A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I
1	__id	first_name	last_name	email_address	organization	state	comment	additional_document_name	additional_document_url
2	129	Tara	Sawyer	taranisan@gmail.com		Oregon	Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
3	282	debbie	James	starfishdj@aol.com		Texas	I can't believe you guys are squashing another american industry. This time it affects me. It's one thing to protect the public but quite another to overprotect at the expense of a lot of people's jobs. I guess you don't care because you got a cushy government job. What are you going to do when you destroy all those who support the government through taxes? Hello those taxes pay your salary. We are the producers and the money makers. You have become the destroyers.
4	270	Susan	Green	segpdx@yahoo.com	Bullseye Glass	OR	Greetings- I am writing to you as an almost 21 year employee of Bullseye Glass. Of course, I and everyone at Bullseye is concerned about the environment. We have always been progressive in the way we deal with environmental concerns- meeting and/or exceeding goals and limits that were given to us. The issue here is that we were not informed of these new benchmarks before the information was leaked to the press. And, benchmarks are just that- goals to work TOWARDS. We are happy to do, and have already begun work on new systems. My immediate concern is that the proposed temporary rule regarding chromium SEVERELY limits our production. Chromium as we use it is not a hazard, and there is no proof that it can or will be one. There is only proof that it is NOT a health concern. The proposed rules are supposed to be for emergency situations. This is not an emergency. Soil levels tested fine. Air quality is improving and will continue to do so now that we have knowledge and are installing filtration systems. The rule will not make anything better, and will only serve to harm small business. Also, no other small business that uses chrome is in the cross hairs. If this is such a danger, why aren't other businesses that use chrome being targeted in this rule as well? It's simply not well thought out, or executed, and will only harm the community in that many people may be put out of work. Please CAREFULLY consider this rule- it's bad science, will solve nothing, and will possibly harm hundreds of local families, not to mention tens of thousands of people around the world that rely on Bullseye's products for their livelihoods. Thank you for your consideration- Susan Green
5	171	Eileen	Radigan	Eradigan@rochester.rr.com		NY	From everything I am reading, there is no danger here. The levels are lower than required. Jumping into temporary rules that are largely ineffective and cause companies and their employees to loose their jobs doesn't make sense. First you need proof that damage is being done. First things first.
6	235	Nancy	LiVolsi	mathtea@gmail.com		NY	Keep Bullseye open. Let them prove themselves to make production clean. They are responsible people, they want to do right by the people. Let them!
7	173	Portland	Concerned Citizen	sueflah@yahoo.com		Oregon	Please adopt and enforce these important emission control regulations as soon as possible to protect Portland residents from toxic substances.Thank you.
8	281	Bob	Jones	robertsenoj@gmail.com	Individual	Florida	I have used Uroboros and Bullseye glass for years. Both make exceptionally fine art glass that is highly regarded world wide. Both forms are run by good people that are highly skilled and knowledgeable. I encourage you to work with these small manufacturers to enhance environmental standards while keeping their businesses open and viable. It would be a shame if these individuals were forced to take their specialized and advanced technical skills to other countries.
9	203	Ken	Goodrich	goodrichk@yahoo.com	K & L Crafts/Gifts	MD	Innocent until proven guilty. As a glass artist I rely on Bullseye Glass Co for much of my supply. I care about the issue but understand that the company is taking steps to correct the problems.. Allow the company to take steps to correct the issues without enacting strict rules that puts the business at risk of closing. Thank you. Ken Goodrich
10	5	Callie	Meiners	photocallie@gmail.com		OR	Please, do not support the Air Quality 2016 Temporary Rules. These onerous rules put an unnecessary and unsustainable burden on local manufacturers. The rules do not address the real air quality problems facing Portland. Instead they target small businesses that do not produce large tax revenues. Bullseye and Uroboros are known around the world as businesses that make quality glass, ethically and locally. These rules are focused only on these small local business and not large producers of chemicals which there is such sudden concern over, such as any number of other glass manufacturers (consider alcohol bottling?). Lest we forget the incredibly high levels of car and truck exhaust inhaled daily, but this is not a concern for the DEQ-but art glass-that's where we draw the line now? These onerous new rules come less than a week after the DEQ found NO evidence that heavy metal emissions were causing harm. The DEQ found NO evidence of harmful levels of arsenic, chromium or cadmium in schools. It appears these rules are being introduced merely to calm public opinion. These companies have made beautiful glass in Portland for forty years. I'm afraid that if these rules will drive them out of business. Certainly their employees locally will be harmed and the ripple of these changes will be felt by the art glass community around the world. I don't understand. I thought Oregon supported the arts. I thought Portland supported local businesses and workers. I have never been more disappointed to call Portland home.
11	37	Ronald	Parvin	Winecg@yahoo.com	Glass artist	Oregon	The electrical furnances used to produce borosilicate colored glass are much different than furnances fueled by gases. There is not the turbulence during the batching process or during the actual melt process with electric furnances. They also operate on a smaller scale in volume.
12	27	Paul	Ruscher	ruscherp@lanecc.edu	Lane Community College	Oregon	I am writing as an atmospheric scientist who has taught graduate level atmospheric chemistry before. I am writing in support of the need for new requirements for monitoring and modeling with respect to the possibility of heavy metal air contamination near manufacturing facilities that are involved in production of colored art glass. Such contaminants are demonstrated health hazards and even though EPA has not yet necessarily established federal guidelines for minimum acceptable risk for all of these contaminants, it does not mean that they are not harmful. Public health studies on the risk of hexavalent chromium and cadmium in particular, are numerous, and DEQ's proposed rule is a good start to address them. There are over 6,000 studies on cadmium and other heavy metals in the literature just since 2012, and over 800 on hexavalent chromium. My primary concerns with the proposed rule is the lack of specificity as to the monitoring and modeling requirements imposed on the manufacturers and the lack of specification as to filtration. There is a great burden on DEQ to use best practices here with respect to each of these items, and there is also uncertainty as to what will be acceptable. For example, atmospheric stability and wind direction and speed will all have a bearing on the resultant plume for any escaping contaminant from any source. Under stagnant flow conditions, so common in the Pacific northwest, concentrations can be quite localized to the facility and quite intense. Dilution will naturally occur when ventilating winds and mixing occurs under less stable conditions, perhaps reducing the risk near the facility, but broadening the plume. The proposed rule could be strengthened if some details as to appropriate modeling and monitoring procedures are specified. Both mobile and fixed sampling should be contemplated for known large sources. In addition, I am concerned about the apparent restriction that the rule defines with respect to two facilities in Portland. Are there other facilities in the state which should also be required to follow the rule? What if new facilities are started in other areas? The rule should be clarified to indicate that any facility that uses these materials, and perhaps not just in the quantities mentioned, should be subject to the rule. Finally, there may be motivation here by people in the Portland metropolitan area to create a regional or county air pollution authority. This makes some sense in the context of an airshed, which does not respect county boundaries. If there were a true regional approach here, it would have to involve multiple counties in the Portland area, including those north of the Columbia River. My comments are not designed to be representative of those of my employer or my professional affiliation with the A. M. S. Paul Ruscher, PhD, Fellow, American Meteorological Society (A. M. S.) Dean, Science Division, Lane Community College
13	220	Laura	Brownfield	Laura@glassplay.co	Glass Play	OR and AZ	I have been a customer of Bullseye Glass for over 10 years and have toured their facility several times including the furnace rooms and all production areas. I was profoundly pleased with the level of “green� methods they used and attention to safety for their employees and customers. The manufacture is a fixture in the neighborhood, and a global leader in the industry. They promote green environmental issues and lifestyles. The recent news that they may not be in compliance with air safety issues seems, at minimum, greatly exaggerated. They are expanding their practices to add additional safety filters and should be given the short time it needs to accomplish the installation. There is contradictory scientific evidence about possible issues. Hundreds, if not thousands, of livelihoods are dependent on their glass production, including mine. I travel from our southern Oregon home to Portland each year to purchase the glass that I use for my work. I agree and support the statement from Bullseye that Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye’s furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Laura Brownfield Glass Play
14	177	Cynthia Rose	Weaver	rosietko@gmail.com		CA	Please work with the glass companies to help protect the environment. Monitor all the local businesses instead of finger pointing at a few well established small companies. Give Bullseye time to correct any problems and focus on fact instead of hysteria. Check out all the manufacturing in the area and get it right for Portland, it;s people and the community. It saddens me to think sucha wonderful glass company could be harming the environment. I support their work and desire to make theier omissions right. On a more logical point. Get al the manufacturing out of the city. Make sure they all put filters on their exhausts. Stop pointing the finger until you have the facts. And get it right .
15	255	Jerre	Davidson	jerredavidson@gmail.com	Jerre Davidson Glass	Virginia	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
16	47	Leah	Busch	leah@brazeestreetstudios.com	Brazee Street Studios	Ohio	Please do the proper research before limiting production of Bullseye Glass. I run a business that relies on Bullseye, and if their production is cut, so is my job and that of 10 others. Bullseye has gone above and beyond to keep their glass "green". Please let them continue to improve their factory processes as they have been doing for 30 years. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Please consider your actions and the people (and families) they will harm. Leah Busch
17	280	Nancy	Wilcox	nwilcox95@comcast.net		OR	The recent OHA studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of trivalent chromium. Evidence clearly indicated the furnaces wont turn Cr(III) into Cr(VI). In this light the glass making companies should not be subjected to a crippling temporary rule before they can get finish installing more efficient processing measures. At this point they have been following all the state regulations and are being singled out based on politics and public fear rather than scientific facts.
18	169	Laurie	Matthews	Laurie.r.matthews@gmail.com		Oregon	I disagree that a temporary rule is the right path forward. A permanent solution that is based on more reliable research needs to be the focus. This is clearly a politically motivated solution, not a real one.
19	79	Steven	Stelz	stelz@embarqmail.com	Stelz Studios	NEW JERSEY	To Whom it may concern: I am against a temporary restriction that may be imposed on the Bullseye Glass company for the use of Chromium to produce the green glass pigments found in over 50% of their product line. It would seriously effect my business here in New Jersey and I would no longer be able to produce ANY of my glass paintings as well as some of my stained glass works. Without the various shades of green coloration to the glass, it would be impossible to produce any kind of significant art piece in glass and I would probably go out of business. Steven Stelz Stelz Studios Flemington, New Jersey
20	155	Leng	Hunter	jeh32@msn.com	Chan Leng Geok Hunter Inc	Houston	Bullseye is responsible for the development of Studio Art in USA & probably also round the world. Thus It is responsible for putting Portland on the International map. As an Architect, sculptor and a glass lover, I try to attend the conferences whenever one was held & I take the chance to visit the city's beloved bookshop, seafood and stash up on the hazelnuts as well. The Owners have also been very supportive of many of the artists that are now considered masters in the art and worked tirelessly to promote young artists (a renown group now from Australia) and develop the possibilities for glass. I understand that they have also been regularly giving art pieces to the Portland Museum & the Corning Museum. From my years of 'knowing' (meeting at the Conferences) them I recognized the Owners of Bullseye as people who do good work and not ask for praise. Air quality is important but I hope DEQ work with Bullseye to come to a viable workable solution, bearing in mind that there are also no conclusive cause that Bullseye cause the emissions. Cutting off certain production that will ruin their busibess is drastic. Do not let a great American institution like Bullseye bite the dust because because it may be causing the noxious emissions. That wll be a sad end for Portland, for the US and the world. Glass is one of the oldest medium dating back to antquity & I hope DEQ appreciates what a great institution Bullseye is and work with it. To every problem is a solution - the question is only how long it takes and how much. Sounds like Bullseye is already doing its part to work with you. PLEASE work with them. Gratefully, Leng Hunter
21	84	Pam	Stransky	Pamskii@hotmail.com	Re: Bullseye Glass	WA	Re: temporary and egregious, overly harsh rules not based on science, will cause extreme hardship to 2 small local business as well as to thousands of glass artisans like myself. There is no justification for such a politically based set of rules. I expect you to reconsider, and after full research cpleted, enact appropriate safeguards rather than business-crushing and draconian rules. Thank you. Pam Stransky
22	229	Laura	Parham	LauraGoffParham@gmail.com	Laura Goff Designs	TN	I urge you to look at science and not sensational headlines in making the decision to limit production at Bullseye and Uroboros glass. These two companies are world class leaders in the stained glass field. The quality of their product line is unmatched by any company. Their products are used by artists worldwide! Your decision will have a detrimental impact on ALL colored sheet glass manufacturers in America. I have been a professional stained glass artist for 30 years. I have installed thousands of stained glass windows in hundreds of churches. Why? People want stained glass windows. They want new stained glass windows and they want their old stained glass repaired. Your decision may hinder professional craftsmen ability to repair stained glass windows in churches. I, and my staff, depend on being able to purchase colored sheet glass. Temporary regulations made in haste out of fear without the scientific evidence to support these restrictions are knee-jerk political maneuvers. Regulations should be based in scientific proof and put into place to protect all citizens while also looking out for those same citizens who rely on Bullseye to survive.
23	292	Patricia	Nelson	pnelson1@aol.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
24	45	Abigail	Spring	abi@abispring.com	Abi Spring	OR	I am confused by the DEQ's desire to make a temporary ruling regarding the use of Chromium 3 in their glass. From my understanding this kind of ruling is only appropriate when there is an immediate threat to public health. The OHA has not found this to be the case. Further, your motives seem extremely political rather than science or public interest based when you look at the fact that in 2013 when Precision Castparts was found to be the number ONE toxic air polluter in the country and nothing was done to them, no temporary ruling was passed, at that time. I am an artist. And yes I do work with glass, but Bullseye's survival wouldn't have much of an effect on me since I get the bulk of my glass from other sources. What does affect me is that our states DEQ and EQC seem to be operating with little knowledge of what they are making decisions about. At a recent DEQ EQC meeting, correct me if I am wrong but the EQC commissioner did not know what baghouse filtration was. As a member of the general public, not someone making decisions about environmental regulations, I know what is.
25	233	Warren	Weiss	wiweiss@verizon.net		Virginia	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
26	310	Pamela	Richarde	peacecoach@me.com		Oregon	In our community governmental system, we must be sure when we make decisions that put 'rules' or restrictions around anything, that these decisions are based on clear, solid evidence. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. This feels much like a political action unfortunately. The impact of random changes based on fear is NOT what our Oregon green community stands for. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. I urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Take the time for due diligence and work WITH the community, the business and the people that are involved. If it is clearly determined that changes are needed, then partnering with Bullseye and other small glass manufacturers is the highest pathway, rather than 'doing' something to them without better research. It is our culture to partner. Please consider an integrated approach to this challenge. Thank you
27	76	wendy	hahn	wkhahn@yahoo.com	Retired Materials Scientist, Los Alamos National Laboratory	New Mexico	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
28	67	Michael	Miro	michael@miroglass.com	Miro Glass Art Studio	New Mexico	I understand there is some temporary regulations directed at the Bullseye Glass facilities. I know that Bullseye are extremely conscientious and their research and development is front and foremost in their production of glass. I think they know more about what they are doing than those who are not in the industry. I hope actions will not be taken by uninformed fears and suggest that regulators not unnecessarily restrict and work closely with Bullseye Glass and others in the industry.
29	254	Barbara	Simon	bbbsimon@comcast.net		FL	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. B Simon
30	13	Grey	Byrd	pkreisberg@spiritone.com		OR	Please explain how someone from California can sing the praises of a company polluting the air in Portland, Oregon.
31	53	Roger	Nachman	Roger@nachmanglass.com	Nachman Studios LLC	WA	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. We sincerely appreciate any support you can provide right now.
32	166	Tadd	Leggate	tkleggate@gmail.com	Glass artist	AR	I completely understand the concern over the emissions from the Bullseye glass plant. It's my understanding they were following the limitations allowed under their legally issued permit. It is also my understanding the company has already voluntarily contracted to install filters to remove the potentially harmful emissions. Bullseye is a responsible company and does not deserve to be hindered and potentially ruined due to poorly thought out knee jerk regulations. They are a gem in your community and should be worked with rather than worked against.
33	262	ruth	Parvin	ruthnilea@yahoo.com	SE Portland neighborhood	OR	It breaks my heart to see what is happening around Bullseye glass. I can't imagine the fear that the parents and people who live in this area feel. And I just hate what is happening to Bullseye who, as I understand it, have been operating within the law. The temporary rules being proposed appear, however, to be due to public fears that are not based on science. They appear to be a way to appease the fears of the people based on fear no science. I am a long time potter and have studied the chemistry of making glazes, a type of glass. It seems to me that there is a real lack of understanding of the chemical processes that happen inside the kiln and fear mongering based on the lack of this understanding. Please do not do something hasty and political that will destroy this portland based small business. Know your FACTS first.
34	127	kathleen	walbridge		KMW Glass Art	CA	why did it take so long after all these years to inform them. it does not seem fair the way it is being handled?
35	78	Leslie	Johnson	Adreamaday@q.com		WA	Decisions should be based on factual evidence not hasty restrictions made to pacify the public. The ones who are making these rash rules even temporarily should at the very least be given crash courses in glass production and chemistry. By making this unprecedented judgement it shows the DEQ is lacking in both areas. Many rely on Bullseye for jobs, other sources of income and some just the joy of creating. Also why is Bullseye being restricted when they are not the only glass manufacturer? Clearly someone needs to step in and rethink this approach to this situation and find a solution that is realistic. Thank you for your consideration of my opinion
36	144	Anne D	Harris	annespan@suddenlink.net		CA	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. I have taken glass classes at Bullseye and first and foremost are safety concerns for participants. I believe Bullseye will do all that is necessary to produce a safe environment for the production of their glass as well. Please do not be hasty in restricting this company without thorough scientific investigation of the specific production process as it applies to this company. Thank you.
37	278	Kari	Russell-Pool	kari@karirussell-pool.com	Petrovic Glass LLC	Ohio	I am an artist and educator located in Ohio who makes work tied to Bullseye's product. I am also an engaged and caring steward of our planet's air, water and environment. My wish would be that the governing authorities would focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation to address Portland's air quality issues. Rules that could give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. My further hope is these rules and regulations would cover all businesses, and not just target specific industries. Understanding that there is no evidence that emissions from the Bullseye facility pose any acute health risk, if the EQC were to implement the proposed temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public and put our livelihoods in danger. My impression has been that the haste to adopt technically flawed temporary rules makes Oregon appear responsive to fears over reason-based solutions that protect both the health and safety of the community and the important USA based manufacturing business and jobs both locally and globally. Sincerely Kari Russell-Pool
38	135	betsy	smith	betsybirth@gmail.com		WA	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
39	195	Denise	Hovda	wildprairieartglass@hotmail.com	Wild Prairie Art Glass	ND	Please base your ruling on scientific facts instead of the "possiblity" that the glass manufacturing process is the cause. Your decision will affect more people across the US than you can fathom at this point. Peoples livelyhood and careers are at stake at this point.
40	161	Melody	Lynch	dmlynch2468@gmail.com	The Craft Guild of Dallas	Texas	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. This has far reaching impact and is not a decision that should be taken lightly or without due diligence. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Making such quick decisions without all the facts effects not only the numerous families who work for Bullseye but also thousands of artists across the country who rely on Bullseye glass, ALL colors of glass, to make their glass art which provides their livelihood and that of their families.
41	200	Donald	Croxton	croxdon@aol.com	hobbist	Florida	It is time that legislation be determined by scientific fact not gut reaction misinformation.
42	261	Michelle	Stewart	topspin1418@gmail.com	Stain glass Artist	Georgia	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a stain glass artist that rely s on Bullseye for my glass needs. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. With all due respect I hope your making the right decision to only target this one type of Manufacture. Have the other businesses in your wonder state not also effecting the air quality too? Thank you for you time with my message.
43	248	Ann	Rosendahl	anlaglas@anlaglas.com	Anla Glas A/S	Denmark	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
44	212	Audrey	Morrell	Audreka.m@gmail.com		Ohio	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. These rules would have a negative impact not only for the companies involved, but for numerous small businesses and glass artists that rely on the products these companies all over the US and worldwide produce to make a living. We urge you to consider reason and facts. Thank you.
45	153	Jerry	Melvin	crickit246@comcast.net	Retired Federal Planner	Oregon	With the train yard next door to glass co. its really unfair to say one company is causing more harm than the other, you have to inspect the many trucks, trains and even the cars to really know who caused the problem going back many years so if you stopped the trains and cars then checked I'm sure you would see better results also. Let's clean up the entire problem not just a small company problem and say that will clean up everything, that's unfair to target only the small companies that have already began to install a better exhaust system that will take care of problem, according to many experts. After all .this problem should have been prevented by city inspectors many years ago.
46	123	Denise	Mullen	dmullen@ocac.edu	Oregon College of Art and Craft	Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
47	217	Markus	Klein	markus.klein@inspiration-for-glass.com		Germany	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
48	260	Marceen	bloom	marce@effectnet.com	private - artist		This is over-the-top for regulation....Please have facts that this is a problem. Focus on the big corporations and the rivers, and the big companies. There is no proof of massive contamination.....Play right. This is an art community.
49	244	Rebecca	Derby	barwickbecky@yahoo.com		NC	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
50	214	TERRY	Rothwell	tsrothwell@gmail.com	Mr.	New Mexico	Any and all decisions should be made based on proven science only. Irate and hysterical citizens do not override the reality of that science.

51	132	Margery	Gjerstad	mgjerstad@msn.com	Artist	Washington	I am a glass artist who uses Bullseye Glass and would be severely hampered by the changes in rules limiting metals emissions from small colored art glass manufacturers. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Please reconsider your actions.
52	184	Becky	Wills	becky@yellowdogglass.co.uk	Yellow Dog Glass	UK	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Ill judged knee-jerk reactions could result in the loss of many jobs and a situation from which the art glass companies of Portland can never recover. The loss of their product will have a devastating knock on effect in the world of art glass. Please consider any further actions only based on scientific fact not scare mongering fiction.
53	68	Michael	Miro	michael@miroglass.com	Miro Glass Art Studio	New Mexico	I understand there is some temporary regulations directed at the Bullseye Glass facilities. I know that Bullseye are extremely conscientious and their research and development is front and foremost in their production of glass. I think they know more about what they are doing than those who are not in the industry. I hope actions will not be taken by uninformed fears and suggest that regulators not unnecessarily restrict and work closely with Bullseye Glass and others in the industry.
54	175	Leslie	Simonds	Lbsimonds55@gmail.com	Vista Glass	Pennsylvania	Bullseye glass is an invaluable resource for glass artist all over the U.S. The proposed sanctions and ensuing production cuts would have a very grave impact. The company is willing to work with regulators to find solutions to satisfy all concerned. Don't put politics before science!
55	205	David	Aavang	quinch9000@gmail.com			I would like to voice my support for Bullseye Glass in Oregon. they supply glass to many small business, in addition to being a small business themselves. I have read the scientific analysis of their production of green glass by Dr. LaCourse and the reports by local health authorities that find bullseye glass is not creating a hazardous byproduct during the production of green glass. I would hope that the DEQ and EPA would not put into effect knee-jerk temporary regulations that have a permanent, damaging result to small business and the people they employ.
56	30	Rob	Wilcox	porteavant@gmail.com	none	Oregon	The document does not specify how and where the ambient concentration limit of metals is to be measured. Is it an instantaneous measurement? Does the equipment need to gather a volume over time to compute an average? Are the averages broken into time buckets where the ambient measurement cannot exceed the limit? Is there a specific piece of equipment operated a certain way that determines the implementation of the limit? Are you referencing a published standard for measuring from another agency? It will be important to provide references used to set the ambient air concentration numbers, and explain them to all of the stakeholders. Thank you for your quick work on this project, looking forward to the long term rulemaking and best regards.
57	101	Melody	Roth	mroth97@msn.com		OR	his is an improper use of temporary rule making. The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission should only consider a temporary rule when credible evidence demonstrates a rule is needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest." This is not the case here. Hastily adopting temporary rules make it appear that agencies are being proactive, but these rules do not protect the public, and makes Bullseye a scapegoat. There is no evidence that emissions from the facility pose any acute health risk nor that Bullseye is fully responsible for the emissions, nor that Bullseye's 42 years of operation have resulted in areas of health concerns in the vicinity of the facility. If the EQC were to implement this temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public. There is no immediate health risk. The recent OHA studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of these materials. As the OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people."[1] OHA also concluded that current data shows "long-term health risks are relatively low." Further, DEQ found no health concerns due to cadmium, arsenic, total chromium or hexavalent chromium in the soil around Bullseye's factory. Soil samples showed soil levels were generally below naturally occurring or background levels of heavy metals. Keith Johnson, manager for the DEQ's Northwest Region Cleanup Program, stated, "[o]ngoing emissions from the Bullseye facility are not resulting in harmful impacts to soils around the facility." DEQ's and OHA's own statements provide that the rule is not needed to prevent “serious prejudice to the public interest.� Instead of a hasty and discriminatory temporary rule, DEQ should focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Bullseye will support that effort. These rules should give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. New regulations should cover all businesses, not just target minor specific industries. With minor changes to correct scientific errors and omissions in the currently proposed rule, Bullseye Glass is willing to sign an agreement that achieves all of DEQ's goals and allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. The haste to adopt technically flawed temporary rules makes it appear that Oregon is repressive to manufacturing businesses and does not care about jobs. Oregon agencies should strive for proper and fair treatment of all parties, based on law, rather than responding to public concern resulting from sensational blog posts and test results with partial data and no peer review. The health and safety of the community can be achieved without forcing these businesses to close. If Bullseye Glass is forced to stop producing 50% of its glass products for 6 months, without regard to ongoing test results or added emission controls, Bullseye's survival is at risk. We support an agreement that is similar to the temporary rules, but unlike the temporary rules, also allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. Bullseye Glass Co. has a payroll of $7.5 million dollars. 130 Portland families and 20 other Bullseye families depend on Bullseye for jobs. Hundreds of Oregon artists and craftspeople depend upon Bullseye products. Tens of thousands of artists across the United States and the world depend upon Bullseye products Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
58	75	Manon (Nonnie)	Lyketsos	nonlyketsos@gmail.com	Radiant Glass Studio	MD	Please do not restrict Bullseye's ability to produce glass until you have solid evidence of danger to people and the environment. I make my living using Bullseye glass and unnecessary restrictions for the sake of appeasement rather than fact would unfairly harm my product line, and therefore my income.
59	295	Shuichi	Ogata	booshu1@yo.rim.or.jp	Artist	Osaka Japan	If can not make glass . We can not fix before art works .
60	245	John	Sweet	Bikegatestudio@bendbroadband.com	BikeGateStudio	Oregon	Until further testing is done and Bullseye has their new filtration system up and running, it would be unfair to the artists that use their product and the employees that make it. It is my option that the DEQ is stepping the guidelines set up for a temporary shut down. Please don't go forward with this shut down. This sounds like a knee jerk reaction that Donald Trump might come up with!
61	289	Edward	Sawyer	wishputty@hotmail.com		Oregon	A temporary rule is appropriate in the instance in which there is an immediate threat to the public good. Contrary to the claims made on the DEQ website, there is not an immediate threat from these facilities, and this is supported by the Oregon Health Authority and Multnomah County Department of Health as well as independent members of the scientific community. The claims made on the DEQ website and in the full text of the rule are not supported by science - no evidence is cited to support claims made. Please do not pass this temporary rule. It is not based in science, but rather in fear. It will hurt responsible businesses made up of responsible people who are working to do the right thing.
62	263	Deborah	Anglin	tangoexpat@yahoo.com		TX	There are enough scientifically proven, serious problems that deserve your attention. As such, please leave this company alone. I used this product for years without any ill effects. Sincerely, Deborah
63	204	Diane	Routt	droutt@tds.net		WA	As a glass hobbyist I have been following the events in the news regarding two of Portland's glass companies, Bullseye and Uroboros, with great interest. I have just learned about DEQ's attempt to impose a temporary regulation that is based on judgement not scientific evidence. Two other agencies, Oregon Health Authority (OHA) and the Multnomah County Heath Department have stated there is no immediate health risk to the Portland Community. Portland is known worldwide as "Glass City". Many artisans have relocated to the south west region of Oregon and Washington to be closer to their sources. Many artisans have come to Portland to be able to learn how to work with glass at the Bullseye Resource Center. I might add Glass conventions have been held in Portland since it is known as the glass hub of the United States. I have taken classes from Bullseye for the past 10 years from fusing to lampworking. They have always stressed safety in working with glass and components that we add to the glass for a final product. Bullseye offers compatibility options with their glass products that no other glass supply markets. I recently took a 3-day class with Bullseye and we were taken on a tour through the factory. I was so impressed with the process and what it takes to make glass. I know they have taken every precaution to abide by the regulations that have been required since they went into production, this is discussed in the classes they offer. I am just a hobbyist but I know many people make their living making products from glass. The decision not only impacts Bullseye and Uroboros but this temporary rule will impact more than the areas around the factories but people's source of income. Has DEQ bothered to communicate with OHA and Multnomah County Health Department about their findings? Has DEQ attempted to understand what is involved in making glass and the years of research Bullseye and Uroboros has invested? Has DEQ bothered to look at the big picture of their decision, it goes beyond Portland? DEQ needs to understand before they start making rushed decisions. Glass making has been an art for centuries….
64	256	Russell	Gilman-Hunt	rgilmanhunt@gmail.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
65	151	Debora	Seaver	deboraseaver@gmail.com		Idaho	I am asking that Oregon DEQ does more research before setting rules temporarily or permanently. DEQ needs to understand how these companies produce their products before implementing restrictions. It is my understanding that both glass making facilities have been cooperative with DEQ and I would hope that DEQ reciprocates.
66	230	Johanna	C.		Portland Resident		Please do not make rules hastily based on public panic. New rules should be based on sound scientific evidence.
67	92	Debbi	savage	glassydeb@aol.com	Texas Glass Artists Assoc.	TX	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
68	114	Lori	Hudson	lori.hudson@superiorfarms.com	Superior Farms	California	I feel it is imperative that the decision to limit usage of stated minerals and metal is based on actual scientific data not on speculation. I have read a summary of the results on study done by the OHA taken earlier in the year in Portland. This study stated that minimal emission were documented and levels of hazardous materials emitted were well under hazardous levels. Adopting temporary rules are not the solution. By doing so you are targeting two small companies unfairly. These controls seem technically flawed and are not likely to improve the air quality of Portland. From what I know both of these companies are for improvement of air quality, but these temporary rules will not accomplish this goal. Both the DEQ and EPA have acknowledged there is not clear evidence of acute or chronic health risks based on the usage of Cr(III). There is no proof that CR(III) will change into a more toxic for of chromium - Cr(VI). Scientific evidence clearly indicates that furnaces heat won't turn Cr(III) into Cr(VI). Do not adopt policies that are not ground in good science.
69	253	Nathalie	Joel	nat.jojo@virgin.net	Nathalie Joel Glass Design	United Kingdom	I do not object to Bullseye and Uroboros having to upgrade their furnaces if the scientific tests on pollution are proven conclusive but I urge you not to rush into making them stop production of glass. The interested parties are not only the public and the 2 manufacturers as you state in your document, this will also affect tens of thousand of glass artists across the world who make a living by using the raw materials produced in Portland. Please make sure your decisions are based on scientifically proven facts rather than on assumptions and political pressure. Your decisions are going to have a huge economical effect much further afield than the Portland area. You could literally starve and kill the art glass world community. I know it will directly affect me and I do not live in Portland as I need those materials to be able to work and bring up my family, without them I might as well close down, it is that simple. Art glass was found in Pompeii, French cathedrals have stained glass dating from the Middle Age, please realize the consequences of your actions in the wider world not just in Portland. Art glass is part of Humanity, Bullseye and Uroboros are 2 of the very few art glass manufacturers in the world. Please realize this.
70	181	Sandra	Feder	sandy_feder@hotmail.com	Art by Fire	CA	There is NO scientific evidence that these small glass manufacturers are causing harmful emissions. Until studies are done that show harmful emissions, it is unfair to target these 2 manufacturers and potentially ruin their businesses and the business of the buyers or their products. Since the studies have not been done,it would be prudent to initiate studies to see what emissions come from these colored glass manufacturers. Then, and only then, can decisions be made regarding the manufacturing process and its emissions. To adopt temporary rules that limit the manufacturing, is premature and harmful to the industry. This adoption of temporary rules would be like telling jewelry makers that they can't make jewelry because certain metals might be emitted into the atmosphere. A much better choice would be to run tests to see exactly what emissions come from the process and then let scientists determine if these emissions cause a problem. Prof S H Feder, Sacramento City College, Sacramento, CA
71	221	Kay	McCann	Kayja32@aol.com	self	Oregon	In response to DEQ putting temporary restrictions on Bullseye Glass manufacturing I believe this is yet another example of social media and a handful of people complaining and spreading unsubstantiated rumors to thwart Bullseye's glass production. I would expect you to show scientific evidence behind your decision and not give in to public pressure which could destroy an industry and put many out of work. It's unfortunate that the government cannot be trusted to follow the law but instead have a few people seemingly dictate their decision making.
72	249	Ann	Rosendahl	anlaglas@anlaglas.com	Anla Glas A/S	Denmark	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
73	140	Nicole	Burdette	nburdette@colton.com	Garden Glass	Oregon	Please do not allow political expediency to influence rules for any small businesses. Environmental rules should be based on clear scientific evidence and should be applied as necessary for public safety. Rules that unnecessarily harm small businesses harm all of us. Politics should never set public policy!
74	11	Sandra	Ihrig	Sandra_ihrig@yahoo.com		Oregon	Why are these rules temporary? What about other air pollution not in the news? One example being The Dalles Amerities? Of you only address Portland and only Portland what about the other hot spots?
75	66	Joan	Kraus	jnskraus@cox.net		CA	Your attack on glass production is irrational! Bullseye does not endanger air quality, and your attack will cause a loss of jobs and probably a company. I am an environmentalist, but this is crazy!
76	236	Morio	Toyoshima	supermorio@aol.com		OR	I believe the health of the public of Oregon comes first, period... And I am not a Bullseye user.. But I have been to Bullseye for the tours inside their factory more than a few times... they showed us everything.. Is there any factory shows you everything while they are in full production mode if they are doing anything illegal... They have been a very friendly and an open-minded manufacturer.. If their emission level is under the current regulation.. then look for other possible emitters around.. If you want them to improve their emission system, then give them some time to install better equipments... provide some financial or/and logistical help to improve their system, because they (Company, employees and users) have been paying great amount of tax to the State for a long time.. they deserve governmental assists from the State and Federal institutions... Wrong if you punish them hastily based on insufficient research results or sensational media reports... Work with them... Don't try to kill them... Remember, they are not a big company with tons of assets to resist or endure the hardship.. They are the small businesses which the State of Oregon have tried hard to nourish and grow in the past..
77	52	Janet	Brocklehurst	janetbrocklehurst@gmail.com	Sweet Harmony Jewelry Design	Vermont	I use Bullseye glass almost exclusively for my business. Please allow more testing for permanent rules to be scientifically based, not these temporary rules which seem unfair and not based on scientific evidence.
78	303	Robert	Seitz	Harmonyartglass@sbcglobal.net	Harmony Art Glass Company	Illnois	we believe that the amount of metal oxides is very limited , and can be further controlled. It is the rich history of stained glass that makes our country strong. This art proved the highest cultural advancements in our American society.
79	285	Donald	Burt	dburt_mail@yahoo.com	Liberty Mutual Insurance	Ohio	I appreciate the rational and measured approach that the DEQ is taking towards this issue. Please do the right thing. If there is health danger, take prompt action to mitigate it. If there is not evidence of an immediate danger, then please consider the importance of these small businesses to people of Portland and to the many people all over the world who use their products. Small scale manufacturing of something as unique and enriching to our quality of life as this artists' media is something a city should treasure. Give the companies a chance. Help the companies do the right thing so that they can survive and continue to add to the rich quality of life in Portland.
80	35	Maeghan	Culver	mculver@nwim.org	Northwest Integrative Medicine	OR	To Whom It May Concern, I appreciate the care the DEQ is taking in finding the cause of the heavy metal exposure to the Portland area citizens and environment. As a physician with extensive training in environmental medicine and treatment of toxicity, it is imperative that we address sources of possible exposure, such as those found near Bullseye and Uroboros glass manufacturing plants. However, based on recent OHA findings, the data suggests that the actual short-term risk to citizens is negligible, suggesting that we have time to take corrective action. Furthermore, as is mentioned in the summation on the DEQ website, the DEQ has previously recognized that the level of risk is proportionate to production size. From previous legislation, it seems that both of these companies were following the permitted processes, yet these companies have been targeted by the media as companies poisoning their neighborhood. Large glass production companies will need to adjust their production methods to control for heavy metals, but the application of these methods should be proportionate to the risk they pose to the public, just as it has been. I am concerned that by acting drastically in response to the sensationalism of the news, this current emergency measures may jeopardize the well being of local businesses and the job positions they provide in my community. As a policy is developed, tiered requirements should be proposed, based on the level of risk of exposure (ie quantity of harmful materials use). It would also be beneficial to allow time to implement changes, especially considering that there is no proposed short-term harm from the current levels of exposures. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration of this and trust that the DEQ will work to find a solution that takes all parties, citizens and small businesses, into consideration. Sincerely, Dr. Maeghan Culver
81	40	Marjorie	Wippel	gwippel@dlartglass.com	D&L Art Glass Supply	CO	I feel these temporary regulations are made in haste out of fear and panic without the scientific evidence to support these restrictions. The survival of two of the most important glass manufacturers in the country, let alone the world, are at stake! Please, please take a closer look at the situation and reconsider such extreme action at this time pending further research on this subject!
82	191	Debra	Joseph	djoseph@sssnet.com	Concerned Citizen and Customer of the businesses you are trying to destroy	Ohio	This is an improper use of temporary rule making. The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission should only consider a temporary rule when credible evidence demonstrates a rule is needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest." This is not the case here. Hastily adopting temporary rules make it appear that agencies are being proactive, but these rules do not protect the public, and makes Bullseye a scapegoat. There is no evidence that emissions from the facility pose any acute health risk nor that Bullseye is fully responsible for the emissions, nor that Bullseye's 42 years of operation have resulted in areas of health concerns in the vicinity of the facility. If the EQC were to implement this temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public. There is no immediate health risk. The recent OHA studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of these materials. As the OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people."OHA also concluded that current data shows "long-term health risks are relatively low." Further, DEQ found no health concerns due to cadmium, arsenic, total chromium or hexavalent chromium in the soil around Bullseye's factory. Soil samples showed soil levels were generally below naturally occurring or background levels of heavy metals. Keith Johnson, manager for the DEQ's Northwest Region Cleanup Program, stated, "[o]ngoing emissions from the Bullseye facility are not resulting in harmful impacts to soils around the facility." DEQ's and OHA's own statements provide that the rule is not needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest." Instead of a hasty and discriminatory temporary rule, DEQ should focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Bullseye will support that effort. These rules should give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. New regulations should cover all businesses, not just target minor specific industries. With minor changes to correct scientific errors and omissions in the currently proposed rule, Bullseye Glass is willing to sign an agreement that achieves all of DEQ's goals and allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. The haste to adopt technically flawed temporary rules makes it appear that Oregon is repressive to manufacturing businesses and does not care about jobs. Oregon agencies should strive for proper and fair treatment of all parties, based on law, rather than responding to public concern resulting from sensational blog posts and test results with partial data and no peer review. The health and safety of the community can be achieved without forcing these businesses to close. If Bullseye Glass is forced to stop producing 50% of its glass products for 6 months, without regard to ongoing test results or added emission controls, Bullseye's survival is at risk. We support an agreement that is similar to the temporary rules, but unlike the temporary rules, also allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. Bullseye Glass Co. has a payroll of $7.5 million dollars. 130 Portland families and 20 other Bullseye families depend on Bullseye for jobs. Hundreds of Oregon artists and craftspeople depend upon Bullseye products. Tens of thousands of artists across the United States and the world depend upon Bullseye products. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
83	88	Fay	Bright	fsbright@bellsouth.net	Individual	Louisiana	It seems to me that this temporary ruling may do irreparable harm to the small colored glass manufacturers. Why not let them install their baghouses then test to see if they are causing any metal contamination? Bullseye Glass has been in business for decades. Let them continue in business while this issue is resolved. Causing them to lose 50% of their business for 6 months seems ludicrous and an over reach of the regulators. Is there no common sense to this issue? I am a customer of Bullseye Glass. Thousands of artists use their products and many others purchase work which they commission. I hope you will rescind this temporary ruling immediately. Fay Bright
84	168	Cathy	Wheeler	catsglassart@gmail.com		Alabama	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. I am a glass artist in Birmingham using Bullseye glass for my fused glass artwork. These stringent rules will not only affect the business of Bullseye Glass but mtpy business and the businesses of many, many of my fellow artists.
85	20	Robin	Denburg	robin@realtyrobin.com	self	Oregon	I would like to request the following changes to the proposed rules: o lower the amount of emissions triggering the required baghouse from 10 tons (a massive amount!) to 1 ton. Reason- if I live next door to an entity emitting 9.9 tons of a heavy metal I'm going to trigger the same emergency situation. 10 tons was arbitrarily chosen and is much too high. o include all heavy metals, not the limited list as currently drafted by DEQ staff. Reason- scientific evidence is clear that metals like, for one example, nickel is a significant health risk. It is not currently included in the rule language. Additionally the cost to a glass maker is not significant to install either a combo or additional baghouse for additional heavy metals. o have the rules apply statewide, not just the Portland area Reason- other cities also have citizens living in proximity to glass makers and other non-glass maker heavy metal emitters. They are also being exposed to an increase in cancer especially if they are in close proximity to a manufacturer. o This rule really should address heavy metal emitters that are not just glass facilities. So my specific request is that it not be limited to glass makers. Realizing that is unlikely I would request a different emergency rule making session for non-glass maker emitters. Reason - there is ample evidence in the Forest Service study that non-glass makers are ALSO emitting heavy metals. They need to be addressed just as urgently as the glass makers. o Direct DEQ in conjunction with the Forest Service to do another round of moss testing in Portland and a first round in various other Oregon cities. And to expand the type of heavy metals being tested. o Have penalties for violators. The proposed rules have no penalty for violators. This needs to be a component. It needs to be strong enough that someone questioning doing this realizes it's better to install a relatively inexpensive baghouse. I would suggest a fine of $50,000 per violation. o Add third party monitoring language, paid for by the emitter. There is no language addressing testing pre or post installation of a capture system. This should be part of the permit fees and the work should be independently done, by someone like EPA or Linda George. o Direct DEQ staff to study in detail California air quality standards. This should be both for glass makers as well as all heavy metal emissions. Reason- there is no need to reinvent the wheel and California has a process and regulations that work and work effectively. They are recognize by the federal government as largely best in class standards. Thank you in advance for your evaluation of my comments. I would also like to have DEQ staff specifically respond to: o Why was 10 tons chosen as the limit? Was it an arbitrary number? If so why is it just a massively high amount? o Why are the rules not addressing the entire state? o How were the type of heavy metals included in the language chosen? Why, specifically, were other heavy metals like nickel excluded?
86	268	Phillip	Johnson-Tuwaletstiwa	philhopi@gmail.com	retired	New Mexico		Comments on the Proposed Temporary Rule specifically directed at small colored glass manufactures.docx	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/9394979c-de91-4933-9e2e-4ed9a403e6bf
87	301	Linda	Meadows	lmeadowsgm@gmail.com		Alabama	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. The proposed new regulations will severely impact the local business area as well as the larger community of glass artists worldwide. Both DEQ and EPA have acknowledged there is no clear evidence of acute or chronic health risks based on Bullseye's use of Cr(III). Cr(III) is essential to the production the glass. Scientific evidence shows the use of the compound is not harmful. Nevertheless, DEQ wants to restrict Bullseye from using Cr(III) for an extended period of time. They are essentially basing these rules on an assumption of guilt without any proper supporting scientific or factual evidence. Bullseye understands the public interest and supports stronger environmental standards for our industry. To that effect, the company has already begun the process of installing 99% efficient baghouses on furnaces that melt glasses with chromium. Bullseye Glass and DEQ will test these filtration devices to make certain they operate correctly. Please delay this ruling until all the facts have been collected and reviewed. Thank you,
88	240	Jan	smith	Magpiemoonglass@gmail.com			Dear Governor Kate Brown, The DEQ appears to be in the process of making temporary rules not entirely based on science and driven by the press, eager for headlines to sell their publications, as well as ambulance chasing lawyers and citizens who lack the knowledge to make sound decisions, to restrict the ability for Oregon art glass manufacturers to conduct their businesses. Unsound decisions appear to have been made more to appease the public and protect the DEQ in advance of scientific analysis is examined to determine what levels of toxins these factories emit and what actual threat is presented to thephysical areas around these factories. Your temporary regulations will financially devastate not only these businesses, but the businesses of 1000's of glass artists across the United States. In addition, Spectrum Glass in Washington state will be harmed because much of their warm colors are made by Uroboros. The science in these temporary rules makes claims of emissions that if are precluded by the nature of the glass. Bullseye has made every effort to be transparent and cooperative. They have posted their intent to make improvements. Your DEQ site has listed a study showing minimal heavy metal residue in the area and this is after the presence of glass manufacturing in those areas for many years. These temporary rules will not produce instant change and harms many more people. The DEQ should wait, determine exactly what heavy metal emissions actually are and make permanent rules based on science and deliberation and consideration of all involved, not act out of unproved fears. These glass factories are a part of your economy and have paid taxes for their representation. Please honor them with the consideration any citizen of Oregon should expect. Thank You. Sincerely, Jan Smith
89	82	Luciana	Proaño	Lucianaproano@msn.com		OR	I hace been a client Of Bullseye Glass for almost 18 years and consider myself responsible towards the environment. I think this temporary measure is not supported by enough scientific data and mostly political. It will be too harmful to the livelihood of not only the employees that will have to be laid off but to the many artists and others that survive by using this glass as prime matter. Bullseye is being responsible by conducting research along with authorities and should be given opportunity to survive. It has been there 40 years! I stand by Bullseye. Thanks for listening Luciana Priaño
90	176	Nancee	Hiffmann	Nhoffmann4@verizon.net	Sunshine & Rainbiws	TX	Please do not enact temporary or permanent laws that will negatively impact the livelihood for so many people. At least don't do this without working with the Bullseye reps to draft a reasonable solution to the issue. Thank you so much!!!
91	102	Jocie	Braaksma	jocie100@yahoo.com	Artist	Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
92	163	Mary	James	maryjames20@gmail.com		Washington	I have purchased and used glass from Bullseye for 15 years. I am horrified my use of pleasure, art glass has affected the families in the area. I really would have assumed it had been investigated.
93	167	wendy	Rogers	wrogers1@nbnet.nb.ca		Canada	Science does not support the need for any temporary rules. Please don't hobble a successful business for no good reason! The public is safe.
94	100	Alice	Gebhart	alicearts@verizon.net	Heritage Art Gallery & Glass Studio	RI	I am a professional glass artist who makes my living as such. ALL the glass I purchase to make my fused glass art comes from and is made by Bullseye Glass and Uroboros Glass companies. I would be put out of business if your temporary action were to be put into effect. If it were proven that the air quality is harmful or that the current production of glass were harmful, I would understand the restriction but that is not the case. It has been said that "it MAY be harmful" "if certain conditions existed," but that is also not the case. There is no evidence to support any kind of restriction.
95	152	Russann	Royce	russannroyce@gmail.com	1952	OR	Do not impose environmental sanctions on this business until a study has been done. They did everything as requested by DEW. They are a fine business who cares about the environment. Please save this business, until more study is done.
96	51	Chasity	Logan	cglogan@ilstu.edu			Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
97	157	Doncella	Marquess	Doncella49@comcast.net	none	Oregon	Please do not support the 2016 temporary rules. You need to listen to the scientists that are better qualified to to form an opinion. Oregon can't afford to lose jobs which could be a result of all the new regulations. Bullseye has always worked extremely hard to insure safety and they will do everything they can to address this problem.
98	206	Jean	Fernandes		University of Texas Arlington, Sinaca Studios, Creative Arts Center of Dallas	TX	Please understand that these are small businesses that your regulations will be affecting. These businesses provide thousands of jobs, support a very large community that makes their living from these materials, and are an asset to the local, national, and international economy. If these small businesses shut down as a result of these "temporary" regulations, it would collapse an entire community of people. If there is specific scientific evidence that shows a large contamination/pollution problem as a direct result of the companies’ manufacturing of art glass, I would completely understand these regulations being implemented, but this does not seem to be the case. If these regulations are imposed on these companies, there will be protests and significant uproar as a result of the unfair discrimination against these two small glass companies. As of now, there is scientific proof online that shows that the furnaces do not turn Cr(III) into Cr(VI), which is the primary concern of the DEQ. Both, DEQ and EPA have acknowledged there is no clear evidence of acute or chronic health risks based on Bullseye's use of Cr(III). Bullseye Glass has started to take steps to use baghouses to cut any possible emissions and I think that this is important because it shows the company's concern about the environment as well as their willingness to comply with the public's concerns. As of now, the risk of implementing these regulations on Cr(III) on top of the current suspension of cadmium glass production would cut the glass product line by 50%. This would be detrimental for the growth of these companies, the jobs they provide and the glass community that they support. The DEQ needs to take into consideration that scientific evidence currently does not support the regulations that they are planning to implement.
99	103	Marsha	Trawick	Marsha.trawick@gmail.com	Artist studio	Texas	Bullseye glass supplies thousands of independent artist. We depend on them for our lively hood. This will only push another industry off shore resulting in lost jobs and opportunity in the US. We all want the best environment possible but there has to be some common sense. This should be fully studied before you destroy an entire industry. Have you shut down all bottling companies that use that product? There must be away to come to terms before you destroy so many people.
100	10	Regina	Loos	503regina@gmail.com		Oregon	It is absolutely critical that toxic elements not be released into our air, water or land. I support your temporary rules but would like to see them broad enough to include protection from the next potential polluter. My family has lived about 10 blocks from Bullseye Glass for the past 28 years. Well over a year ago my doctor found some metals in my system. Mercury was finally gone but the cadmium persisted. "What do I need to change? Where is it coming from?" I asked my doctor. "The environment. Food. It's hard to tell," he answered. Next to hit our family was the threat of prostate cancer and cadmium is a very high common denominator. And I will always be wondering about my good friend and neighbor (who lived here for 30 years) and recently died of kidney cancer. He was in his 50's. Thank you for working on this toxics issue with all due haste. This is not just a matter of statistics. Every day that passes has an effect on the health and well-being of great numbers of real people.

101	77	Daniel	White	white.daniel0284@yahoo.com		VA	The DEQ should only make rules based upon FACTUAL scientific evidence. The soil tested around the facility of Bullseye glass wad found to have NORMAL levels of all heavy metals. Also, your own report didn't show evidence that Cr(III) EVER changed into Cr(Vi), SO NO TOXIC EMISSIONS FROM THESE SMALL GLASS MANUFACTURERS. No temporary rules are needed, but instead do ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC WORK BASED UPON EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH to come up with permanent rules. Your paragraph above is misleading and factually erroneous, and I stand behind companies that have safely operated for half a century, not politically motivated individuals who can't conduct evidence based scientific research. Get your FACTS and THEN make a permanent set of rules.
102	187	Diane	Ziegman				This company, Bullseye, is trying to comply with the law to run their business by installing proper equipment for purification. Unfounded regulations like this are what drives companies to move operations to other countries (e.g. China) who will welcome them with open arms. Do not force them to move with these frivolous claims.
103	296	David	Taylor	micromelt01@gmail.com	Anla Glas	Denmark	Bullseye Glass maybe a small business measured against others but it is a world class company and the world is watching how the DEQ behaves. Of course we in Europe see to our consternation every day how some american politicians spout rubbish in order to garner the whoops and votes of the people. I hope that the DEQ , politicians and opinion makers in Portland will not use public fears and emotions to gain short term popularity and votes but will act responsibly and follow the wisdoms of science and technolgy to assess and amend if required. There is no evidence to instigate drastic 'firefighting' measures which will probably result in the loss of many jobs worlwide except in China.
104	85	Linda	Bennett	lindabennett427@gmail.com	The Glass Attic Studio	Ontario Canada	As a glass artist that has used Bullseye products for over twenty years, I have been following this situation as have many others that depend on Bullseye and Uroboros After researching various other probable sources of pollution in the Portland area I feel that the temporary rules you are considering are based more on politics and sensational headlines than fact based scientific conclusions. I find it unconscionable that Bullseye who has been in business for 42 years and has been a responsible corporate citizen ( and who voluntarily shut down production as soon as the "problem" was brought to their attention) should be put it the position of becoming a scapegoat so that the general public is appeased without due consideration to all sources that may be contributing to the air quality problem . Regulatory decisions should be based on science, not politics. Imposing poorly written and misdirected rules only serves the short term and will affect not only the employees of Bullseye, but tens of thousands of Glass artists, teachers , craftspeople and retailers worldwide. I personally would lose more than half my income if production was stopped for 6 months. I urge you to reconsider what would appear to be a hasty decision and allow Bullseye to work with the relevant organizations to ensure a viable lasting solution that will be in everyones best interest. sincerely Linda Bennett
105	124	Denise	Mullen	dmullen@ocac.edu	Oregon College of Art and Craft	Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. This rush to unfounded action is disturbing and unprofessional, and makes Oregon look unorganized and ineffective. I strongly urge the powers that be to act responsibly, on proven science and to not make knee jerk reactions that cause more harm than good and adversely affect another group of innocent people.	Bullseye glass .docx	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/31f47897-ba81-4831-80ad-e54ffca457a2
106	192	Christine	O'Connor	oconnor.chris@verizon.net		NY	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. We sincerely appreciate any support you can provide right now.
107	148	Julie	Seavy	julie.seavy@gmail.com	Alchemy Fine Glass LLC	Colorado	I am a glass artist who uses glass produced by Bullseye Glass Co. There is no alternative in all the world to the glass produced by Bullseye. Without it, I ; and thousands like me ; will no longer be able to produce my work in the same manner. I am also an attorney who has handled environmental litigation. So I understand the difficulty inherent in the situation in Portland. However, I urge the DEQ to be thoughtful in issuing temporary regulations. While everyone involved wants to protect human health and the environment, even temporary regulations must be designed to alleviate actual concerns supported by the facts and by science. Your own studies show there is no immediate health risk. Further, Bullseye has been completely cooperative and continues to be willing to sign an agreement that achieves all of DEQ's goals. Therefore, please continue working with Bullseye on final rules that address all environmental concerns, but allow it to remain in full business.
108	143	Kim	Hagan	kim@fhighlanderdesigns.com	F. Highlander Designs	OK	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. I would be greatly impacted if Bullseye Glass is unable to product 50% of it's glass.
109	183	Lynn	Lloyd	lynn_lloyd@comcast.net		Washington	The Art and Science of glass making has been in existence for at least 5000 years. The ancient Egyptians made glass to decorate their sacred objects and travel into the afterlife. The Romans made glass and modern glass makers inhabit the Island of Murano Italy, off the coast of Venice. In such an island composed of little commerce but glass making, don't you think that if the environment had been poisoned over the last few hundred years, that we'd have heard about it? The environmentalist do NOT have their facts straight. Companies like Bullseye are environmentally conscientious and would never do anything to endanger the Earth. Until such time that the environmentalist can PROVE their case beyond a shadow of a doubt, the local and state governments should not interfere. "Temporary Laws" tend to become permanent and as such, difficult to abolish. Politicians rarely admit mistakes. Yes, you'll shut up the critics, but at what cost? Remember the environmentalist do not have the FACTS on their side. Do NOT initiate this Slippery Slope of "Temporary Laws" and remember you work for ALL of the people, not just the ignorant loud-mouths.
110	141	Gina	Szulkowski	Gszulkowski@gmail.com	none	Illinois	I take environmental concerns very seriously, but rushing to quick judgement on the glass companies will not benefit the people of Portland. Both Bullseye and Urbros have worked within all the laws and codes that existed. They have been good neighbors, and are working to continue to be good neighbors. Please consider the entire picture before making your decision. Theses are two small companies who have made considerable impact to the arts community by employing artists, teachers, and artisans. They have brought students and buyers to to Portland just for their glass.
111	308	Concerned	Artisan			New York	I am not in favor of implementing these temporary rules! The stained glass industry as a whole will suffer. Stained glass may seem like a small niche but it employs a lot of people. I am in favor of clean air but this seems arbitrary and puts a huge burden on small glass manufacturers. In the bigger picture it will effect ALL stained glass artisans. Could not your efforts be put to better use like targeting chemical manufacturers or large companies the pollute far more?
112	193	James	Coon	jim_em@ameritech.net	jim and em stained glass	Michigan	I hope the issues with bullseye glass does not result in layoffs and possible closure of the plant. All over the US we rely on Bullseye glass for our business. The hope is that the facts are legit and not just supposing there is a problem. We all want clean air and hope that Bullseye's efforts to have clean are are sufficient. Thank you
113	118	Philippa	Rubell	psrubell@gmail.com	Glass artist	California	I live in California, as you can see, but have visited Portland on several occasions to take classes offered by Bullseye, and have also visited the Uroborus factory. The glass center, including its factory has always struck me by its meticulous concern about health and safety, with all facilities being carefully vented, waste appropriately disposed of, and a concern for environmental issues in general. While, of course, dangerous by-products should not be allowed to be emitted, Bullseye seems to be anxious to commit to creating whatever new filtering systems are requested, and to comply with all scientifically documented information on the subject. The issue regarding chromium seems to be scientifically invalid, as the chemistry of the glass manufacture depends on the chromium remaining in its non-toxic form, and there is nothing in the process to engender the formation of the dangerous chromium isotope, in fact processes are in place to prevent its formation. Punishing the the company on the basis of a gut reaction, rather than scientific evidence is unfair, especially in the light of the pollution we are all subjected to on a daily basis by larger enterprises, and a restriction on the use of chromium, which could quite likely close down Bullseye, and the glass art world in general would be tragic. Portland is truly the glass art center of the world now, and this is something to be very proud of. The loss of jobs, a thriving and benevolent company, and an art form would impact the population of Portland, and people like myself who love the products, and need them to continue with our art. In conclusion, I think it is obviously of benefit to everyone to provide the best filtering processes available, but the banning of the use of chromium, which would make the manufacture of much of the glass palette impossible, is an unproven knee-jerk response. One might as well say let's ban eggs because they contain sulfur. I entreat you to not pass hasty judgement on a company which, while small in the general scheme of things, is huge in the world of art-glass, and irreplaceable. (Or will be once more have to turn to China).
114	89	Fay	Bright	fsbright@bellsouth.net	Individual	Louisiana	It seems to me that this temporary ruling may do irreparable harm to the small colored glass manufacturers. Why not let them install their baghouses then test to see if they are causing any metal contamination? Bullseye Glass has been in business for decades. Let them continue in business while this issue is resolved. Causing them to lose 50% of their business for 6 months seems ludicrous and an over reach of the regulators. Is there no common sense to this issue? I am a customer of Bullseye Glass. Thousands of artists use their products and many others purchase work which they commission. I hope you will rescind this temporary ruling immediately. Fay Bright
115	63	Ann	Bauman	Annbauman@sbcglobal.net		California	It appears that DEQ is initiating this temporary rule-making in response to news articles that show DEQ in a negative light. It also disregards the fact that Bullseye is a good corporate citizen and has demonstrated its willingness to work with DEQ. Hastily adopting temporary rules make it appear that the agency is being proactive, but these rules do not protect the public, and makes Bullseye a scapegoat. There is no evidence that emissions from the facility pose any acute health risk nor that Bullseye is fully responsible for the emissions, nor that Bullseye's 42 years of operation have resulted in areas of health concerns in the vicinity of the facility. If the EQC were to implement this temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public.
116	81	Kuno	Egger	kuno@retailsoftware.com	Salt Spring Gallery	British Columbia	We depend heavily on Bullseye glass for production of gift ware and a switch to Uroboros glass would require scrapping all our current designs and starting over. Considering how long Bullseye has been in production may we encourage you not to precipitously shut down big chunks of their product line.
117	97	William	Grix	wgrix@mac.com	Wm Grix Art Glass	hawaii	Hello The neighborhoods in these areas and the affected families and jobs of the people who work for these companies.should all be considered in these temporary rules. As adopting.these rules even though said temporary. the impact would not be,.I would suggest a monitoring program however frequent to address and discover what is real and what is perhaps only feared. I am sure that the companies in question would not intentionally want harm to come to anybody, not the public or their own employees. This approach would serve all. Thank you William Grix .
118	302	Linda	Meadows	lmeadowsgm@gmail.com		Alabama	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. The proposed new regulations will severely impact the local business area as well as the larger community of glass artists worldwide. Both DEQ and EPA have acknowledged there is no clear evidence of acute or chronic health risks based on Bullseye's use of Cr(III). Cr(III) is essential to the production the glass. Scientific evidence shows the use of the compound is not harmful. Nevertheless, DEQ wants to restrict Bullseye from using Cr(III) for an extended period of time. They are essentially basing these rules on an assumption of guilt without any proper supporting scientific or factual evidence. Bullseye understands the public interest and supports stronger environmental standards for our industry. To that effect, the company has already begun the process of installing 99% efficient baghouses on furnaces that melt glasses with chromium. Bullseye Glass and DEQ will test these filtration devices to make certain they operate correctly. Please delay this ruling until all the facts have been collected and reviewed. Thank you,
119	219	Susan	McWilliam	susanmcwilliam@yahoo.com	Adventures In Glass	New Mexico	I stand with Bullseye and their comments regarding these regulations which should not be motivated by politics but by scientific study. Putting so many people out of work and we the artists who need the glass should not happen for a "maybe" something might happen. Bullseye is a responsible company. The DEQ must prove without a doubt scientifically before attaching regulations on Bullseye.
120	136	Eduardo	Prado	eduardoasprado@icloud.com	Artist from Brazil	Sao Paulo	I am a glass artist from Brazil and for more then 25 years I use only glass from Bullseye. I use Bullseye for their tecnology, quality and respect for their clients and workers. I am 100% sure that they are not doing anything illegal.
121	252	Paula	Radke	paularadke@gmail.com	Paula Rasked Dichroics,Inc	CA - California	This will put me, a 62 year old woman who has been making a living using Bullseye Glass out of a job. What can I do at 62? I am not qualified to do anything else and I am too old to enter the force force. Please savey business and handle this issue fairly with no chips on anyone's shouldets.
122	273	Jack	Whitworth	jack@whitworthstainedglass.com	Whitworth Stained Glass	Texas	I fully support Bullseye and Uroborous companies and their effort to comply with existing guidelines. Their willingness to modify their process in order to secure a safer environment is evident. I find it wrong that processes could be changed (even temporarily) before factual data and guidelines are obtained and implemented. I implore the resistance of the DEQ to submit to media and political bias and pressure. Multiple visits to both Bullseye and Uroborous indicate responsible and responsive community members. The stained glass studio industry depends on these and all stained glass manufacturers for beautiful and high-quality stained glass. Thank you.
123	9	Marc	Rose	marcrose.b@gmail.com		Oregon	I understand the need/desire to protect local businesses, but not particularly when local businesses refuse to even acknowledge that their business practices have been a problem in the past. To date, Bullseye has been arrogant and shown no contrition. The company refuses to even accept that the emissions measured are coming from their factory, despite the evidence. I would contrast Bullseye to Urorburos, which reached an agreement with DEQ to limit emissions voluntarily. I sincerely hope that we do not now see a watered down version of rules that have been bent to Bullseye's wants. Please do not put business interests over public health and safety.
124	106	stephanie	nyman	stephnyman@gmail.com		Idaho	please see the attached letter. Thank you for your time and consideration	be glass or deq.docx	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/1d5ee5f6-ed11-40bf-83cc-837bc9a945e8
125	297	Kurumi	Tokushige		Glass artist	JAPAN	I have used these glasses for long time. These glass companies support glass artists all over the world.
126	104	Elzbieta	Gerla	Betty@elzbeads.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
127	288	Raoul	Stepakoff	skipoff@comcast.net	self-employed	CA	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Forcing Bullseye to curtail production of certain of its glasses will deeply effect the ability of tens of thousands of glass artists throughout the world from creating their art and harm the families of employess and suppliers of Bullseye. This is a small business and the rules could potentially put it out of business, for the sake of political expediancy.
128	90	Martha	Keane			Oregon	I urge the DEQ to base their decisions on science and fact, not the fears of the public. It is DEQ and EQC's responsibility to know the science and wait for the results to come back from a wide range of testing instead of making hasty decisions and implementing rules that will have real and lasting impacts on families and communities. I urge you to slow down and take the time to make informed decisions. As a glass artist, I stand with Bullseye and Urobos. As an Oregonian, I am alarmed by what I have seen in the news from my fellow community members and the hasty, uninformed response of the DEQ. As an educated environmentalist, I am confident that a reasonable solution exists that will protect both air quality and businesses, should those in charge choose to seek such a solution.
129	39	Anthony	Longo	aclongo@verizon.net	RAINBOW ART GLASS, INC.	NEW JERSEY	We sincerely hope that no "knee-jerk" reactions will take place and initiate economic crushing rules to our small industry. I have 20 employees who rely on the products that Bullseye manufactures in order to meet mortgages and rent. Shouldn't common sense regulations that are based in scientific proof be put into place that protects all citizens while also looking out for those same citizens who rely on Bullseye to survive? I am a family man also and worry about my children's health all the time, but have to be mindful of the truth, not subjective views from other non-experts, when responding to concerns. I hope these temporary rules are reviewed again to take into account the actual test results in the area and corresponding scientific models. Thank you.
130	87	Tamara	Coatsworth	tami@tlcglass.com	TLC Glass Design	Idaho	I am a professional artist and I have been working with Bullseye products for 25 years. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Oregon should be grateful and supportive to companies that are responsible. I'm sure China would love to step in and take more american jobs.
131	142	Christopher	Bailey	chrisbailey.oregon@gmail.com	Private citizen	Oregon	Please do not subject Bullseye Glass to temporary rules that will likely cause job loss and adversely affect Bullseye's position in the glass making industry. Until clear scientific evidence proves that heavy metal pollution in and around Bullseye's manufacturing plant is directly linked to Bullseye, temporary rules forcing Bullseye to halt use of certain products would be arbitrary and unfair. Create an agreement with Bullseye to halt production immediately if clear scientific evidence directly links use of chemicals at Bullseye to contamination in the surrounding communities.
132	199	edna	brown	booedna.barown@yahoo.com		Michigan	I don't quit understand the path you are taking with the glass factories, if you found 5 site that contained high levels and only two are near glass factories, what is near the other 3 and why are we not notified what is near those spots that are responsible for those areas. Why are we just ruling out glass factories.
133	32	Bob	Leatherbarrow	bob.leatherbarrow@gmail.com	Leatherbarrow Glass Studio	British Columbia, Canada	Bullseye is the world leader in suppliers of glass and related products for kilnformed glass. I believe they have acted in a responsible manner in light of the Feb 4 report on toxic emissions, and I trust that they are genuine in their commitment to reduce future emissions. Mt main comment is that every effort should be made to enable Bullseye and other glass manufacturers to enable them to continue creating glass for the worldwide market. Please use science and environmentally sound practices in your decision making.
134	269	Jon	Orloff	jon.orloff@mindspring.com	Professor Emeritus, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Maryland	Oregon	This proposed rule is ill-considered at best. Study the science, listen to those who have studied how the generation of Cr-6 can be prevented and base your rules on rational analysis. "Feel good" regulations that play to ignorant hysteria are a poor way to go; they will do nothing for the environment and cause economic harm to the state. Use only evidence based reasoning.
135	116	Guy	Whittaker	ge.whittaker@gmail.com	Retired materials science teacher	Oregon	This proposal is very flawed. There is no scientific reason to implement this. Bullseye is quite willing to work to correct third issue, working to install necessary bag filtration. Additional restrictions that would effectively cause undue hardship on this company and it's employees is poor judgement on DEQ's part. This proposal should not be implemented.
136	267	Jim	Piercey	jpstudios@aol.com	J. PIERCEY STUDIOS, INC	FL	Environmental regulation based on accepted scientific guidelines is an imperative - unwarranted regulation based on emotion, voodoo science, or hysteria, is not. There has to be a logical separation between fact and fiction. If it can be proven that either of these two companies are responsible for the release of any heavy metals into the environment, then they should forced to comply to the new regs. I'm from Florida. Recently I visited the beautiful state of Oregon - a standard bearer for the environment. If there was any other state I would want to live it, it would be Oregon, not only for its beauty but because the people there seem to really care about the place. If in fact, there are increased levels of heavy metals in the soils around Uroboros and/or Bullseye, who is to say that they are the responsible parties? Many industries near these glass factories probably use heavy metals (tanneries, paint manufacturers, electro- plating plants, some types of ceramic manufacturers, cement manufacturers, wood preservation plants). Both of these glass manufacturers appear to be located in areas that have historically been industrial. If contamination is found in these areas, who can say how long it has been there or from where it originated? Just the term "heavy metals" cause consternation among people. As for Cr III, it is a naturally occurring form of chromium. It is is many foods and is a necessary micronutrient - it is necessary for some protein structures and certain enzymatic actions. I would venture that many of the people that are supporting the the DEQ proposal are the same ones that buy from the health food store, then swallow chromium picolinate (Cr III) Cr VI us altogether a different matter. If it can be proven (using SCIENCE) that either companies furnaces are converting III to VI, and it is being released into the air, then it is a problem that should be addressed. These companies make beautiful glass. I use it in my business. If these Oregon factories (as well as the few other glass factories still located in the USA ) are forced out of business because of arbitrary and unnecessary regulation, then I will in turn have to buy my materials from overseas sources. It would seem to me (remember, I'm a Floridian) that EPA and DEQ would work together with these companies to determine the actual source of these pollutants, then work towards eliminating the source. This past year, the Stained Glass Association of America held their annual conference in Portland. We did so because it is the home of both Uroboros and Bullseye which are famous around the world. I feel totally confident that both companies operate with a very high degree of integrity and ethics and are totally dedicated to the environmental wellness of the area.
137	19	Henry	Grimmett	Ghanalytical@gmail.com	GH Analytical Labs	OR	After a review of the literature and the epa study I find the response by both the public and the legislature to be hysterical. Certainly we want to protect the publics health and keep cadimum and other heavy metals out of the environment but theses rules probably do neither. First, the glass companies have general been good neighbors providing jobs, spending money with other local companies and supporting various non profits. They have all keep emissions within legal limits. If you elect to change those limits it should be across all industries not just 5 or 6 glassmakers, some of whom are very small. Second, the rules need to have a phase in which has been the historical norm, not a do it now or close. Finally, there needs to be a rational for demanding these extraordinary expenses, it can't be because some neighbors are on a crusade. One glass plant, located only in an arsenic hot spot actually uses no arsenic but is located next fodoor to a Styrofoam melting facility and across the street from an asphalt recycling plant, the most probable source. To close them down or require them to invest $500,000 won't make an iota of difference for the health of the neighborhood but would eliminate 20 good jobs. Now's not a good time to use a hammer even if it would get a few members of the public of your back.
138	62	Nancy	Oudegeest	Business@oudegeest.com		California	Before putting large numbers out of work and small businesses out of business do your homework. Let the facts and science determine your moves not fear.
139	264	Joe	Leggiero	lafarge04@hotmail.com	Savannah Glasswork	Canada	Just begging you guy to re-evaluete any negative issues on this matter. As a glass artist for many years ( and many to come) I hope for a well tough legislastion. We breath metals, poisons... We eat metals, poisons...I don't feel now that any arguments against my favourite glass Company are fare. The future I see is the deat for my craftmanship. What about controlling glass manufactured in Cina and the letal contenents in it? PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE BE WISE IN YOUR DECISIONS. Best regards
140	120	Karen	Caldwell	caldwell877@comcast.net	Sundlower Glass Studio	NEW JERSEY	Please find a way to allow Bullseye to resume production of chromium glass while trying to resolve tis issue. I, along with thousand of other artist will be ourt of business not being able to obtain glass to create our art. I beg you to try to come up with a solution for all of us to survive and maintain our jobs. In the research that I have studied, I do not see the environmental impact which the DEQ has put upon Bullseye Glass. Please do not hold up production for six months. I will have to close my business after 39 years if this happens. Please come up with an agreeable solution soon!
141	276	Phyllis	Williams	phyllis.w@comcast.com	Fused Glass Artist	CA	Hello, I understand the anxiety of Portland's residents who live in the vicinity of Bullseye and Urborous Glass manufacturing facilities. I believe the Proposed Temporary Rule for Colored Glass Manufacturer Emissions goes too far and is based on fear and a lack of understanding of their manufacturing process. A leading glass scientist from Alfred University, Williams LaCourse, PhD states to obtain the desired colors for Bullseye and Urborous glass, it is not possible for their furnaces to produce toxic chromium. Many small arts and crafts businesses use Bullseye and Urborous Glass to make their living. This temporary bill will cause harm to small independent artist who rely on their glass without scientific evidence it would make Portland's and our environment safer. Thank you for your consideration.	LaCourse letter.pdf	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/0910a5ab-0b64-4276-915f-1c74bdecaff3
142	121	Teri	Shamlian	tshamlian@hotmail.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Bullseye is willing to make the changes needed to improve air quality, these rules aren't needed. It would be silly to have a rainbow with colors missing. Small glass companies are not the target. We sincerely appreciate any support you can provide right now.
143	227	Francine	Lofrano	ftblote@sbcglobal.net		California	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of San Francisco, California. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. This ruling would be devastating to Bullseye Glass, their employees and their customers - please, you must reconsider and review the science!
144	298	Bob	Stevens	bstevens@blendedsystems.com	Glassting Impressions	GA	"More likely than not" is no grounds for such a ruling. Get you facts then act.
145	259	Suzanne	Townsend	Suzanne@agreementswork.com		Oregon	I am very concerned that the temporary rules you are considering are not based on actual science. The State should not risk the loss of important small glass makers based only on fear. DEQ should not react to past oversight problems by imposing restrictions that are not well thought through. Thank you.
146	294	Jo	Tricker	jtglass@xtra.co.nz	Jo Tricker GLass	New Zealand	I fully agree with all 9 points that bullseye has presented in regards to air quality, which I have attached in a word document, and I fully support its efforts to operate as a legitimate company in the business/social community of Portland Oregon. Bullseye glass has been in operation for 42 years. It is highly respected - not only in America but also worldwide - as the forefather of kilnformed glass manufacturing and art glass education Given that a leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium, I am appalled as to why DEQ would favour politics and poorly written rules over and above factual science. If the production of Bullseye glass were to be curtailed or completely shut down, this would set a trend for all the other glass art manufactures in America such as Uroboros in Oregon, Spectrum in Washington, System 96 in Washington, Kokomo in Indiana, Wissmarch in Virginia, Creation is Messy in Seattle, Northstar in Oregon, Youghiogheny glass in Pennsylvania, and Armstrong Glass in Georgia (to name a few…) to also be curtailed. Thousands and thousands of people worldwide who have art glass businesses would also have to shut down resulting in loss of jobs worldwide. The consequences of actions need to be carefully considered!	BE air admissions	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/4bbdb606-340d-45c4-ac2f-924b08a68173
147	42	Diane	Miller	dianemillertx@sbcglobal.net		Oregon	Bullseye Glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. LaCourse, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. I urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Unreasonable fears should not trump reason-based solutions. The health and safety of the community can be achieved without forcing these businesses to close. Instead of a hasty and discriminatory temporary rule, DEQ's should focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Please don't make the glass companies scapegoats for unsubstianciated health risks, and wait until all the data collection and studies are completed rather than imposing temporary rules.
148	99	Melinda	Bryden	melinda@redfernconsultants.com	Redfern-Designs	Washington	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. My livelihood and many other artists will be negatively by harsh unrealistic standards.
149	137	Carol	Routh	Carol@hevanet.com	Beadsongs	Oregon	I began working in colored glass in 1994, which is when I met Dan and Lani. In these 22 years I have known them to be deeply dedicated to ethical business practices and environmental safety. I have been studying all the information available on the current situation regarding heavy metals being discharged due to glass production. From what I can tell, the temporary regulations are based on politics, public perception due to newspaper reports, and not the facts of the situation. Oregon can and should do better than this.The DEQ should be working cooperatively with Bullseye to establish The facts of what needs to be done. Bull's-eye appears to be in complete agreement that safety is of the highest concern, and completely willing to do what it takes. It sounds to me like the temporary rules will seriously damage your relationship with them, and other businesses trust of the DEQ, in the viability of that company as well as the artists who depend on their products. For myself, Green is integral to everything I do, in my livelihood will be seriously damaged without that source of green glass. please slow down and rethink the temporary rules. Focus on permit rules based on scientific fact. Thank you.
150	139	Dalene	Reese	haciendadelsol@q.com	Hacienda del Sol Stained Glass	N.M.	There are many issues to consider. Please let DEQ and the Environmental Quality Commission know whether you agree with the points below, and let them know how you would be affected by the temporary or permanent loss of Bullseye's products. 1.This is an improper use of temporary rule making. The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission should only consider a temporary rule when credible evidence demonstrates a rule is needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest."; This is not the case here. Hastily adopting temporary rules make it appear that agencies are being proactive, but these rules do not protect the public, and makes Bullseye a scapegoat. There is no evidence that emissions from the facility pose any acute health risk nor that Bullseye is fully responsible for the emissions, nor that Bullseye's 42 years of operation have resulted in areas of health concerns in the vicinity of the facility. If the EQC were to implement this temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public. 2.There is no immediate health risk. The recent OHA studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of these materials. As the OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people" OHA also concluded that current data shows "long-term health risks are relatively low." Further, DEQ found no health concerns due to cadmium, arsenic, total chromium or hexavalent chromium in the soil around Bullseye's factory. Soil samples showed soil levels were generally below naturally occurring or background levels of heavy metals. Keith Johnson, manager for the DEQ's Northwest Region Cleanup Program, stated, "[o]ngoing emissions from the Bullseye facility are not resulting in harmful impacts to soils around the facility." DEQ's and OHA's own statements provide that the rule is not needed to prevent “serious prejudice to the public interest.� 3.Instead of a hasty and discriminatory temporary rule, DEQ should focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Bullseye will support that effort. These rules should give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. New regulations should cover all businesses, not just target minor specific industries. 4.With minor changes to correct scientific errors and omissions in the currently proposed rule, Bullseye Glass is willing to sign an agreement that achieves all of DEQ's goals and allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. 5.The haste to adopt technically flawed temporary rules makes it appear that Oregon is repressive to manufacturing businesses and does not care about jobs. 6.Oregon agencies should strive for proper and fair treatment of all parties, based on law, rather than responding to public concern resulting from sensational blog posts and test results with partial data and no peer review. 7.The health and safety of the community can be achieved without forcing these businesses to close. 8.If Bullseye Glass is forced to stop producing 50% of its glass products for 6 months, without regard to ongoing test results or added emission controls, Bullseye's survival is at risk. We support an agreement that is similar to the temporary rules, but unlike the temporary rules, also allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. 9.Bullseye Glass Co. has a payroll of $7.5 million dollars. 130 Portland families and 20 other Bullseye families depend on Bullseye for jobs. Hundreds of Oregon artists and craftspeople depend upon Bullseye products. Tens of thousands of artists across the United States and the world depend upon Bullseye products.

151	154	Dawn	Petricevic	Nwmxmom@gmail.com		Oregon	Instead of a hasty and discriminatory temporary rule, DEQ should focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Bullseye will support that effort. These rules should give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. New regulations should cover all businesses, not just target minor specific industries.
152	207	Emelie	Rogers	emrogers@ix.netcom.com	emrogers designs	CA	As a glass artist, environmentalist, I am concerned with the lack of reliable, supported scientific data regarding your constraints on glass furnace use in art glass facilities. Work with the entities involved to arrive at a reasonable well-supported remediation.
153	56	Sam	Grillmeier	rengls@att.net	Renaissance Glass Studio	Ohio	Having read all the pertinent information on these temporary rules I believe they are in haste and would due more harm than good. Scientific evidence does not support the need for these. Co-operation between all entities involved should continue until a just solution is found. Knee jerk laws are hast and counter productive.
154	117	Jennifer	Higgins	mjhiggins143@yahoo.com	Higgins Glass Studio	Alabama	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Not only do your decisions affect your community, but hundreds of thousands of glass artists around the world. This decision could cripple all of us. YOU MUST consider all the facts before making a decision based on scare tactics and politics alone. Test what Bullseye is telling you about their processes before you make more governmental rules that kill our businesses. Find ways of compliance instead of making blanket policies that have long reaching consequences that you haven't considered. I applaud everyone who truly looks into this objectively and bases their decisions on facts.
155	277	junya	tsugita	j.tsugita@gmail.com			To us is I need a glass of bullseye. Glass artists in the world you need a glass of the bullseye. Please do not let stop the production of the bullseye glass .
156	33	Jessica	Applegate	applegatebrown@msn.com	Eastside Portland Air Coalition	OR	* The wording in the temporary rule seems vague using terms like "will probably install" and "DEQ and OHA believe to be safe for the public." * There appears to be no enforceable penalty provision. There needs to be specific quantifiable penalties for breaking the rules. This is important because you can make all the rules you want and if there are no penalties, basically no one cares. * Are glassmakers getting the summer off, since no permits would be required until Sept 2016? The requirement should be effective immediately, with a 30-day or similar grace period. * There should be a provision for similar emitters no matter what product they are producing. No loopholes. * The DEQ may be willing to fix one of their mistakes from 2007 loopholes for Bullseye, but if they cannot do so with a transparent process that centers on the communities most at risk and provide them with a seat at the table that allows them to protect their own health, then no one can honestly say that their culture has changed. * We are also concerned that this temporary rule only covers art glass manufactures and not other major polluters in the Portland Metro area. * Also, the rules are so inconsistent when identifying which material is toxic. In one place they mention that the EPA lists 188 HAPs, then they're only concerned about their fave 3, then it's also nickel. There isn't any logic. * City of Portland and Multnomah County adopted the precautionary principle in 2004/2006. Please be reminded of that commitment. http://www.sehn.org/pdf/portland.pdf
157	201	Daniel	Seffinger	Dannyseffinger@yahoo.com	Ashlandglassact	Oregon	I oppose the rules limiting metals that would effect glass production at bullseye glass. This would have devastating effects both for bullseye and hundreds of glass craftmen effects the lilyhood of many artists . Please do not do this. Dan seffinger
158	306	Tina	Dodge	tdodge6@yahoo.com	n/a	VA	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
159	29	Debbi	Elmer	Debbi@timberidgeglassworks.com	Timberidge Glassworks	Texas	It is alarming to me that the DEQ would consider implementing the proposed overreaching regulations on the glass manufacturers there in Oregon. Bullseye Glass has been an upstanding business in the Portland community and has quickly begun to take actions by installing filters to ensure safe operation. To enact hasty regulation does nothing but hurt the glass industry worldwide...especially when scientific analysis has shown that no harm has been done. The regulations will have far reaching effects. Already, we are experiencing shortages of glass colors. Business impacts are huge on the small business owner. For Bullseye employees, this could impact their livelihoods and families. Safety is paramount. However, no one has yet proven that any damage has been done. Please do not regulate unnecessarily. Thank you.
160	250	Michele	Schuster	micki@davidfschuster.com		New Mexico	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
161	150	Lin	McJunkin	mcjunkin@wavecable.com		Washington	I have been a loyal customer of Bullseye Glass Co. in Portland, OR since the 1970s, when they were making sheet glass from recycled beverage bottles in an effort to reduce solid wastes in landfills. For the past 45 years, I have found them to be consistent in their environmental concerns. Please do not make a temporary rule targeting this one small industry. Please consider a rule ONLY when credible evidence demonstrates a rule is needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest."This is not the case here. You need to use science and facts BEFORE you issue a rule, not AFTER. I am an avid and active environmentalist, concerned with clean air and water. I am also an active glass sculptor who relies on a full palette of colors from Bullseye. I would be willing to subsume my professional needs to those PROVEN to be detrimental to the environment, but that is not the case here. If you issue a ruling without the proper science to back it up, I could lose my business for lack of a full palette of glass colors to offer my clients. I could by glass in my home state of Washington, but it is of vastly inferior quality, and I would hope that the Washington DEQ would also limit these factories' productions due to the presence of CrIII in the air. Please proceed with great caution and skill before you malign or even force out of business this fine company. Thank you. -Lin McJunkin
162	272	Bert	Weiss	bert@customartglass.com	Bert Weiss Art Glass	NH	Bullseye Glass Company is working hard to be a responsible community member while manufacturing a world class product. Please work with them to verify that their emissions are not harming the community.
163	228	Mary	d'Autremont	marydautrey@comcast.net			Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
164	34	Jessica	Applegate	applegatebrown@msn.com	Concerned parent	Oregon	* The wording in the temporary rule seems vague using terms like "will probably install" and "DEQ and OHA believe to be safe for the public." * There appears to be no enforceable penalty provision. There needs to be specific quantifiable penalties for breaking the rules. This is important because you can make all the rules you want and if there are no penalties, basically no one cares. * Are glassmakers getting the summer off, since no permits would be required until Sept 2016? The requirement should be effective immediately, with a 30-day or similar grace period. * There should be a provision for similar emitters no matter what product they are producing. No loopholes. * The DEQ may be willing to fix one of their mistakes from 2007 loopholes for Bullseye, but if they cannot do so with a transparent process that centers on the communities most at risk and provide them with a seat at the table that allows them to protect their own health, then no one can honestly say that their culture has changed. * We are also concerned that this temporary rule only covers art glass manufactures and not other major polluters in the Portland Metro area. * Also, the rules are so inconsistent when identifying which material is toxic. In one place they mention that the EPA lists 188 HAPs, then they're only concerned about their fave 3, then it's also nickel. There isn't any logic. * City of Portland and Multnomah County adopted the precautionary principle in 2004/2006. Please be reminded of that commitment. http://www.sehn.org/pdf/portland.pdf
165	178		Jackson	eejackson77@hotmail.com		CA	I am a glass artist that relies on glass produced by Bullseye Glass which is a responsible company. The Air Quality Temporary Rules are not based on science but on politics. I ask that you reconsider adopting them as they will not solve any environmental concerns and will adversely affect many employees and artists. Thank you.
166	96	Jessica	Wesolek	jessica@cre8it.com	WOW! Gallery	NM	One of the things that hurts support of environmental agencies is their constant tendency to go overboard, and act without gathering all the science. This restriction would greatly harm or destroy two companies, eliminate jobs in those companies and also adversely affect the livelihood of thousands of glass artists around the country. Before going off half-cocked for political reasons, try working with these companies to get the true facts and resolve the problem, which they are very willing to do.
167	128	Deanna	Muir	tanddmuir@bendbroadband.com		OR	I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed temporary regulations by DEQ that will severely curtail production by Bullseye Glass co.I am a lifelong Oregonian and have run my own small business in OR for nearly 25 years. I am strongly against the improper use of temporary regulations by DEQ to control the manufacturing process that does not produce any serious prejudice to the public interest. There is no proven immediate health risk according to DEQs and OHAs own reports. The DEQ should focus on permanent rules based on scientific facts that pertain to all businesses, not targeted specific industries. Our state agencies must deal with safety for all, but it must be done judiciously and fairly. we need to factor in the importance of employment and income to the state. Bullseye Glass has a long standing reputation as a manufacturer of a quality product and dependable employer in the state. we need more businesses as dedicated as they are to their product and their employees.
168	186	David	Hopper	dghopperart@gmail.com	Independent Artist	California	I am not in favor of this temporary ruling. The proposed rules to fill a regulatory air toxic gap is an action to a non existent or unproven condition. This knee jerk ruling by the DEQ exhibits how agencies are swayed by unscientific opinions and public comments. It is only fair that you work with these small glass companies through scientific reporting and analysis. I have known the owners of the two sheet glass manufacturing companies for over 40 years and at no time have they been irresponsible in protecting the health of their employees and environment. As a fellow manufacturer, you taking the action of establishing this Temporary Ruling would be unscientific, illogical and open your agency to a damages lawsuit. "The proposed rules would fill a regulatory gap by setting operation standards for the smaller art glass businesses that emit air toxics and potentially cause serious health effects." This statement from the proposed ruling is enough to fill a lawsuit against the DEQ. The DEQ has not proven "smaller art glass business emit air toxics."
169	189	Erinn	Dady			IL	While I am concerned about the environmental impact regarding this decision, my hope is that the ruling will be based on actual facts, not merely the likelihood of emissions.
170	69	Maura	Allen	mauraallen@mac.com	Artist	CO	Science trumps politics. Science -- not conjecture -- should be the driver on decisions relating to environmental and health issues. Better regulations may be needed, but the temporary ones are not. The consequences on small business (including loss of jobs and loss materials to artists worldwide) are severe and unnecessary. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. The culture of the organization is exemplary--everything they do, from education to production is above and beyond industry standards. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. I strongly urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these temporary rules.
171	172	David	Schuster	dsf@davidfschuster.com	Artist, owner	New Mexico	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
172	266	Jean	Scholtz	jean.scholtz@mindspring.com		Oregon	I just read the majority of the 14+ pages of comments. It is very obvious that passing this temporary order will adversely impact citizens across the world. You need to conduct some thorough studies to determine what impacts if any the current processes are have on the environment and work with the glass companies (as well as other polluters in Portland) to come up with regulations that work for all concerned.
173	159	Kym	Textor	Kym.textor@bigpond.com	blossom & blue	QLD Australia	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues.A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
174	222	Tiffany	Spahn	Devilspahn@hotmail.com		Oregon	I live and work in the Brooklyn neighborhood of Portland, not far from Bullseye Glass. Bullseye Glass is a quality small business which enriches Portland as a whole, and has a long history of responsible operation. It would be a huge misfortune if ill considered regulations forced them out of business and caused the loss of jobs and a unique Portland business. I urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
175	275	brianna	ortega	bo2@pdx.edu	portland state	Oregon	I want to know what is going on with our air and water. I have high arsenic in my urine from living near woodstock and cesar chavez. I want to know that Portland wants to protect its people that care so much about health and the enviornment. I want to know what is going on and why my health is deteriorating at such a young age.
176	21	Annie	Ray	2annieray@gmail.com	n/a	OR	Yes small manufacturing should be regulated. Kudos for gathering actual field data! Now for the big manufacturing, the elephant in the room is Precision Castparts. The public must demand the same standards of real time air & soil monitoring along the Johnson Creek locations. The public has the right to know the volume of toxic air releases that are allowable by DEQ permit. The public has the right to know the tonnages of heavy metals & the long term consequences of living near by the most toxic polluter of Portland. Also all the subsequent smelters throughout the area that work in conjunction w/ Precision Castparts need monitoring & no doubt contribute to the heavy metal toxic load that Portland suffers from. The relationship of DEQ & public health has to be taken into account around all these issues! Please equip the DEQ monitoring station on SE Lafayette with toxics monitoring equipment. thank you for your attention Sincerely, Annie Ray 5806 SE Rhone St PS We have pregnant daughter living close to Precision Cast Parts & have 2 special needs grandchildren with neurological problems.
177	197	Margaret	Greene	margaret42@tds.net		Oregon	In these situations it is easy to make decisions based on fear and political pressure instead of on scientific evidence. Please read the research, understand the implications before making sweeping decisions (even temporary ones) that will impact people's businesses and lives.
178	71	Karla	Fears	kpfears@gmail.com	search site	Virginia	Science before emotion. This country already lives in an environment of fear. Please do not add to that by hair trigger reactions. Let someone who is unbiased do testing to ensure the folks at Bullseye and other glass making industries don't have to go out of business. Many artists, like myself, depend on them. Livelihoods will be destroyed based on an environment of fear and that's not what built the United States. Karla Fears (no one or nothing)
179	279	Marc	Petrovic	mtpetrovic@cia.edu	Cleveland Institute of Art	Ohio	I am an artists and educator located in Ohio who makes work tied to Bullseye's product. I am also an engaged and caring steward of our planet's air, water and environment. My wish would be that the governing authorities would focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation to address Portland's air quality issues. Rules that could give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. My further hope is these rules and regulations would cover all businesses, and not just target specific industries. Understanding that there is no evidence that emissions from the Bullseye facility pose any acute health risk, if the EQC were to implement the proposed temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public and put my livelihood in danger. My impression has been that the haste to adopt technically flawed temporary rules makes Oregon appear responsive to fears over reason-based solutions that protect both the health and safety of the community and the important USA based manufacturing business and jobs both locally and globally. Sincerely, Marc Petrovic
180	242	Nanette	Thrush	artsgrl67@hotmail.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
181	55	Sarah	Lundin	Sarah.lundin@gmail.com		Oregon	As a glass artist and lifelong resident of the Portland Metro Area, I strongly beseech your department to proceed with careful, calculated, science-based consideration of the long-term goals of improved air quality in regards to the glass manufacturing industry. Any impromptu or speculative measures taken at this point in time, against reasonable and concrete validation of actual risks of harmful pollution will have damaging consequences on many levels. Hasty, ill -conceived measures have a nasty habit of setting irrevocable precedent.
182	185	Renee	Farr	rfarr01@comcast.net		FL	As a firm supporter of Bullseye Glass, please use responsible decision making when determining the use/non-use of Chromium III. Bullseye Glass has been, and hopes to continue to be, a member of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Please do not rush to a decision that isnt based on science and facts. There is scientific evidence showing that the use of Chromium III by Bullseye Glass does not produce any toxic emissions, nor does the use of Chromium III result in a change to Chromium VI within their furnaces. I urge you to review all the scientific facts before making a ruling.
183	239	Gregory	Bell	flatlatex@yahoo.com	Edenwind Studios	OR	I have worked w/ Bullseye Glass for well over a decade. They have exhibited nothing but prudence and responsibility in regards to employee, customer and public safety. I trust that the ownership will do everything possible to cooperate w/ officials and install/implement new systems/technology to make their processes safe for everyone. Temporary rules may make for good news sound bites, but they will have very real, very lasting effects on many people's lives. Please take the long view - let Bullseye get filtration in place that addresses the real problem, not a bandaid media fix. NO to Temporary Rules that feel good yet don't actually fix a problem and have a negative impact on so many lives. Think!
184	38	Blake	Peterson	BlakeGPeterson@gmail.com		Oregon	There is no immediate health risk. The recent Oregon Healthy Authority studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of these materials. As the OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people."OHA also concluded that current data shows "long-term health risks are relatively low." Further, DEQ found no health concerns due to cadmium, arsenic, total chromium or hexavalent chromium in the soil around Bullseye's factory Soil samples showed soil levels were generally below naturally occurring or background levels of heavy metals. Keith Johnson, manager for the DEQ's Northwest Region Cleanup Program, stated, "[o]ngoing emissions from the Bullseye facility are not resulting in harmful impacts to soils around the facility." DEQ's and OHA's own statements provide that the rule is not needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest."
185	2	Andy	Haverland	andy@yaquinaboat.com	Yaquina Boat Equipment	OR - Oregon	It is my hope that the DEQ would do its very best to ensure that the supposed environmental issues raised by the recent discovery of elevated levels of toxic metals in the air, are treated as delicately as possible. People's jobs are at stake, and its easy to assess fees and require copious amounts of red tape just fro a small business to function. It is my hope that you would regulate without an agenda, either left or right.
186	223	Denise	Bohart Brown	artsydenise@icloud.com	independent glass artist	Colorado	I have been involved in the art glass industry as an artist for 15 years, and in my experience and knowledge, Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible and environmentally-conscious operation. I support Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions should not be rushed in a knee-jerk reaction to a situation that sounds as though it might be toxic, scary, poisonous, hazardous, etc. Such decisions must not be reactionary, but must be based on science (not politics), and in order to be fair to all involved they must be based on a thorough examination of the facts and evidence. DEQ’s apparent desire to rush into being these poorly written and misdirected rules unfairly affects not only a specific industry (without affecting other neighboring businesses that may share the blame, but will not currently share the dire results of these restrictive regulations), but also the myriad of businesses and individuals like myself that rely on Bullseye to supply us with the tools of our trade. While I understand the necessity of DEQs investigation and subsequent thorough understanding of the situation, this is something that has manifested over time - over years, perhaps decades. The OHA has stated that there is no immediate health risk to the community. I urge you to take the time needed for your due diligence and then, and only then, relying on science and fact, implement new regulations that can be borne fairly by all industries and will positively impact the lives and health of the people of Portland.
187	31	Martha	Wittstruck	witt44@charter.net	Normandale Community College	MN	I urge you to look at the science and not the headlines when you make your decision about limiting the use of certain metals used by the Bullseye glass company. Bullseye is a respected leader in glass production for kiln glass artists. Regulations that would severely limit Bullseye's ability to produce glass would have a catastrophic world-wide effect on glass artists, educators, craft business, and the entire glass industry. Please do not destroy an amazing company. I believe Bullseye Glass to be good steward of the environment and that claims about pollution are exaggerated and inflammatory. Bullseye is not a bad actor but a responsible community oriented company. Singling out Bullseye and other glass manufactures for punishment without regard to facts and other sources of possible pollution is not only unfair but solves nothing.
188	24	Nancy	Sala	Kaleidoglass@gmail.com		NM	The DEQ needs to make decisions based on scientific findings, and not on political motivated opinions. The rules the DEQ is proposing will affect a company that has followed all regulations, will affect their employees, and most of all, will affect artists from all over the world. Do do this for political reasons.
189	257	Pat	Kane	mpkane@comcast.net		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
190	98	Phyllis	Crawley	pgcrawley@hotmail.com	1410 Fahrenheit	Indiana	After further investigation of your files, I have determined that you are not paying attention to your own findings. In your reports, it has been determined that there is absolutely no health issue from Bullseye Glass Co. What are you doing? Read your own DEQ reports.
191	94	Christine	Burris	ctburris@aol.com	NA	District of Columbia	I am a fused glass artist working in the Washington, DC area. My work depends on the availability of colored glass in all colors, such as produced by Bullseye. Your state is very fortunate to have this art glass factory producing such high quality glass. Your proposed rules would be be deleterious to Bullseye and perhaps even close their business, all because of emissions which MAY be harmful to humans. Bullseye states that they support "permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Bullseye will support that effort. These rules should give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. New regulations should cover all businesses, not just target minor specific industries." Any temporary rules should put into place an agreement such as this, guaranteeing that in the future Bullseye must comply in a timely manner with new scientific evidence regarding emissions and public health. It is my understanding that If Bullseye Glass is forced to stop producing 50% of its glass products for 6 months, without regard to ongoing test results or added emission controls, Bullseye's survival is at risk. Bullseye supports an agreement that is similar to the temporary rules, but unlike the temporary rules, also allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. Thank you for this opportunity to address this issue, critical to my artistic endeavors. Christine Burris, Washington, DC
192	23	Julie	Carrico	Jakcarrico@gmail.com		Oregon	These rules will put an extreme hardship on all glass manufacturers when there is no scientific reasoning to suggest that such a hardship is necessary. After initial soil results came back as very low risk, it should have necessitated more in depth research into what is needed. Bullseye and other glass manufacturers are working towards installing filters, which will further reduce risk. These temporary rules are overly burdensome and not needed.
193	179		Jackson	eejackson77@hotmail.com		CA	I am a glass artist that relies on glass produced by Bullseye Glass which is a responsible company. The Air Quality Temporary Rules are not based on science but on politics. I ask that you reconsider adopting them as they will not solve any environmental concerns and will adversely affect many employees and artists. Thank you.
194	72	judy	luther	judyl13@q.com	The Glass House (business)	Oregon	Historically (ancient, Egyption) glass has been important to civilization. This interest alone makes me a glass advocate. Oregon (coastal artisans/businesses) piqued my interest in this medium. Scientific laboratory chemical production of glass mirroring God's plentiful supply of silicon (sandy beaches) make it a natural product. We need this cottage industry in Oregon. It is a 'clean' industry. The I-5 Corridor is NOT a clean industry...make that your priority...not Bullseye Glass.
195	119	Lydia	Piper	lapiper@comcast.net	Grand Mesa Studios	New Mexico	As a glass artist who is a customer of Bullseye Glass, I am dismayed to see the implementation of temporary rules that are targeted to specific companies based on such limited information. The imposition of these rules will greatly impact businesses and individuals around the world, that depend on Bullseye and Uroboros glass production. Therefore, I urge you to do further investigation and work with these companies to find a solution to this problem based on scientific fact, and not react to the emotional responses from the media and public. Your own technicians state that there is no public health concern based on recent testing. Therefore, putting a business at risk by implementing rules that are not based on fact, when so many people depend on it for their livelihood, is irresponsible. I urge you to reconsider these temporary rules.
196	48	Lataya	Dailey	daileytay@hotmail.com		OR	First, thank you for forming these temporary rules to stop the exposure of toxic emissions from Bullseye and Uroboros Glass. As well as to address other glass-making companies. There are a few points I hope will be changed before the rules are approved. Below are my concerns. --Please prohibit chromium III as well if the glass-making furnaces are not equipt with emission controls since it produces chromium IV when heated. "If DEQ does not deny or approve the Notice of Intent to Construct within 10 days after receiving the Notice, the Notice will be deemed to be approved." ---Please hire enough staff at DEQ to review all notices of Intent to Construct. "Each CAGM must perform the following source testing on at least one controlled glass-making furnace." --Please have all glass-making furnaces tested to insure all are operating within guidelines. "(1) CAGMs may not use arsenic, cadmium or chromium VI in raw materials in any glass-making furnace that is not controlled by an emission control device DEQ approved." --Please add chromium III since it produces Chromium IV when heated. "For the purpose of establishing a maximum allowable chromium III usage rate, the following are required: (a) Performing a source test in an uncontrolled furnace or at the inlet of an emission control device as specified below: (B) Test while making a glass that DEQ agrees is made under the most oxidizing combustion conditions and that contains a high percentage of chromium III as compared to other formulas the CAGM uses;" --Please alert the public in the surrounding area to the date of this test since the furnace will be uncontrolled at time of test. --Please have a DEQ staff member preform all tests not company employee. --Please set fines for non-compliance --Please make sure all glass-making furnaces are required to have emission control units. Thank you, Lataya Dailey
197	225	Regina	Seamann	reginadon@live.com	Stain Glass By Nana	Iowa	Please do not make them comply as larger companies, as mall business have a hard time making it as it is due to all the regulations. Small mom and pop organizations/ businesses cannot stay in business and keep prices low so us who are also trying to survive on a limited income can afford to buy raw goods ( such as sheets of glass.) Please do not force them to comply as it will shut down one more American dream of owning there own business, which in turn help others to enjoy the healing therapy of doing stain glass on a small scale. Thank you for listening and taking thus in consideration.
198	130	Ernest	sugden	ernestsugden@hotmail.com	retired	Oregon	Please take time to listen to what the studies are showing.
199	58	D	Germana	djgermana@yahoo.com		NY	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
200	112	Sheri	Marshall	boeingbabe@gmail.com		MS	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.

201	182	Linda	Norris	linda@linda-norris.com	Artist	UK	As an UK based artist and fervent environmentalist I have been following the recent toxic air emissions revelations closely. I understand that Bullseye has always been 100% compliant with State emissions regulations and has voluntarily temporarily halted use of Chromium, Cadmium and Arsenic in their production following the recent toxic air emissions revelations and is currently installing a 'bagging' system which will be 99% efficient in terms of preventing toxic air emissions from its furnaces in the future. As a responsible company have also employed an environmental consultancy to overhaul all their processes and advise them on the most effective way to proceed to protect their neighborhood and employees. Bullseye Glass is fundamental to my practice as an artist working with hard-to-reach children and vulnerable adults in my own community. The fabulous range of fully compatible colours has enabled me to draw in people who are marginalised and have limited communication skills, as well as allowing me as an artist in my own right to develop my own artistic expression. There is no replacement for this material as no other company has invested so much expertise, time and experience into developing a truly remarkable palette of colours. The impact of Bullseye Glass on the development of studio glass globally can not be underestimated, and the support and encouragement given to artists and communities by the company through their competitions, prizes and sponsorship represents a massive contribution to glass art on a worldwide scale. Examples of work made with Bullseye Glass are in internationally important collections across the world, such as the V&A Museum, London. Nothing should take precedence over environmental health, but decisions concerning the use of Chromium and other heavy metals in the factory should be based on proven science, and it concerns me that calls for a temporary ban on the use of these materials are being based on sensationalised press reports and emotive reaction, rather than the bare science. I understand that the proposed restrictions could put the future of the company at risk and could cost the jobs of many employees in Portland and elsewhere across the USA, it would necessarily have a knock on effect on suppliers and artists globally. Given the fact that latest soil tests show no increased prescence of toxins in the vicinity, and the attempts that Bullseye are making to ensure their toxin emissions falls far below the required minimum level, I would ask that the company be allowed to resume production and safeguard the jobs of their employees, while the state undertake scientific monitoring of emissions and avail themselves of the expertise required to protect the citizens of Oregon from all industrial environmental impact, not just that from two small factories with over 40 years manufacturing experience who contribute so much to glass art and opportunites for marginalised people in communities across the globe.	image001.jpg	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/4961cda5-ef2d-4d4f-b743-6bbf4d38e34d
202	290	Mike	Rerick	mike@dragonglassworks.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. If Bullseye Glass is forced to go out of business, you will affect me as an artist as well as thyousands of other people world-wide. You could be responsible for destroying an entire art form. Why don't you investigate the real pollutants that make our air bad - commercial diesel engines in trucks, buses and ships. There have been numerous studies showing that they are the number one contributor to air pollution.
203	113	Delores	Taylor	Pdvgirl@gmail.com		WA	I'm disappointed that an entire industry has been placed under attack without scientific support that the glass industry is the cause of pollution without addressing all other industries that are worse polluters. Science should have been done first then meetings with all industries doing their bit to clean up the air not isolating one industry and turning a blind eye to other industries. Also unduly making this about public reaction rather than how science can make Portland a better place to live with all businesses not just two businesses being singled out. The point should be to provide clear and accurate directions that is fair to all.
204	126	Lia	Howe	lia.glass.dream@xplornet.ca	Lia's Glass Dreams re:Bullseye Glass	Canada	I am an artist using Bullseye glass. I have been using it for over 20 years. I have followed the company and its workings for a very long time. I find it very sad to hear that a government agency is choosing to impose " temporary" rules when there is NO scientific proof that this is the source of the areas problems. The science actually shows the opposite is true, please read the work of Dr. William LaCource of Alfred University. By using Bullseye as your scapegoat you are not dealing with the real problem, you are just looking for the easy out. Use some of your government money to study ALL businesses in the area, I am sure you will find another source. Thank You Lia Howe
205	208	Virginis	Rigney	Vnarts@aol.com	none	CA	Bulls eye glass is essential to hundreds of artists. They known as a quality company that offers quality product and as a company that supports the community of artisans in many ways. Please give careful thought and process to any regulation that will impact the service they provide
206	238	David	Kingman	david@kingmanarts.com	Kingman Arts	Oregon	Do not make temporary rules based on guesses. Determine toxic levels of metals involved and make permanent rules.
207	145	Helen	Balagot	helen.balagot@comcast.net	n/a	Washington	I urge legislators to please work with the manufacturers on a fair long term solution that will not put them out of business. Please don't create rules that hurt small businesses, hurt local employment and end up sending jobs overseas. I use art glass as a hobby and would be very sad to see yet another American-made product become unavailable while overseas manufactures, who pollute our earth so much more, only get more business because of it. Thank you, Helen Balagot
208	146	Phillip	Harris	newlifeglass@frontier.com		WA	I have been working with glass for 46 years. I have been using Bullseye Glass for 40 years. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Please reconsider your actions. Thank you, Phillip Harris NewLife Glass
209	134	Theodore	Rips	Tedrips@gmail.com	Individual	CA	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
210	6	Grey	Byrd	pkreisberg@spiritone.com	individual resident of Portland	OR	I don't understand why it is not patent that no business, big or small, or any individual be allowed to emit toxic substances into our atmosphere. I am sure the technology exists and is affordable, to mitigate chromium, cadmium, cobalt, arsenic, nickel, what have you! Why you need more time to figure this out is beyond me.
211	61	TERRY	LITTLE	tlittlehhord2@yahoo.com	buyer of bullseyes glass	n/a	Agree the environment and the health of people are important. That the health of the public and the workers at Bullseye is also important. The problem is temporary rules tend to just lay there and de facto become "law". I do not support this temporary ruling. I would support a third party of experts to set out a .program for confirming if there is a problem from wherever it is coming from and how to fix it. Thank you for your kind attention and consideration of my personal and independent opinion. Terry Little
212	226	John	Svenson	svenson@extremedreams.com	Extreme Dreams Fine Arts Gallery	Alaska	Please consider basing your decisions concerning the Bullseye glass Co. on hard science. They are THE coveted premier glass co. in the world. We are under contract with the State of Alaska to produce large glass murals for new schools, all Bullseye, so even we, as well as many others are indirectly impacted by your decisions. Tens of thousands of people as well as many millions of dollars are at stake. Thank you John Svenson
213	251	Jean	Dougherty	jeancaindougherty@hotmail.com	Individual	WA	Unless the Oregon DEQ can prove that air and soil levels are contaminated there should be no rules applied to the colored glass industry. Stained glass industries are beloved by many people over the centuries.
214	14	Annie	La Rue	mrs.annielarue@gmail.com		Oregon	The proposed rule changes lack quantifiable and enforceable violation definitions and monetary penalties. The lack of monetary penalties is a non-deterrent to industry emitters. The proposed rules lack even rudimentary mandatory public notification standards if a violation should occur. The proposed rules lack specific mandated and continuous science-based air quality monitoring requirements that are as stringent as or more stringent than the standards used by the EPA. The proposed rules should require any emission control devices to be properly maintained and inspected, and all records produced as a result of these inspections to be made public records. The proposed rules should give DEQ emergency authority to act prior to consulting with OHA to limit CAGM's use of metals of concern.
215	305	Claire	Zevnik	glassylady57@yahoo.com			As a customer and constant user of their glass, I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. This company has a long history of responsible operation and environmental safety. I believe that all regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. I strongly urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
216	70	Valerie	Larson-Lohr	larsonlohr@me.com	Fire and Glass Design	Texas	Please make your decision concerning the two glass manufacturers based on scientific fact, not political pressure or fear. The science is there is solid evidence that the manufacture of the glass does not put the population at risk. The recent OHA studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of these materials. As the OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people." OHA also concluded that current data shows "long-term health risks are relatively low." Further, DEQ found no health concerns due to cadmium, arsenic, total chromium or hexavalent chromium in the soil around Bullseye's factory. Soil samples showed soil levels were generally below naturally occurring or background levels of heavy metals. Keith Johnson, manager for the DEQ's Northwest Region Cleanup Program, stated, "[o]ngoing emissions from the Bullseye facility are not resulting in harmful impacts to soils around the facility." DEQ's and OHA's own statements provide that the rule is not needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest."
217	284	Kathy	Monti	glassykathy@yahoo.com	Prairie Light Art Glass Studio LLC	ND	I urge you to use science as a basis for your decisions regarding glass manufacturers. Many rely on the glass industry for their livelihood. Thank you, Kathy Monti
218	73	judy	Fisher	Judy@seejudyfisher.com	Ju-Ro Glass Creations	South Carolina	I am retired and supplement my in me with my fused glass creations. Already my business has been adversely affected by the stoppage of red glasses until an environ,eo tally safe solution is in place. Now, as I understand it, you are suggesting temporary cessation of green glass unti,such t,e as, who - you?, determine IF ther is even an issue with the Che,is try I'm green glass. ????? Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
219	28	Paul	Ruscher	ruscherp@lanecc.edu	Lane Community College	Oregon	please see attached.	deq-art-glass.docx	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/16326f11-46a9-45ae-a929-0da3afb8813b
220	190	Vikki	Stacey	staceycolourdiva@hotmail.co.uk	Glass artist	Buckinghamshire	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. I am a self employed glass artist and recently visited the beautiful city and surroundings of Portland, so understand that you want to keep it healthy. This is not the way and will only cause more city wide social problems as well. Please rethink and research before you act. Thank you Vikki. UK
221	287	Belinda	Schearf	bkschearf53@aol.com	Glass Art by MSM	Missouri	As a glass artist who is a customer of Bullseye Glass, I am dismayed to see the implementation of temporary rules that are targeted to specific companies based on such limited information. The imposition of these rules will greatly impact businesses and individuals around the world, that depend on Bullseye and Uroboros glass production. Therefore, I urge you to do further investigation and work with these companies to find a solution to this problem based on scientific fact, and not react to the emotional responses from the media and public. Your own technicians state that there is no public health concern based on recent testing. Therefore, putting a business at risk by implementing rules that are not based on fact, when so many people depend on it for their livelihood, is irresponsible. I urge you to reconsider these temporary rules.
222	307	David	Roberts	dsr@ihsstudios.com	IHS Studios Inc	Texas	My studio designs and installs stained glass windows in Texas and the surrounding states, although we do have several projects nationwide, including the Pentagon. We have done business with Bullseye for decades and have found their facility to be the cleanest glass manufacturing facility nationwide. I have no doubt that Bullseye operates with the utmost regard for the environment and public safety. When these safety concerns were brought to their attention, they voluntarily suspended their production of red glass pending modification of their equipment. This voluntary suspension unquestionably creates a hardship on their operations, a hardship on my company, and risks placing a hardship on Bullseye employees and the communities in which they live. It appears that these "temporary" rules which will prohibit the creation of green glass, cutting Bullseye's sales down to 50%, will unquestionably lead to job losses in the very community being protected. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bulleeye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. I would hope that the DEQ will act responsibly, as Bullseye does, and base their proposed rules on science rather than trying to gain publicity for "doing something" which may not solve the problem, and certainly would create unemployment.
223	22	katherine	saunders	katefsaunders@gmail.com	lewis creek glassworks	Oregon	I am writing concerning the recent Oregon Environmental Quality Commission's meeting to discuss Administrative Rules Chapter 340, regarding changing air quality rules in light of recent air quality issues in Portland. It is clear that some regulations need to be changed concerning air quality and manufacturers of colored glass in Oregon, but I think that any regulatory decisions must come from sound scientific study and are not hastily made reactions due to public pressure and speculation. Bullseye has recently concluded, after careful scientific research, that their use of chromium III is safe. Chromium III does not turn into chromium VI in their factory. To change the current air quality regulations to prohibit Bullseye from using chromium III is not based on any scientific data and will have a serious, perhaps fatal, impact on the ability of Bullseye to continue in business. Bullseye has already begun the process of installing better air quality systems and should be applauded for its immediate response to the air quality situation. Bullseye has been a conscientious and responsible business in Portland for many, many years. It employs a lot of people. Bullseye is recognized worldwide for its highest quality fusible glass, which it spent years developing. As a glass artist, I have already felt the impact of their voluntary suspension of certain glass colors. It will have a worldwide impact on many, many people. DEQ has a responsibility to both the citizens of Oregon and to the businesses that lie within the state. It will be possible to satisfy both groups if the process of making sound legal and science based decisions are followed. More time and input on the facts needs to happen, and judgement made only after all the scientific data is studied. Thank you for your time and consideration on this important issue. Kate Saunders Lewis Creek Glassworks P.O. Box 1007 Neskowin, Oregon 97149
224	218	Cassandra	Koslen	ckoslen@gmail.com		Oregon	The phrasing "likely emit" is troubling. It implies a lot of missing information. Instead of a temporary restrictions on small manufacturers, let's spend time and resources determining the true source(s) of the air toxics and then create regulations based on fact that will have long term effect.
225	170	Kathy	Littman	kathbass@yahoo.com		CA	please allow Bullseye glass to continue to make the wonderful product that makes my contribution to my Local Marketplace, a store that sells only North Bay, California local artist's products to the public. This small and wonderful business supports sustainable businesses and families at the most basic level and is in direct competition with businesses that only care about the bottom line and are not contributing to the quality of our local environment and the environment of the world.
226	299	Maria Gracia	Cabanilla	geneandmaria@comcast.net		Oregon	I have been an employee at Bullseye Glass for 21 years. I work and live in the communities affected, and it is obvious that we all want clean Air. I strongly support our local government to push for better environmental standards. But, I m worried that Bullseye Glass has become the scapegoat of a much larger issue. The DEQ and EPA have announced that there is no evidence of health risks ; so, why are they pushing for a sweeping temporary regulations that will put our jobs at risk? This temporary regulation will not protect the public – it will only harm Bullseye and all its employees. Please take a second look at this temporary regulations and please make a decision that is based on science and not politics. Not allowing us to use Cr(III) will have a huge economic impact to the workers of Bullseye Glass. I urge to work on regulations that make sense ; regulations that aim to protect all. I urge you to strive for fair treatment of all parties, based on law and science. I hope my voice also matters. Maria Gracia Cabanilla
227	41		Bonig	Nancy@bonig.com	Nancy Bonig Glass Studio	Colorado	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. I will go out of business if you close this factory because I use only their product. My friends in the glass industry will also have to close their doors, the friends I have at Bullseye will lose their jobs and all because of undocumented speculation. Please consider the economic impact on the immediate community and the larger art glass community.
228	3	Sara	Meissner	sarameissner21@hotmail.com		OR	Please pass the proposed rules to stop glass factories from using arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and nickel. I work across the street from Bullseye, and as a mother who was pregnant two years ago here, learning there are potential health issues/risks to my son or myself is alarming.
229	12	Pamela	Klebaum	klebaumpp@gmail.com		California	I urge the DEQ to evaluate the scientific evidence in this matter and not get tied up in the sensationalism stirred up by some members of the press. Bullseye is an environmentally conscious company and has always been stellar in its obligations to the public's health.
230	237	Barbara	Dutton	Redcj5@gmail.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. As a long time glass fused, I've used Bullseye glass and while I appreciate the concerns for public safety, I don't believe this temporary action is the best path to take.
231	283	Jim	Vermeer	jvermeer@q.com	Vermeer Glass Art	Iowa	Dear Regulators: The DEQ is in the process of making temporary rules not entirely based on science and with hysterical fingerpointing by the press to restrict Oregon art glass makers before they have all the facts on just what levels of metals used in glass are harmful. They propose to limit these job creators and Oregon ambassadors based on consumption of metals when the majority of what metals these factories consume does not pose a health risk because it is sealed in glass. Basing a rule on consumption and not emissions is just onerous rule making not based on facts. The DEQ should wait, determine what toxic levels are and make permanent rules based on science not hyteria and fine the factories for exeding those levels. Yes, we are from Iowa and yes we care about the environment; however, before over reacting, I hope you realize the impact of your actions for many individual businesses across the country. You are impacting the lives outside of Portland as well. Please move forward cautiously, as your decisions impact many lives both in Oregan and across the country and internationally. Thank You. Sincerely, David Kingman
232	162	Melody	Lynch	dmlynch2468@gmail.com	The Craft Guild of Dallas	Texas	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. This has far reaching impact and is not a decision that should be taken lightly or without due diligence. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Making such quick decisions without all the facts effects not only the numerous families who work for Bullseye but also thousands of artists across the country who rely on Bullseye glass, ALL of the glass, to make their glass art which provides their livelihood and that of their families.
