Subject: Meeting with Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council Regarding 

Secondary Lead Smelting and Primary Lead Smelting Residual Risk and Technology Reviews 

Date: October 7, 2011 

Participants: 

Earthjustice

Emma Chause 

James Pew 

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

Jane Williams 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Nathan Topham 

Steven Silverman 

Chuck French 

Summary: 

A meeting was held between members of the EPA and representatives of Earthjustice and NRDC 

to discuss the proposed secondary and primary lead residual risk and technology reviews 

(RTRs). The EPA provided clarification of the requirements included in the primary and 

secondary lead RTR proposals. 

Representatives of Earthjustice and NRDC highlighted a number of issues raised in their public 

comments and urged the EPA to take action in response to those comments. The following issues 

were raised by Earthjustice and NRDC during the meeting: 

• The proposed rules did not follow the requirements of section 112 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) 

• The use of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) as a measure of risk is 

not protective enough because the NAAQS only requires an adequate margin of safety 

while section 112 requires an ample margin of safety 

• The EPA should have evaluated requirements that would prevent the loss of one IQ point 

in children 

• The EPA should have considered an ambient standard of 0.02 μg/m3 averaged over one 

month, or a lower concentration 

• The IEUBK model used to develop the NAAQS benchmark of 0.15 μg/m3

underestimates risk to children by underestimating soil ingestion rates and only using a 

95% confidence interval that would not properly account for children living in close 

proximity to a lead smelter 
• Background levels of lead resulting from lead smelter emissions should be incorporated 

the risk assessments due to high blood lead levels that can occur from living/working in 

areas subject to contamination 

• The EPA cannot consider cost or feasibility in determining whether risk is acceptable 

• Advances in technology should have led to stricter standards under the section 112(d)(6) 

technology review 

• The compliance dates for the rules should not exceed 90 days 

• The South Coast Air Quality Management District rule for secondary lead smelters 

should have been considered in this rule, specifically the hourly emission limit and 

averaging time for the ambient standard 

• Section 112(d)(6) requires the EPA to satisfy section 112(d)’s requirement that the 

standards must reflect the best performers in a category 

• The EPA must consider environmental justice in the decision making process 

• The EPA must set a numerical standard for mercury from secondary lead smelters and 

standards for organic hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from primary lead smelters 

• The EPA must use an uncertainty factor to account for early childhood exposure in risk 

assessments 

• The EPA must consider cumulative impacts beyond the source category being considered 

• The EPA should add the results of the multipathway and inhalation risk assessments to 

determine the level of risk