February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 p pb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by t he Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recomm end that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jerry Call American Foundry SocietyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Age ncy 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the E PA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new reg ulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many sta tes.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Daniel Twarog

NADCAFebruary 7, 20 11

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This w ill result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Alli ance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Charles McEvoy

Western ExtrusionsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplac e. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new st andard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the tim e to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Tom Abbas PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambi ent Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will r esult in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

J. Andrew Doyle American Coatings AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsy lvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposin g a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burden s between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is n ot the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Alex Howard

SMEPAFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly S tallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Qua lity Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in si gnificant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), low ering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. T his will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Andy Kick

Lake States LumberFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washingto n, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In add ition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more hi gh

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Alois J. Koller Jr. Koller Enterprises, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Qu ality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in s ignificant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lo wering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Andrew J Miner PPG Industries, IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The propo sal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 203 0. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put eve n more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bradley A. Benson Squires

- Belt Material Co.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambi ent Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will r esult in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

William Dunn

Trim

- Tex, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The prop osal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 20 30. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put ev en more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bill Turner Rextac, LLCFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Blake Hardwich

Manufacture AlabamaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lo wer the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years af ter establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In additi on, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

BRIAN NEWHOUSE

LAKE STATES LBR.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs , increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the curre nt standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will signif icantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Robert Easterbrook

East

- Lind Heat Treat, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washing ton, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal wou ld lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two yea rs after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In a ddition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Robert Hege III

Meadows Mills IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

J. Gregg Borchelt Brick Industry AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The propo sal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 203 0. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put eve n more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bill Perdue American Home Furnishings AllianceFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will resul t in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAP I), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt thi s new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Benjamin F. Rassieur III Paulo Products CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylv ania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marke tplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a n ew standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens bet ween 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bruce A. Steiner

American Coke & Coal Chemicals InstituteFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range betw een 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent st udy by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violatio n of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel t o recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

ROBERT WILLIAMS

MOBILE PAINT MFG. CO INCFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Cecilia Allison

K & S Tool, Die & Manufacturing, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 pa rts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb stand ard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place ma ny counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stak e.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Carroll Anderson Production Castings, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Scien ce Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations

and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and smal l businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Clifford R. Beadle

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 par ts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standa rd in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place man y counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake

.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Berry Colorado Assn of Commerce & IndustryFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Chris Faria

PPGIndustries IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- pay ing manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Charles C. Whitaker

Cello

- Wrap Printing Co., Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallw orth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in signifi cant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This w ill significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Chris Olsen Tate & LyleFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 2000 4

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

est ablishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a n ew standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Chris Burgess Arcadia Chair CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in signifi cant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This w ill significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Cletis Jackson

Hi

- Tek Mfg IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lo wer the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years af ter establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In additi on, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Michael O'Brien

Window & Door Manufacturers AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Hol ly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result i n significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Ac t. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this n ew, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Charles G. Mayhew Foldcraft CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The pro posal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard onl y two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2 030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Cindy Squires

National Marine Manufacturers AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new Natio nal Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. Thi s will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

A lliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of t he Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA n ot adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Cyrus T. Wright

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulator y burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Dale A Freeman Freeman Contract Services, LLCFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range betw een 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent st udy by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violatio n of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel t o recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Daniel Glier

Glier's Meats incFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compet e in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1

trillion in new r egulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many s tates.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Thomas A. Danjczek

Steel Manufacturers Associat ionFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Age ncy (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb)

to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recen t study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in viol ation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Pan el to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

David W. Frengel

Penn UnitedFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Daniel A. Brailer WESCO International, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard i n 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many co unties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Dell Collins Vermeer CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Boa rd U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

M anufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses an d hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Deborah K. Wo olley Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & IndustryFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Sta llworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standar d of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard woul d place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jo bs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Danielle Elmer

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Duane Jebbett Rowmark,LLC.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 par ts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standa rd in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place man y counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake

.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

David Moss PPG Industries, IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory B oard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations

and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 m illion jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Debbie Marshall

ChevronFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environ mental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per bill ion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Durham McCauley
McGard, LLCFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abili ty to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufac turers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hind er economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Donna C. Clark

Jack Daniel DistilleryFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (p pb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accor ding to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urg e the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Stacy Dorsey

PPGFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Todd Douthit

PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties i n our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongl y urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Donald Popp The Ruscoe CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability t o create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacture rs are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder e conomic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

