 

emissions data for this facility is of concern, and EPA should consider emissions from that facility in the 

RTR process and in setting any standards for the secondary lead smelting industry. 

Finally, we wish to reiterate for the reasons discussed in this email and in our prior requests that a 

significant extension of the comment period is necessary for this complex and important rulemaking. 

We request that you inform us as soon as possible whether EPA will grant additional time for comment. 

Thank you for your consideration. 

Robert 

My Bio | Web site | V-card 

T 202.861.1708 F 202.861.1783 

M www.bakerlaw.com 

Robert Steinwurtzel 

rsteinwurtzel@bakerlaw.com 

Baker & Hostetler LLP 

Washington Square, Suite 1100 

1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-5304 
-----Original Message----- 

From: French.Chuck@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:French.Chuck@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 11:41 AM 

To: Steinwurtzel, Robert N. 

Cc: DeLaquil, Mark; Russell Kemp 

Subject: Re: FW: Emailing: EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0344 ltr.pdf 

Hi Robert, 

Thanks for the letter. I have 1 question, as follows. The letter suggests that some testing might 

be undertaken. Could you clarify whether tests will be conducted and if so when, where and what 

pollutants will be tested. 

Thanks. 

Chuck 

From: "Steinwurtzel, Robert N." <rsteinwurtzel@bakerlaw.com> 

To: Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: "DeLaquil, Mark" <mdelaquil@bakerlaw.com>, Russell Kemp <rkemp@environcorp.com> 

Date: 06/02/2011 04:07 AM 

Subject: FW: Emailing: EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0344 ltr.pdf 

Chuck, please see attached for your information. Regards, Robert Steinwurtzel. 

This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information 

that is privileged, confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby 

notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. 

If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and 

deleting it from your computer. Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of 

inaccuracies as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, 

or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are 

present in this email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. [attachment 

"EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0344 ltr.pdf" deleted by Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US] This email is intended only 

for the use of the party to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, 

confidential, or protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any 

dissemination, copying or distribution of this email or its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have 

received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it 

from your computer. Internet communications are not assured to be secure or clear of inaccuracies as 

information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain 

viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this 

email, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission.