NC0003760_Correspondence_19800515

NPDES DOC /WENT SCANNIN` COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0003760
DuPont Kinston facility
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Approval
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
May 15, 1980
This document is printed on reuse paper - iignore any
content on the' esrerse side

Ater of urt emul na
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN pepurtnirnt of J118ticr
ATTORNEY GENERAL
P. O. Box 629
RALEIGH
27602
15 May 1980
MEMO TO: Page Benton
Bill Mills
Jim Mulligan
Becky French FROM: Harvey Stuart NS
Assistant Attorney General
RE:
A. C. Turnage
Forrest Westall
Bill Ross/Thomas Hilliard
Carol Bryson
E. I. duPont de Nemours and Company, Inc.,
Kinston Plant, NPDES Permit No. NC 0003760
Administrative Hearing (AH WQ 79-6)
Attached you will find a copy of a letter from Mr. E. I. Long
which formally withdraws duPont's hearing request in the above -
referenced matter.
This action comes as a result of the settlement of this
matter in accordance with the settlement terms contained in my
letters to duPont dated March 7, 1980 and April 30, 1980.
It is my understanding that the permit should be revised
to incorporate the changes described in my above -referenced
letters and that the revised permit will now go to public
notice.
If you have any questions concerning the terms of the
revised permit please contact me. You may recall that there
was a previous mix-up concerning the substance of the permit
modifications necessitated by this settlement.
I am hereby closing my file relating to this adjudication.
/dw
encl.

A
It-12003- K
d POO
ESTAOUSHEO 1802
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS St COMPANY
INCORPORATED
KINSTON PLANT
KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28501
TEXTILE FIBERS DEPARTMENT
Mr. J. L. Stuart
Assistant Attorney General
Department of Justice
State of North Carolina
P. 0. Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Dear Mr. Stuart:
Ref:
cc: Mr.
Ms.
L. P. Benton -Raleigh
Brenda M. Foreman -Raleigh
NORTH CAROLINA
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
MAY 151980
ENVIRO(; ;1 NTAL PRC,1 rCTIOiI •SE; TION
RECEI'i E 9
May 12, 1980
(1) Letter, Mr. J. L. Stuart to E. L. Long,
April 30, 1980
E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., NPDES
Permit No. NC 0003760, Adjudicatory
Hearing (AHWQ 79-6)
(2)
In response to your letter (Ref. 1) regarding the Kinston
Plant NPDES permit, we accept the explanations offered. Accordingly,
I wish to withdraw our request for an adjudicatory hearing (Ref. 2).
ELL : j sb
Sincer
E. L. Long
Specialist
Environmental Control
BETTER THINGS FOR BETTER LIVING .. . THROUGH CHEMISTRY

rg
RUFUS 1.. EDMISTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
*ate of !Tor* &troth=
pepartment of 'Notice
P. O. Box 629
RALEIGH
27602
30 April 1980
Mr. E. L. Long
Specialist
Environmental Control
Textile Fibers Department
E. I. dePont De Nemours and Company, Inc.
Kinston Plant
Kinston, North Carolina 28501
Re: E. I. duPont de Nemours and Company, Kinston Plant,
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760, Administrative Hearing
(AH WQ 79-6)
Dear Mr. Long:
This is in response to your March 12, 1980, letter concerning
the proposed settlement of the above -referenced matter. In that
letter you questioned two monitoring requirements and one effluent
characteristic which appeared on the proposed modification of page 2
of the subject permit. Specifically, you questioned the following
items:
1. An increase in the frequency of fecal coliform analysis
from monthly to daily.
2. The increase of the dissolved oxygen value from 2.0 mg/1
to 2.5 mg/l.
3. A new requirement for analysis of settleable matter.
I have discussed your questions with the staff of the Division
of Environmental Management and would offer the following explanations
in response to each point.
1. The fecal coliform analysis should be conducted monthly,
not daily. This requirement was incorrectly transposed
from a previous draft permit for this facility.

Mr. E. L. Long
Page 2
30 April 1980
2. The dissolved oxygen value should be 2.5 mg/1. I have
been informed that this value was originally discussed
and agreed to by both parties during a December 6, 1978,
meeting.
3. The analysis for settleable matter should appear as a
monitoring requirement in the modified permit. I have
been informed that this requirement was mistakenly
omitted from the previous draft permits and is a mandatory
monitoring requirement dictated by the current applicable
federal regulations.
I hope that this brief discussion of the issues raised in your
March 12 letter is a sufficient explanation of what items should
appear in the final modified version of the permit. If you still
object to any of these provisions, please feel free to contact me
at telephone number(919) 733-5725 and I will be glad to discuss
these matters in greater detail.
I look forward to hearing from you so that we can reach a final
settlement in this matter.
Sincerely,
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
Attorney General
James L. "Grvey" Stuart
Assistant Attorney General
JLS/rsw

RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
MEMORANDUM
Atufe IIf arfk 1ttroIiva
Peparfinenf of $usfise
P. O. Box 629
RALEIGH
27602
25 April 1980
TO: Page Benton, A. C. Turnage, Bill Mills, Forrest Westall
Jim Mulligan, Bill Ross/Thomas Hilliard
FROM: Harvey Stuart PS
RE: E. I. duPont de Nemours and Company, Inc., Kinston Plant
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760 - Administrative Hearing
(AH WQ 79-6)
Attached you will find a copy of a draft letter to duPont which
addresses objections raised by the company in a March 12, 1980,
letter re permit modifications which have been proposed as a settle-
ment of this matter.
You will recall that we have settled the TSS limitations and that
the questions raised on March 12 relate to two monitoring requirements
and one effluent limitation which appeared on the proposed modification
of page 2 of the permit and which are allegedly different from previous
requirements.
Please advise me if you agree with the discussion contained in the
attached draft.
I will not mail the letter until I hear from you.
/rsw
Attachment

HS/4-25-80
DRAFT
Mr. E. L. Long
Specialist
Environmental Control
Textile Fibers Department
E. I. duPont de Nemours and Company, Inc.
Kinston Plant
Kinston, North Carolina 28501
RE: E. I. duPont de Nemours and Company, Kinston Plant,
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760, Administrative Hearing
(AH WQ 79-6)
Dear Mr. Long:
This is in response to your March 12, 1980, letter concerning the
proposed settlement of the above -referenced matter. In that letter
you questioned two monitoring requirements and one effluent character-
istic which appeared on the proposed modification of page 2 of the sub-
ject permit. Specifically, you questioned the following items:
1. An increase in the frequency of fecal coliform analysis
from monthly to daily.
2. The increase of the dissolved oxygen value from 2.0 mg/1 to
2.5 mg/1.
3. A new requirement for analysis of settleable
I have discussed your questions with the staff of
Environmental Management and would offer the following
response to each point.
1. The fecal coliform analysis should be conducted monthly, not
daily. This requirement was incorrectly transposed from a
previous draft permit for this facility.
2.• The dissolved oxygen value should be 2.5 mg/1. I have been
informed that this value was originally discussed and agreed
to .by both parties during a December 6, 1978, meeting.
3. The analysis for settleable matter should appear as a monitoring
requirement in the modified permit. I have been informed that
this requirement was mistakenly omitted from the previous draft
permits and is a mandatory monitoring requirement dicated by
the current applicable federal regulations.
I hope that this brief discussion of the issues raised in your
March 12 letter is a sufficient explanation of what items should appear
in the final modified version of the permit. If you still object to any
matter.
the Division of
explanations in

Mr . Long
Page 2
of these provisions, please feel free to contact me at telephone
number [phone] and I will be glad to discuss these matters
in greater detail.
I look forward to hearing from you so that we can reach a final
settlement in this matter.
Sincerely,
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
Attorney General
James L. "Harvey" Stuart
Assistant Attorney General
JLS/rsw

North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources &Community Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Howard N. Lee, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
April 1, 1980
MEMORANDUM
TO: Harvey Stuart
Assistant Attorney General
FROM: Forrest Westal 1 , Head Original Signed By
Technical Services Branch FORREST R. WESTALL
SUBJECT: Alleged Inaccuracies in NPDES Permit No. NC 0003760 -
E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. - Kinston Plant
Mr. E. L. Long of DuPont has questioned the apparent change in effluent
limitations for dissolved oxygen in his company's permit. We have reviewed
notes from the December 6, 1978 meeting between DEM staff members and
Mr. Long. At this meeting, it was determined that in order to obtain the
6 mg/1 effluent dissolved oxygen limitation for the point of discharge
into the Neuse River, at least 2.5 mg/1 dissolved oxygen would be required
as measured in the chlorine contact chamber or effluent structure. This
fact was supported by data submitted by DuPont at this meeting. This
point was discussed and agreed to for inclusion in DuPont's permit.
Accordingly, this limit should have been included in the May, 1979 permit,
as it was in the most recent proposed permit.
If you have any questions, please call.
cc: Andy Williams
A. C. Turnage
F'.O. F3ux lib I RtIei h, Nuitli (_.n rlus:'ilrl1
:1,, L;rua! Upp rtur:ir •11li'm1n, A,! ,o t_mnl,;yrr

•
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Ater of ortll gar.>xtirta
pepartment of 3Justice
P. O. Box 629
RALEIGH
27602
19 March 1980
MEMO TO: Page Benton, A. C. Turnage, Bill Mills,
--Forrest Westall, Jim Mulligan
Bill Ross/Thomas Hilliard
FROM: Harvey Stuart
RE:
E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, Kinston Plant
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760 - Administrative Hearing
(AH WQ 79-6)
Attached you will find the most recent correspondence concerning
the above -referenced matter.
I would appreciate your comments as to whether the alleged in-
accuracies noted by DuPont are correct in light of your previous
discussions with this company.
Please contact me if you can provide any relevant information.
/dw
encl.

R-12003-K
r - 1
ESTAIUSNED1802
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY
INCORPORATED
KINSTON PLANT
KINSTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28501
TEXTILE FIBERS DEPARTMENT
Mr. J. L. Stuart
Assistant Attorney General
Department of Justice
State of North Carolina
P. 0. Box 629
Raleigh, N.C. 27602
Dear Mr. Stuart:
NORM CAROLINA
ATT04NEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
i 'I:. i 1 1 71980
ENVI'O+:..1f:NTAL PRCTE I1.,,! SfCTlO;1
RECEIVED March 12, 1980
Ref: 1. Letter, Mr. J. L. Stuart to E. L. Long,
March 7, 1980
2. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., NPDES
Permit No. NC 0003760, Administrative
Hearing (AHWQ 79-6)
3. Letter, Mr. A. F. McRorie to E. L. Long,
May 11, 1979 (Attached)
4. Letter, E. L. Long to Mr. A. F. McRorie
on February 6, 1979, Request for
Adjudicatory Hearing
This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter (Ref. 1) regarding an
agreement reached by you, DNRCD staff and Du Pont representatives at a pre -
hearing conference on January 17, 1980 (Ref. 2). The revised TSS and BOD
permit limits specified in the attachment of your letter are acceptable for
the Kinston Plant.
I would like to point out, however, two new changes and one new effluent
characteristic have now been added to this permit which were not discussed at
the January 17 meeting. Reference 3 is a copy of our existing permit reissued
May 11, 1979, and I have highlighted these changes to facilitate comparison.
Specifically, the following have now been changed/added:
e The frequency of the fecal coliform analysis was changed from
monthly to daily.
e The dissolved oxygen requirement was raised from 2 mg/1 to 2.5 mg/1.
o The analysis for settleable matter is a new requirement.
r''£TTER THINGS FOR BETTER LIVING .. . THROUGH CHEMISTRY

s -
Mr. J. L. Stuart - 2 - March 12, 1980
It appears that these changes may have stemmed inadvertently from
discussions and revisions made in our original (second round) permit issued
December 29, 1978, and later revisions made on May 11, 1979.
We will appreciate your prompt response to reissue our permit to
reflect changes in the aforementioned instances. Following this, I will
formally withdraw our request for an adjudicatory hearing (Ref. 4).
If you have a question or wish to discuss this further, please call
me at 919-522-6445.
Sincerely,
E. L. Long
Specialist
Environmental Control
ELL/1ww
Attachment

rp '.‘
North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources &Community Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Howard N. Lee, Secretary
May 11, 1979
Mr. E. L. Long, Environmental Control Specialist
E. I. DuPont De Nemours and Company
Kinston, North Carolina 28501
SUBJECT: NPDES Permit No. NC0003760
E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Company
Kinston, Lenoir County
Dear Mr. Long:
Reference is made to your letter of February 27, 1979, by which you requested
that the monitoring frequency requirements for discharge number 001, which are
contained in Part I A(1) of the subject Permit, be revised to reflect' monitoring
frequencies for a Class II wastewater treatment facility.
Members of the staff of the Washington Regional Office have advised me that a •
meeting was held in Raleigh on December 6, 1978, between you, Mr. A. C. Turnage,
and Mr. R. F. McGhee. 'During the meeting it was mutually agreed upon that DuPont's
design flow would be reduced from 3.8 MGD to 3.6 MGD. This reduction in design
flow resulted in a change in DuPont's wastewater treatment facility classification
from Class III to Class II.
Therefore, please find attached the revised page two (2) effluent limitations
and monitoring requirements for discharge 001 of the subject permit, which should
be substituted for page two (2) of the permit as issued December 29, 1978.
Tf we can be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact us.
cc: Mr, A. C. Turnage, Jr.
Mr. Jim Mulligan
Sincerely, /
�, ,
�•5�4 ) o
A. F. McRorie 'j,� i
Director ,Ally.:
V
6
P n nr' 1 !. 0,
t.. l'•

RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Atzric of tirfil Cantina
X
peparfinetrf irf Jusfire
P. O. Box 629
RALEIGH
27602
7 March 1980
Mr. E. I. Long
Specialist, Environmental Control
Textile Fibers Department
E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, Inc.
Kinston Plant
Kinston, North Carolina 28501
Re: E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, Kinston Plant,
NPDES Permit No. NC 0003760 -- Administrative Hearing
(AH WQ 79-6)
Dear Mr. Long:
At the January 11, 1980 pre -hearing conference in the above -
referenced matter we agreed to modify the permit effluent limitations
for total suspended solids (TSS) . Also there was some discussion at
the pre -hearing conference concerning whether the BOD limitations
contained in the permit were a correct statement of a December 6,
1978, agreement between DuPont and the Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development (DNRCD) . I have been informed that the BOD
limits which appear in the permit are accurate.
Attached you will find a proposed revision of Page 2 of the
permit which includes the agreed -upon TSS limitations. Please review
this document and indicate whether DuPont agrees that these limita-
tions are an accurate statement of our January 17 agreement. If
DuPont agrees to accept the revised effluent limitations you should
formally withdraw your request for an administrative hearing on this
permit. Upon receipt of a formal withdrawal of the hearing request,
DNRCD will issue public notice of the revised TSS limitations and
the revised permit will therefore be routinely processed.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
Attorney General
James L. Harvey"Stuart
Assistant Attorney General
cle,: Mr. _ navi c7 1 _ Seh rea

bcc: Page Benton
A. C. Turn age
Bi Mills
rrest Westall
Jim Mulligan
Bill Ross/Thomas Hilliard

MEMO.
'6/
TO:
DATE•
0
SUBJECT:
J A✓i2
0A) j-eNj
4-Aid /e l - ' ' X----Aide,0 et.
� ' ,BOD ' •�.
f
Ilk North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources &Community Development

RUFUS L. EDMIsTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
MEMO
ttttE of por mot faaroLina
pepartment of Justine
P. O. Box 629
RALEIGH
27602
17 January 1980
TO: Page Benton A. C. Turnage
Forrest Westall Jim Mulligan
Bill Ross/Thomas Hilliard
FROM: Harvey Stuart/-/5
RE: E. I. DuPont De Nemours and Company, Inc., Kinston Plant,
NPDES Permit No. NC0003760, Administrative Hearing
(AH WQ 79-6) - Pre -hearing Conference
The pre -hearing conference in this matter was held on Thursday,
January 17, 1980.
As a result of this conference, a suggested settlement of this
permit adjudication was discussed which would incorporate the
following changes in the subject permit:
1. An increase in the applicable effluent limitations for
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) to 790 lbs/day (average) and 1190 lbs/
day (maximum) .
(This amendment would represent an increase in the TSS
limitation as compared with the limitation contained in the permit
as issued and is equal to the TSS limitation under the previous
EPA -issued permit for this facility.)
2. Amend the BOD limitations to accurately reflect the agree-
ment reached between DuPont and DEM during a December 6, 1978, meeting.
(Apparently this limitation was erroneously listed on the permit as
issued. I have asked Jim Mulligan to provide the correct value for
this limitation.)

Page Two
You should note that I am of the opinion that the TSS limitation
contained in the subject permit is legally indefensible for the
reason that a revoked federal effluent limitation guideline was used
to calculate the challenged TSS limitation using the pretext that the
use of the revoked guideline was an exercise of "best engineering
judgment." The applicable federal cases indicate that the regulating
agency must have some credible technical evidence from which a valid
engineering judgment can be derived in the absence of a lawfully
promulgated technology -based guideline. In the absence of an inde-
pendent technical basis for determining the TSS limitation, the State
cannot substitute a revoked guideline in this case.
You should also note that this permit is scheduled to expire on
March 31, 1981, and that new federal effluent limitation guidelines
for this industry will probably not be promulgated, at the earliest,
until the time for the reissuance of this permit. Therefore, the
net effect of agreeing to the old TSS limitation is to issue a short-
term permit which is subject to re -opening upon promulgationof the
applicable federal guidelines.
I would appreciate your comments and an indication of TEEM' S
position concerning the agreement to and formalization of the proposed
settlement. The revised permit would, of course, go back to public
notice because of the liberalized effluent limitation.
/ck