C. Richard Titus

Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallwor th:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would pla ce many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Douglas Woods

AMT

- The Association for Manufacturing TechnologyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Daniel Zink Cottrell, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

esta blishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a ne w standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying m anufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Edwina Beasley

PPGFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Scie nce Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hur t manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations

an d job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and sma ll businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Eugene T. Corbin

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallw orth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard o f 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 pp b standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would

p lace many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Ed Childress Syncro CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Richard Elias

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 par ts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standa rd in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place man y counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake

.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

O. Frank Williams

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufactur ers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses

.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million job s by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesse s and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Glen R. Anderson Pressure Sensitive Tape CouncilFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stan dard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard w ould place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Gerry E. Dozier
PPG Industries Inc., Fiber Glass ProductsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

George N Clark

Manufacture AlabamaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lo wer the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years af ter establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In additi on, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Glenn Hamer Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry/Arizona Manufacuters CouncilFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s propose d new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the re quirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Gary Jones Printing Industries of AmericaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compet e in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1

trillion in new r egulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many s tates.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Glenn Frommer

ADCO ProductsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s propose d new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manu facturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requir ements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend tha t the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Herman B. Turner

Heatron, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulator y burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Henry Lodge Lodge Manufacturing CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 p pb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by t he Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recomm end that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Scott Hopwood
PPG Industries, IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agenc y 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regula tory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states

.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Marilyn Hansen

Hudson Extrusions, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 p pb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by t he Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recomm end that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Blake Jeffery

Indiana Cast Metals AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Julia Phelps

Sut phen Towers IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accord ing to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jay Moon Mississippi Manufacturers AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Boa rd U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

M anufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses an d hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

James C. Stull Continental Heat Treating, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 p arts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb stan dard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place m any counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at sta ke.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jeanna E Potts

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Jeanne Bell Westside FinishingFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 p arts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb stan dard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place m any counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at sta ke.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jeff Kauk

Nucor SteelFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U .S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abil ity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs b y 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses a nd hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jeffery R Mi ller

PPGFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protectio n Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb)

to a r ange between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASA C Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jed Falgren

Metalcasters of MinnesotaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

James Fleming Rep ublic Services Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard i n 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many co unties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Johns Friel Mid West Fabricating CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Sci ence Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincer ely,

James Gordon Winston Printing Co. Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stall worth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 p pb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jim Hickman Langdale Forest Products Co.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone wil l hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulatio ns and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cos t 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large an d small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sinc erely,

James Greenwell Reliable Plating CorpFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stan dard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard w ould place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

James K. Lyons Alabama State Port AuthorityFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standa rd.

Sincerely,

Jeff Meade

PPGFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard i n 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many co unties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Joseph R. Kloppenberg Kloppenberg & Co.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Science Advis ory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufac turers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job los ses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small busine sses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jonathan M. Edwards Edwards Oil Co. of Lawrenceburg, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

D ear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the curr ent standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

establis hing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new st andard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manuf acturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Joshua Ray PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

John Stauber Innovative Pine TechnologyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The propo sal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 203 0. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put eve n more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jack M. Stewart California Manufacturers & Technology AssociaitonFebr uary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed ne w National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 p pb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufact urers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requiremen ts of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that th e EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

John W. Finger Sioux CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulator y burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Janice Wirtz

PPGFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambi ent Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will r esult in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kari Dorvinen

Lake States LumberFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue , NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 a nd 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to p ut even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kenneth W. Bonin Lake States Lumber, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will resu lt in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MA PI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Ai r Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kevin E Sauer

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The prop osal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 20 30. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put ev en more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Dr. Kurt G. Olson

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Qu ality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in s ignificant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lo wering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kirk McCollough Seneca Foundry IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Wa shington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 an d 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to pu t even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kenneth R Ingram

Valv

- Trol Co.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stall worth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in signif icant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowerin g the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kate Ryan

ITW TACCFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the cur rent standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

establi shing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new s tandard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manu facturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Kevin Schwalb

Textile Rental Services AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Lance Brown The Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy (PACE)February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulator y burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Laurel Rodricks PPG AerospaceFebruary 7 , 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new Nati onal Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. Th is will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Len Carmichael Sunnyside CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsy lvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global mar ketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens b etween 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Lori L. Leffler

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambi ent Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will r esult in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Lisa Freeman PPG, PMC, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The prop osal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 20 30. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put ev en more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Leif Lindbo

Lake States LumberFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallwort h Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in signifi cant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This w ill significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Larry Vandergriend Hughes Brothers, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Wa shington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposa l would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only tw o years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Michael A. Martin

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in signifi cant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This w ill significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Matt Croson

Adhesive and Sealant CouncilFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The propo sal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 203 0. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put eve n more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Matthew F. Johnston Worthington Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr . Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This wi ll result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Allia nce (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the C lean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not a dopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Thomas E Maziarz PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvan ia Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketp lace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens betwe en 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Marnie Christopherson Lake States Lumber/Innovative Pine Technology, I nc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Age ncy (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb)

to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recen t study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in viol ation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Pan el to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Cesar Medeiros

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Michael Jones

PPG Protective and Marine CoatingsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard i n 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many co unties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Michael P. D'Ambra

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Bo ard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers ’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs b y 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses a nd hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Mark Kayne

S ioux CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental P rotection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb ) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accordi ng to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our n ation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Chris Moyer Pennsylvania Foundry AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ab ility to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manu facturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 20 20 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and h inder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Meghan Roe

PPG I ndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accord ing to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Mark A. Roth PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and ad d $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder eco nomic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

John M. Stradinger

Hollan d 1916February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb)

to a ran ge between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a re cent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in v iolation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Mark Suber

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Environmental Protectio n Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and comp ete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that t he EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1

trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Ric Fenton Alpha Natural ResourcesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range betw een 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent st udy by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violatio n of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel t o recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Nancy Stephens

Manufacturers Association of FloridaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and ad d $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder eco nomic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Heather D. O'Bannion

PPG Protective & Marine CoatingsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Env ironmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2 008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many count ies in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Russ Murray

Ohio Cast Metals AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Science Advis ory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufac turers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job los ses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small busine sses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Paul Michalec

The Ruscoe Co.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billi on (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties i n our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongl y urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Paul N. Cicio Industrial Energy Consumers of AmericaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Lance Penfield Prince Manufacturing CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the cur rent standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- payi ng manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Phillip D Norman

ColomerFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Of fice Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozon e will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regu lations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard woul d cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt lar ge and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

W Scott Pleskonko

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stan dard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard w ould place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Peter E. Macler

Texas Cast Metals AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bruce D. Putnam

PPG Industries Fiber Glass ProductsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 an d 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to pu t even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Paul Walker Streator Dependable Mfg.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Q uality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), l owering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Paul F Wilson, Ph.D. PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Ave nue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new stand ard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 202 0 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time t o put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

patrick ortiz longview fibre paper and packagingFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new Nation al Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Al liance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of th e Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA no t adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Karen Bailey PPG Industries, Inc Fiber GlassFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is p roposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

N ow is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Rich Bauer

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 201 1

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This wi ll result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers

Allia nce (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the C lean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Reynaldo M. Chavez

San Antonio Manufacturers AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Robert C. Giomi Morgan Ohare, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (p pb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accor ding to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urg e the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Richard Higgins HK Research CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Rhonda L Linz

PPG Protective and Marine CoatingsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many c ounties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Rita Needham

Missouri Association of ManufacturersFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

S cience Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Robert Morret Pennex Aluminum CompanyFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stan dard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard w ould place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

James Rock

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Ronald Vollmer ADCO Products, IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallwort h:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would pla ce many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Renee' Ostrosky
PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Scienc e Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations

and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 m illion jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Richard Patek

Telsmith Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard i n 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many co unties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Charles T. Drevna

National Petrochemical & Refiners AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Richard Walker

AAMAFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the cur rent standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

establi shing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new s tandard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manu facturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jim Schiappa
PPG Industries, IncFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal O ffice Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozo ne will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased reg ulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard wou ld cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt la rge and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Steve Lewallen

Wisconsin Cast Metals AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 2000 4

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

est ablishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a n ew standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Scott Manley

Wisconsin Manufacturers & CommerceFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Stephen Michael spartanburg forest productsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The propo sal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 203 0. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put eve n more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Stephanie Shealy Santee CooperFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stan dards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stri ngent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

steve hays standard industrial corp.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington , DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addi tion, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more hig h

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Shawn Peck

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Stewart Rariden Stone City Products, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 an d 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to pu t even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Theodore W. Summerland II

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. H olly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will resul t in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAP I), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt thi s new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Sarah Zielsdorf

Lake States LumberFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The p roposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard o nly two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

P.A.Argentinis Elan Technology inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Qu ality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in s ignificant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lo wering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Tammy L. Davis

PPGFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- pay ing manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Ted Smith
Smith Millwork, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Fed eral Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increa sed regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current stand ard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone st andard.

Sincerely,

Tim Voss

Arrow Adhesive Co.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. S tallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stand ard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard wo uld place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Tina Rickard

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt ma nufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and jo b losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 mil lion jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small b usinesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Travis Kinyo

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Envi ronmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per b illion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 20 08. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counti es in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I str ongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Thomas A. Logston

PPG Industries CA&DFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

traci jensen

hbfullerFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many c ounties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Truman F. Wilt PPG Industries, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufactur ers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses

.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million job s by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesse s and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Lisa Ventrano

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billi on (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties i n our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongl y urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Victoria BrindAmour Tegrant CorporationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Jay Vroom CropLife AmericaFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 par ts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standa rd in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place man y counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake

.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Verne Tuite

Klein Tools, Inc.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Bo ard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers ’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs b y 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses a nd hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Wayne K. Scharber TN Chamber of Commerce & IndustryFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallwo rth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would pl ace many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs a t stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

William

PerciballiFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ab ility to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manu facturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 20 20 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and h inder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Wiliam Ries

PPG IndustriesFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accord ing to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bill Lievense Foundry Association of MichiganFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Boar d U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Ma nufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jim D.Neiman Neiman Enterproises, Inc.

Comment: Why are we trying to eliminate jobs and chase them out of our country to other countries, when our focus should be on creating new jobs. Our Company is in the forest products business and we have been hit e xtremely hard with the collapse of the housing inFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

T he Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 part s per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standar d in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Thomas S. Narbit Jr.

PPG Industries

Comment: Where is the science? Only 2 years ago the EPA set a standard for Ozone of 75 ppb. Industry assisted the others in changes that have met attainment in the Houston Area. Now another reduction seems to be directed at reducing jobs, not protecting the pubFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Scien ce Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations

and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and smal l businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Howard Lambert

Midwest Metal Products, Inc.

Comment: What does not make sense to me is President Obama's goal of increasing Mfg. exports (which I think is what we need to do) while his actions of increasing cost at every point: EPA, OSHA, Medical Insurance, etc., etc., has the exact opposite effect. As aFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the cur rent standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

establi shing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new s tandard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manu facturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Lusker O'Neal Clements Rock Tenn Paper Co.

Comment: We have already lost millions of jobs to outsourcing, moving manufacturing to countries with low wages including slave labor, and the theft and giving away of American technology. Therefore we do not need people that are paid by our hard earned tax dollarFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth

D esignated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Standa rds (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant c osts, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Edwin Kercher

Kercher Industries, Inc.

Comment: Two years ago industriy was told to obtain one result, now they are told they need to

do more. No wonder everone talks of the loss of American manufacturer. This is part of "Death by a Thousand Regulation" to American industry.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

De ar Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the curre nt standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

establish ing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new sta ndard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufa cturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Robert D. Bessette

CIBO

Comment: This rule on top of the Boiler MACT rule, the other NAAQS rules, GHG rules, new Water regulations and solid waste rules and ash classification are strangeling the American economy, killing any potential growth and job recovery or formation. This is 100%February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for oz one will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased re gulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard wo uld cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt l arge and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard

.

Sincerely,

Pete Weisenberger Weisenberger & Company, LLC

Comment: This is the definition of insanity and political double

- speak. On the one hand, talking about keeping American jobs and creating new jobs, and, on the other hand, impleme nting job

killing regulations. The highest of hypocrisy.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stan dard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard w ould place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Tina Lynn Lake PPG Industries, Inc.

Comment: This is another example of the Agency’s overregulation and will put high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb sta ndard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at st ake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Peter Faulkner

PPG Industries

Comment: This country cannot afford to lose more jobs. We need to give time for the existing 75ppb standard to workFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accord ing to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Charles Nason

Worzalla

Comment: This comes on the heels of the President's pro

- business movement for re

- election. Why doesn't anyone in Washington understand this will cost the U.S. jobs, dollars and have a chilling effect on business recovery?February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvan ia Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketp lace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens betwe en 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

NEIL BELLIKKA

Prairie Tool Co.

Comment: The US economy can not stand with more regulationsFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environment al Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Acc ording to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in o ur nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly u rge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Ray Bacon

Nevada Manufacturers Assn

Comment: The regulatory constraints on US industry are doing more to drive jobs out of this

cou ntry than tax policy or anything else government does to business. If they penalized the guilty with logical and common sense measures, then fine. In reality they puniFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Bo ard U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations

and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 m illion jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

George Gehring Gehring Textiles/Gehring

- Tricot Corp

Comment: The past 10 years we have seen manufacturing sacrificed with all the Free Trade Agreements

- and add this to the in

- direct costs of running a domestic manufacturing company

has ma de it impossible to stay in business. This would be an added cost that our oFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

esta blishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a ne w standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Eric Van Dellen Amway

Comment: The new rule set two years ago has created a significant b urden on Western Michigan, specificly due to transport accross Lake Michigan. To lower the standard in just two years places an unreasonable regulatory standard. The state of Michigan is clawingFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for oz one will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased re gulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard wo uld cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt l arge and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard

.

Sincerely,

Tom Morrison Metal Treating Institute

Comment: The Metal Treating Institute agrees with the Manufacturer's comments and is troubled by regulation that changes so rapidly that you can't comply with it as well as costing jobs in manufacturing when we are in such need of industries to create jobs.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

establishin g the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new stand ard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufact uring jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

James Finkel

Wallace Cranes

Comment: The marginal incremental improvement in decreasing the thres holds for ozone will be far outweighed by the costs of abatement. Too, has the energy cost (and subsequent chemicals generation) of creating the abatement equipment been figured into the total eFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Stand ards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will

s ignificantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more strin gent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Donald E. Moors Western Gage Corp

Comment: The current standards are adequate. Further restriction will not offset the deleterious effect they will have on the economy.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallwor th Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

St andards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significa nt costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This wi ll significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more s tringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

James Barrie Sellers

Geokon Inc

Comment: The current Ozone levels are quite adequate and further reductions would not be

cost effective

- the costs would greatly exceed any small benefit that might be de rivedFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s p roposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 pp b and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by th e Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recomme nd that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Scott Macdonald Maryland Thermoform Corporation

Comment: Regulations raising standards here in USA without corresponding reductions in foreign competitors are destructive to domestic manufacturers and their employees. Any changes should be in lock step with our foreign trade agreements or they are not only destFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Enviro nmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to cre ate jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers ar e troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $ 1 trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder econom ic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Brian Moore

APAC

- Mississippi , Inc.

Comment: Poor timing for new regulation that seems at least at this point unnecessary. Lets give the 75ppb standard more time.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ abi lity to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manuf acturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 202 0 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hi nder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

David Nelson

Siou x Corporation

Comment: Poll the unemployed... I will go with whatever they say.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Wa shington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 an d 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to pu t even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Andy Plauche' PPG Industries, Inc.

Comment: Please give the curre nt standard of 75 ppb time to work before setting new

standards.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current stan dard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard w ould place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

William Retsch

PPG

Comment: Please do not change the current ozone standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range from 70 ppb to 60 ppb. Give the current standards time to work.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 2 0004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- payi ng manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Brenda C Reed

PPG Industries

Comment: Our economy is already in huge trouble. This will only make the economy worse, by taking manufacturing jobs from the Amercan people. Please allow the current regulations to stand and give the people of Amercia job security.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office

Science Ad visory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manu facturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 milli on jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small bus inesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jer ry Miller M&M Hi Tech Fab, LLC

Comment: NO more Regulations or Taxes; is it any wonder, fewer products are Made in USA!February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled th at the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1

trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Robert E Kersey

Rochester Metal Products

Comment: I support the letter. The EPA's actions are just another indication of the administrations complete dislike of the business community and the free enterprize system in general.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Fed eral Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) f or ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increas ed regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standa rd would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly h urt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

William Ferguson Chatsworth Products, Inc.

Comment: I request that the EPA not adopt a new, more stringent ozone standard.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufactu rers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 an d add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

VIRGIL SCOTT

SOUTHWEST ELECTRIC

Comment: I FAIL TO SEE HOW MORE REGULATIONS AND FORMS WILL ACCOMPLISH

ANYTHING OTHER THAN HIGHER COST FOR ENERGY. THE GENERAL PUBLIC CAN

HARDLY PAY THEIR UTILITY AND TRANSPORTATION FUEL COST AS IT IS.February 7, 2011

D r. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambie nt Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will re sult in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance ( MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

John W. Martin III

Mar

- Mac Wire, Inc.

