Memorandum of Meeting 

Date: August 24, 2010 

Participants: 

EPA: Steven Bradbury and Bill Jordan (OPP), Phil Ross (OGC), 

Joan Harrigan-Farrelly, Dennis Edwards and Melba Morrow (AD) 

NALCO: Cynthia Taub and Seth Goldberg (Steptoe and Johnson), Steve Landsman and 

E. Stuart Passantino (NALCO), Rick Holt (Holt Regulatory Consultants, Inc.) 

Following introductions and statements that a summary of the meeting and the handout material 

would be placed in the docket for ammonia and urea, NALCO provided opening statements. 

NALCO emphasized that their request for a meeting with the Agency was not to advocate their 

position on the registration of ammonia or urea, but to provide the Agency with an understanding 

of the impact that a decision could have on NALCO’s customers. NALCO passed out copies of 

three documents at the meeting: a slide-presentation prepared for the meeting; a 2005 email 

from EPA to an employee of Steptoe and Johnson (the law firm representing NALCO); and a 

2008 letter from EPA to NALCO’s counsel. Copies of these documents are attached. 

Steve Landsman presented a historical review of how NALCO began marketing their OxiPro 

system which includes the use of ammonia and/or urea as what NALCO describes as “halogen 

stabilizers”. The following was stated by Mr. Landsman in his presentation: 

 

• In 2004-2005 the OxiPro System was developed by NALCO 

• A staff member in the Antimicrobials Division (AD) was contacted in 

2005 and then sent a 2005 email to an employee of Steptoe and Johnson 

stating that the ammonia, when used as a “stabilizer” to extend the 

residual of free chlorine in the system did not require registration as a 

pesticide. 

• Based on advice from AD, the OxiPro System was distributed. This was 

prior to Buckman’s registration of ammonia in 2007. 

• NALCO was informed in 2008 in a letter sent to its counsel by the 

Agency that their ammonia product could be marketed as long as no 

pesticidal claims were made. 

• Sales of the NALCO product continued based on the letter that was sent 

from the Agency in 2008 and the feedback that an AD staff member 

provided on promotional material that NALCO’s counsel submitted to the 

AD staff member for review. Again the Agency advised NALCO that they 

could market their product without registration. No paper trail exists for 

this exchange between the AD staff member and NALCO. 

• In conclusion, NALCO has built the OxiPro System based on advice 

received from AD. 

Stuart Passantino of NALCO provided an overview of the marketing challenges facing 

NALCO’s customers in the pulp and paper industry and the importance to them of having the 

OxiPro system. The following was stated by Mr. Passantino in his presentation: 
• NALCO’s customers in the pulp and paper industry are receiving pressure 

from several sources. There is not enough capital to re-invest back into 

research on process improvements for the paper industry, there is foreign 

competition to the paper industry, and there is decreased paper 

consumption due to the digital and computerized advances that compete 

with the use of paper products. 

• The customers can not afford to be “off-line” or to experience a down time 

which would have an adverse impact on the paper industry. 

• OxiPro helps the paper industry by improving the efficiency of the 

machinery that is used in paper production. The OxiPro system is 

currently used on some 100 machines in the paper industry and the use of 

the OxiPro System aids customers in remaining more competitive and 

sustainable. 

• The OxiPro System involves three components: 1) the chemistry which 

includes sodium hypochlorite, a pH stabilizer and a halogen stabilizer that 

has been identified as being either ammonia or urea; 2) pro-active 

monitoring tools which check for microbial activity and provide feedback 

on chemical activity within the system which monitors fouling of the 

machinery; and 3) on-site expertise which includes approximately 12,000 

member personnel force who possess knowledge of the industry and are 

able to perform sophisticated analyses using the data obtained from the 

monitoring devices. 

• In conclusion, any disruption in NALCO’s ability to deliver this service to 

their clients would have an adverse impact on their customers and the 

paper industry. 

Seth Goldberg, counsel for NALCO said they were looking for ways to resolve the issues. He 

said they brought in Rick Holt, to be a go-between and “honest broker” for all parties. However, 

Mr. Goldberg said the effort was re-buffed by the other two parties. NALCO said they would 

like to resolve the issue as soon as possible without consequences. NALCO said they would be 

interested in any other approaches EPA had to offer. 

Representatives for NALCO stated that they would like to continue to be able to provide their 

services and products to their customers in an uninterrupted manner. Any decision made by the 

Agency with regard to the registration of ammonia and urea should provide an adequate period 

for affected persons to comply with whatever decision is made. NALCO would not want to be 

subjected to enforcement if the decision on ammonia is not in their favor and they emphasized 

that they have acted in good faith based on the guidance that was given to them in 2005. They 

requested that the Agency offer an approach that will resolve this issue and take into 

consideration NALCO’s customers and their concerns regarding compliance. 

The Agency informed NALCO that the Agency is in the middle of a comment period relating to 

the petitions that have been filed for ammonia and urea. The Agency will look at all comments 

and exercise efficiency and transparency in addressing comments and in arriving at a decision. 
There will be consideration given to the registration status of ammonia/urea and, if needed, to the 

timing and implementation of any changes in the registration status of the products in question. 

Comments from customers should be submitted to the docket and should address any concerns 

regarding the impact of any changes in registration on the paper industry.