Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0085-0554
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2023-08-16T04:00Z

From: 
Jones, DonnaLee <Jones.Donnalee@epa.gov>
Sent:
Monday, October 19, 2020 12:47 PM
To: 
Knight, Jeffrey A. <jeffrey.knight@pillsburylaw.com>; Allen Dittenhoefer <adittenhoefer@montrose-env.com>
Cc:
Raymond, Gabrielle <graymond@rti.org>
Subject: 
Re: COETF Comments on EPA - DLL

The rationale was that is was a conservative measure. 

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:  (919)  541-5251  Fax  (919)  541-3207
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

                                       
From: Knight, Jeffrey A. <jeffrey.knight@pillsburylaw.com>
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 12:36 PM
To: Jones, DonnaLee <Jones.Donnalee@epa.gov>; Allen Dittenhoefer <adittenhoefer@montrose-env.com>
Cc: GABRIELLE RAYMOND <graymond@rti.org>
Subject: RE: COETF Comments on EPA - DLL 
 
Got it, thanks again for following up.  We will also take a look at older RTR rules as well.  Again, we are trying to understand the rationale for why EPA would use 100% of the detection limit when it is a DLL situation vs 50% of the detection limit when it is a BDL.  The 50% approach has been EPA's long-standing practice for BDLs, and the rationale is sound for the BDL part of a DLL as well because it uses the middle value of the range of possible values between zero and the detection limit.  Thanks, - Jeff 
 
 
From: Jones, DonnaLee <Jones.Donnalee@epa.gov> 
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 12:25 PM
To: Knight, Jeffrey A. <jeffrey.knight@pillsburylaw.com>; Allen Dittenhoefer <adittenhoefer@montrose-env.com>
Cc: GABRIELLE RAYMOND <graymond@rti.org>
Subject: Re: COETF Comments on EPA - DLL
 
Mr Knight - So far, the consensus is that this is policy, as a conservative measure, and is in all our RTR rules to date. I don't have any time to look into the old rules right now (other than Integrated Steel) but maybe some time before we propose the rule. I will also check with the risk analyst for this project later this week to see if its been written down anywhere outside of the Federal Register (FR) and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The risk analyst (Ted Palma) was out of office last week. Our SPPD division RTR coordinator however already stated it was policy and in the FR and CFR. 
 
Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:  (919)  541-5251  Fax  (919)  541-3207
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.
 
Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.
 
 
From: 
Jones, DonnaLee <Jones.Donnalee@epa.gov>
Sent:
Friday, October 16, 2020 12:13 PM
To: 
Knight, Jeffrey A. <jeffrey.knight@pillsburylaw.com>; Allen Dittenhoefer <adittenhoefer@montrose-env.com>
Cc:
Raymond, Gabrielle <graymond@rti.org>
Subject: 
Re: COETF Comments on EPA - new RTI designation letter attached

Mr. Knight-- I will check into getting an "official"  document. I'm sure there is something. It's also in all the published FR notices to date that had this issue, so even if we do not have a "policy" memo, it's as firm as the "policy" to not treat COE as COE after a control device, which was written in the FR notice and support documents but not in any official memo. Also, the procedure was used in my recent rule (published 7/13/20) on the Integrated Iron and Steel RTR (subpart FFFFF). See the "Data memo" in the docket. 

I will ask the measurement group today but it might be until Monday before I get a response because many people have Friday off if they work on a compressed schedule.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711  Tele:  (919)  541-5251  Fax  (919)  541-3207
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

                                       
From: Knight, Jeffrey A. <jeffrey.knight@pillsburylaw.com>
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 8:42 AM
To: Jones, DonnaLee <Jones.Donnalee@epa.gov>; Allen Dittenhoefer <adittenhoefer@montrose-env.com>
Cc: GABRIELLE RAYMOND <graymond@rti.org>
Subject: RE: COETF Comments on EPA - new RTI designation letter attached 
 
Dr. Jones, thank you for the quick responses.  On the DLL issue, you reference a measurement technology group policy.  Is this a written policy or just a practice?  If it's a written policy, we'd like to get a copy so we can understand better why EPA would use differing approaches for DLL vs. BDL situations.  Many thanks, - Jeff
 
 
Jeffrey A. Knight | Partner
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
1200 Seventeenth Street NW | Washington, DC 20036-3006

t +1.202.663.9152 | m +1.703.887.6683

jeffrey.knight@pillsburylaw.com | website bio