Comment: I continue to struggle to compete against China and Mexico in steel products. Neither country has the choking regulations with which we mus t contend in the USA.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb)

to a ran ge between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a re cent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in v iolation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Aanstasia Tullos

Norbord

Comment: I am signing my name to the petition to tell the EPA not to adopt a new, more stringent ozone standard and to g ive the current standard time to work.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billi on (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties i n our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongl y urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

John W Wymer JR Jack Wymer LLC

Comment: Has there been Real Research by Real Scientists to establish the need ? Or is "Computer Modeling" with selected Inputs ?February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (p pb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accor ding to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urg e the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Rex Greer APUs by Rex, LLC

Comment: EPA needs to stop trying to implement any new regulations and determine how much damage they have already done to the environment such as the global warming scam. Between EPA, CARB. and Al Gore they have done more damage to the air quality than the lastFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board

U.S. En vironmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturer s are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and a dd $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder ec onomic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

George woods Littlejohn Engineering Associates

Comment: EPA has set the proposed standards at levels that they know cannot be met. Virtually every State will be in nonattainment status based on the proposed placement of monitors in the highest traffic areas which w ill bias the data in the way they want it to gFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts p er billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard i n 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many co unties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Michael Gore

Three R Plastics

Comment: Enough is enough. Lets enforce the rules on the books first. Raising the bar hig her will not improve compliance.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accord ing to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Bob Winstead BAE Systems Ordnance Systems, Inc

Comment: Endorsing letter on behalf of BAE Systems, Ordnance Systems, Inc. at Holston

A rmy Ammunition Plant in Kingsport, TennesseeFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The En vironmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many coun ties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Terry Bush SpiraFlex LLC

Comment: Enacting regulation without regard for the consequences is no different than taxation

w ithout representation.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb)

to a ra nge between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a r ecent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Donald C. Stine
PPG Industries, Inc.

Comment: Continuing to over burden manufacturing with needless regulation will reduce available jobs, when they are needed most. Leave regulation to our elected officials in congress.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after

esta blishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a ne w standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying m anufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

William Sopko

Stamco Industries

Comment: Clean air is a world wide issue. China & India a re the world's worst . They are already subsidized by thier governments to hurt our manufacturing base in America. We do not need more costly regulations that make us even more costly to complete globallFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designate d Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs , increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the curre nt standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will signif icantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Joseph Cattaneo Glass Packaging Institute

Comment: As president of the Glass Packaging Institute, the North American trade association for the glass container manufacturing industry, we would like to sign on to t his petition.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range betwe en 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent stu dy by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Harold C Bennett Utility Trailer Mfg. Co.

Comment: Another nail in the coffin of manufacturing in the US. High cost , unmeasurable benefits, and less high paying job s in the US. I thought we were trying to create domestic jobs! Let's stop this nonsense.February 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1 trillion in new regulator y burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

William E. Gaskin Precision Metalforming AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (pp b) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. Accord ing to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Dave Tilstone National Tooling & Machining AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulation s and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Since rely,

Kevin M. Burke American Apparel & Footwear AssociationFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- pay ing manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Lorraine Gershman American Chemistry CouncilFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Qu ality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in s ignificant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lo wering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulatory burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Kalkwarf

Metals Service Center InstituteFebruary 7, 2011

Dr. Holly Stallworth Designated Federal Office Science Advisory Board U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004

Dear Dr. Stallworth:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone will hurt manufacturers’ ability to create jobs and compete in the global marketplace. The proposal would lower the current standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) to a range between 70 ppb and 60 ppb. This will result in significant costs, increased regulations and job losses.

Manufacturers are troubled that the EPA is proposing a new standard only two years after establishing the 75 ppb standard in 2008. According to a recent study by the Manufacturers Alliance (MAPI), lowering the current standard would cost 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1
trillion in new regulator y burdens between 2020 and 2030. In addition, a new standard would place many counties in our nation in violation of the requirements of the Clean Air Act. This will significantly hurt large and small businesses and hinder economic growth in many states.

Now is not the time to put even more high

- paying manufacturing jobs at stake.

I strongly urge the CASAC Panel to recommend that the EPA not adopt this new, more stringent

ozone standard.

Sincerely,

Stephen Larkin

Aluminum Association