Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172-7197
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2008-03-25T04:00Z

"King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov> 

03/12/2008 04:28 PM

	

To

Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

Comments to RTC on secondary

From  Key Legal Comments RTC…

 

P 1

Response to #1: 

 

“EPA agrees that there is evidence the W126 form is currently the most
biologically relevant form available for reflecting vegetation response
to O3 exposures.  However, EPA does not…”

 

P 2

Response to #2:

 

Delete “EPA disagrees that its decision to propose a broader range of
levels for W126 is unlawful and arbitrary.”

 

P 3

“EPA notes that the uncertainties associated …. Can be evaluated
against each other.”   ???

 

P 5

Response to comment #3  “EPA notes that since the Agency did not
choose this alternative such a supplemental proposal is not
necessary.”