Chuck French/RTP/USEPA /US 

To Nancy Jones <jones.nancy@ecrweb.com>

 01/10/2008 04:59 PM 

cc Anne Pope/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, norwood.phil@ecrweb.com, Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, 

smith.darcie@ecrweb.com, Lesley Stobert <stobert.lesley@ecrweb.com>, Tom 

Driscoll/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Robin Segall/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Subject Re: Secondary Lead and chromium speciation(Document link: Chuck French) 

Hi Nancy Paula, and Others, 

 I think I found the citation and documentation that we need to support the 1% Cr VI speciation 

assumption for Secondary Lead Smelters (that Nancy provided below). It is found in the the following 

document: 

AB2588 Air Toxics Hot Spots Health Risk Assessment, prepared for GNB Technologies Inc., Vernon 

California, Facility Number 044551, May 2000, prepared by Lake Engineering, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia. 

This large Hot Spots document presents a summary (5 pages) of the chromium speciation test results by 

Del Mar Analytical in 1991 for the GNB (Quemetco), CA facility, which are consistent with Nancy's 

speciation numbers in the table attached below. I have one hard copy of the document. Let me know if 

you want a copy of the document (and/or test summary 5 pages) for you files, the docket, etc.... 

Anyway, do you think this is adequate documentation for speciation assumption? Or, do we need to 

hunt for the "raw data",etc....? Anyway, let me know if you have comments or questions. 

Thanks. 

Chuck 
Nancy Jones <jones.nancy@ecrweb.com> 

To Anne Pope/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

01/10/2008 09:44 AM 

cc norwood.phil@ecrweb.com, Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, smith.darcie@ecrweb.com, Lesley 

Stobert <stobert.lesley@ecrweb.com> 

Subject Re: Secondary Lead and chromium speciation 

Chuck/Anne, 

While I do not believe I have the original materials received from the GNB (Quemetco), CA facility, here 

is the file where I calculated the ratio of the trace metal HAPs to lead from the test of baghouse dust. 

Note that all sampling of chromium VI was below the detection limit. By comparing the detection limit 

of chromium VI to the measured concentration of total chromium, a conservative use of the detection 

limit, the % chromium VI of total chromium is < 1%. 

Nancy 

At 07:19 AM 1/10/2008, Pope.Anne@epamail.epa.gov wrote: 

 Chuck, 

 ORD is pressing for test report summaries that speciation is based on. 

If we have the basis of the 1%, then we need to provide the documentation. Robin Segall and Tom 

Driscoll are helping with review of Cr speciation test reports. for other categories, contractors are 

providing memo summarizing Cr speciation recommendation with documentation and references to 

source test reports. I believe this needs to be done for secondary lead. 

NOTE Danny Green, ERG, does not have any information as the files were sent back to Iliam Rosario. 

Maybe you have the documents in your office or perhaps you have provided the background 

information to ECR. 

anne 

 
Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US 

To Lesley Stobert <stobert.lesley@ecrweb.com>

 01/09/2008 04:47 PM 

 Cc jones.nancy@ecrweb.com, norwood.phil@ecrweb.com, Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, 

smith.darcie@ecrweb.com, Anne Pope/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Subject Secondary Lead and chromium speciation(Document link: Anne Pope) 

 Hi Anne, Nancy and Leslie, 

I recall there was still an issue with the chromium speciation. 

Do you have the information/data/citations, etc... needed for the chromium speciation for Seconday 

Lead? Do you still need something from me? If so, let me know. 

Thanks. 

Chuck 

 Lesley Stobert <stobert.lesley@ ecrweb.com> 

To Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

 01/08/2008 01:03 PM 

 Cc norwood.phil@ecrweb.com, smith.darcie@ecrweb.com, jones.nancy@ecrweb.com 

Subject Re: Fw: Thanks, also coordinate changes? 

 Chuck and Paula, 

 We don't think there are any coordinate changes to be made. We did need to made a change in the 

NAD for one of the facility's coordinates before modeling, but that was done and is all we can think of 

for changes that were made or needed to be made for this source category. If there is something we're 

forgetting, please let us know. 

 Lesley 

 At 11:33 AM 1/8/2008, Hirtz.Paula@epamail.epa.gov wrote: 

ECR 

Paula Hirtz 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

 Mail Code E143-01 

 109 TW Alexander Drive 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 

 Email: hirtz.paula@epa.gov 

Direct Line: (919) 541-2618 
----- Forwarded by Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US on 01/08/2008 11:32 AM 

----- 

Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US 

 To Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

 01/08/2008 11:28 AM 

 cc Anne Pope/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Subject 

Re: Thanks, also coordinate changes? 

Fw: 2nd Pb facility closures 

(Document link: Paula Hirtz) 

I am not sure about the status of the coordinate changes. 

 I am sorry my memory is unclear about this....... Who do you think would be best able to answer this 

question (EC/R? HEID? ERG??)? 

Paula Hirtz/RTP/USEPA/US 

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

 01/08/2008 11:19 AM 

 cc Anne Pope/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Subject Thanks, also coordinate changes? 

Fw: 2nd Pb facility closures 

We are waiting on coordinate changes too - do you have these? 

Paula Hirtz 

US Environmental Protection Agency 

 Mail Code E143-01 

 109 TW Alexander Drive 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 

 Email: hirtz.paula@epa.gov 

Direct Line: (919) 541-2618 

__________________ 

See below. Let me know if you have any questions. 

 Thanks. 

Chuck 
----- Forwarded by Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US on 01/08/2008 11:08 AM 

 "Danny Greene" <Danny.Greene@erg.com>

 To Chuck French/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

 12/10/2007 01:45 PM 

 cc 

Subject 2nd Pb facility closures 

Chuck, attached is a table showing the secondary lead smelting facilities in operation since 1990. For 

most of the facilities, the operation/closure was based on records in the Toxic Release Inventory 

database. However, in a few cases, project memoranda were used to supplement the TRI data. 

Please let me know if you have any questions. 

 Thanks, 

Danny 

(See attached file: 2nd Pb Historical Operation.xls) 

 Lesley Stobert 

 EC/R Incorporated 

 6330 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 325 

 Chapel Hill, NC 27517 

 (919) 484-0222 ext. 345 

 stobert.lesley@ecrweb.com 

Nancy Jones 

Sr. Environmental Scientist 

EC/R Incorporated 

6330 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 325 

Chapel Hill, NC 27517 

Phone: (919) 484-0222 x227 

Fax: (919) 484-0122(See attached file: GNB CA dusttest.xls) 
Blast/Reverb Exide 

(GNB), CA

Bag House Dust - 

Reverb

Bag House Dust 

- Blast Furnace

Bag House Dust 

- Hard Lead

Bag House Dust 

- Material 

Storage

Bag House Dust 

- Soft Lead

Bag House Dust - 

Cyclone BH

Rotary Dryer

ND=1/2LOD ND=1/2LOD ND=1/2LOD ND=1/2LOD ND=1/2LOD ND=1/2LOD

Ratios of: Ratios of: Ratios of: Ratios of: Ratios of: Ratios of:

metal HAPs to 

lead '91

metal HAPs to 

lead '91

metal HAPs to 

lead '91

metal HAPs to 

lead '91

metal HAPs to 

lead '91

metal HAPs to lead 

'92

Lead 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00 1.0E+00

Antimony -- -- -- -- -- --

Arsenic 1.7E-02 8.9E-03 6.6E-03 7.4E-03 3.8E-03 2.5E-03

Beryllium 7.4E-08 9.1E-08 7.4E-08 9.3E-08 9.1E-08 6.5E-08

Cadmium 1.7E-02 2.7E-02 7.2E-03 1.0E-02 3.5E-03 2.7E-03

Chromium (Total) 2.1E-04 4.0E-05 6.6E-05 2.2E-04 5.1E-05 2.6E-05

Chromium (VI) 1.8E-07 2.3E-07 1.8E-07 2.3E-07 2.3E-07 1.6E-07

Manganese 5.8E-05 4.0E-05 1.6E-04 4.8E-04 3.8E-05 na

Mercury 6.5E-06 6.7E-06 5.3E-06 6.7E-06 4.5E-06 9.9E-07

Nickel 8.1E-05 4.0E-04 6.8E-04 6.1E-04 1.8E-04 6.6E-05

Selenium 1.9E-03 1.2E-03 1.1E-03 7.0E-04 2.4E-04 2.6E-04

GNB CA dusttest.xls/ratios 2/26/02
17-Oct-91 Hard Lead Material Storage Blast Furnace Soft Lead Reverb CYCLONE BH STACK

BH Dust Analysis TTLC* TTLC TTLC TTLC TTLC (Serving Rotary Dryer)

Exide (GNB), CA Detection Analysis Detection Analysis Detection Analysis Detection Analysis Detection Analysis Feb. 18, 1992

Limit Result Limit Result Limit Result Limit Result Limit Result

(mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)

Arsenic 1.0 4,500 1.0 4,000 1.0 4,900 1.0 2,100 1.0 9,700 1,900

Beryllium 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.05

Cadmium 0.1 4,900 0.1 5,500 0.1 15,000 0.1 1,900 0.1 9,700 2,100

Chromium (Total) 0.05 45 0.05 120 0.05 22 0.05 28 0.05 120 20

Chromium (VI) 0.25 0.125 0.25 0.125 0.25 0.125 0.25 0.125 0.25 0.125 0.25 0.125

Lead 0.05 680,000 0.05 540,000 0.05 550,000 0.05 550,000 0.05 570,000 770,000

Manganese 0.5 110 0.5 260 0.5 22 0.5 21 0.5 33 --

Mercury 0.01 3.6 0.01 3.6 0.01 3.7 0.01 2.5 0.01 3.7 0.76

Nickel 0.5 460 0.5 330 0.5 220 0.5 100 0.5 46 51

Selenium 0.1 720 0.1 380 0.1 670 0.1 130 0.1 1100 200

* 1/2 of detection limit used for nondetects for beryllium and chromium VI

One-half the detection limit used for chromium VI for all due to analysis resulting in concentrations < the detection limit.

Note below that if the detection limit is used as a conservative estimate of chromium VI concentrations, the % of total chromium is < 1%.

CrVI DL % of total Cr 0.56 0.21 1.14 0.89 0.21 1.25

GNB CA dusttest.xls/test results 2/26/02