233	109	Bonnie	Hinz	bonniehinz@gmail.com		MN	Bullseye glass supplies colored glass to thousands of independent artists, including myself. We depend on them for our livelihood. We all want the best environment possible but there has to be some common sense. These rules will put an extreme hardship on the glass manufacturers and artists when there is NO scientific reasoning to suggest that such a hardship is necessary. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon.
234	241	Beth	Tierney	Beth@seafocus.com	See through sand	Dorset	As I work with glass it is in my interest to see that production at these companies continues unimpeded. However, as a professional diver, I also have a strong focus on the environment and agree that ANY company releasing toxins into our environments should be responsible. The issue here seems to be that although there is proof that the long-term effects of these processes are minimal (The OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people." there is a lack of understanding about the issue at large. Surely, it would make more sense for the local authorities to work WITH the glass manufacturers to ensure safety standards are increased, that research into effects is increased and to inform everyone on the results of this research?
235	215	Deb	Fritz	Debfritzdesign@gmail.com	Fritzfires	Maryland	As a glass artist, I have prided myself on selecting Bullseye glass for its long history of responsible operation. I stand with them in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions should be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose misdirected rules.
236	86	Sherry Ann	Boyd-Yost	sherry_yost@lostartoriginals.com	Lost Art Originals	WA	I am a warm glass artist and am concerned that the cutting of production of Bullseye Glass would hinder my business as I use they're produce in a major amount of my art works. If the levels of metals are not of concern-able amounts, and a bag house is being installed to prevent the metals getting into the air? It seems very much over kill to keep them from producing much of there line of products, and Possibly putting them out of business. And UN-employing some very fine talent and important research in our industry. Bullseye has been a very progressive and evolving glass product company, always concerned with safety in there teaching and creating their fine glass product.. From my point of view. This would be a devastating loss. Please look into a reconsideration of these actions. Respectfully, Sherry Boyd-Yost	SBYpsw.2015.doc	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/6fe80c7a-e241-4529-9787-ff1929ccf7bc
237	209	Felicidad P	Morgan	chicamima@msn.com	chicamima designs	California	while i am an out of state glass artist, your decisionaffects my modest income significantly. I agree we need controls. in order for Uroboros and Bullseye, to be able to implement the controls in a cost effective manner, perhaps a rebate or subsidy like those given for solar energy would accomplish the goal quickly with a smaller impact. these are two USA manuafacturers we sure would ot see resort to exporting production plants etc. We need to support our USA small/medium businesses and our USA craft industries. many from other countries marvel at what we as Americans craft and we who do craft hand crafted American glass etc support our local businesses. this affects not only the glass industry but the other businesses that go hand in hand such as metals, gemstones, etc. This will affect the local Oregon economy as well as affect out of state commerce benefitting Oregon. If it must be done to protect our help, the least that could be offered is some type of subsidy or rebate to soften the blow for all of us and still accomplish the goals desired.
238	198	Shannon	Gill	deva2101@yahoo.com	Golden Cricket Studio	Florida	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues.A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseyes furnaces do not produce toxic chromium.We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
239	274	Kathy	Monti	glassykathy@yahoo.com	Prairie Light Art Glass Studio LLC	ND	Dear Jill, We, in the glass industry are depending on you to make decisions based on science, our livelihood depends on it. Thank you, Kathy Monti
240	232	Kevin	O'Brien	kevin@obrienstainedglass.com	O'Brien Stained Glass, Co., Inc.	Minnesota	Re Bullseye Glass: Please understand that the availability of these glass from the Oregon locations is very important to the artwork of related industries. Since there has been no demonstrated level of hazard from these operations..we urge that the state allow these products to be made while Bullseye does its part with the state to assure reasonable safeguards. Sincerely
241	50	Eric	Swanson	eric@ericswanson.com	Eric Swanson Photography	NM	As a consumer of Bullseye Glass products I have found this company to be responsible and concerned with the manufacture and sales of their product. I believe that this hearing needs to be based on actual air quality monitoring standards and real unbiased scientific study. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
242	194	Lori	Love	duncansue@verizon.net		MD	I am a glass artist - there are thousands of us worldwide that rely on Bullseye Glass products. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. You are not only threatening our creative endeavors and in many cases our livelihood by these proposed draft regulatory decisions, but you are also impacting the many employees of Bullseye Glass and their familys by hastily drafted regulations that can not be supported by the available science. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
243	293	Jerry	De Wald	Studio-66@midco.net	Studio 66 Custom Design Stained Glass	South Dakota	Please do not constrain the abilities of either Bullseye or Uroboros from producing glass without using thoroughly vetted scientific studies that prove without a doubt that their proccesses do in fact endanger the public. We have used their products for over 16 years and have suffered no ill effects. Their Glass is essential for the continuation of our business and livelihood!
244	83	Susan	Hobbs	trcat12@aol.com		Oregon	Please take the necessary time to study this issue ... do not race to decide something that probably is making you look foolish ... please don't let hysteria rule the day ... I am a fused glass artist and I do not believe that putting either company out of business is in the best interests of anyone ... please think carefully before you make any decisions
245	174	Abby	Robinson	abbymoranrobinson@gmail.com		Ohio	I'd think a state that was interested in the welfare of ALL it's citizens, economically as well as medically, could find a way to definitely measure whether these airborne pollutants were really caused by two small glass facilities. "More likely than not does not seem to me to be a compelling reason to put people out of work in your state, deny glass artists in the ability to make a living in many other states, an risk the complete closing of a business. Why not wait for something more definitive? Sincerely, Abby
246	160	Josephine	Geiger	josephine@jageigerstudio.com	J A GEIGER STUDIO, LLC	MN	Please, when considering the new regulations, please, please, use facts and not speculation. As a self-emplowed glass arist, I depend upon the fabulous art glass produced from art glass manufacturers across the country, like Uroboros, Bullseye, Spectrum, Kokomo, Youghegheny, Wissmach, etc. Please use the facts not fear inspired commentary in determining the regulations these small companies have to inplement, because those costs will trickle down and impact my, and countless other artists, livlihoods as well.
247	247	Emily	Carlson	mle@solsticeartsource.com		Illinois	Open the document to see the effects of the process	12916101_606737696144139_8805361366631670536_o-1.jpg	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/3aaba488-0717-46a6-8357-e42927a1d5b6
248	133	Mary	Weigand	mary_weigand@yahoo.com	Citizen of Oregon since1954	Oregon	WE NEED RESPONCIBLE SCIENTIFIC PROVEN DEQ ENVIORNMENT CHANGES - NOT PANIC DRIVEN WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CHANGES: Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rule
249	95	Joanne	Merrick	sculpturedlife@gmail.com	Winds of Art Studio	Oregon	Bullseye glass has been doing business responsibly for many, many years. It has been serving the art community and has supplied necessary product to bring about much joy and beauty into our communities and lives. Any changes should be made upon facts, nothing less. There should be NO temporary change nor change at all, without substantial proof of facts. NO wild cannon decisions made on off the cuff information. Provide facts or back off. There is no room for strong arm tactics here. We are watching and we are listening. We are standing against irrational decisions. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
250	211	William	Goldsmith	corgisnk@bgproductions.com	Bill Goldsmith Productions	PA	To Whom it may concern: Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. We sincerely appreciate any support you can provide right now !

251	15	Matthew	Preusch	mpreusch@kellerrohrback.com	Keller Rohrback L.L.P.	California		KRPublic Comment CAGM.pdf	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/bb64fa56-3bbe-4dbd-8745-a57a85883230
252	309	sharon	genasci	sgenasci@spiritone.com	NWDA Air Quality Committee	Oregon	Draft Written Testimony from NWDA Air Quality Committee to the EQC on Air Toxics Temporary Rulemaking for Small Colored Glass Manufacturers, 3.22.16 Thank you for the opportunity to send written comments from the NWDA Air Quality Committee, to offer our views of your proposed temporary rules limiting metals emissions from small art glass manufacturers. First, we would like to remind the EQC that our group, formerly the NWDA Health & Environment Committee, worked closely with ODEQ from 1997 through 2001, when Dr. Robert Amundson, our consultant worked with our NW Portland neighbors to gather VOC data using bucket monitors during strong industrial odor events. Later he put DEQ beakers on neighbors porches to gather dust falling through the air near ESCO Corporation, a multinational foundry on the edge of the neighborhood built in 1913. The particulates in the dust were analyzed for heavy metals. These monitoring projects over the years provided evidence of lead, manganese, cadmium, arsenic, chrome Vl at dangerous levels for the public health of nearby residents. Four years ago ODEQ was present during negotiations with ESCO for a Good Neighbor Agreement (GNA) that would reduce ESCO's emissions by 20 per cent, but with no agreement to monitor the three plants to assure the neighbors that new controls were in fact reducing emissions even that amount. In all those years of working with ODEQ there was no attempt at any rule making to reduce heavy metals in our public airshed. We welcome ODEQ's belated concern, but the proposed temporary rules only for glass manufacturers is clearly not enough ; not nearly enough. Now is the time to write rules that apply to all industrial polluters emitting dangerous, heavy metals statewide. Please step up and give us the protection we need for our children and ourselves in Oregon. California and Washington state both have much better air regulations to protect public health. We are asking ODEQ to lead the way now to a higher standard for controls of heavy metals than Washington & California. Sharon Genasci, Chair, NWDA Air Quality Committee
253	122	Carol	Conway	handmedownlions@msn.com		Colorado	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
254	36	Juanita	Remien	jmremien@gmail.com		Oregon	I support setting operation standards for glass maker manufacturers to require best available filtering technology installed. I support making these rules permanent. Additionally I would like Oregon to adopt comparable standards for air quality to California and Washington, including barring diesel engines.
255	108	Matt	Vinci	mvinci72@gmail.com		CA	To whom it may concern, It strikes me that Bullseye Glass has been there for 40 years. Without rancor I say this: If there are dangerous emmissions from the glass manufacturing process, with certainty you must have a mountain of evidence of the harm it has done to the local population. If you don't have that evidence then isn't the role of your agency to inform the public of that fact, rather than shudder Bullseye? After 40 years there would have to be a lot of unambiguous material evidence of environmental harm and a long standing surge in health problems related to the compounds in question. Again, Isay this without rancor. I'm not trying to goad anyone there. However, after 40 years, the evidence wouldn't be subtle. It would be a screaming mountian. If that is not there, then enacting rules that would put these glass manufacturers out of business is just wrong. Additionally, not informing the public of the obvious fact that there is no large scale, long standing surge in very dire health problems is irresponsible here. My two cents. Sincerely, Matthew Vinci Glass Artist
256	93	Phyllis	Crawley	pgcrawley@hotmail.com	1410 Fahrenheit - a glass artist	Indiana	Hello. As a professional glass artist, I would like to say that I don't think you are being responsible about Bullseye Glass Co I'm not sure who is causing this revolt, but I suggest you use your head to look over the scientific information you have been provided. If you close Bullseye down even for 4 weeks, you not only put the producers out of work, you put tens of thousands of artists out of work as well. This would have a huge impact on the economy. Not only in the US,but also across the world. Please think of this logically. Thank you.
257	25	Paul	Ruscher	ruscherp@lanecc.edu	Lane Community College	Oregon	I am writing as an atmospheric scientist who has taught graduate level atmospheric chemistry before. I am writing in support of the need for new requirements for monitoring and modeling with respect to the possibility of heavy metal air contamination near manufacturing facilities that are involved in production of colored art glass. Such contaminants are demonstrated health hazards and even though EPA has not yet necessarily established federal guidelines for minimum acceptable risk for all of these contaminants, it does not mean that they are not harmful. Public health studies on the risk of hexavalent chromium and cadmium in particular, are numerous, and DEQ's proposed rule is a good start to address them. There are over 6,000 studies on cadmium and other heavy metals in the literature just since 2012, and over 800 on hexavalent chromium. My primary concerns with the proposed rule is the lack of specificity as to the monitoring and modeling requirements imposed on the manufacturers and the lack of specification as to filtration. There is a great burden on DEQ to use best practices here with respect to each of these items, and there is also uncertainty as to what will be acceptable. For example, atmospheric stability and wind direction and speed will all have a bearing on the resultant plume for any escaping contaminant from any source. Under stagnant flow conditions, so common in the Pacific northwest, concentrations can be quite localized to the facility and quite intense. Dilution will naturally occur when ventilating winds and mixing occurs under less stable conditions, perhaps reducing the risk near the facility, but broadening the plume. The proposed rule could be strengthened if some details as to appropriate modeling and monitoring procedures are specified. Both mobile and fixed sampling should be contemplated for known large sources. In addition, I am concerned about the apparent restriction that the rule defines with respect to two facilities in Portland. Are there other facilities in the state which should also be required to follow the rule? What if new facilities are started in other areas? The rule should be clarified to indicate that any facility that uses these materials, and perhaps not just in the quantities mentioned, should be subject to the rule. Finally, there may be motivation here by people in the Portland metropolitan area to create a regional or county air pollution authority. This makes some sense in the context of an airshed, which does not respect county boundaries. If there were a true regional approach here, it would have to involve multiple counties in the Portland area, including those north of the Columbia River. My comments are not designed to be representative of those of my employer or my professional affiliation with the A. M. S. Paul Ruscher, PhD, Fellow, American Meteorological Society (A. M. S.) Dean, Science Division, Lane Community College
258	8		Richardson	current@gorge.net	n/a	Oregon	To whom it may concern, I welcome DEQ's actions to reduce harmful emissions of certain heavy metals from some art glass facilities -- but I disagree with the notion that closing this regulatory loophole is sufficient. DEQ seems to believe that investigations of impairments to our air, water and soil aren't really worth bothering about; and that since the public is alarmed at this one particular instance -- art glass manufacturers in Portland -- a very specific patch on existing regulations is all that's needed. This would completely miss the point. The public needs a more vigorous DEQ and a Department director more zealous for the health of the public and of our natural resources. We need an agency that actively seeks out impairments that compromise our environment and human health, and then acts with resolve to alleviate them. As an Oregonian living near a railroad company's creosote-emitting tie plant, I see, smell and feel (have headaches) the impacts of impaired air quality on a regular basis. DEQ has done nothing substantial to support my community's health or environmental integrity. So it comes unfortunately as no surprise that the agency was so lax in seeking out heavy metal contamination in Portland neighborhoods. The human beings in my community, as in the Portland neighborhoods near the glass manufacturers, just don't seem to matter to DEQ. It should not take front-page news articles to motivate DEQ employees and leaders to do their jobs! I strongly urge DEQ officials to reform their agency into one that stands up to polluters, and stands up for the health of Oregonians first and foremost. I ask DEQ not to begin regulating a few heavy metals from a specialized manufacturing sector in Portland, but rather to strengthen all harmful heavy metals emitted by all industries -- indeed, by any sources -- in all Oregon cities and towns. Respectfully, Dan Richardson The Dalles, Oregon
259	196			oags@cfl.rr.com	Glass Artisian	Florida	If you are really concerned, check out the glass manufacturers in Germany, Italy, Poland to name a few that have been creating some of the most sought after art glass in the world. Family generations after generations and THEY LIVE REALLY LONG lives. Get off your HighHorses folks. Get a life.
260	164	Laurie	Fossier-Mills	Beachgecko@mac.com	BeachGecko Glass Art Studio	Australia	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
261	91	Becky	Ratliff	rbc@ratbone.net	Glass artist	Montana	I am appalled at the proposed knee jerk temporary regs. We all want things environmentally well done.... but not on non scientific rash actions that impact our lively hood, jobs and risk company reputations. Get your facts and then act accordingly but stop the rush to act without facts!
262	165	Carol	Bishop	carol@bishopcards.com		OR	I am of course concerned about the high pollution levels of metals as first reported but have also realized that later testing has shown lower levels. There seems to be confusion and/or conflicting measurements done. Before forcing these glass companies to make major outlays on equipment, I do think the science must be done and confirmed, including showing that those facilities are the ones that produce the metals emissions. We don't want the companies to have to close down if there are other ways to limit such pollution, and we do need to ascertain they are indeed the source of such emissions. Take your time and do the investigation thoroughly before making decisions.
263	216	Deb	Fritz	Debfritzdesign@gmail.com	Fritzfires	Maryland	As a glass artist, I have prided myself on selecting Bullseye glass for its long history of responsible operation. I stand with them in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions should be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose misdirected rules.
264	105	Scott	Jenkins	tsjenkins@mac.com		Oregon	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. We sincerely appreciate any support you can provide right now.
265	300	María	Aragon	maricruzaragon@gmail.com	Independent	Mexico	I know that Bullseye art glass manufacturer follows all the rules that science says. I use this glass from your country and it is a shame that you even think in closing it. Think where the pollution problems really are, and please if you believe on science, follow what is saying.
266	65	Janis	Capraro	jcapraro@verizon.net	Mountain Wave Studio	California	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
267	234	Jacque	Rowland	jac_pt@yahoo.com		NM	Scientific evidence clearly indicates these furnaces won’t turn Cr(III) into Cr(VI). If they did, the glass would be ruined. I am really bothered by the idea that the state doesn't really look at the evidence but yet they cause much worse things on their watch for instance the water and severe damage to people from the lead pipes in Michigan.
268	125	Renato	Foti	renatofoti@gmail.com	trio design glass	on	I use bullseye glass exclusively for my livelihood. I did read the letter re CR 3 , i would ask that you allow Bullseye glass time & ability to allow for modifications or prove the safety of CR3 since it is a critical element in the making of glass used for 100's of raisins globally.
269	49	Amy	Ferber	Amyferber@bullseyeglass.com	Bullseye	OR	Glad I can comment, buy glass!
270	7	Christina	Thompson	thompson.portland@gmail.com		OR	Please include hexavalent Chromium to the concern list.
271	107	Carolyn	Ratliff	cratliff1957@bellsouth.net	self	Alabama	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Science, not political issues should govern regulatory decisions. According to a leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. I strongly urge DEQ to depend on science and fact, and not to rush to impose poorly written and misdirected rules.
272	18	Concerned	Parent	voiceofathena@yahoo.com		Oregon	I support Clean Air AND Bullseye & Uroboros — Glass Makers are NOT the Enemy I am a SE Portland native, an artist, and a mother. I care deeply about these issues, and support a rational fact based approach to reducing air toxics that does NOT target and destroy the art glass world. I advocate for the State, Regulators, and City of Portland to stop feeding the media blitz, and work cooperatively with ALL industrial source points equally and rationally in a way that improves air quality AND protects the lively hood of employees and artists. Hasty regulations, made in reaction to fear and misinformation, which are dominating public discourse, do not protect public health. The EPA has standards. Part of the current misinformation is that nothing is known about glass manufacturing emissions. When in truth quantitative standards have already been created. Part of the controversy lies in that periodic or pot furnaces are not part of the source category. The final rule applies only to glass manufacturing plants that operate continuous furnaces and use one or more of the glass manufacturing metal HAP as raw materials.and therefore these standards have never been applied to the artisan glassmakers in Portland. But the formulas and acceptable levels already exist. The Glass Manufacturing area source category was listed for regulation under section 112(c)(3) for its contribution of the following urban HAP: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, and nickel. The glass manufacturing final rule requires each new or existing affected furnace to comply with a PM emission limit of 0.1 gram per kilogram (g/kg) (0.2 pound per ton (lb/ton)) of glass produced or an equivalent metal HAP emission limit of 0.01 g/kg (0.02 lb/ton) of glass produced. What would make more sense, and seem reasonable for all sides, is that with the lack of DEQ standards, they not scramble to reinvent the wheel, and fall back on using EPA standards to calculate the allowable usage of these metals, allow Bullseye Glass and Uroboros to resume operations within this usage while continuing to report raw materials consumption and monitor ambient air. In addition, DEQ should continue to work with these glass companies, which have been more than willing to cooperate, to make improvements that would reduce overall emissions in a fact based and scientific way, allowing them to remain financially viable employers while investing in filtration and control technology that will improve the industry as a whole and ensure public health. These standards are available here: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/area/fr26de07.pdf As I have followed the unfolding of this story, and watched neighbors griped with fear turn away from civil discourse and solutions, instead embracing misinformation and anger to attack and suppress any dissent to their narrative, going so far as to personally attack, slander and threaten – I have been afraid to speak out in dissent, and that is a terrifying thing in a democracy. The loudest voice is not always the most accurate, it takes all of us to make this city what it is — we need to stop letting fear divide us and focus on facts and whole truths. Sincerely, A Concerned Portlander, Mother, and Artist
273	80	anne	mcelhinney	anne3mac@yahoo.com		hawaii	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Since there is no immediate threat to community safety, please consider more longterm solution.
274	59	John	Mckinley	217682LR@hotmail.com	Glass House	Oregon	These glass companies make so much money and have hundreds of products to sell, not having greens or a few other colors will not greatly impact their operation. They will suffer a little less profits but the public will have piece of mind that they are not being poisoned.
275	210	Heike	Brachlow	Heike.brachlow@network.rca.ac.uk	Self employed artist	UK	Rather than effectively shutting down the small scale coloured glass businesses (which millions of artists all over the world rely on for their glass, and who have a significant number of employees who would likely loose their jobs), why not give them time to improve their systems? They have been operating for decades - a few months extra is not going to make a huge difference. Unless it can be scientifically proven that their emissions are so dangerous for the environment that there is no other choice, of course.
276	286	Min-Yi	chen	michael@vetri.com.tw	Vetri glass art company	台灣	I use Uroborus fusing glass only. I will also out of business if this company closed. I wish this company continuing manufacture and supply fusing glass to my company in the codition of environmental frendly.
277	138	Alberto	Romañach		The Ohio State University	Ohio	Bullseye Glass is telling me that they are completely willing to sign an agreement that achieves ALL of DEQ's goals and allows both parties to "respond promptly to new factual information." If it were up to me, instead of making "temporary" policies based on a few samples, I would be directly communicating with a professional from Bullseye Glass and taking MANY more samples, samples you can both agree on. I'm just a student who's only interacted with Bullseye once or twice, but from the concern they've expressed, I firmly believe that after enough research and with a lot of scientific background on the matter, Bullseye would be more than happy to implement new company policies to promote your goals, but only if it's directly based on the evidence that you find together. That's the key to cooperation. You both have to WORK TOGETHER before making any kind of decision, temporary or permanent.
278	131	Louise	Erskine	erskine.real.estate@juno.com	self	MA	I disagree with the temporary rules limiting metals emissions for your art class community. They have been good neighbors and provide a valuable service to both Oregon and the world wide art community. As with any scientific endeavor the data should be obtained before any effective plan of progress is begun. Please consider my request. Thank you for the time.
279	46	Sally	Alferink Tez	Sallytez@yahoo.com	Bullseye neighbor	Oregon	In addition to arsenic, chromium, and cadmium, please also set a temporary rule for the regulation of other toxic materials used such as lead which was elevated in the air monitoring done in October 2015. Please ensure that Bullseye uses the best possible technology for any filter installation and pays for this to essentially close the 2007 exemption it got.
280	243	Lisa	Barnett	inthemiddleofnowhere123@yahoo.com		Oregon	Please do NOT pass this temporary rule. This ruling is not based on scientific evidence, and will seriously damage the business of Bullseye glass as well as its thousands of employees. I want environmental safety but do not want hastily prepared "fixes" that cause unnecessary hardship for our citizens. Please don't act so hastily and take the time to make a rule after getting in all the facts. Thank you, Lisa Barnett
281	213	Eugenia	Olson	rnpcn@comcast.net		Washington	There is no urgency. There has not been enough time taken for a complete and comprehensive study. There are toxic metals used in the production of some glasses but a knee-jerk response is not warranted at this time. Further studies and a comprehensive plan of action by both the glass companies and the agencies involved is a better plan for both the public and the economics involved in the issue. Thank you for your consideration.
282	74	Karen	Reece	beadkrap@yahoo.com	beadKRap	Colorado	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Thank you for your consideration.
283	147	Rene	Ellis	reneellis101@gmail.com	Rene Ellis Studio	Minnesota	It makes no sense to shut down, even temporarily, 2 small glass makers because it is "likely they will produce more pollutants"; than other manufacturers in the area. This proposal is not based on sound analysis, is grossly discriminative against small business, and has the appearance of political grand standing, not problem solving. I am a working glass artist in Saint Paul, Minnesota. I have been paying my bills through sale of my glass art using Bulleye products for over 16 years. I consider my art as Green Art;. I have always been proud of the company's ethics, standards, and quality. I spend thousands of dollars on their products because I know that they are consciences of environmental, manufacturing, and safety processes. They are right now in the process, voluntarily, to ensure even higher standards of manufacturing. Bullseye Glass has been, and continues to be a business that is responsible to the environment, its staff, its community in Portland, and all the glass artists across the country that depend on Bullseye Glass for their lively hood. I urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. What motive is there in forcing them out of business? You put them out of business, you put me, and thousands of other artists across the country out of business. You also put the small businesses that the glass artists depend on in their own communities out of business. We have only 2, here in Saint Paul, MN and our entire community depends on them for Bullseye Glass.
284	258	Lisa	Hilquist	lhilquist@gmail.com	self	CA	Please do not destroy two small businesses by over-compensating the flaws in your laws. If the regulations were for much larger glass manufacturers, and these levels met, by smaller companies, are the laws not flawed? Why should smaller companies be penalized. Get the facts about furnace emissions instead of reacting to inflamed public ignorance. Don't you think the employees would be dropping like flies if the emissions were so hazardous as perceived?
285	54	Stephen	Edwards	glassman@alfred.edu	Professor Emeritus Alfred University	New York	I am a emeritus professor of glass art and engineering at Alfred University. There is absolutely no evidence of a threat to public health by Bullseye and Urobos glass plants in Portland. They provide valuable jobs and resources to the region that will be threatened if these regulations are put in place. These chrome bearing glasses and cadmium selenium glasses are perfectly safe to melt !!!!!
286	26	Paul	Ruscher	ruscherp@lanecc.edu	Lane Community College	Oregon	I am writing as an atmospheric scientist who has taught graduate level atmospheric chemistry before. I am writing in support of the need for new requirements for monitoring and modeling with respect to the possibility of heavy metal air contamination near manufacturing facilities that are involved in production of colored art glass. Such contaminants are demonstrated health hazards and even though EPA has not yet necessarily established federal guidelines for minimum acceptable risk for all of these contaminants, it does not mean that they are not harmful. Public health studies on the risk of hexavalent chromium and cadmium in particular, are numerous, and DEQ's proposed rule is a good start to address them. There are over 6,000 studies on cadmium and other heavy metals in the literature just since 2012, and over 800 on hexavalent chromium. My primary concerns with the proposed rule is the lack of specificity as to the monitoring and modeling requirements imposed on the manufacturers and the lack of specification as to filtration. There is a great burden on DEQ to use best practices here with respect to each of these items, and there is also uncertainty as to what will be acceptable. For example, atmospheric stability and wind direction and speed will all have a bearing on the resultant plume for any escaping contaminant from any source. Under stagnant flow conditions, so common in the Pacific northwest, concentrations can be quite localized to the facility and quite intense. Dilution will naturally occur when ventilating winds and mixing occurs under less stable conditions, perhaps reducing the risk near the facility, but broadening the plume. The proposed rule could be strengthened if some details as to appropriate modeling and monitoring procedures are specified. Both mobile and fixed sampling should be contemplated for known large sources. In addition, I am concerned about the apparent restriction that the rule defines with respect to two facilities in Portland. Are there other facilities in the state which should also be required to follow the rule? What if new facilities are started in other areas? The rule should be clarified to indicate that any facility that uses these materials, and perhaps not just in the quantities mentioned, should be subject to the rule. Finally, there may be motivation here by people in the Portland metropolitan area to create a regional or county air pollution authority. This makes some sense in the context of an airshed, which does not respect county boundaries. If there were a true regional approach here, it would have to involve multiple counties in the Portland area, including those north of the Columbia River. My comments are not designed to be representative of those of my employer or my professional affiliation with the A. M. S. Paul Ruscher, PhD, Fellow, American Meteorological Society (A. M. S.) Dean, Science Division, Lane Community College
287	44	Paul	McNulty	mcpaulty@yahoo.com	Bullseye Glass Co (R&E)	Oregon	My employer quoted scientific evidence of Dr. LaCourse as proof that Cr (III) doesn't convert to Cr (VI) in the 'Glass melting process'. BUT - the report fails to mention any form of Chrome bypassing the melt due to being a very fine particulate. Can non-glass bound (raw?) Cr (III) become Cr VI? It is all assumptions at this point. I highly recommend the following test to prove/disapprove prior to the new temporary rules: Run 1%-1.5% Cr (III) batch from non cullet source. Collect 12 hour exhaust as per: EPA Method 0061 (Hexavalent Chromium (Cr+6) in Stack Gas Emissions) Analytical proof ~ rather than a report from a board professor. Thanks, -P
288	64	Peggy	O'Hara	Pegleg7240@gmail.com	Pegleg's Treasures	NY	I am a glass artist who will be directly affected by your decisions. I sell a Celtic knot bowl made specifically with Bullseye green glass. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
289	271	Mark	Ditzler	mark@markditzler.com	Mark Ditzler Glass Studio	Washington	Please allow Bullseye and Uroboros Glass companies to correct air quality problems without curtailing their production. Bullseye and Uroboros are responsible companies who will do the right thing if given the chance. Also, my glass business depends on a reliable and affordable supply of their glass products to stay in business. Please work with these companies to achieve acceptable air quality standards without harming the art glass industry. Thank you
290	16	Robert	LeChevallier	rlc@buckley-law.com	attorney for Northstar GlassWorks, Inc.	Oregon	See attached testimony of Abe Fleischman, president of Northstar Glassworks, Inc.	Northstar Glassworks, Inc testimony.docx	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/184a7331-e35a-4d78-b24e-591cbf8348f1
291	231	Arlene	Dean	aglassbash@comcast.net		WA	Let's not use jump to conclusions. Let's take the time to look into what is really happening and NOT ruin a business before we know the full facts.
292	149	Daniel	Head	danielhead@savoystudios.com	Savoy Studios	Oregon	I strongly support Bullseye and Uroboros's ability to create the colored art glass that we use in our studio. Unrealistic limitations based on fear and not science will only harm artists working with their products.
293	304	Ralph	Shuping	ryshuping3@gmail.com		OR	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
294	188	Ann	Nash	anash@manzanodayschool.org	Manzano Day School	New Mexico	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
295	202	kathleen	White	kathleenwhite101@gmail.com		CA	I am a glass artist, and very concerned about the future of art glass should these temporary rules become effective. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Thank You Kathleen White
296	110	Cheryl	Sattler	cherylsattler@yahoo.com		Florida	Please see attached file.	Bullseye environmental letter.docx	https://data.oregon.gov/views/trwb-z8xe/files/36c34608-d790-43c1-807e-b50e14e9efc2
297	17	Shawn	Ingersoll	Shawnwingersoll@gmail.com		Oregon	It is my sincere opinion that the metals listed on this temporary rule are lacking. It is highly important that all toxic metals (or materials that we do not yet know their impact, include the precautionary principle here) used at these facilities be known to EQC and DEQ and that they are added to this list. In addition, any new metals in the future that have not been used in the past or currently should also be reviewed for inclusion when and if that time comes. They may be able to install a bag on one furnace, make the glass with the limited defined metals at this furnace, and still use other unfiltered furnaces on other toxic metals that were never included. Allowing for continued human and environmental damage despite this ruling. Questions related to this concern: What if they increase production of other metals like Lead?
298	111	David	Colton	dhcnic@comcast.net		California	Bullseye Glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen in the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. I support Bullseye Glass because I am a member of the glass art community and because our family has a son who resides in Portland. This issue affects the economic health of Bullseye Glass, a Portland business. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. I urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. I appreciate any support you can provide at this time.
299	156	frances	squillari	gla1720@hotmail.com	1950	Florida	bulleye' glass furnaces do not produce chromium,rely on scientific facts
300	158	John	Emery	jpreston43@cfl.rr.com	PRESTON STUDIOS	Florida	Like many other stained glass artists I am VERY concerned about the possible loss of a major national treasure like Bullseye. The glass arts have been dealt a severe blow nationally and internationally by the Great Recession. Losing Bullseye would only add the decline in this uniquely AMERICAN tradition - where art glass is not just for churches, but for people to live with in their homes and daily lives: http://www.prestonstudios.com

301	224	Leslie	Wallace	lesliew@sonic.net	small business owner	California	I have worked with Bullseye Glass for over 10 years. I use their product exclusively in my home based buisness. If their glass becomes scarce, prices will rise. I can afford neither a scarcity of my glass or a significant rise in cost. I will be put out of business as soon as my supply is depleted. I cannot substitute another supplier, my inventory is exclusively Bullseye for technical reasons. You cannot mix glass. It scientifically does not work. I use their product because of it is constant quality control. I have the same product now that I did ten years ago. Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I have visited the Portland facility many times. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules. Not only does your decision affect the Portland facility, it's repercussions will be felt Globally. So many artists depend on Bullseye Glass. California has managed to chase many businesses away with ill thought legislation. Please think carefully before you lose a valuable and unique business. Portland is a hub for creative thinking, a reason that I visit as often as I can. I can tell you that Bullseye is a major reason to visit, my trips would be curtailed if they are no longer there as a source. Who is spearheading this hate? You have scientific documentation to back a business, yet you obviously are choosing to bend an ear to someone crying wolf. Please think carefully before you act, the ripples of your decisions will spread further than you can see at this moment.
302	43	Karen	Young	kareneyoung@yahoo.com		California	Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission should only consider a temporary rule when credible evidence demonstrates a rule is needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest." This is not the case here.
303	57	Sara	Dolph CPA	sara@saradolphcpa.com	Wilson Design Studio	Tennessee	Bullseye has always been one of the most publicly responsible companies in the United States. Are you people unaware of the scientific evidence that supports Bullseye's position? You should base your decisions on science rather than some ill-founded biased positions of selected persons. I would think that Bullseye is an important and contributing member of your business community and you would want to work with them to solve any problems, rather than try to drive them out of business. You must also be completely oblivious to how many persons they employ and how many families you would impact by driving them out of business, not to mention the thousands of us glass artists that depend upon their products. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon.
304	246	Lori	Blessing	Loribless@gmail.com	D"Verre Kilnformed Art Glass	Idaho	I am a glass artist in Idaho. I feel that Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules
305	180	Cyndy	Later	cyanaurora50@gmail.com		California	Bullseye glass has a long history of responsible operation. I stand with Bullseye Glass in its efforts to continue operations as a responsible citizen of the social and business community of Portland, Oregon. Regulatory decisions must be based on science, not political issues. A leading scientist, Dr. William LaCourse of Alfred University, has said Bullseye's furnaces do not produce toxic chromium. We urge DEQ to rely on science and fact, and not to rush to impose these poorly written and misdirected rules.
306	265	Jean	Scholtz	jean.scholtz@mindspring.com		Oregon	I urge DEQ to not impose temporary restrictions on the rules limiting metals emissions from the processes of art glass manufactures. The science shows that their current processes are adequate or being addressed at this time. DEQ should focus on finding a policy that is scientifically supported to put into place permanently. A temporary order will actually not be temporary and will most likely eliminate two companies and many jobs in the Portland area.
307	60	Joey	Fisher	Joey_t77@hotmail.com		VA	Please do not prevent Bullseye from continuing to mfg glass. It would eliminate half of their product line and cause serious issues in the stained glass and fused glass industry.
308	115	Michael	Beaman	mb@beamanarch.com	Beaman Architecture Ltd.	Oregon	The State of Oregon should be working to find relative common ground in complex issues where public safety is involved and where forthright businesses are concerned. Please accept these comments in support of Bullseye Glass's position: 1. This is an improper use of temporary rule making. The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission should only consider a temporary rule when credible evidence demonstrates a rule is needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest." This is not the case here. Hastily adopting temporary rules make it appear that agencies are being proactive, but these rules do not protect the public, and makes Bullseye a scapegoat. There is no evidence that emissions from the facility pose any acute health risk nor that Bullseye is fully responsible for the emissions, nor that Bullseye's 42 years of operation have resulted in areas of health concerns in the vicinity of the facility. If the EQC were to implement this temporary rule, numerous significant sources of toxic air pollution will remain from many unregulated businesses. Thus, the temporary rule would not effectively protect the public. 2. There is no immediate health risk. The recent OHA studies found that there was no increased cancer risk in SE Portland attributed to Bullseye's use of these materials. As the OHA states on its website, "it is unlikely that the level of metals detected in the air would cause any immediate health problems for people." OHA also concluded that current data shows "long-term health risks are relatively low." Further, DEQ found no health concerns due to cadmium, arsenic, total chromium or hexavalent chromium in the soil around Bullseye's factory. Soil samples showed soil levels were generally below naturally occurring or background levels of heavy metals. Keith Johnson, manager for the DEQ's Northwest Region Cleanup Program, stated, "[o]ngoing emissions from the Bullseye facility are not resulting in harmful impacts to soils around the facility." DEQ's and OHA's own statements provide that the rule is not needed to prevent "serious prejudice to the public interest." 3. Instead of a hasty and discriminatory temporary rule, DEQ should focus on permanent rules, based on scientific investigation and a thoughtful process to address Portland's air quality issues. Bullseye will support that effort. These rules should give clear directions to businesses and support the safety of the community. New regulations should cover all businesses, not just target minor specific industries. 4. With minor changes to correct scientific errors and omissions in the currently proposed rule, Bullseye Glass is willing to sign an agreement that achieves all of DEQ's goals and allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. 5. The haste to adopt technically flawed temporary rules makes it appear that Oregon is repressive to manufacturing businesses and does not care about jobs. 6. Oregon agencies should strive for proper and fair treatment of all parties, based on law, rather than responding to public concern resulting from sensational blog posts and test results with partial data and no peer review. 7. The health and safety of the community can be achieved without forcing these businesses to close. 8. If Bullseye Glass is forced to stop producing 50% of its glass products for 6 months, without regard to ongoing test results or added emission controls, Bullseye's survival is at risk. We support an agreement that is similar to the temporary rules, but unlike the temporary rules, also allows DEQ and Bullseye to respond promptly to new factual information. 9. Bullseye Glass Co. has a payroll of $7.5 million dollars. 130 Portland families and 20 other Bullseye families depend on Bullseye for jobs. Hundreds of Oregon artists and craftspeople depend upon Bullseye products. Tens of thousands of artists across the United States and the world depend upon Bullseye products.
309	4	Portland resident					I am very worried about its effect on our health and the duration of our exposure to these toxic materials. I am definitely in support of rules that would help prevent these toxic materials from compromising our air quality.
310	291	Kathy	Engholm	comment@indigocrow.co		Oregon	Of course, the physical health and safety of our community should be a top priority. Economic health is a lower priority, but should not be sacrificed unnecessarily. The proposed rules under consideration are not properly crafted to solve the overall problem of toxic chemical pollutants in the Portland area, but instead appear to place unjustified limitations on two small, locally-owned businesses while ignoring other industries with greater emissions. Uroboros and Bullseye were both founded in Portland over 40 years ago and have been part of our community through thick and thin. They sell their products world-wide and bring that revenue back to Portland in the form of jobs, taxes, education, and support of the arts. Flint, Michigan has lead in their water because they lost their manufacturing jobs, had to cut costs, and made bad decisions. Don't gut a Portland industry "just in case", especially when they have been long-term good citizens and are eager to work together with the rest of the community to research and resolve this issue.